Monday Moan 23

Overblown sense of importance

The BBC makes headline news – on the BBC.  The BBC is ‘in crisis’ – according to the BBC.  The BBC ‘has not faced a greater challenge than this for, oh, at least 10 years’, according to the BBC.

I know the rest of the media has jumped on the various stories about the BBC – never being slow to hammer what is, for many of them, their chief rival.  So it is now, officially, a ‘really big story’.  We know this because the resignation of the Director General on Saturday evening, inconveniently after the main evening news programme had already been broadcast, was considered so important that a special News Report was slotted into the schedule to cover the event.

The UK media is not known either for its modesty about its own importance or for having a sense of proportion that relates in any way to the sense of proportion that might be accorded by the population at large.  But hang on a minute, please.  This frenzy of angst about the BBC stems from a couple of decisions made by the Newsnight programme – you know, the one that goes out at 10.30pm every evening, when its audience (apart from media and political people) consists of a man and his dog.  I wonder whether it was the man or his dog that complained?

The vast majority of the British public probably don’t care one way or the other what  Newsnight reports or does not report.  They certainly wouldn’t have thought the BBC was in crisis, at least until this was headline news on the BBC itself and then in the rest of the media.

Call me old-fashioned, but I much preferred it when the BBC concentrated on reporting the news rather than creating it.

Festival of Remembrance – what is it for?

The Royal British Legion Festival of Remembrance in the Royal Albert Hall is a fixture in the annual calendar – always happens, always on BBC1, always the evening before Remembrance Sunday.  According to the Royal British Legion, the Festival commemorates and honours all those who have lost their lives in conflicts, and is both a moving and enjoyable evening.

Saturday’s Festival contained all the usual elements of marching bands, sombre presenter (Huw Edwards) and moving filmed clips of servicemen and others talking about their experiences.  It ended with what amounted to a short service of remembrance and the sight of thousands of poppies falling like snow from the ceiling of the Albert Hall onto the heads of the people below. The audience appeared to be mainly ex-servicemen and women and I am sure they found these elements to be very traditional and moving.

What I’m not sure about is whether they really thought that for the evening to be both moving and enjoyable they needed to be entertained by the likes of Rod Stewart, Amore, Laura Wright and The Overtones.  Obviously good publicity for that list of stars and wannabe stars, but what, in truth, did they add to the occasion?  Rod Stewart is one of many performers today who seem particularly reluctant to get out of the spotlight, despite advancing years making their inability to sing even more apparent than ever.  As for the rest, well let’s just say they are in a long, long line of ‘the most exciting new young stars’ who are thrust before us, shine brightly for a moment and then fizzle out like so many spent fireworks.  Fame, for most of them, will be fleeting.

 

Too close to call?

A big round of applause for the pundits the world over who bought into the expert view from American analysts that last week’s USA election was ‘too close to call’.

 

There was so much discussion about how Mitt Romney had closed the gap and the election was now on a knife edge that people actually believed it.  Only it wasn’t true – it wasn’t too close to call.  Obama won 332 electoral college votes against 206 for Romney.  In the popular vote (which itself counts for nothing) he won by 2.7%.  The 2012 results were closer than those in 2008, but given all the factors involved (see Moan 21) that is hardly surprising.

If this was ‘too close to call’ then maybe opinion polls shouldn’t be taken too seriously?  And maybe the pundits, the ‘experts’ who are wheeled out to give us the benefit of their experience and wisdom on such matters are all being paid just a little more attention and money than they merit?

 

Protecting families and businesses – or making political capital?

Rachel Reeves, the Labour Party’s Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, has complained about the 3p per litre tax rise on fuel planned for January next year.  She says that with the UK economy "so fragile and prices still rising faster than wages", it would be "wrong to go ahead with another tax rise on families and businesses".

Amazingly, it seems that most people in the UK don’t want to pay more for fuel either – with a recent survey revealing that 85% of people had concerns about rising fuel prices.

 

OK, so let’s take stock:-

·        the automatic fuel tax rises which should apply in January were introduced by …….er, the Labour Party;

·       is anybody surprised that 85% of people have concerns about rising fuel prices?  I am.  I can’t believe it’s not 100% - but that demonstrates nothing more than that people don’t like tax or price rises;

·       will a 3p price rise really be a major issue?  Petrol prices have been up and down over the last couple of years, with 3p changes not uncommon in either direction.  So why would another change in January be any more damaging or noticeable?

