ITV2 seen the beginning of The exclusives today. The programme is about six wannabe journalists fighting for a job in the celebrity magazine industry.
It stresses that the industry is not easy to get into and will not be as easy as they are expecting it to be and they will have lots of various tasks to complete. They all get put onto different departments to have chance to learn before being told what they are going to be doing.
Some of them seem to find the tasks given to them a walk in the park, such as looking through clothes while others find accents make it impossible to transcribe an interview.These are all things that they will quickly have to overcome to survive in the industry, and learn to be interested in things that they really aren't bothered about - simply because it will give them more work and credibility.
They seemed so excited at the prospect of naked men or well known celebs coming into the office, and while that excitement is a great part of the job - they also need to remember to tailor it and be professional not show the company up.
There main task was to attend the Brit awards and get the best interviews but some of them dressed more like they were going to a party rather than going to work. They then decided to interview anybody and not write the answers down while recording.
As the show went on there was some clear rifts growing between various members of the group and instead of thinking of a variety of questions them being stuck as to what they could ask certain celebs that wouldn't meet their questions.
And then beyond all that one group went to the z-list party, asked odd questions and were "blagging" it. Meaning that like the other team they were wasting time and getting off on the wrong foot with certain members of the celebrity community.
Slowly you could see them learning and improving, realising that they were able to do the job but had perhaps been thrown in at the deep end to show their raw talent, then again the only thing one says he has learnt is that he should "learn to take a coat". Though then they talk to Nick Knowles, great, but how does he fit to More magazines readership? I'm sure they will explain that to us at some stage.
Interviews over. Now just time to wait and find out what comes next at HQ.
And surprisingly there is no let up, because now they need to go out and find 'real men' for a photo shoot. Not the easiest job, but I guess it's just like heading out there and doing a pod cast, but asking more specific people, making it a little more difficult because they can't just approach everybody. They all have different approaches and different success rates, and you can see why because some of them seem to struggle to figure it out.
The team that won were the ones that got stuck in and seemed much more organised, as well as ensuring that they had a nice range of people, as the editor explained. Proving that the other team need to re look their strategy and evaluate where they went wrong, and how to approach people in the future - they surely must have been able to find just as many hotties as the other team all across London!
As another break came on and the competition came on my mum stated "the programme is cr*p but the prize is worth winning, in my opinion anyway". While it isn't supposed to be aimed at my mums demographics, I find that I agree with her.
It's alright but how so many flaws. I mean they've not made a cup of tea or had to do any filing yet, or even had to sit down at a desk and look through a load of boring press releases. The show is making journalism look highly glamorous and like they only ever get to do the fun things, but that's not how it works, while they have been doing the odd thing that they don't enjoy they're still on the go and working in somebodies perfect department.
The photo shoot was again a mixed bag, as again you'd imagine and it showed peoples weaknesses and strengths. Lets see how they all do in the next episode but I don't expect the attitudes and skills to make any dramatic shocking improvements.
I think that I am being highly critical and that in reality the show is really good for journalism and encourages people to try to get into tough industries, I just hope it doesn't make people think they can meet celebs at the drop of button. Sadly, the disappointment and misinterpretation that I expected it to be.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
Society is destroying itself
Nobody wants to stand out for the wrong reasons. We want to stand out for our personalities and our quirky looks. It’s all fine, providing we’re the ones that are in control.
But what do you do when you’re not in control of how you look. Some people go to drastic action such as surgery, other people hide the real them. For many, if it’s something they grew up with they can handle it; it’s when suddenly somebody faces a change in appearance later in life they struggle.
To general society this is perfectly acceptable, but what about if you look normal but aren’t. We accept people that are missing a limb, have their hair shaved off or have a skin issue. However, society can sometimes over look people because they don’t need walking assistance.
I myself have a heart problem, and I’ve had it all my life. But to look at me you’d just think I’m an above average height female, that’s slightly overweight and has glasses. In reality I look like many people in the population, but what about what’s deep inside.
People look at me strangely when I say I can’t pick up heavy items or that I can’t do that cardiac exercise – the only people that society seems to say that’s okay for is the disabled, ill or physically unable. My condition is like a mental illness, people run away from you because of it.
All that aside, people just like me carry on. We don’t give up our lives and we don’t stop fighting. And because of this social attitude, people worse off than me have to fight our government and our system. In the same way as cancer patients get denied life extending treatment, people with hidden unseen illnesses have to fight to get any financial or physical support.
We are becoming a sad society where people healthy, ill or otherwise are being judged in a shocking way. No matter how you look, everybody is different and that’s okay. However, we are a society that is becoming more looks conscious all the time, and we wonder why mental health problems occur in one out of every four people.
If we want to help our society and help ourselves maybe we should stop judging people on their looks, and consider their abilities and talents.
Average height makes shopping easy
According to New Look, 80% of women that shop in their tall section do so online or at ‘Core’. Because of this, most of their stores have now stopped stocking the tall range they used to provide.
This of course is not a crime; shops always do what is most profitable to them and what uses the floor space they have most suitably.
However, for me as a tall person myself I find this somewhat sad. I’d like to know why on all these important questions, I never get asked to fill in a questionnaire. I never buy clothes online, because simply – I like to try them on before I buy them, instead of having to return them.
I don’t generally need tall clothes for tops and trousers, but dresses always. I go into other high street stores and their own sections, and look at dresses, what would often be defined as a party dress. The sorts that go to just near the top of the leg, the sort of thing I often call a top. I call them a top because whatever size I buy, they don’t go all the way down past the bottom and frankly I don’t want to show those parts off to the world.
These dresses are long enough for a woman of average height, but not for somebody taller by several inches. And because of this, I hate being tall and having to go shopping. I see so many items of clothes that look really nice, and without even trying them on and just putting it against my body the people I’m shopping with agree it wouldn’t go anywhere near to where it’s supposed to.
The question I pose however is how tall people are supposed to pride themselves in how they look and feel happy about whom they are, when main street stores take away all the clothes they wear. I struggle to believe that 80% of all tall women don’t shop on the high street.
And if they don’t is that by choice, or do they feel that online is the only place where they have a wide enough selection of clothes? I personally find that it would be of the second option, because tall clothes are very limited on the high street.
While being tall is not a crime, they certainly make it feel like it is not something that is natural and normal. The high street should help tall people embrace who they are, make them actually want to buy the clothes that they offer and consider the fact that most models that they use need tall clothes.
Of course, this is just something that I want, clearly the rest of the tall people are happy to shop online and hope that it fits them after spending money that may well be limited. But surely tall people should be treated equally, in just the same way as petite sections in shops are shrinking and disappearing.
It seems only the average height dare to step foot in a shop door any more. And that cannot be right.
Saturday, May 05, 2012
The exclusives on ITV2
Recently, I have seen adverts for The exclusives, a programme for hopeful journalists that will see one of them get a job at the end of it.
It seems like a great idea on the off, I felt a bit jealous when I see it to start with. It looks a bit like the Apprentice (BBC) it seems. But then I seen something crucial, 'Exclusives' was done to look like a red top - so like the Sun, Daily Mirror etc.
Suddenly, I was put off a little. This country and the media industry has enough celebrity and gossip journalists to sink a battleship at the moment - It's great that they will be giving people a job and that their success will grow, but why does this show have to make all training journalists seem to only be interested in that sort of thing?
The lack of variety of person, seems to be a real shame. Even the people that seemed to want to interview people on other areas such as Martin Luther King and Thatcher have been 'dolled up' to match the glamorous appearance of a 'red top'.
I must stress, I have no issue with red tops, or people wanting to interview people like Thatcher for those sorts of media products - but they have all been made to sound and look so generic in the advert that it gives the impression of a lack of passion and unique attitude.
I hope when I watch it I am wrong, and they all can show their unique intelligence and passions without being knocked down and made to appear just like another journalist, but something tells me I'm going to be out of luck. Check back to find out what I think when the show starts soon!
It seems like a great idea on the off, I felt a bit jealous when I see it to start with. It looks a bit like the Apprentice (BBC) it seems. But then I seen something crucial, 'Exclusives' was done to look like a red top - so like the Sun, Daily Mirror etc.
Suddenly, I was put off a little. This country and the media industry has enough celebrity and gossip journalists to sink a battleship at the moment - It's great that they will be giving people a job and that their success will grow, but why does this show have to make all training journalists seem to only be interested in that sort of thing?
The lack of variety of person, seems to be a real shame. Even the people that seemed to want to interview people on other areas such as Martin Luther King and Thatcher have been 'dolled up' to match the glamorous appearance of a 'red top'.
I must stress, I have no issue with red tops, or people wanting to interview people like Thatcher for those sorts of media products - but they have all been made to sound and look so generic in the advert that it gives the impression of a lack of passion and unique attitude.
I hope when I watch it I am wrong, and they all can show their unique intelligence and passions without being knocked down and made to appear just like another journalist, but something tells me I'm going to be out of luck. Check back to find out what I think when the show starts soon!
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Bahrain: The revolt and sport
F1 is expected to continue as scheduled in Bahrain this weekend. This is while there are many protests going on in the country about human rights and many other important issues. Violence is escalating.
There are many calls from people for the race to be cancelled and for them to get out of there, as it makes it seem like they are turning a blind eye to the struggle. However, the race being there shows both sides of the coin.
Them being there means they continue to allow the high powers of Bahrain to benefit from the profitable sport that F1 is, and there is increased security making the regime more brutal to its people to keep them away from the area - to make it look peaceful and normal.
But just because the sport is there does not mean they are ignoring the issues, because at the same time they have brought them to light, they have intensified the struggle for change and given the people of Bahrain more of a voice.
Posters of protest have shown F1 teams killing the people of Bahrain, I guess in some ways due to increased security this makes sense, but also F1 going ahead means those at the top of their power line are distracted for a weekend.
Perhaps instead of protesting about the sport being there and them funding the wealthy, protesters would do much better and spend their time more effectively this weekend by doing things to seriously weaken the powers control while they aren't looking. They are missing the perfect chance to cause real chaos when the media are already watching.
I wish the protesters well, but they need to do more this weekend than just be angry at a sport - otherwise the powers of their country will win because things would have remained calm and they'll get their money, as well as chance to speak to the world.
Organise and revolt while the world watches on. Solidarity to the protesters of Bahrain.
There are many calls from people for the race to be cancelled and for them to get out of there, as it makes it seem like they are turning a blind eye to the struggle. However, the race being there shows both sides of the coin.
Them being there means they continue to allow the high powers of Bahrain to benefit from the profitable sport that F1 is, and there is increased security making the regime more brutal to its people to keep them away from the area - to make it look peaceful and normal.
