As you may know, I've been blogging for quite some time. Things on this blog may have wound down however its far from the end.
You may follow me on twitter. www.twitter.com/frompaul
Or visit my associated blog: http://morefrompaul.wordpress.com/
I do hope you will continue to nip in for a nosey from time to time and thanks, as always for visiting.
Paul
Some of the older readers to this blog from the UK will have very vivid memories of a particular BBC television programme broadcast at 9.25pm on October 31st 1992.
Ghostwatch was billed as a live investigation into poltergeist activity in a suburban street in Southern England. In reality it was a prerecorded drama featuring TV presenters previously associated with factual programming. The plot was simple, the programme would start normal enough but would build to a terrifying conclusion. Of course by that time, everyone knew it was indeed drama but not before some people in true Orson Welles style, had run for the hills.
So many people complained to the BBC that the recording was banned, never to be repeated and the producers guidelines now advise against newsreaders, factual presenters taking direct, long roles in TV drama's. The content which started tame enough became edgy with mystery ghost sightings and some clever editing for its day. Personally speaking, it was the best evenings entertainment that I remember from childhood, it scared the whits out of me until the plot obviously gave itself away.
As Halloween 2008 draws to a close, I thought I'd trawl the internet for a bit more info about Ghostwatch and struck gold. You can now watch the show again via youtube and in fact, contribute your own GW memories for a new documentary that is being made. Simply head over to the special GWbtc Youtube page or visit the official blog to find out more information.
As I mentioned, never could such a show be made again on the BBC, they even advertised a call centre number on screen as part of the drama. At one point, over 20,000 callers were trying to get through to speak with the programmes presenter Michael Parkinson.
For anyone out there who remembers the poltergeist/ghost called 'pipes', heres a clip with all the 8 sightings from the show, enjoy!
One of my photographs has made it into the top-twenty photographs which will form an exhibition at the National Museum of Media and Photography in Bradford.
The photograph was taken on the road to Buxton in Derbyshire and was taken after two previous visits to the same location.
The twenty images which will be exhibited were originally uploaded to flickr and then included in a 'britain in pictures' group. The exhibition itself runs at the museum until January 2008.
It goes without saying that I'm honoured that my picture has been chosen, especially given the quality of some of the other photographs in the group.
A local Staffordshire town has been disrupted with road closures and police cordons after a bomb disposal unit was called in to take a closer look at one or possibly two suspect items.
The team were called in to Biddulph near Congleton at around 5pm today and although details are still sketchy, the authorities were clearly not taking any chances as they blocked off roads and and called in army experts to take a closer look.
In this day and age, this obviously goes to show how city-wide fears of bomb attacks have now moved into the suburbs. Nothing can be left to chance, no matter how trivial an incident may seem.
Fortunately occurrences like this are rare and although the exact details are not known by myself at this time, it is still reassuring to see that there is obviously a high degree of vigilance here in the UK at the moment.
As some people may know, I don't live in Biddulph but as soon as my girlfriend notified me of the police cordon and rumours of two suspect devices in a loft, I was quick to advise her to take pictures of the scene and also video footage too.
The photographs and video footage where taken by Emma Barlow who lives in Biddulph and via this blog, they have also been passed onto the BBC local news teams for Staffordshire.
Not often that this blog is first for breaking news, however as more and more people become 'citizen journalists', the headlines will increasingly hit the RSS feeds before they hit the more traditional forms of broadcast media.
Bomb scare in Biddulph? from pthurst and Vimeo.
The BBC News website is reporting that Prince Harry will not be serving in Iraq after all. The website claims that sources close to the BBC have indicated that the British General Sir Richard Dannatt has confirmed the decision not to send the prince into battle.
According to Paul Adams, who is one of the BBC's defence correspondents, the decision will have been made in light of the reports that insurgents had planned to target the Prince.
Now is it only me or does this not state the obvious? Of course the Prince would be targeted! Just like every other soldier who wears the British uniform.
If this story turns out to be true then, like the Prince probably would be himself, I would be disgusted. How can we send our soldiers into harms way then not afford the same 'privilege' to the Prince, who is a serving soldier?
This level of duplicity once again shows that when it comes to decisions such as these, our country's leadership seems to lack backbone. We dither and lack the common sense to follow through the actions which are needed as consequence of earlier decisions.
One in, all in. One out, all out. Thats what I would say and what kind of message does this send to families of those who have been killed in Iraq. For that matter, what kind of message does this send to families of those who are yet to be killed in Iraq also?
Why don't we send Tony Blair instead? I believe he's free after June the 27th.
It would appear that Gordon Brown might just be greener than we all thought.
Recently spotted 'dipping' into the twilight zone that is the ministerial hooter, our future PM didn't appear to be picking his cabinet ministers. Rather he seemed to be tackling some, apparently more stubborn, green issues.
This very topic was mentioned on tonights 'Newsnight' on BBC 2 where Jeremy Paxman seemed to criticise bloggers for not really being the 'citizen journalists' that we are sometimes labelled as. Paxo seemed to prefer the 'stiff upper lip' of traditional newsgathering and reporting as opposed to the bloggers who do, admittedly seem more content to focus on what may be resting at the top of the lips instead.
