Monday Moan 65

WANT  TO KNOW WHAT I THINK?

Amongst the deluge of email that appears in my inbox every day I spotted one asking me if I wanted to join a panel called Shopper Thoughts, run by Tesco apparently.  I joined and have been filling in short questionnaires every few weeks when they ask me.

 

Recently I was asked to complete a questionnaire online next time I was in my local Tesco.  I tried, but failed completely as the online form did not appear as promised when I logged on.  I tried again and still no success.  So I called the helpline number provided. This took me to Tesco Customer Services, and although the person I spoke with had never heard of Shopper Thoughts, her supervisor said I needed to call their internet helpdesk on a different number.  The internet helpdesk said they knew nothing about it and I should call their customer services ……… .  

 

Undaunted, I approach the customer information point in the shop.  Oh yes, they had heard of it because another customer had been in earlier that day and had asked the same question.  That customer had then called the customer services number and been advised that Shopper Thoughts was a scam and they should ignore it.

 

Imagine my surprise then, when I check with Tesco online and discover that Shopper Thoughts was launched by Tesco in 2009 and gets plenty of mentions, including on their web pages for investors.

 

I’m very happy to be contacted by Tesco to give my thoughts on all this if they want them.

WALLY FOUND

Political spin doctors tell their masters how important it is to use the current ‘key message’ at all opportunities.  Make sure you manage to refer to it in every interview so that people are in no doubt what they are supposed to remember from amongst the things you have said.

 

Ed Miliband has taken all this to heart.  The current key message is that people should not be taken in by improved economic data but should realise instead that there is a cost of living crisis.  

 

Yesterday’s BBC London news programme had a piece about how the Labour Party in Harrow had managed to split into two and, in the process, lose control of the Borough Council to the Conservatives. Ed was asked for his views on this change in leadership and his response must have brought  tears of joy to the eyes of his spin doctors – “you always get particular issues with local councils, but the point I want to make is that people should vote Labour if they want someone to tackle the cost of living crisis”.

 

Brilliant execution.  Nonsensical response to the question.  But all delivered with his new determination to say the right thing and to say it with a Gordon Brown-like smile on his face.

 

Best of luck with the unions this week mate.

 

 

ACCESS – BUT NOT AS WE KNOW IT

Since October 2004, the Disability Discrimination Act has required companies and organisations providing services to the public to ensure that they offer reasonable access to disabled people. In many cases this means ensuring that the building within which the services in question are provided is itself accessible to all.

 

It’s not easy to work your way through the mountain of helpful guides produced on this topic, like the 360 page code of practice produced by the Disability Rights Commission (described as a 'practical guide for small businesses), but I’m pretty sure it means something a bit more appropriate than this ……………..

 

 

 

SUNDAY NIGHTS

Downton Abbey has returned.  

Oh joy.




 

 

The Earl and Countess of Grantham still seem the least likely couple to be in bed together since Eric and Ernie.

 

And Lady Mary is still searching for her facial expressions.

 

 

Monday Moan 22

Too much for the mornings

Can’t get out of the habit of listening to the Today programme in the mornings, but it’s beginning to challenge my concentration and interest levels at that time of the day, now that I don’t actually need to be up that early.

To add to the frustrations of the irritating presenters (see Moan 8) we also have to contend with so many either simply uninteresting or impenetrable pieces.  When an item hits both of those buttons then I find myself stretching for the ‘off’ switch.

Last Friday we had the joy of listening to a ‘debate’ on the topic of ‘what does the City of London have to fear from Europe?’  On one side we had Sharon Bowles, MEP for South East England and Chair of the European Parliament's Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee.  On the other we had Bob Lyddon, a management consultant specialising in European Banking and author of the Bruges Group report  ‘The UK’s risks and exposure to the European Investment Bank and other financial European mechanisms’ – my heart was not fluttering with excitement.

When Sharon Bowles started talking about CRD4 and OTC Derivatives I had a sinking feeling in my stomach. Justin Webb, the presenter, had the good sense to ask her to explain what they were, but Bob Lyddon failed to take the hint when answering a question about what, specifically, he thought the City needed to be concerned about, when he said “Basle 3, which is what we call CRD4, given that Basle 1 and Basle 2 caused the financial crisis…”

He was asked again “What are the Europeans going to do that the City should be worried about?” to which he responded with something about the Financial Transactions tax. Sharon Bowles jumped in to say “it’s not going to be introduced in a way that the UK is having to introduce it” – thanks for that clarification Sharon, but how would the EU stop it? “they have to make sure it doesn’t distort the single market and if it does then they can stop it and indeed if it does then so can those that are not going to join it.” Ah, I see.

Sharon was not one to hide her achievements either – “On OTC Derivatives it was me that blazed a trail in Europe to exempt foreign exchange, it was me that blazed a trail to exempt corporate end users and pension funds, it was me where I stopped retroactive clearing requirements.”  Well, thank goodness for Sharon is all I can say.

Justin Webb then gave Bob Lyddon a chance to get a word in and said “so, you can do it [stop EU regulation] and it would have been worse if we had been left on our own?”  To which the rather lame response from Bob was “well I don’t know, two lots of medicine, one is supposedly worse than the other, we’d prefer to have no medicine”

Time to hit the snooze button.

 

That's a bit of luck

Not sure if it’s a good thing to realise that all those celebrities who you used to think of as weird and slightly odd are now seemingly caught up in the Jimmy Savile scandal. Apart from the late Jimmy Savile himself, I am thinking here of Gary Glitter and now Freddie Starr.