But just because the sport is there does not mean they are ignoring the issues, because at the same time they have brought them to light, they have intensified the struggle for change and given the people of Bahrain more of a voice.
Posters of protest have shown F1 teams killing the people of Bahrain, I guess in some ways due to increased security this makes sense, but also F1 going ahead means those at the top of their power line are distracted for a weekend.
Perhaps instead of protesting about the sport being there and them funding the wealthy, protesters would do much better and spend their time more effectively this weekend by doing things to seriously weaken the powers control while they aren't looking. They are missing the perfect chance to cause real chaos when the media are already watching.
I wish the protesters well, but they need to do more this weekend than just be angry at a sport - otherwise the powers of their country will win because things would have remained calm and they'll get their money, as well as chance to speak to the world.
Organise and revolt while the world watches on. Solidarity to the protesters of Bahrain.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Specimens not for shipping
Laboratories in the UK have had a knock back recently, as animal rights protesters have got many airlines to agree to not transporting animals that are heading to labs for scientific research.
Now I am not an animal lover, I am not some big enthusiast, but at the same time I don't like anything being boxed up and I don't like anything poking things around because it has such little consent. I also understand that animals are a part of testing new medicines and developing them.
However, I say well done to the protesters on this one, and well done to the airlines for agreeing to this. Because they do not deserve to undergo a traumatic plane flight and then be put through such cruel tests.
Worse than that, I do not understand why scientists require rats to be imported at all. There are plenty of rats and mice in this country, and there is no doubt at this because they are called vermin and generally not wanted.
I struggle to see how any laboratory can justify the idea that animals should be brought from many countries to undergo the cruelest of tests. It may be in the name of medical research, but they did not agree to either the initial flight or the risk of death.
If scientists are too scared to test medicine on humans, then you wonder what goes into it that might be so deadly.
Whether you agree with them using animals for testing or not, I am sure that you agree nothing should be caged up against its will - you wouldn't like it would you.
Now I am not an animal lover, I am not some big enthusiast, but at the same time I don't like anything being boxed up and I don't like anything poking things around because it has such little consent. I also understand that animals are a part of testing new medicines and developing them.
However, I say well done to the protesters on this one, and well done to the airlines for agreeing to this. Because they do not deserve to undergo a traumatic plane flight and then be put through such cruel tests.
Worse than that, I do not understand why scientists require rats to be imported at all. There are plenty of rats and mice in this country, and there is no doubt at this because they are called vermin and generally not wanted.
I struggle to see how any laboratory can justify the idea that animals should be brought from many countries to undergo the cruelest of tests. It may be in the name of medical research, but they did not agree to either the initial flight or the risk of death.
If scientists are too scared to test medicine on humans, then you wonder what goes into it that might be so deadly.
Whether you agree with them using animals for testing or not, I am sure that you agree nothing should be caged up against its will - you wouldn't like it would you.
Deep voices win elections
According to scientist research, winning politicians are more likely to have deeper voices. This is whether they are male or female.
Many people are saying that this is because a deep voice adds conviction and sounds more convincing than somebody with a higher pitched voice.
If this is the case, then the large majority of females are going to struggle for a long time to come. Maybe this, while it is focused on politics extends out businesses. This could be the answer as to why there are so few women on many boards.
Or perhaps it's all coincidence and that many women politicians felt that they had to have voice training to sound more manly and lower pitched to fit into the house - not to win votes. Either way it is sad that women cannot be themselves and that as well as feeling pressured to appear in certain clothes, with certain make up and have certain postures and poses - they now have to even change their voice, something that completely defines them.
A voice is something that even if people change their hair and looks, they age and change you can still expect to recognise somebody from - but the politicians made to have voice training or feel obligated to are completely destroying the push for females and men to be equal.
They're saying 'If you can't beat them join them' and instead of embracing females they are shunning it saying it isn't good enough and they'll have to pretend to be a male instead.
It makes me so angry. Something as natural as your voice can push you forward or hold you back? In that case I think I better scrap together some money for some training - otherwise I'm going to struggle all my life to get into the top jobs that I want to.
Many people are saying that this is because a deep voice adds conviction and sounds more convincing than somebody with a higher pitched voice.
If this is the case, then the large majority of females are going to struggle for a long time to come. Maybe this, while it is focused on politics extends out businesses. This could be the answer as to why there are so few women on many boards.
Or perhaps it's all coincidence and that many women politicians felt that they had to have voice training to sound more manly and lower pitched to fit into the house - not to win votes. Either way it is sad that women cannot be themselves and that as well as feeling pressured to appear in certain clothes, with certain make up and have certain postures and poses - they now have to even change their voice, something that completely defines them.
A voice is something that even if people change their hair and looks, they age and change you can still expect to recognise somebody from - but the politicians made to have voice training or feel obligated to are completely destroying the push for females and men to be equal.
They're saying 'If you can't beat them join them' and instead of embracing females they are shunning it saying it isn't good enough and they'll have to pretend to be a male instead.
It makes me so angry. Something as natural as your voice can push you forward or hold you back? In that case I think I better scrap together some money for some training - otherwise I'm going to struggle all my life to get into the top jobs that I want to.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Simple sauce and pasta
Simple sauce and pasta (veggie friendly)
Cook the garlic, chilli, herbs and onion in the oil/spray for 2 minutes in a medium/large sized saucepan.
Season to taste and add in the passata/chopped tomatoes. Leave it to simmer covered for 10 minutes.
Cook the pasta while the sauce is simmering, but follow instructions to ensure that pasta is fully cooked.
Drain the pasta and but boiling hot water over it and drain again (to remove any starch).
Put the pasta in the sauce, cover the pasta in the sauce by mixing and then serve.
Suggestions
You do not have to use pasta spirals, just these are good to collect all the sauce in and to mix them together easily. I personally used multi type spirals, but this is just to give it extra colour, texture and flavour.
When putting in the passata/chopped tomatoes be very careful as it can spit up and make a mess.
If you do not like really spicy food cut down the amount of chilli put into the recipe.
You can put chicken in with this if you want to bulk it out, or you can serve with a healthy side salad, even some bread may be suitable.
My thoughts
This is a nice and simple dish that can be created quickly, and luckily doesn't involve many ingredients.
This is great for a simple supper or to serve at a buffet or for several people for lunch. For me 1tsp of dried chilli is too much, but not by much.
It is very versatile and can be adapted to be different easily, or to match individual tastes better.
 |
| Simple sauce and pasta - Image by Danielle Lowe |
Simple sauce and pasta (veggie friendly)
Time: 15 minutes plus preparation
Ingredients (for two people)
Cooking oil or spray
1 small red onion, thinly sliced
3 medium garlic cloves, crushed or finely chopped
1/2 tsp of dried mixed herbs
1 tsp of dried chilli flakes or 1/2 a fresh red chilli
500g of passata/chopped tomatoes
Salt and pepper (to season)
225g of pasta spirals
MethodCook the garlic, chilli, herbs and onion in the oil/spray for 2 minutes in a medium/large sized saucepan.
Season to taste and add in the passata/chopped tomatoes. Leave it to simmer covered for 10 minutes.
Cook the pasta while the sauce is simmering, but follow instructions to ensure that pasta is fully cooked.
Drain the pasta and but boiling hot water over it and drain again (to remove any starch).
Put the pasta in the sauce, cover the pasta in the sauce by mixing and then serve.
Suggestions
You do not have to use pasta spirals, just these are good to collect all the sauce in and to mix them together easily. I personally used multi type spirals, but this is just to give it extra colour, texture and flavour.
When putting in the passata/chopped tomatoes be very careful as it can spit up and make a mess.
If you do not like really spicy food cut down the amount of chilli put into the recipe.
You can put chicken in with this if you want to bulk it out, or you can serve with a healthy side salad, even some bread may be suitable.
My thoughts
This is a nice and simple dish that can be created quickly, and luckily doesn't involve many ingredients.
This is great for a simple supper or to serve at a buffet or for several people for lunch. For me 1tsp of dried chilli is too much, but not by much.
It is very versatile and can be adapted to be different easily, or to match individual tastes better.
Monday, January 30, 2012
A book review on Fyodor Dostoyevsky's 'Notes from underground'
A deeply thought provoking book, that encourages the reader to consider every single element of their life, even unwillingly at times.
You're taken on a journey with the characters of the book, you gain the ability to look beyond them and see what they claim not to, you learn to know their strengths and weaknesses.
Even though he is such an unlikable creature and he often has the ability to make the reader dislike him for his actions. In fact, that is of course his aim, to be disliked and mocked and to win the reader over. However, because of this predictable nature we play along with it to amuse him, and in fact we come out victorious and shame him.
Shaming him though, he knows is something that the readers do not want to do, it is against their nature. Besides all that the book is shown to be an old fashioned piece of writing referring to the reader as 'gentlemen' implying that women will not be able to handle the sharpness in his tone and nature.
Though it seems old fashioned and at times vulgar, it is a fascinating read - captivating and leaves room for contemplation. It has a cute little twist at the end that shows that nobody can fully control their lives and emotions.
The blurb asks if he's going mad or the world around him, well I think neither - I think it just shows the reality that leaves people wanting to have more control on their life.
Certainly worth a read, especially at a reasonable price and not too long a length. Once you've got into it, you'll be considering his next move and what hes planning all the way along. But nothing can help you to conclude what his next steps will be, because though he is predictable there is still something completely spontaneous about him - though he claims otherwise.
I also wish I found out more about what happened to the others in the book, even though it was a book that focused on him being a hermit and hiding away from society. They might be notes from underground but they ring very true with society today.
You're taken on a journey with the characters of the book, you gain the ability to look beyond them and see what they claim not to, you learn to know their strengths and weaknesses.
Even though he is such an unlikable creature and he often has the ability to make the reader dislike him for his actions. In fact, that is of course his aim, to be disliked and mocked and to win the reader over. However, because of this predictable nature we play along with it to amuse him, and in fact we come out victorious and shame him.
Shaming him though, he knows is something that the readers do not want to do, it is against their nature. Besides all that the book is shown to be an old fashioned piece of writing referring to the reader as 'gentlemen' implying that women will not be able to handle the sharpness in his tone and nature.
Though it seems old fashioned and at times vulgar, it is a fascinating read - captivating and leaves room for contemplation. It has a cute little twist at the end that shows that nobody can fully control their lives and emotions.
The blurb asks if he's going mad or the world around him, well I think neither - I think it just shows the reality that leaves people wanting to have more control on their life.
Certainly worth a read, especially at a reasonable price and not too long a length. Once you've got into it, you'll be considering his next move and what hes planning all the way along. But nothing can help you to conclude what his next steps will be, because though he is predictable there is still something completely spontaneous about him - though he claims otherwise.