I think the answer, as always, does lie somewhat in the middle. Both journalist and blogger do fulfill similar roles in that both 'mirror' events or culture. We just do it in different ways and, on this occasion, I am more grateful to the bloggers. They remind us to think twice before shaking hands with Mr Brown, especially if he's just leaving the commons.
You can read guido fawkes blog post here.
Here's the BBC's Nick Robinson's take on the issue of Blogger v Journalist and finally, you can check out the BBC's newsnight blog post here, The BBC's site also includes Guido's interesting film on this topic too.
What a hectic day! We've had a series of arrests in Birmingham which seem to be spurring wall-to-wall news coverage live from the scene (there really is 'nothing to see here' though). Why couldn't this report be presented from the TVC studios?
We've had DC calling for TB to chuck in the towel and take early retirement (or possibly exile?) and we've had the shocking news that this January, the UK has seen the hottest average temperatures since 1914 (didn't realise global warming was a problem then, did you?). So even the seasons seem to be moving along too fast.
In all honesty, this kind of pace is far too quick for my little brain. How am I supposed to take all this in, even if it is presented by the lovely Joanna Gosling?
I am going to politely request world leaders, political groups, militants, football transfer window officials and overpaid pop stars to SLOW DOWN!!! Oh and if its hard for people like me to ponder on events like these, how hard must it be to report on them?...
The reason why the launch didn't garner much attention to anyone outside of the BBC's 'Gateway' intranet site, is probably due to the fact that the college cannot be accessed by us mere mortals in the outside world. Its a bit like Hogwarts...
The new online facility aims to ensure that the standards are kept high (for BBC staff only) and this is reinforced by a physical facility too, (for the 'muggles' perhaps?) apparently over an Italian deli in London.
On a serious note. I find it interesting that in this age of mass-media and rolling news, the BBC are still interested in not only keeping a presence in what's becoming a fairly busy marketplace, but the Corporation clearly intends to reinforce the strong journalistic principles on which the NCA department was built. As such, I think this is licence fee money relitively well spent (easy on the deli takeouts though please).
As part of my teaching in schools. I have been asking the media students "what makes a good news channel on TV?" It's amazing how many get caught up with the bells and whistles before even considering the framework from which the actual content is gathered.
I am worried that the new Al Jazeera news channel, may fall under this banner. Yup they may be gearing up for HD broadcasting. And its pretty impressive to see a wall of reporters and correspondents waiting to 'bring us up to date' immediately, but I'm slightly concerned that there's an anti-Israel bias that has already crept in. Maybe its not in how the news has been reported as much as the stories that they are missing out.
In this day and age. The media is playing an ever increasing role in how we perceive or world and indirectly how politicians deal with things on our behalf. I hope the BBC's college is quick to remind its students of the ethical responsibilities which accompany their reputation as one of the most trusted news providers on the planet.
(You may read a more detailed mandate on this blog post from the CoJo Editor. should you wish. Or check out biased BBC. Maybe they could assess some of the coursework?)
powered by performancing firefox
The BBC have made public, the reasoning behind their recent broadcasts concerning the execution of Saddam Hussein.
This post by Kevin Backhurst who is the controller for BBC News 24, explains what the BBC decided to show and why.
The tightrope for any state broadcaster is very narrow to tread. The Corporation's mandate is to record and report events from around the world, but this must be done appropriately. Any BBC Journalist in NCA must follow editorial policy. It outlines how news events should be reported. In most cases the rules are easy to follow but in some cases, the lines become blurry. So what is appropriate or inappropriate?
This is a very complex issue with pro's and cons (see my last post regarding media coverage), censoring any news item for whatever reason can either damage accuracy or even misrepresent events or individuals.
Previously I pointed out that when governments or authorities censor news, we may be forgiven for being a little skeptical as to why but when the censoring is applied by the broadcaster and not faceless men in grey suits, it becomes a whole different issue.
What if the news wasn't 'sanitised' or cut? What if it was shown, warts and all? We may connect more powerfully with what's happening. For example, over 75% of Americans support capital punishment, but I wonder if the figure would quite as high if they were televised? Once we see events in full or once we see the uncut aftermath. It can be particularly powerful.
Now were back to that fine line. If we did show the real carnage of war or suicide bombings, we would upset many people. How would bereaved relatives feel? How would we feel?
I think a case could be made for a more 'hardcore' news but I'm not sure how it should be made or by whom. Millions of 'non-newsy' viewers will have tuned in to see the recent footage from Iraq, but the modus-operandi for news organisations should never be sensationalism or macabre-ism, even if these would pull in the most viewers.
____________________________________
Firstly, may I congratulate the BBC on providing tasteful, decent yet comprehensive coverage of Saddam's execution.
These are incredibly delicate days at the moment. The way in which the worldwide media cover this issue could set the public mood in the region for the coming days and months.
The BBC have reported accurately and appropriately and as such, the editorial decisions taken have upheld the corporations reputation for authoritative reporting.