There was something rather uncomfortable about listening to Freddie Starr being interviewed on TV  last week expressing his distaste for the despicable things Jimmy Savile has been alleged to have been doing – not that Freddie knew about them, of course. 

I couldn’t quite put my finger on it (perhaps not the best choice of words in relation to this story), but wasn’t it lucky for Freddie that schools were closed last week for half term, thus allowing his newest fiancé to be sat there at his side whilst he was being interviewed?

 

It must be important because the News teams are there

You can always tell when a news story is important because the News channels ship their anchor men and women over to wherever it might be in the world, so that they can report ‘live’ from the scene.  Superstorm Sandy merited the ITV news team going over and they are still there now to report on the American Presidential election.  No doubt the BBC team is on its way even now.

Does it add to our understanding or enjoyment?  Why can’t they just trust it to their relevant correspondents already stationed out there?  How do they feel about having to answer the questions posed by the incoming UK-based people rather than themselves being seen as the top person doing the interviewing?

  

Downton Abbey – life is quite simple really

Downton Abbey may be over for another season (although it is coming back for a Christmas Special, apparently) but I am still not supposed to say anything comical or questioning or disparaging about it (see Moan 16).

So, working within those guidelines, I think I can say that yesterday’s final episode managed to gallop through a huge number of issues with barely a pause either for breath or to apologise for the many significant changes in the way the characters were 'developed'.

And at the end, the key message appeared to be that the world would be a better place if everyone would just take up cricket. Even if the English themselves were not very good at it.

Monday Moan 16

Protests spread over shocking insult to Royalists

Royalists around the world have reacted against the publication of photographs of The Duchess of Cambridge sunbathing topless in the garden of her holiday home.  Protesters in every corner of the world have taken to the streets to demonstrate their opposition.

 "Those who should be held accountable, punished, prosecuted and boycotted are those directly responsible for these photographs and those who stand behind them and those who support and protect them, primarily the French," a leading protester said.

He said that British and Commonwealth governments should press for an enforceable international law banning insults to the British and other royal families.

There have been protests over the photographs in cities around the world in recent days, with spontaneous demonstrations by mobs of angry old ladies, who have made fairy cakes and set up bring and buy stalls outside French embassies. When questioned, none of the protesters had actually seen the photographs, but they had read about it in the Daily Mail so knew it must be true.

The “tut-tutting” could be heard from miles around.

The obscure, poor quality photographs at the centre of the row show the Duchess as a beautiful, if rather thin, young woman, comfortable with her body and with her new husband, apparently deeply in love and unaware that she is being spied upon.

The world needed to know Royalists "would not be silent in the face of this insult", said the protester, who branded the photographs the most dangerous insult to Royalists ever.

 

Didn’t take long, did it?

Oh dear, the Guardian's columnist Simon Jenkins has become the first journalist I have seen to break with the self-imposed restraint code operated by the media during the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

In his column on 11th September  he takes a number of huge swipes at the "sobbing with joy and weeping with ecstacy" of the London media and politicians. Nice touch to suggest it was a London issue - that should help garner support from everywhere else.

He makes numerous references to "throwing public money" at problems and contrasts Danny Boyle's entertainers and the athletes with the "nasty taste of the International Committee, it's ZiL lanes and fats cats" - lovely populist stuff there, particularly the mention of unnamed 'fat cats' - who doesn't despise them?

Of course, his praise for Danny Boyle's entertainers does not sit well with his condemnation of the "extra £40m on the opening ceremony", but hey, who needs consistency when you are ranting?

Wild, unsupported and contentious statements litter this apology for serious journalism - "this proves only that unrestricted public spending can work wonders" - well, yes it can, but then again it might also be just a waste of money unless it is properly controlled and with a specific aim.  "The same is true of defence. No sum is considered too great and no return too abstract". Oh really?  Why then have we had such an uproar about defence cuts? No unrestricted public spending there, surely?

And then the priceless "if it [the Government] can blow £9.3bn on sport why not shower money on intellectually rather than physically gifted young people and call it a university?". (note: it’s difficult to find official Government data, but some estimates suggest that public expenditure on tertiary education has been more that £10bn each year since the Olympics were awarded to London)

The whole article is full of statements that could be picked apart, but why bother? The press is back where it feels most at home - criticising, carping, undermining.  It was a lovely summer without this insidious nonsense, but all good things must come to an end I suppose. It would have been nice if we could have had a few more days though, but I guess they were champing at the bit for the Games to end. Normal service has been resumed.

 

 

Sports Personality of the Year (SPOTY)

According to Barney Ronay, apparently chief sports writer of The Guardian, the reason for Andy Murray having taken so long to become a real British sporting personality is nothing to do with him being sullen, scruffy, chip-on-both-shoulders, spoilt youth, but the fact that he was not born in Surrey.  He calls on the great British public to demonstrate that SPOTY can be "more than a self-serving irrelevance stewarded by a clique of home counties voters".  No sign of The Guardian pandering again to the anti-London and the South-East brigade there then.

Equally, no guidance from Barney as to who that 'clique of home counties voters' would like to see crowned SPOTY this time - so how are we to know who shouldn't get our vote?  He suggests they would chose to vote for people like Steve Redgrave and Seb Coe, as if this was somehow wrong.  How can it be wrong to support people who, in their eras, were the best in the world at times when Britain was not endowed with many who deserved that title?

It's all very well writing humorously Barney, but have an eye for factual accuracy and at least a modicum of logic.

 

 

Downton Abbey

Apparently, I am not allowed to say anything about Downton Abbey, the story of every-day, simple folk now set in the years after the First World War.  It is a national treasure above lampooning.