I also wish I found out more about what happened to the others in the book, even though it was a book that focused on him being a hermit and hiding away from society. They might be notes from underground but they ring very true with society today.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
The modern yogurt
Yogurt never really went away. It's still something that is side in wide amounts on supermarket shelves. Children eat them, they're supposed to be healthy and good for us so it's understandable why there are so many and how the prices of them are slowly going up (because the companies know people will pay for the things they want).
However, companies are constantly looking for new flavours, new ideas and new designs to encourage the consumer further. But why should we let them do all that hard work and bunk up the price of the dairy product even more? We shouldn't and we don't need to.
Recently I have fallen back in love with the traditional yogurt. For a while I used to eat them because I believed that I should - now I eat them because I want to.
It isn't just tubs of yogurt, it's natural yogurt too. You can take any simple and cheap yogurt or some natural plain yogurt and add your own things too it. You don't need to pay much at all.
If you have fruit in the house it's really simple to just get some yogurt, chop some fruit or throw it in and there you go, a fruity yogurt. And if you don't have the time to do that every time you want a yogurt then chop up some fruit put it in a tub and have it to sprinkle some in whenever.
It might sound like a lot of effort when you could buy a yogurt with fruit already in it, but what is better and more healthy then fresh bits of fruit? It combines the great love and health of the yogurt, as well as the healthy love for fresh fruit.
Or if you want a guilty treat just grate in some chocolate or even throw some sweets of your choice in, and you have created a healthy but tasty little pot of delights.
Don't let a yogurt pre-fruited, ruin your love of fresh and yummy fruit.
However, companies are constantly looking for new flavours, new ideas and new designs to encourage the consumer further. But why should we let them do all that hard work and bunk up the price of the dairy product even more? We shouldn't and we don't need to.
Recently I have fallen back in love with the traditional yogurt. For a while I used to eat them because I believed that I should - now I eat them because I want to.
It isn't just tubs of yogurt, it's natural yogurt too. You can take any simple and cheap yogurt or some natural plain yogurt and add your own things too it. You don't need to pay much at all.
If you have fruit in the house it's really simple to just get some yogurt, chop some fruit or throw it in and there you go, a fruity yogurt. And if you don't have the time to do that every time you want a yogurt then chop up some fruit put it in a tub and have it to sprinkle some in whenever.
It might sound like a lot of effort when you could buy a yogurt with fruit already in it, but what is better and more healthy then fresh bits of fruit? It combines the great love and health of the yogurt, as well as the healthy love for fresh fruit.
Or if you want a guilty treat just grate in some chocolate or even throw some sweets of your choice in, and you have created a healthy but tasty little pot of delights.
Don't let a yogurt pre-fruited, ruin your love of fresh and yummy fruit.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
A change in my blog
My blog is going to have a change of direction from now on. This is mainly because of a change in the amount of time that I have, but also because of new writing adventures meaning my efforts are to be more focused on more areas.
I have been accepted to write on The National Scribbler as a general contributor. However, this means that some opinion.comment pieces shall appear on there not here. Some rejected pieces, or pieces that do not quite fit the target audience shall appear here, if I do not have another potential source to send them too.
I have also decided to split my book reviews in a more suitable fashion.
Young adult and teen books shall continue to be sent to the Guardian children's book site, but only there until I am 18 (when I will no longer be a member).
More in-depth books and ones that have an element of interest for everybody (such as links to modern society, biographies etc) shall now appear on The National Scribbler.
Any books that I feel don't fit the target audiences or are rejected shall now appear only on my blog. So you might want to keep a closer eye on my Twitter (@DanniiLowe) to see where my articles are.
My blog is also now going to include a wider range of subjects, including film and TV reviews, recipes and cooking ideas, travel pieces and a much wider range of news pieces.
This new idea is to come into affect very soon, so please keep an eye out for a much wider range of topics and things to interest you more. A new year for us all, a chance to expand the mind and our interests.
Keep reading, till next time.
I have been accepted to write on The National Scribbler as a general contributor. However, this means that some opinion.comment pieces shall appear on there not here. Some rejected pieces, or pieces that do not quite fit the target audience shall appear here, if I do not have another potential source to send them too.
I have also decided to split my book reviews in a more suitable fashion.
Young adult and teen books shall continue to be sent to the Guardian children's book site, but only there until I am 18 (when I will no longer be a member).
More in-depth books and ones that have an element of interest for everybody (such as links to modern society, biographies etc) shall now appear on The National Scribbler.
Any books that I feel don't fit the target audiences or are rejected shall now appear only on my blog. So you might want to keep a closer eye on my Twitter (@DanniiLowe) to see where my articles are.
My blog is also now going to include a wider range of subjects, including film and TV reviews, recipes and cooking ideas, travel pieces and a much wider range of news pieces.
This new idea is to come into affect very soon, so please keep an eye out for a much wider range of topics and things to interest you more. A new year for us all, a chance to expand the mind and our interests.
Keep reading, till next time.
Sunday, December 04, 2011
A reflection on November 30
November 30 2011 showed lots of public sector workers heading onto the streets, to the picket lines and spending the day at home. They were joined by private sector workers, pensioners and students to give them extra support - to show that it isn't just them wanting this.
We'd all like to think that this strike will make a difference in the pension bill and changes - but of course it is unlikely too, not just one day of action - though I wish so much that it did. Many people turned out, a good couple of hundred thousand from across the UK at least - holding much more local rallies gave the chance for more people to get there and take their families with them.
However, when I was at the London rally I heard one of the speakers saying 80% of Labour party members support the strike. That is something I want to focus on, because as a Labour party member I am shocked at such a low percentage.
The unions are supposed to be something we work with, the public sector is something we are supposed to protect and represent. Our leader doesn't agree with anything that the grassroots party members do - because he is not in the same league, the same class as the parties members.
80%, no that is really simply bad. That suggests that our party really is leaning more towards either the middle classes or private sector. We are not a party that is about that, and to even suggest that 80% is a good number it is not. If it was 80% of the Tories, then sure I think everybody would be surprised and happy with that result.
But this is a party, labour is a party that is about movements like this, about workers like those striking and about the future of the public sector. When I hear things like that I am shocked at such words, I feel ashamed to be part of such a party because to me - when they are striking and labour are in the opposition seat, I feel that the public sector will be relying on us.
Our leader and our 'top dogs' in the party do not understand. They are not brave enough to stand up for what the rest of society is doing, because they seem to think that being radical, brave, new and out there is something to be ashamed of.
If the Labour party really want votes from people that recently went elsewhere - then is not supporting them doing the party any favours? Because right now I do not see what votes they are trying to get, and I certainly do not see where they are aiming any positivity.
I am proud of our public sector workers, and I feel they deserve a decent old age. I want people to have a decent standard of living and to be encouraged to work for their country - even if my party does not.
We'd all like to think that this strike will make a difference in the pension bill and changes - but of course it is unlikely too, not just one day of action - though I wish so much that it did. Many people turned out, a good couple of hundred thousand from across the UK at least - holding much more local rallies gave the chance for more people to get there and take their families with them.
However, when I was at the London rally I heard one of the speakers saying 80% of Labour party members support the strike. That is something I want to focus on, because as a Labour party member I am shocked at such a low percentage.
The unions are supposed to be something we work with, the public sector is something we are supposed to protect and represent. Our leader doesn't agree with anything that the grassroots party members do - because he is not in the same league, the same class as the parties members.
80%, no that is really simply bad. That suggests that our party really is leaning more towards either the middle classes or private sector. We are not a party that is about that, and to even suggest that 80% is a good number it is not. If it was 80% of the Tories, then sure I think everybody would be surprised and happy with that result.
But this is a party, labour is a party that is about movements like this, about workers like those striking and about the future of the public sector. When I hear things like that I am shocked at such words, I feel ashamed to be part of such a party because to me - when they are striking and labour are in the opposition seat, I feel that the public sector will be relying on us.
Our leader and our 'top dogs' in the party do not understand. They are not brave enough to stand up for what the rest of society is doing, because they seem to think that being radical, brave, new and out there is something to be ashamed of.
If the Labour party really want votes from people that recently went elsewhere - then is not supporting them doing the party any favours? Because right now I do not see what votes they are trying to get, and I certainly do not see where they are aiming any positivity.
I am proud of our public sector workers, and I feel they deserve a decent old age. I want people to have a decent standard of living and to be encouraged to work for their country - even if my party does not.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
A book review on Bernard Becketts 'August'
It's not very often I come across this style of book. The two stories running alongside each other and occasionally coming together makes it so fascinating. And because of the smashing imagery created it reminds me of a film, and you could just imagine this book turned into an emotional heartbreaking film.
The more you go into the book, the more you wonder about how they got there - even though you're finding out more about it. Each little time a part ended, it was like a little cliffhanger and I just kept thinking "why stop now, why not tell all the story" but of course knowing all the story might not have given the same effect.
Learning about their stories made fear rise from within me, because it felt like I was them - it felt like everything that was happening I could feel. An understanding was able to develop in my brain when they went into the physics and philosophy of certain points, even though perhaps I would have been baffled in the past. All of this is because I felt like them, even though I was reading the book as an onlooker and could not be both people, I was.
Every time they submerged into their own stories, all thoughts of them being stuck upside down in a car, at night, badly injured left my mind. Just like they were telling the stories to forget their situation themselves. The whole book, even though it includes the past of the city and the settlement was set within that one car - yet that car was made to feel so far away.
And as the end grew nearer, I began to worry even more. I did not like the stories that they were telling, there was a difference in them from then to now - but they could not see it. And then the reality all comes out, and I found myself so angry at Tristan (the male in the book) for Grace. But they slowly came to an agreement and the shouting and attacks stopped.
Then such a cliffhanger, did they die trying to break free from the car, or did they survive and get found? I do not know, I have no idea. At this point I wept a little, because I didn't know - I didn't want them to die. I wanted them to live happily, I wanted Grace to be with what she called her angel. And even now there are a million solutions and possibilities going around in my head.
Ow gosh, Bernard Beckett, why did you have to leave it like this, why ow why? If only I knew how the author personally imagined it to end, I could feel that the story is over. Or maybe it isn't over? And 'August' was just the beginning.
The more you go into the book, the more you wonder about how they got there - even though you're finding out more about it. Each little time a part ended, it was like a little cliffhanger and I just kept thinking "why stop now, why not tell all the story" but of course knowing all the story might not have given the same effect.
Learning about their stories made fear rise from within me, because it felt like I was them - it felt like everything that was happening I could feel. An understanding was able to develop in my brain when they went into the physics and philosophy of certain points, even though perhaps I would have been baffled in the past. All of this is because I felt like them, even though I was reading the book as an onlooker and could not be both people, I was.
