I personally believe that the reason for the first group’s significant erosion throughout the last ten, maybe twenty, years is as a direct result of government interference in the education system. It began when the stringent requirement to spell correctly was abandoned, and students were no longer required to expand their vocabularies by memorizing the meaning of a half-dozen new words provided to them each day. As a result, each new generation developed slang of its own, in order to express peer ideas, and the English language was subsequently corrupted. Insurance salesmen became known as ‘financial advisors,’ dustmen were termed ‘waste disposal engineers’ and everyone, it seemed, invented new terms to describe themselves in ways that gave them additional kudos. Those, like me, whom had been brought-up in the fifties and sixties, increasingly found it difficult to understand what the younger generation was talking about.
Monday, 3 December 2012
Friday, 30 November 2012
BRITAIN’S FREE PRESS IS DEAD. Anyone who thinks that Leveson’s ‘statutory underpinning,’ or the profession’s response to his proposal will serve the Public Interest should read the small print in his report. In the name of transparency: all whistle-blowers will be outed, and the ability to speak ‘Off The Record’ will no longer exist.
No more Chatham House. And no more ability to protect an informant’s identity. Leveson proposes formal ‘contracts’ between journalists and their sources to keep their identity secret – so that the authorities can demand to see whom has said what – and the source is obliged to hold a formal document that can be discovered by any physical search.
Friday, 23 November 2012
PERHAPS ‘DANCE’ is the most appropriate word to be used here, because there is a Poe-like ‘red-death’ ballet [purely for entertainment] being conducted by the likes of David Icke and his fellow conspirators as they seek to promote manufactured evidence of widespread establishment paedophilia using Twitter and the Web to undermine the fabric of our nation and the public’s trust in its establishments and Free Press – whose reports their statements endlessly twist to their own lascivious advantage.
Speculation is one thing, and that will always give rise to conspiracy theories to be discussed in an adult manner; but fabricating ‘evidence’ in order to mislead others – and have the Press and Police Authorities waste precious time investigating them is quite another. Not only does it produce a thick fog which investigators must try to penetrate, it ultimately makes it less likely that real perpetrators could ever be convicted; because a full jury could not be formed from those not having read the subversive material.
It also commits precious resources, Press, and Police personnel to undertaking lengthy enquiries, which could be much better employed in the UK’s war against terror.
Sunday, 11 November 2012
THERE IS MUCH MORE to responsible investigative journalism than the public might realise. In particular, the Leveson revelations regarding the inappropriate use of communication intercepts by Murdoch’s Red Tops and the questionable employment of private detectives by newspapers and national broadcasters to pursue a story have made it seem that journalism is all about muck-raking.
But it most definitely is not.
The Press has a duty to expose corruption wherever it exists, and it also has a responsibility to ensure that the powerless are heard and given the same opportunity as the powerful to present their case. It is the duty of the Press to uncover the truth that others wish to suppress.
Friday, 9 November 2012
WHAT THE HELL-KIND OF CLOSED QUESTION IS THAT? And what the hell-kind of producer permits any kind of on camera interview to be conducted in which its audience is denied the right of knowing full details of what is being discussed?
My last post disparaged infantile speculation about establishment paedophilia on the internet; but here is a national broadcast organisation, on live TV, associating itself with pixelated gossip and downright lies.
Schofield did not present the PM with an open question, inviting him to comment upon internet speculation. He presented his list of public suspects as if they were all guilty and demanded to know if Cameron would be ‘talking to them.’
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
I HOPE THAT LEVESON is taking the time to fully consider what his proposals might mean for society if he supports placing further restrictions upon the British Press. To give him a clue, he might like to trawl the internet in the wake of the media being unable to present verified facts regarding known, live, powerful individuals engaged in paedophilia – and then consider if the Press is not already unduly hampered enough by the reprehensible costs that libel actions incur – even when the defendant is proved innocent.
Any further legislation would ensure, as is happening now, that the inability to print properly verified facts will lead to the innocent being pilloried alongside the guilty as amateur bloggers turn pure speculation and personal bigotry into ‘facts’ to raise their own blog’s ‘celebrity status’ and feed the public’s paranoia at being denied the truth to which everyone, in a free society, is entitled.
Sunday, 28 October 2012
NOTHING SURPRISES me anymore – least of all the public’s reaction to the unfolding story of Jimmy Savile’s predilection for young girls and boys, and the apparent police failure to properly investigate and prosecute him. Neither am I surprised that it is only after his death that the paedophile will be fully exposed for the abominable creature he was. But the story is not about Sir Jimmy Savile, OBE, KCSG, philanthropist and entertainer – it is about the type of liberal society we have created by pandering to celebrity culture and permitting ourselves to be beguiled by those we elect to represent us.
Wednesday, 3 October 2012
IS IT JUST ME, or is humankind suddenly sinking back into the oceanic depths of ignorance that it once dragged itself from?
Since I last posted anything on this blog, Leveson seems to have decided that the whole of the British Press should be punished for the excesses of the Murdoch tabloids and be denied the freedom to be judged by a jury as to what is in the public interest and what is not; a British MP has verbally attacked the police that he supposedly supports by allegedly calling them ‘plebs’ for not opening Downing Street’s gates so that he could cycle through them; Muslims have gone on the rampage to defend their ‘prophet’ from the allusions contained in an obscure YouTube video; and European politicians claim to have resolved the Euro crisis – by agreeing to print more money!
Tuesday, 28 February 2012
THE FACT THAT THOUSANDS OF POUNDS were approved by Sun executives as regular payments to corrupt officials in return for ‘information’ has largely come as a complete surprise to me. You cannot be a journalist without soon discovering that a significant number of highly placed individuals within Britain’s establishments expect a quid pro quo in any dealings with the Press; but in all my forty-odd working years I can honestly say I have never once paid any of my sources for their information – and I do not personally know of any colleagues who do.
I have no compunction about reimbursing sources their expenses; buying them meals; treating them to a drink; or paying for their cab fares – but I sure as hell would never pay them for information; because that is the one way I am most likely to hear what I want to hear. Paid informants lie, and the greater the payments: the more they are encouraged to do so – and the more likely they are to use their positions to create events that might lead to a lucrative tale.
Friday, 10 February 2012
AS THE LEVESON ENQUIRY reaches the end of its second stage, I find that one of my serious reservations about its possible findings has been relieved from a most unexpected quarter.
Like most journalists I have been appalled by recent court rulings that have enabled celebrities, politicians, and rich business people to serve injunctions on the press and prevent the publication of photographs and articles by using Human Rights legislation to prevent their seedy secrets from ever reaching the light of day; but, this week, in landmark judgments involving a cocaine-possessing German TV actor and Princess Caroline of Monaco, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that the private lives of celebrities are of legitimate interest to the media.
Monday, 9 January 2012
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE of how Photoshop might be used to improve upon an original digital image. (Purists might like to look away now; because what you see is very unlike the original).
Let us imagine that you were the original photographer, tasked with covering a martial arts display that was to take place in the High Street. Well, the image here is probably just the type of action photograph that your editor would expect you to bring back. It is nice and tight, with no distracting background, and conveys the action that was observed. It is a truthful image that could be guaranteed to accompany a sports hack’s written article imparting the full flavour of the event.