I posted on this blog earlier. I commented then, that the single stories in themselves, point to much wider issues in general. It's this 'bigger picture' which must be considered by the news editors as I personally think that the real questions and issues have yet to be asked and examined.
I have finally created and uploaded a picture slideshow containing some pictures from my trip to Rome.
I'm due back in the next year to work on a project for the BBC which will be broadcast nationally in the UK and featured online too.
In the meantime, I'll leave you with the slideshow...
Can bloggers take time off? Do we deserve time off or should we be chained to the computer terminal to continuously churn out our rants, ramblings and observations?
Partly prompted by this BBC Manchester blog post and also by a slight pang of guilt for not updating for a whole seven days, I found myself wondering to what extent and for what purpose do we blog at all?
I suppose for me, its partly to express thoughts and feelings which we all have but we don't all share. We all have opinions on most things but there isn't often an outlet, unless your a blogger of course!
My break over in the Lakes was great, I feel quite relaxed now (almost able to face Christmas... Well almost) It rained continuously for five days and nights but aside from a trip to Newcastle, my Girlfriend and I spent most of the time in our cottage, by the wood burner.
Anyway I am back now and I've returned to 118 emails and a load of work but just time to include one of my pics... Hopefully it will help me keep a sense of 'holiday peace' beyond tomorrows rush hour.
The BBC have been drawing our attention towards some of the common management sayings which many of us will have come across at some point or another.
If its not 'joined up thinking' or 'running it up the flagpole' then I'm sure most of us will have been encouraged to try 'thinking outside the box' or even somehwere up in the 'blue sky'.
A report from the CBI tells us that when we hear these (and other) sayings, we lose confidence in the speaker, it seems that clichés 'blight' us all and make us feel that maybe we aren't hearing anything new after all.
The BBC's article may be found here but as per usual, it got me thinking...
In the business of journalism, clichés are commonplace. Its a 'bid' for this or a 'mercy dash' for that, How many times have we been told of 'crisis talks' where deals are being 'hammered out' or about someone who 'sustains fatal injuries', surely they mean, die?
The BBC are certainly well aware how clichés generally make audiences 'tune out' and that most of us don't really hear past them at all.
They have commissioned a guide which you can download for yourself and it makes quite an amusing read too.
Most of us use clichés quite sparingly and will even apologise before using one, but certainly here in the UK, its clear to anyone who reads through the guide, the message hasn't got through to those who keep us up to date with the news, at all.
The Daily Mail reported yesterday that the BBC is institutionally biased, by their own admission.
This type of thing is often reported and commented on but on this occasion, some of the BBC's top brass and journos seem to agree.
In this article, the Daily Mail quotes Andrew Marr (Political journalist) as saying
"The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly-funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people.
"It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias."
Ok, so its not exactly earth shattering. Surely even the BBC should change with the times? But should this be counted as liberalism?
I tackled this whole topic of bias myself a few months ago here but for those who need to cut to the chase, I feel that true impartiality is impossible. How can we report crimes involving vulnerable individuals or mass murder without overtly stressing the opinions of the victims?
In essence, impartiality has little to do with fact however it may effect how journalists go about looking for them.
But what about comment and analysis? The BBC dedicates some of its news and current affairs output on individuals expressing personal comments on the big issues of the day, and you can take it from me that most have their own agenda in doing so. Here the BBC relies on balance. We can't expect politicians to comment with impartiality but by giving equal measure to different parties etc, they hope to strike some degree of 'fairness'
The Daily Mail's article also looks wider than the just the news remit though. In the article, they also claimed:
Senior figures admitted that the BBC is guilty of promoting Left-wing views and an anti-Christian sentiment.
They also said that as an organisation it was disproportionately over-represented by gays and ethnic minorities.
It was also suggested that the Beeb is guilty of political correctness, the overt promotion of multiculturalism and of being anti-American and against the countryside.
During the meeting, hosted by Sue Lawley, executives admitted they would happily broadcast the image of a Bible being thrown away - but would not do the same for the Koran.
Now that's a whole new ballgame. The BBC's idea of impartiality only really centers around news reporting, some of these issues would probably be considered under 'Taste and Decency' And that's a whole new topic completely...
Do you think the BBC is biased or do you feel they do a good job?
The debate of religion within societies continues to run and run here in the UK, but in a bizarre twist, the media storm has momentarily turned inward.
Readers may be aware that the Muslim veil is never away from the front pages at the moment, but the issue seems to have reached the desk of the news studio itself.
BBC newsreader Fiona Bruce wore a cross on her necklace and a BBC Blogger asked the wider question of what would we do if a Muslim presenter chose to wear the full veil?
Its worth noting, The BBC has not spoken on this matter so lets not throw any BBC PC comments round at the moment, rather I think the blog raises valid questions.
Does something like this affect impartiality? Or does this insult the professionalism of the journalists involved? And should we even be looking at issues like this? Do they not add the the sense of separation that is already far too wide in the UK's religious communities?
My blog is worth $1,129.08.
How much is your blog worth?