Every time they submerged into their own stories, all thoughts of them being stuck upside down in a car, at night, badly injured left my mind. Just like they were telling the stories to forget their situation themselves. The whole book, even though it includes the past of the city and the settlement was set within that one car - yet that car was made to feel so far away.
And as the end grew nearer, I began to worry even more. I did not like the stories that they were telling, there was a difference in them from then to now - but they could not see it. And then the reality all comes out, and I found myself so angry at Tristan (the male in the book) for Grace. But they slowly came to an agreement and the shouting and attacks stopped.
Then such a cliffhanger, did they die trying to break free from the car, or did they survive and get found? I do not know, I have no idea. At this point I wept a little, because I didn't know - I didn't want them to die. I wanted them to live happily, I wanted Grace to be with what she called her angel. And even now there are a million solutions and possibilities going around in my head.
Ow gosh, Bernard Beckett, why did you have to leave it like this, why ow why? If only I knew how the author personally imagined it to end, I could feel that the story is over. Or maybe it isn't over? And 'August' was just the beginning.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Scab - that word we used to call the traitors.
A scab in this sense, I firstly must point out is not one of those things that forms after you've cut yourself. If you are looking for a definition on this may I recommend that you try a different search.
Scab in the sense I am talking about is a traitor. It is somebody that stood for their principles until times got tough and then they returned to normality and let everybody else suffer while they worked. In the mining strikes it was an ongoing action, and people knew that going out on strike risked pay. If they could not afford to do it, they shouldn't have even started it.
To strike and then back down because times are tough, are giving in to the enemy. This is letting the enemy win, because they want you to suffer and they want you to be part of the working class, and they want to show that they do not suffer as quickly if work is not done.
@lisaansell did a blog at http://lisaansell.posterous.com/scab saying that "I did so because a child's circumstances took precedence. My responsibility to that child superseded my responsibility to the union. Am proud of decision I made, so I double dare you to call me a scab."
I agree with her. A family is an important thing to think about and if you know that you need to have the money to look after your family, then staying in work all that time is okay. She sometimes went out on strikes, because she had the money and sometimes not because of children. Both of which are okay, and neither of which make her a scab.
She took each strike as a unique one and decided from there. I would much rather that people did that then went out on strike and then went back to work, because that lets everybody down and then they are a scab.
Of course scab is not a word that we can use lightly, it can be deeply offensive. To me though it is more of a definition of somebody for the way they choose to work, it's like they are double sided and want their cake and to eat it - making them unpleasant like a scab from a cut.
Some children have started calling others scab for getting on with their work when others want to rebel, when in the past they would be called a swot or a nerd. This is wrong, and not acceptable. It is just like being in the workplace. If somebody wants to work let them, if they don't want to work that's their choice - but if you're going to do one or the other you have to stick to your morals.
But if people do decide to change their mind, is calling them scab really a good idea? Doing so can rip apart communities and if you're on strike then communities are probably already pushed to their limits. If you call somebody a scab because they choose to return to work to save their family or to look after their community then that does nothing for moral. It makes the situation more awkward because it hurts their family and makes the community look at that person badly.
If the community views them badly, then why did they bother returning to work. Scab is a very powerful word, and while it is suitable to call some people it - there is no need for it, because it doesn't do anybody any good. Just like strikes can rip communities apart, so can little words. Think it to yourself, but don't call people it out loud. While we might be angry at people changing their mind they shouldn't be ruined because of it.
Some people HAVE to change their mind, and we just HAVE to learn to face it.
Scab in the sense I am talking about is a traitor. It is somebody that stood for their principles until times got tough and then they returned to normality and let everybody else suffer while they worked. In the mining strikes it was an ongoing action, and people knew that going out on strike risked pay. If they could not afford to do it, they shouldn't have even started it.
To strike and then back down because times are tough, are giving in to the enemy. This is letting the enemy win, because they want you to suffer and they want you to be part of the working class, and they want to show that they do not suffer as quickly if work is not done.
@lisaansell did a blog at http://lisaansell.posterous.com/scab saying that "I did so because a child's circumstances took precedence. My responsibility to that child superseded my responsibility to the union. Am proud of decision I made, so I double dare you to call me a scab."
I agree with her. A family is an important thing to think about and if you know that you need to have the money to look after your family, then staying in work all that time is okay. She sometimes went out on strikes, because she had the money and sometimes not because of children. Both of which are okay, and neither of which make her a scab.
She took each strike as a unique one and decided from there. I would much rather that people did that then went out on strike and then went back to work, because that lets everybody down and then they are a scab.
Of course scab is not a word that we can use lightly, it can be deeply offensive. To me though it is more of a definition of somebody for the way they choose to work, it's like they are double sided and want their cake and to eat it - making them unpleasant like a scab from a cut.
Some children have started calling others scab for getting on with their work when others want to rebel, when in the past they would be called a swot or a nerd. This is wrong, and not acceptable. It is just like being in the workplace. If somebody wants to work let them, if they don't want to work that's their choice - but if you're going to do one or the other you have to stick to your morals.
But if people do decide to change their mind, is calling them scab really a good idea? Doing so can rip apart communities and if you're on strike then communities are probably already pushed to their limits. If you call somebody a scab because they choose to return to work to save their family or to look after their community then that does nothing for moral. It makes the situation more awkward because it hurts their family and makes the community look at that person badly.
If the community views them badly, then why did they bother returning to work. Scab is a very powerful word, and while it is suitable to call some people it - there is no need for it, because it doesn't do anybody any good. Just like strikes can rip communities apart, so can little words. Think it to yourself, but don't call people it out loud. While we might be angry at people changing their mind they shouldn't be ruined because of it.
Some people HAVE to change their mind, and we just HAVE to learn to face it.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Picking and choosing from day to day?
How would you like to live in the UK, but not be part of the country? How would you like to be a member of the UK and China at the same time?
It seems a little strange to me to start with, but if you look deeper you could say that it makes sense. If somebody wants to live somewhere that is their choice, and if they don't want to participate then they shouldn't have to. Although some may say why live here, get the benefits but not care about the way the country is run.
Many though, already do not care. Many live here, but do not vote and do not participate in such events. In a similar way, if you are now not on the electoral register then you cannot get a bank account and similar things.
At least this is the impression I get when I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panarchism - It says "emphasizing each individuals right to freely join and leave the jurisdiction of any governments they choose, without being forced to move from their current locale."
The whole concept was created back in the 1800's when a piece called 'Panarchy' was written by a Belgian political economist called Paul Emile de Puydt. As the name suggests it is a spin on anarchy that would allow all governments to compete for members however many existed.
Panarchy isn't just something that is supported by anarchists though. @tingedfringe that describes himself as a "Socialist. Nihilist. Panarchist. Libertarian." believes that all these ideas can go together. When I asked him how he thinks Panarchy might be good for modern society and also if there are any bits we should pay attention to his response was
I'm not a genius, but look on the website link given above, and the links from there. Ask the Twitter guy questions. It's a different thought process, and until I got asked to do a blog on it, I hadn't heard of it. Even google told me, I must mean anarchism.
And according to the flawed political compass test I'm very anarchist - but I think that this sounds much more logical and acceptable, even if it sounds a contradiction to my socialist beliefs.
It seems a little strange to me to start with, but if you look deeper you could say that it makes sense. If somebody wants to live somewhere that is their choice, and if they don't want to participate then they shouldn't have to. Although some may say why live here, get the benefits but not care about the way the country is run.
Many though, already do not care. Many live here, but do not vote and do not participate in such events. In a similar way, if you are now not on the electoral register then you cannot get a bank account and similar things.
At least this is the impression I get when I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panarchism - It says "emphasizing each individuals right to freely join and leave the jurisdiction of any governments they choose, without being forced to move from their current locale."
The whole concept was created back in the 1800's when a piece called 'Panarchy' was written by a Belgian political economist called Paul Emile de Puydt. As the name suggests it is a spin on anarchy that would allow all governments to compete for members however many existed.
Panarchy isn't just something that is supported by anarchists though. @tingedfringe that describes himself as a "Socialist. Nihilist. Panarchist. Libertarian." believes that all these ideas can go together. When I asked him how he thinks Panarchy might be good for modern society and also if there are any bits we should pay attention to his response was
It'd be good for modern society because it's the practical bridge between liberal democracy and anarchism. i.e it has all the features of both but without the bugs. The point that should be held high is it's polycentric nature - "Unity in diversity". Even if you don't fully embrace it. So fiscal panarchism (ignoring polycentric law) would have each party holding a % of the budget equal to % of their vote.Which is an improvement on PR as it removes the majoritarian nature of democracy.Now when somebody that believes it and understands it puts it like that, it makes more sense doesn't it? Wouldn't we all prefer to see our vote really count, for our support to actually matter - to give us all a meaning in participating in our country, wherever that might be. And wouldn't life be much more simple to be able to like certain parts of a political thought, instead of having to agree with it all.
I'm not a genius, but look on the website link given above, and the links from there. Ask the Twitter guy questions. It's a different thought process, and until I got asked to do a blog on it, I hadn't heard of it. Even google told me, I must mean anarchism.
And according to the flawed political compass test I'm very anarchist - but I think that this sounds much more logical and acceptable, even if it sounds a contradiction to my socialist beliefs.
Friday, November 04, 2011
Child poverty
I'm doing this blog because of the debate that UKYP is doing. However, it is also a follow on from my inequality in education blog and also the piece I did regards the Beatrice Webb foundation considering the definition of poverty.
UKYP are basically saying they cannot tackle the issue, because it's too big. They're saying what is the definition of child poverty. Many point out that there are already many projects in place to try to tackle the issue.
The government are trying to tackle child poverty and rescue people from child poverty and poverty in general. Of course many parties all across the developed world would say they are trying to tackle these issues.
Charities and organisations across the world are trying to get people out of poverty. However, not many tackle specifically poverty in the UK.
The reality is, poverty is being considered and trying to be handled. Or so we are lead to believe. It seems a bit naive to believe that it is being tackled. And why do I say this? Because people in this country, especially younger people seem to be more about equality - not just equality locally or nationally, but instead worldwide.
Many people in the UK send money, clothes and products abroad to try to help those that are disadvantaged abroad. However, why are we saying that because there is a higher rate of poverty in another country we can allow our rates to rise to extreme levels? Surely we as citizens of the UK and the world should be looking to bring down every poverty level, no matter where it is and how high it is.
The debate raised the question of what is poverty? Well I still believe that it is nothing to do with xboxs and phones - but it is about what you need. If you need a phone for your future career, to get a job, to do college work or to volunteer in society - then suddenly, if you cannot afford a phone then yes that is important and that is part of poverty.