Can’t help thinking that this is just another example of making political capital, no matter whether the issue merits it or not.  If the Labour Party was serious then surely it would be questioning the fact that over 60% of the cost of a litre of petrol or diesel goes to the Treasury – the highest figure in Europe.  Or is that one a little too tricky?

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 21

Time to choose

In a few days from now the American people will get the chance to vote for their next President.  Barack Obama or Mitt Romney – from here it doesn’t seem like a difficult decision, does it?  But that’s not the way it is over the other side of the Atlantic.

How could it be that this is such a close election?  Well, let’s not forget that Barack Obama only just managed to squeeze past the aged John McCain last time round, despite his opponent’s complete lack of personality or charisma, despite the economic crisis and despite the anger created by years of apparently pointless and unsuccessful war in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Getting the American public to vote for its first black president was a big deal and it was achieved only by a relatively narrow margin.

Obama was then hailed as the man to change everything. Of course he promised a lot, but much of the euphoria surrounding his election was generated by unrealistic expectations on the part of others.  I confess to being swept up in this myself, so much so that I sat glued to the television to watch the inauguration ceremony, because I was convinced it was a historic turning point.  That euphoria and those expectations have weighed like an increasingly heavy millstone around Obama’s neck as the realities of government have exerted their force.  Nobody, not even the President of what many consider to be the most powerful nation on Earth, can change things overnight. 

Obama has, of course, faced some pretty tricky obstacles as he has tried to govern. It seems that a significant proportion of Americans believe he is a marxist, socialist, communist, muslim (delete as you wish) intent on destroying the American way of life. He has faced opposition from the Republicans to almost everything he has tried to do, including a campaign against his introduction of what to most of the rest of the developed world seemed to be pretty obvious proposals for healthcare reform, to extend access to healthcare provisions to the poorer members of society – including the almost 17% of Americans who have no health insurance.  Apparently, this was just an example of his communist beliefs.

He now faces a man who , according to many observers, is not just gaffe-prone, but a serial distorter of the truth (or liar, if you prefer).  Of course, there are those on the other side of the debate who claim that Obama is the liar.  And in the country of free-speech, both sides are able to make their vitriolic and partisan allegations almost unchecked.  Romney a liar?  or Obama a communist? 

 

Oh well, the election will be over soon and then, apart from the arguments, name-calling and righteous opposition to whatever is proposed by the new President, we can take a rest from campaigning - for at least a year to eighteen months.  Then it all kicks off again. 

 

A multimedia icon speaks

Dr. Michael Savage is not Tom Jones in a poor disguise, but a multimedia icon in the conservative movement, heard by 10 million listeners a week on “The Michael Savage Show” and syndicated across the U.S. in more than 300 markets.  At least, that is how he bills himself on his own website (obviously, not the Tom Jones denial bit).

.

He is also one of only a handful of people banned from entering the UK.  Banned for his extremist views.  But free to peddle them elsewhere, of course.  He is one of President Obama’s fiercest (or at least one of his loudest) critics.  I am not going to put a link to his website in the Moan – you can look him up if you want to do so.  But I will highlight the following comment attached to one of his many video postings:-

 

“Independents and Republicans are shown to have higher IQs then [sic] democrats and liberals. Just science fact now. That’s why none will vote for Obama. We still have to worry about the other 50% of the country though, you know the ones that aren’t that smart.”

 

Heaven help us all.

 

  

Independence Day

Scotland is to get its vote on independence.  That is, the people living in Scotland will get to vote – which includes the almost 370,000 English people resident there, but not the 750,000 Scots resident in England.

 

Where will it all end?  English nationalism?  Independence for the Isle of Wight?  Not much support for the latter at the moment, as the Isle of Wight Party is not after independence but a fixed link (bridge or tunnel) between the island and the English mainland.  There was a Vectis National Party in the 1970s, which campaigned for independence on the basis that it believed the sale of the Isle of Wight to England in 1293 was unconstitutional.

 

That’s the kind of historical grudge that could grow into a major movement one day.

 

 

Pots and kettles

There is something deliciously amusing about the complaints by Chelsea about alleged comments made by referee Mark Clattenburg during their game against Manchester United yesterday.  These comments are said to include some inappropriate racial language.

 

All this from the club that has supported John Terry throughout the Anton Ferdinand affair and all the allegations about racial insults that were involved. 

 

Pots and kettles.