The reality is that as they say, poverty to us is different to that of Africa. However, of course it is different - we are in a different stage of our development, we have different requirements in life and we want different things.
However, I stress that there is a difference between want and need. In some parts of Africa for them to even see a phone is unimaginable, for them to own one in most cases is a want. However, for us in our country to not have a phone, for many people it causes isolation.
This is not right. This is not a good thing. The fact that such material things have become a necessity is nothing to be proud of.
Fuel poverty, we might say is a real necessity in this country - but it is not. I ask you how people managed before the wide spread use of electric and gas to every home? They managed, and yes it gave some people a shiver but they managed. Now, yes we are more energy conscious and we don't want to chop the trees down and use up all the coal to keep warm, so therefore we as society are forcing our self into poverty.
But what else could poverty be you ask? Perhaps people being able to eat healthy food and a balanced diet. Yes, sure that is indeed something else. We say it is about how many people are malnourished and hungry, but is our expectations of plate sizes out of proportion with the rest of the world? Are we too picky about wanting to get joints of meat from the super market instead of the cheaper butchers? Would we rather be lazy and buy our fruit and vegetables for more from the supermarket, than growing them ourselves for less. But yes, not everybody can do that.
Then though there are more intriguing issues. The people that live in the city but have never seen fields, cows and sheep - and the people living in the country that have never travelled to a big city - are they both equally in poverty? Because does that suggest that they cannot afford to get somewhere. They cannot get there because of isolation by society. Are the people that live on minor roads in the country, that do not get the roads gritted or cleared in bad weather - are they in poverty because they cannot afford a gritter or a cleaner, or suitable transport to get them to where they need to be.
Child poverty is not a simple statistic. It is not a one fits all approach. It is not something that can be defined and fixed with money and policy alone.
Child poverty is in fact something that exists in every corner of our society. It lurches on every street, in every postcode, in every area - just instead we choose to define it with the most easy things and the most noticeable things. We mention those things that are memorable and are seen as crucial to peoples lives. However, everybody requires different things in life and it is a personal thing.
All of the above issues matter not just in our country, but across the world. And if you doubt it, a farmer in Africa struggles to get to a big city hospital, they struggle to have an air conditioned home because of utility connections, possibly affecting a health condition they may have.
We can pretend that child poverty and poverty in general is being tackled. However, it is not - people in the world do not have everything they require for their life, their job and their progression.
UKYP are basically saying they cannot tackle the issue, because it's too big. They're saying what is the definition of child poverty. Many point out that there are already many projects in place to try to tackle the issue.
The government are trying to tackle child poverty and rescue people from child poverty and poverty in general. Of course many parties all across the developed world would say they are trying to tackle these issues.
Charities and organisations across the world are trying to get people out of poverty. However, not many tackle specifically poverty in the UK.
The reality is, poverty is being considered and trying to be handled. Or so we are lead to believe. It seems a bit naive to believe that it is being tackled. And why do I say this? Because people in this country, especially younger people seem to be more about equality - not just equality locally or nationally, but instead worldwide.
Many people in the UK send money, clothes and products abroad to try to help those that are disadvantaged abroad. However, why are we saying that because there is a higher rate of poverty in another country we can allow our rates to rise to extreme levels? Surely we as citizens of the UK and the world should be looking to bring down every poverty level, no matter where it is and how high it is.
The debate raised the question of what is poverty? Well I still believe that it is nothing to do with xboxs and phones - but it is about what you need. If you need a phone for your future career, to get a job, to do college work or to volunteer in society - then suddenly, if you cannot afford a phone then yes that is important and that is part of poverty.
The reality is that as they say, poverty to us is different to that of Africa. However, of course it is different - we are in a different stage of our development, we have different requirements in life and we want different things.
However, I stress that there is a difference between want and need. In some parts of Africa for them to even see a phone is unimaginable, for them to own one in most cases is a want. However, for us in our country to not have a phone, for many people it causes isolation.
This is not right. This is not a good thing. The fact that such material things have become a necessity is nothing to be proud of.
Fuel poverty, we might say is a real necessity in this country - but it is not. I ask you how people managed before the wide spread use of electric and gas to every home? They managed, and yes it gave some people a shiver but they managed. Now, yes we are more energy conscious and we don't want to chop the trees down and use up all the coal to keep warm, so therefore we as society are forcing our self into poverty.
But what else could poverty be you ask? Perhaps people being able to eat healthy food and a balanced diet. Yes, sure that is indeed something else. We say it is about how many people are malnourished and hungry, but is our expectations of plate sizes out of proportion with the rest of the world? Are we too picky about wanting to get joints of meat from the super market instead of the cheaper butchers? Would we rather be lazy and buy our fruit and vegetables for more from the supermarket, than growing them ourselves for less. But yes, not everybody can do that.
Then though there are more intriguing issues. The people that live in the city but have never seen fields, cows and sheep - and the people living in the country that have never travelled to a big city - are they both equally in poverty? Because does that suggest that they cannot afford to get somewhere. They cannot get there because of isolation by society. Are the people that live on minor roads in the country, that do not get the roads gritted or cleared in bad weather - are they in poverty because they cannot afford a gritter or a cleaner, or suitable transport to get them to where they need to be.
Child poverty is not a simple statistic. It is not a one fits all approach. It is not something that can be defined and fixed with money and policy alone.
Child poverty is in fact something that exists in every corner of our society. It lurches on every street, in every postcode, in every area - just instead we choose to define it with the most easy things and the most noticeable things. We mention those things that are memorable and are seen as crucial to peoples lives. However, everybody requires different things in life and it is a personal thing.
All of the above issues matter not just in our country, but across the world. And if you doubt it, a farmer in Africa struggles to get to a big city hospital, they struggle to have an air conditioned home because of utility connections, possibly affecting a health condition they may have.
We can pretend that child poverty and poverty in general is being tackled. However, it is not - people in the world do not have everything they require for their life, their job and their progression.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Inequality regards education
The UCAS process seems to be getting a lot of attention recently. This blog however, is something that has nothing really to do with that - I am looking for peoples opinions and comments to form part of my book.
I'm currently going through the process of applying to university myself, and one thing that shocked me is the £22 application fee, if you wish to apply for more than one university. I mean I understand that there has to be an administration cost, but £22 seems excessive.
I think perhaps it seems harsh to me for several reasons.
1) Most people I know, their school/sixth form/college has paid for their application to be processed.
2) £22 is more money than those of us that are lucky enough to still receive EMA in this final year actually receive. As everybody that used to get £30 now gets £20.
So already, education is seriously unjust. It is highly unfair and unequal. Because some people will choose to spend a more manageable £11 to try to get into university, by only sending off for one course. Others wont even apply because of the costs involved in the process. Those that are the most socially harmed and damaged in society, do not in reality have the chance to go to university.
They can neither afford to apply or then to go there in the first place. Why? Because even if they do get a place they have to put a large sum of money down as a deposit/bond for accommodation. They have to afford travel to their university. They have to afford to buy things to go in their room/kitchen/bathroom.
Meaning that even if people do find the money to apply and they get in, they have to find hundreds of pounds to spend before a student loan comes through. And what does that mean? That means that people are more likely to apply to local, and possibly worse universities because it saves them money.
So besides all of the unfairness in universities deciding people because of where they come from and their background (which they do, whatever they say), people from less well off backgrounds have more battles to fight with.
Not that the government, opposition or anybody really cares about normal people out there.
Thoughts would be appreciated.
I'm currently going through the process of applying to university myself, and one thing that shocked me is the £22 application fee, if you wish to apply for more than one university. I mean I understand that there has to be an administration cost, but £22 seems excessive.
I think perhaps it seems harsh to me for several reasons.
1) Most people I know, their school/sixth form/college has paid for their application to be processed.
2) £22 is more money than those of us that are lucky enough to still receive EMA in this final year actually receive. As everybody that used to get £30 now gets £20.
So already, education is seriously unjust. It is highly unfair and unequal. Because some people will choose to spend a more manageable £11 to try to get into university, by only sending off for one course. Others wont even apply because of the costs involved in the process. Those that are the most socially harmed and damaged in society, do not in reality have the chance to go to university.
They can neither afford to apply or then to go there in the first place. Why? Because even if they do get a place they have to put a large sum of money down as a deposit/bond for accommodation. They have to afford travel to their university. They have to afford to buy things to go in their room/kitchen/bathroom.
Meaning that even if people do find the money to apply and they get in, they have to find hundreds of pounds to spend before a student loan comes through. And what does that mean? That means that people are more likely to apply to local, and possibly worse universities because it saves them money.
So besides all of the unfairness in universities deciding people because of where they come from and their background (which they do, whatever they say), people from less well off backgrounds have more battles to fight with.
Not that the government, opposition or anybody really cares about normal people out there.
Thoughts would be appreciated.
Friday, October 28, 2011
A product of capitalism
Halloween, bonfire night and Christmas are all rapidly approaching. For young children it's a time of great fun, dressing up, sweets, late nights and gifts - but for the rest of us, it's a money spending exercise that many don't really enjoy.
All three events are around for a purpose. To celebrate events and people - and that of course is often forgotten. But we all know that it's often forgotten, and that's something me talking about wont change.
However, to the younger people in society all three events are becoming nothing more than a product of capitalism. They're just events that happen where we feel obliged to spend money in our shops. They are becoming products of capitalism.
And even for the people that say they make their own sweets and presents to save money, well yes you save money - but you still have to spend extra money to make the items. Now sure, putting money into our economy is a good thing, but I'm sure you'd rather spend it on something for you or that your entire family can benefit from.
Capitalism obviously isn't a new concept. It is far from a new idea. And it has been edging further into our society for generations. Now though, when money is tight, the world finances look even more doomed than before and we're all just fed up - how much longer can the capitalist society rely on the rest of us to pay for them at these times of year.
But all this discussion came about after somebody said 'halloween is a product of the media' and I corrected them, to say surely it's a product of capitalism. I suppose it is both in reality. Because many areas of the media are now so like capitalist organisations that there isn't a difference. Then also there is the fact that media agrees to promote the capitalist events.
Which is worse though? The company that looks to sell the sweets, or the company that advertises the other company making sweets? Both are equally as bad. A newspaper gets paid for the advert, people buy the newspaper and they make profit - without really caring about the content. The sweet maker, though it has paid for the advert gets increased income from that.
They are both promoting events just to promote themselves, to make themselves money and doing nothing for society. Well that's a backfired idea, because sooner or later society will run out of money, we'll be like the people of Greece's streets and then what will they do. Will they still be expecting us to buy newspapers? Will they still be expecting us to but sweets at Halloween? They will expect it but we shall not and their industry will also collapse.
It seems like a far fetched idea I suppose. The idea that these three events that are produced by capitalists are pushing many people too far, but they are. Now of course the bosses wont care about it, they earn enough money to survive any crisis. Bu hows about the workers, the share holders and the people that agree with capitalism and don't try to reject it - can they survive if everything goes belly up.
How long will it take for those people to suddenly oppose the owners and the capitalist scheme when they are hit by it. How long will it be before many people in society become hypocrites and go from loving capitalism and buying into it everyday, to stepping away from it and not trusting it. It's bound to happen when it's too late - instead of them halting capitalism safely and by choice they will push it until it breaks.
And if you don't think it's breaking, then I ask you some simple questions. How many people of all ages do you hear looking forward to Christmas? How many people did you used to hear looking forward too it? And if you don't understand what I mean let me put it my way.
The government lets companies get away tax free. The government cuts funding to young people, old people, the disabled and sick to pay for the hole they left themselves with. Suddenly those people struggle even more to buy that one present, to buy that vegetable treat or to buy some crackers. I've heard many people already saying that this year they're not as stable as they were and it's going to be a huge task.
The 99% of normal people in this country are struggling more and more each day. That's not just because of the government but that's because it links hand in hand with capitalism. They are tearing us all apart, ruining us all - and why? for their own greedy purposes.
The products of capitalism will be the products of a crisis.
All three events are around for a purpose. To celebrate events and people - and that of course is often forgotten. But we all know that it's often forgotten, and that's something me talking about wont change.
However, to the younger people in society all three events are becoming nothing more than a product of capitalism. They're just events that happen where we feel obliged to spend money in our shops. They are becoming products of capitalism.
And even for the people that say they make their own sweets and presents to save money, well yes you save money - but you still have to spend extra money to make the items. Now sure, putting money into our economy is a good thing, but I'm sure you'd rather spend it on something for you or that your entire family can benefit from.
Capitalism obviously isn't a new concept. It is far from a new idea. And it has been edging further into our society for generations. Now though, when money is tight, the world finances look even more doomed than before and we're all just fed up - how much longer can the capitalist society rely on the rest of us to pay for them at these times of year.
But all this discussion came about after somebody said 'halloween is a product of the media' and I corrected them, to say surely it's a product of capitalism. I suppose it is both in reality. Because many areas of the media are now so like capitalist organisations that there isn't a difference. Then also there is the fact that media agrees to promote the capitalist events.
Which is worse though? The company that looks to sell the sweets, or the company that advertises the other company making sweets? Both are equally as bad. A newspaper gets paid for the advert, people buy the newspaper and they make profit - without really caring about the content. The sweet maker, though it has paid for the advert gets increased income from that.
They are both promoting events just to promote themselves, to make themselves money and doing nothing for society. Well that's a backfired idea, because sooner or later society will run out of money, we'll be like the people of Greece's streets and then what will they do. Will they still be expecting us to buy newspapers? Will they still be expecting us to but sweets at Halloween? They will expect it but we shall not and their industry will also collapse.
It seems like a far fetched idea I suppose. The idea that these three events that are produced by capitalists are pushing many people too far, but they are. Now of course the bosses wont care about it, they earn enough money to survive any crisis. Bu hows about the workers, the share holders and the people that agree with capitalism and don't try to reject it - can they survive if everything goes belly up.
How long will it take for those people to suddenly oppose the owners and the capitalist scheme when they are hit by it. How long will it be before many people in society become hypocrites and go from loving capitalism and buying into it everyday, to stepping away from it and not trusting it. It's bound to happen when it's too late - instead of them halting capitalism safely and by choice they will push it until it breaks.
And if you don't think it's breaking, then I ask you some simple questions. How many people of all ages do you hear looking forward to Christmas? How many people did you used to hear looking forward too it? And if you don't understand what I mean let me put it my way.
The government lets companies get away tax free. The government cuts funding to young people, old people, the disabled and sick to pay for the hole they left themselves with. Suddenly those people struggle even more to buy that one present, to buy that vegetable treat or to buy some crackers. I've heard many people already saying that this year they're not as stable as they were and it's going to be a huge task.
The 99% of normal people in this country are struggling more and more each day. That's not just because of the government but that's because it links hand in hand with capitalism. They are tearing us all apart, ruining us all - and why? for their own greedy purposes.
The products of capitalism will be the products of a crisis.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Campaigners demand Dave Hartnetts resignation
Today Occupy London Stock Exchange (OLSX) teamed up with UK Uncut and activists to demand the resignation of civil servant Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC) boss Dave Hartnett.
The protesters could be found outside the head office of Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs HMRC. They were demanding his resignation because of the way that he secretly secured deals with extremely wealthy corporations to let them off paying their taxes.
They also wanted his resignation after a recent survey established him to be the most wined and dined civil servant out of the 172 on the list. Hartnett has attended 107 events held by corporations in the last 3 years, and they are just ones on the record. People from across the political spectrum have also called for his resignation.
However, the offices were highly defended by police and the protesters were not allowed past, leading their to be minor incidents between the protesters and police.
Later in the day protesters spotted Vince Cable and followed him all the way to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills demanding that he also joined the campaign to get Hartnett out.
UK Uncut have campaigned for a long time against big companies that manage to avoid paying their taxes, and last week Hartnett appeared in front of the Public Accounts Commitee about deals he made with Vodafone and Goldman Sachs. These deals cost the taxpayer a total of £6.1billion and he has been accused of abusing his position to "cover up his own mistakes".
Occupy London supporter Kyshia Davey said: "HMRC has just announced it will be going after 146,000 pensioners to demand hundreds of pounds from them. Meanwhile, its boss is striking secret deals with opulent corporations to let them off billions of pounds in tax. Hartnett is fatally undermining public confidence in the UK's tax system at a time of austerity and he must resign immediately."
UK Uncut activist Sam Gilbert added: "The money from Vodafone's £6bn tax dodge alone could have prevented all of the cuts in public services over the past year."
The pressure is growing for Dave Hartnetts resignation, and it is hoped that todays actions lead to more public and political support.
(Information provided by UK Uncuts latest press release).
The protesters could be found outside the head office of Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs HMRC. They were demanding his resignation because of the way that he secretly secured deals with extremely wealthy corporations to let them off paying their taxes.
They also wanted his resignation after a recent survey established him to be the most wined and dined civil servant out of the 172 on the list. Hartnett has attended 107 events held by corporations in the last 3 years, and they are just ones on the record. People from across the political spectrum have also called for his resignation.
However, the offices were highly defended by police and the protesters were not allowed past, leading their to be minor incidents between the protesters and police.
Later in the day protesters spotted Vince Cable and followed him all the way to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills demanding that he also joined the campaign to get Hartnett out.
UK Uncut have campaigned for a long time against big companies that manage to avoid paying their taxes, and last week Hartnett appeared in front of the Public Accounts Commitee about deals he made with Vodafone and Goldman Sachs. These deals cost the taxpayer a total of £6.1billion and he has been accused of abusing his position to "cover up his own mistakes".
Occupy London supporter Kyshia Davey said: "HMRC has just announced it will be going after 146,000 pensioners to demand hundreds of pounds from them. Meanwhile, its boss is striking secret deals with opulent corporations to let them off billions of pounds in tax. Hartnett is fatally undermining public confidence in the UK's tax system at a time of austerity and he must resign immediately."
UK Uncut activist Sam Gilbert added: "The money from Vodafone's £6bn tax dodge alone could have prevented all of the cuts in public services over the past year."
The pressure is growing for Dave Hartnetts resignation, and it is hoped that todays actions lead to more public and political support.
(Information provided by UK Uncuts latest press release).
Friday, October 21, 2011
Handling those sad times
At 17, there are many things about life that I don't understand. And those things I do understand I see them in a different way to adults. Those events that happened when I was a child, my child's mind sees everything differently to that of those adult minds around\me.
When a serious events happens in life, and a child and adult are both effected - neither of them can really understand the others feelings. Unless of course the same event happened to the adult when they were a child. Neither can empathise with the other, to really understand - they can just understand their own feelings and assume the other must feel similar to that too.
I will always remember the 17th of October 2004. I will always remember the in depth details that a child picks up on but adults some times miss. I remember the way that my mind didn't really understand the situation, and I remember the way that my mind just glossed over the situation.
That day my paternal Grandad died. I was very close to him, he meant so much to me. However, if you'd have seen my 10 year old self reacting to the situation - you'd have honestly thought I didn't care and I could handle it. Maybe that was my way of coping, but now I regret everything about that.
Which is why I am writing this. This blog is to not only help me overcome the issues I have faced since that day, but also to perhaps help other young people feeling like I do or to help adults that are trying to understand a child's feelings.
I remember that day so well. I was out with one of my friends in my hamlet. We just happened to be walking down from the park, and I got a phone call. My parents wanted me to go home, and me being the child I was - I said 'but I haven't done anything, what've I done wrong?' - they insisted I hadn't done anything and I went home (running quickly).
Now how I wish that I had been in trouble. I'd have rather been grounded any day. Instead I went up to my mum, who was in her bedroom and she told me. I didn't want to believe it, who would want to believe it. Then off we went to the hospital where he had been taken.
That in itself was something I couldn't understand. There was so many people there in the relatives room that I'd never remembered meeting. How could I accept that it was MY grandad that was dead, if I didn't know any of the people in this room. I couldn't/ Then obviously because of my age I couldn't see his dead body laying there in the hospital room.
I still couldn't believe it or accept it. My 10 year old self didn't accept it. Looking back, I needed some harsh reality, somebody to tell me just to accept it - but of course, nobody wanted to do that. Nobody wants to sit down with a child and break their heart. So nobody did.
The next day it was school, and I went in just like it was a normal day. I didn't tell any of my friends, or if I did it was just as a passing comment. For that next week I continued as normal.
I refused to go in to see his body in the chapel of rest - because I didn't want to see him, I didn't want that to be the last memory and I didn't really want to accept it, so not having proof meant I could continue to trick myself into thinking it was a lie.
When the day of the cremation came there was so many people I hadn't met or heard of before. Most of them were my Grandads wife's family. It seemed more like it was the end of the journey for one of her family members, not for MY grandad. I seemed pushed aside and like I was going to pay respects to a random person. So in my mind this was another sign it was not the end for grandad.
The service was dry and dull. But one thing always pained me. That young child I was picked up on something. During that service the person giving it said he was the husband too, the equals of a dad too, a brother too.. BUT no son of, but no real dad to my dad and certainly no grandad to me. I wasn't mentioned in that service at all, not one mention of me or my dad. He was as important to me as he was to the rest.
From that moment I despised those that were mentioned. Because they had forgotten about me. From that moment I found it even harder to believe and accept. And from that moment I knew that if it was my grandad he would be broken that I was just forgotten so.
And as I found out later in my life, there was a lot of disagreements between my dad and grandad before I was born. There was a lot of issues between my parents and my grandad and his wife. But why ruin my memories, my feelings just because of that. I was not to blame for anything that happened - I was just an innocent bystander.
I seen councillors to try to accept it. He'd died from heart problems suddenly and it really did hit me inside. A couple of years later I asked what had happened to his ashes. My parents contacted my great grandma (my grandads mum) and even she didn't know where they were. It turns out that they are somewhere off the cliffs of Whitby, near to where they used to have a caravan.
How nice of them. Did they really think a 10 year old could just accept it and get over it? Did they just expect me to forget and move on? Because if they did they were so very wrong. Instead I still struggle to accept that he is even gone. I still wonder when he'll knock on the door, when he'll ring me up.
And while you probably don't care much about my own story. I am sharing it with you to highlight that young children need to be able to accept it. That children cannot end up being hurt for the benefit of others. Sometimes differences have to be put aside for the child's sake.
Because I still cry myself to sleep. I still beat myself up about it all. And I can never end this feeling because I have no where to go to remember specifically. Because most people have a stone to go to, a bench or know where the ashes are. And the older I have got the more raw these emotions have become.
And as if that wasn't enough. Last year in the very month that my grandad had died - his wife had the darn nerve to ring up and have a go at my dad. She was saying he had no right to put what he did on his blog. So her or somebody must have been keeping tabs on him. Well, that probably means they are keeping tabs on me. And I hope they are. Because I want them to see what they have done to that once young innocent and happy girl. How dare she ring up then, I have feelings too and that hurt me - and it didn't hurt my dad, it hurt him because I was sitting there in complete tears.
So all I can really do, is ask you to make sure you talk to those affected. That emotions are not bottled up. And that somehow the reality can be found and accepted. Because trust me, if you do not resolve it, it doesn't get easier - it just eats you up more and more, it ruins lives and happiness.
I still wait longingly, I still wish I had answers, I wish I understood more and I wish I could just accept it. But due to so many people trying to protect me in cotton wool and then not caring about my emotions as I got older - I know I can do none of those things. I'm still being dragged under by this brick around my ankles.
And if they are keeping tabs on me - I hope they are happy. I hope that they like to know I have lived half a life for the last 7 years.
When a serious events happens in life, and a child and adult are both effected - neither of them can really understand the others feelings. Unless of course the same event happened to the adult when they were a child. Neither can empathise with the other, to really understand - they can just understand their own feelings and assume the other must feel similar to that too.
I will always remember the 17th of October 2004. I will always remember the in depth details that a child picks up on but adults some times miss. I remember the way that my mind didn't really understand the situation, and I remember the way that my mind just glossed over the situation.
That day my paternal Grandad died. I was very close to him, he meant so much to me. However, if you'd have seen my 10 year old self reacting to the situation - you'd have honestly thought I didn't care and I could handle it. Maybe that was my way of coping, but now I regret everything about that.
Which is why I am writing this. This blog is to not only help me overcome the issues I have faced since that day, but also to perhaps help other young people feeling like I do or to help adults that are trying to understand a child's feelings.
I remember that day so well. I was out with one of my friends in my hamlet. We just happened to be walking down from the park, and I got a phone call. My parents wanted me to go home, and me being the child I was - I said 'but I haven't done anything, what've I done wrong?' - they insisted I hadn't done anything and I went home (running quickly).
Now how I wish that I had been in trouble. I'd have rather been grounded any day. Instead I went up to my mum, who was in her bedroom and she told me. I didn't want to believe it, who would want to believe it. Then off we went to the hospital where he had been taken.
That in itself was something I couldn't understand. There was so many people there in the relatives room that I'd never remembered meeting. How could I accept that it was MY grandad that was dead, if I didn't know any of the people in this room. I couldn't/ Then obviously because of my age I couldn't see his dead body laying there in the hospital room.
I still couldn't believe it or accept it. My 10 year old self didn't accept it. Looking back, I needed some harsh reality, somebody to tell me just to accept it - but of course, nobody wanted to do that. Nobody wants to sit down with a child and break their heart. So nobody did.
The next day it was school, and I went in just like it was a normal day. I didn't tell any of my friends, or if I did it was just as a passing comment. For that next week I continued as normal.
I refused to go in to see his body in the chapel of rest - because I didn't want to see him, I didn't want that to be the last memory and I didn't really want to accept it, so not having proof meant I could continue to trick myself into thinking it was a lie.
When the day of the cremation came there was so many people I hadn't met or heard of before. Most of them were my Grandads wife's family. It seemed more like it was the end of the journey for one of her family members, not for MY grandad. I seemed pushed aside and like I was going to pay respects to a random person. So in my mind this was another sign it was not the end for grandad.
The service was dry and dull. But one thing always pained me. That young child I was picked up on something. During that service the person giving it said he was the husband too, the equals of a dad too, a brother too.. BUT no son of, but no real dad to my dad and certainly no grandad to me. I wasn't mentioned in that service at all, not one mention of me or my dad. He was as important to me as he was to the rest.
From that moment I despised those that were mentioned. Because they had forgotten about me. From that moment I found it even harder to believe and accept. And from that moment I knew that if it was my grandad he would be broken that I was just forgotten so.
And as I found out later in my life, there was a lot of disagreements between my dad and grandad before I was born. There was a lot of issues between my parents and my grandad and his wife. But why ruin my memories, my feelings just because of that. I was not to blame for anything that happened - I was just an innocent bystander.
I seen councillors to try to accept it. He'd died from heart problems suddenly and it really did hit me inside. A couple of years later I asked what had happened to his ashes. My parents contacted my great grandma (my grandads mum) and even she didn't know where they were. It turns out that they are somewhere off the cliffs of Whitby, near to where they used to have a caravan.
How nice of them. Did they really think a 10 year old could just accept it and get over it? Did they just expect me to forget and move on? Because if they did they were so very wrong. Instead I still struggle to accept that he is even gone. I still wonder when he'll knock on the door, when he'll ring me up.
And while you probably don't care much about my own story. I am sharing it with you to highlight that young children need to be able to accept it. That children cannot end up being hurt for the benefit of others. Sometimes differences have to be put aside for the child's sake.
Because I still cry myself to sleep. I still beat myself up about it all. And I can never end this feeling because I have no where to go to remember specifically. Because most people have a stone to go to, a bench or know where the ashes are. And the older I have got the more raw these emotions have become.
And as if that wasn't enough. Last year in the very month that my grandad had died - his wife had the darn nerve to ring up and have a go at my dad. She was saying he had no right to put what he did on his blog. So her or somebody must have been keeping tabs on him. Well, that probably means they are keeping tabs on me. And I hope they are. Because I want them to see what they have done to that once young innocent and happy girl. How dare she ring up then, I have feelings too and that hurt me - and it didn't hurt my dad, it hurt him because I was sitting there in complete tears.
So all I can really do, is ask you to make sure you talk to those affected. That emotions are not bottled up. And that somehow the reality can be found and accepted. Because trust me, if you do not resolve it, it doesn't get easier - it just eats you up more and more, it ruins lives and happiness.
I still wait longingly, I still wish I had answers, I wish I understood more and I wish I could just accept it. But due to so many people trying to protect me in cotton wool and then not caring about my emotions as I got older - I know I can do none of those things. I'm still being dragged under by this brick around my ankles.
And if they are keeping tabs on me - I hope they are happy. I hope that they like to know I have lived half a life for the last 7 years.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
A book review on Mary Hoopers 'Velvet'
I don't think I have cried quite so much at one bit of a book. That next to last chapter really got to me, and I thought it was all over. But luckily it wasn't, there was more around the corner.
The next chapter was a much happier one, but still had a slightly sad element. And in some ways that happy ending ruined the book, because it seemed to me to be a typical ending, that typical happy lovers ending. But maybe really, leaving the book on a sad ending would have left me really quite sad and even distraught.
I was utterly captivated in this book though, I picked it up the first day and read four chapters, but the next day I couldn't put it down. I stayed up past midnight finishing the book. Then in fairness I ended up staying up several more hours thinking about the plot and the meaning of the book.
As the book is set in the start of the 1900's it's a step back in time, but somehow it still seems so modern. A young person running away from her past life to start again, that girl messing up but being given another chance and then that girl raising up in the world - it sounds great. But then that same girl Velvet ends up stuck in a lovers rut, caught up in a world of spiritualism and then endangered by the fraud that surrounds her present life.
The sad reality that her trying to escape from the guilt of her basically murdering her father, leads her to get caught up in a much worse scenario - especially when it turns out that her father didn't die that cold night and has even stepped into the house where Velvet currently lives.
And who'd have thought that a girl that used to work in a steam laundry would end up meeting Arthur Conan Doyle and wearing the sort of clothes she used to clean and fix.
At least Charlie the aspiring police detective comes to the rescue, especially when Velvet goes to him about some baby farm in Reading.
This book was amazing. I was dubious because I don't exactly believe in spirits, but wow that put me in Velvets shoes, I could understand her thinking. Mary Hooper wrote this book perfectly and even though the ending seemed typical it fitted perfectly. This book will make you think time and time again 'owwh no poor Velvet'.
The next chapter was a much happier one, but still had a slightly sad element. And in some ways that happy ending ruined the book, because it seemed to me to be a typical ending, that typical happy lovers ending. But maybe really, leaving the book on a sad ending would have left me really quite sad and even distraught.
I was utterly captivated in this book though, I picked it up the first day and read four chapters, but the next day I couldn't put it down. I stayed up past midnight finishing the book. Then in fairness I ended up staying up several more hours thinking about the plot and the meaning of the book.
As the book is set in the start of the 1900's it's a step back in time, but somehow it still seems so modern. A young person running away from her past life to start again, that girl messing up but being given another chance and then that girl raising up in the world - it sounds great. But then that same girl Velvet ends up stuck in a lovers rut, caught up in a world of spiritualism and then endangered by the fraud that surrounds her present life.
The sad reality that her trying to escape from the guilt of her basically murdering her father, leads her to get caught up in a much worse scenario - especially when it turns out that her father didn't die that cold night and has even stepped into the house where Velvet currently lives.
And who'd have thought that a girl that used to work in a steam laundry would end up meeting Arthur Conan Doyle and wearing the sort of clothes she used to clean and fix.
At least Charlie the aspiring police detective comes to the rescue, especially when Velvet goes to him about some baby farm in Reading.
This book was amazing. I was dubious because I don't exactly believe in spirits, but wow that put me in Velvets shoes, I could understand her thinking. Mary Hooper wrote this book perfectly and even though the ending seemed typical it fitted perfectly. This book will make you think time and time again 'owwh no poor Velvet'.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Occupy London Stock Exchange
Occupy London Stock Exchange (OccupyLSX) has been preparing for a little while, but now the action is growing closer.
At recent political events last weekend, including the 10 years on rally there was leaflets been passed around and people generally saying to spread the word. The organisations first general assembly happened at Westminster Bridge during the Block the bridge, block the bill protest on Sunday October 9.
On Saturday October 15 the movement shall take to The City, London as part of a global movement for 'real democracy'. The movement shall start the peaceful occupation near the Stock Exchange at Paternoster Square.
The action is hand in hand with many other groups trying to highlight the economic situation according to OccupyLSX supporter Kai Wargalla "We stand in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street, protesters in Spain, Greece and the Middle East who started this movement. They have inspired people all over the world to step forward and make their voices heard – now.”
The movement is supported by UKUncut and many other organisations from across the world. UKUncut supporter Peter Hodgson said: “The success of the square occupations across Spain in calling for democracy and an end to austerity. The government is ignoring its electorate as they impose these austerity measures.”
The Facebook page has already after just a week got over 3500 confirmed attendants and 9000 followers. Suggesting the the movement is gathering support.
In an official press release the OcuppyLSX movement said "The occupation in London comes at the same time that hundreds of cities around the world are protesting under the banner of “United For Global Change” calling for true democracy. This is a movement that transcends political affiliation. It aims to open a dialogue on reforming finance and government so that each better serve and protect the interests and well being of the 99%."
For a full list of events happening on October 15 visit here. To see OcuppyLSX in pictures and get more information about the organisation specifically visit occupylsx.org
At recent political events last weekend, including the 10 years on rally there was leaflets been passed around and people generally saying to spread the word. The organisations first general assembly happened at Westminster Bridge during the Block the bridge, block the bill protest on Sunday October 9.
On Saturday October 15 the movement shall take to The City, London as part of a global movement for 'real democracy'. The movement shall start the peaceful occupation near the Stock Exchange at Paternoster Square.
The action is hand in hand with many other groups trying to highlight the economic situation according to OccupyLSX supporter Kai Wargalla "We stand in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street, protesters in Spain, Greece and the Middle East who started this movement. They have inspired people all over the world to step forward and make their voices heard – now.”
The movement is supported by UKUncut and many other organisations from across the world. UKUncut supporter Peter Hodgson said: “The success of the square occupations across Spain in calling for democracy and an end to austerity. The government is ignoring its electorate as they impose these austerity measures.”
The Facebook page has already after just a week got over 3500 confirmed attendants and 9000 followers. Suggesting the the movement is gathering support.
In an official press release the OcuppyLSX movement said "The occupation in London comes at the same time that hundreds of cities around the world are protesting under the banner of “United For Global Change” calling for true democracy. This is a movement that transcends political affiliation. It aims to open a dialogue on reforming finance and government so that each better serve and protect the interests and well being of the 99%."
For a full list of events happening on October 15 visit here. To see OcuppyLSX in pictures and get more information about the organisation specifically visit occupylsx.org
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Pontefract A and E to close
Pontefract hospital will potentially see the closure of its A and E department in November according to one local MP, the BBC Look North has reported this evening.
The news comes less than a year after the new building at the hospital was completed and the department opened. The building that cost the NHS and local organisations millions of pounds.
At a time when the NHS is facing serious budget cuts and alterations, is it right that the unit be shut down? Not only that but is it right to take away a new service from Pontefract and the surrounding area?
Locals and politicians have been fighting to save all of the hospital for a long time now, with the local paper The Pontefract and Castleford Express often reporting on the progress that is being made. To hear so suddenly that the A and E department is expected to close will be seen as a blow to service users and campaigners.
The Mid Yorkshire Trust promised for continuously that the unit will provide a 24 hour A and E service. But they are now considering making it a minor injury unit only.
MP Yvette Cooper told BBC Look North "This is an outrageous betrayal to local people. We will be fighting this all the way. They should not be allowed to get away with this. It's deeply unfair on Pontefract". Yvette is already part of several campaigns in the local area and she will continue to fight to save the unit and hospital.
This all comes after a government report shown that axing the services at Pontefract hospital will save over 3 million pounds a year.
The closure of the unit will put further pressure on Pinderfields hospital that already sees up to 9 hour waiting times, and Dewsbury hospital that is under financial stress from the patients sent from both Pontefract and Pinderfields.
The news comes less than a year after the new building at the hospital was completed and the department opened. The building that cost the NHS and local organisations millions of pounds.
At a time when the NHS is facing serious budget cuts and alterations, is it right that the unit be shut down? Not only that but is it right to take away a new service from Pontefract and the surrounding area?
Locals and politicians have been fighting to save all of the hospital for a long time now, with the local paper The Pontefract and Castleford Express often reporting on the progress that is being made. To hear so suddenly that the A and E department is expected to close will be seen as a blow to service users and campaigners.
The Mid Yorkshire Trust promised for continuously that the unit will provide a 24 hour A and E service. But they are now considering making it a minor injury unit only.
MP Yvette Cooper told BBC Look North "This is an outrageous betrayal to local people. We will be fighting this all the way. They should not be allowed to get away with this. It's deeply unfair on Pontefract". Yvette is already part of several campaigns in the local area and she will continue to fight to save the unit and hospital.
This all comes after a government report shown that axing the services at Pontefract hospital will save over 3 million pounds a year.
The closure of the unit will put further pressure on Pinderfields hospital that already sees up to 9 hour waiting times, and Dewsbury hospital that is under financial stress from the patients sent from both Pontefract and Pinderfields.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Arranged marriages
Hello,
There's a lot of talk and promotion today about trying to stop 'forced marriages'. Now I agree that forced marriages shouldn't happen. Not at all.
However, there is a difference in my eyes between arranged marriages and forced marriages. People can go into an arranged marriage, but they can be in love and be happy with that - not all people mind an arranged marriage.
But also, what about the men? Men are as much 'forced' to marry certain types of females. They have to look a certain way, have a family with a certain amount of money and a certain type of business as well as considering where they live. But how often do we consider that their families force them into certain situations? We rarely do.
Forcing people to marry anybody is wrong. Forcing people to only look at certain types of people to marry is wrong. However, if somebody is happy to be told they should marry somebody from the same background or they don't care who they marry - then that is their choice. I stress again, I think forced marriage IS wrong.
Another point though, is that while there are fresh pledges to get forced marriage 'banned', it is not that simple. How can we know when there is a forced marriage or not, unless the people involved say publicly? We do not. We also have to consider that such a law could be twisted in the women's favour at certain points. If the marriage breaks down and they need to get away they can claim it was a forced marriage and get the guy away from her - it sounds rare and silly, but it could happen.
Forced marriage is wrong. Most of society realises that. However, we must consider more than just the women involved in this horrible culture. We must consider everything.
There's a lot of talk and promotion today about trying to stop 'forced marriages'. Now I agree that forced marriages shouldn't happen. Not at all.
However, there is a difference in my eyes between arranged marriages and forced marriages. People can go into an arranged marriage, but they can be in love and be happy with that - not all people mind an arranged marriage.
But also, what about the men? Men are as much 'forced' to marry certain types of females. They have to look a certain way, have a family with a certain amount of money and a certain type of business as well as considering where they live. But how often do we consider that their families force them into certain situations? We rarely do.
Forcing people to marry anybody is wrong. Forcing people to only look at certain types of people to marry is wrong. However, if somebody is happy to be told they should marry somebody from the same background or they don't care who they marry - then that is their choice. I stress again, I think forced marriage IS wrong.
Another point though, is that while there are fresh pledges to get forced marriage 'banned', it is not that simple. How can we know when there is a forced marriage or not, unless the people involved say publicly? We do not. We also have to consider that such a law could be twisted in the women's favour at certain points. If the marriage breaks down and they need to get away they can claim it was a forced marriage and get the guy away from her - it sounds rare and silly, but it could happen.
Forced marriage is wrong. Most of society realises that. However, we must consider more than just the women involved in this horrible culture. We must consider everything.
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Travel 2 - Dannii 0
Hello,
Yes. The war with travel continues. And as sad as it is, it's going to be one long war, a very long war indeed.
Today, I should be in Manchester, outside the Tory conference protesting. I mean from Leeds, with Leeds against the cuts as a student it would have cost me £5 to go on one of their coaches. Brilliant I thought. Then I realised the coaches would be leaving not much after 9.
Doesn't sound like an issue does it? Well yes, actually this is where travel beats me. Because to get there for anything past 9 would be amazing. Especially as for me to get the FIRST bus that goes through my village is just after 11, before I then have to get the 110 to Leeds from Wakefield - it'd be gone 12:30 by the time I got to Leeds.
How dare the bus companies carry on messing up my political life. It's so unreasonable! Because that also means I cannot report on it as a freelance for anybody. But seriously, I couldn't even get a job in a shop in Wakefield for Sundays, because most jobs are 10-4 on Sundays. Something past 11 is so useless for anybody.
So yes, the bus company has beaten me again. But it shall not carry on like this. I shall not let it. Darn you Arriva, I shall continue to name and shame you.
Yes. The war with travel continues. And as sad as it is, it's going to be one long war, a very long war indeed.
Today, I should be in Manchester, outside the Tory conference protesting. I mean from Leeds, with Leeds against the cuts as a student it would have cost me £5 to go on one of their coaches. Brilliant I thought. Then I realised the coaches would be leaving not much after 9.
Doesn't sound like an issue does it? Well yes, actually this is where travel beats me. Because to get there for anything past 9 would be amazing. Especially as for me to get the FIRST bus that goes through my village is just after 11, before I then have to get the 110 to Leeds from Wakefield - it'd be gone 12:30 by the time I got to Leeds.
How dare the bus companies carry on messing up my political life. It's so unreasonable! Because that also means I cannot report on it as a freelance for anybody. But seriously, I couldn't even get a job in a shop in Wakefield for Sundays, because most jobs are 10-4 on Sundays. Something past 11 is so useless for anybody.
So yes, the bus company has beaten me again. But it shall not carry on like this. I shall not let it. Darn you Arriva, I shall continue to name and shame you.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Total politics blog awards
Dear reader,
Total politics blog awards for 2011 are out. I know some people that asked their readers to vote for them, and that shows - they beat me.
The blogger awards seem to have completely disappeared off of their pages at the minute and they weren't completed - in the same way as the twitter accounts aren't their. However, I hope they will return.
However, I would like to thank you as readers that voted for me when I didn't ask, that listened to other people to say to vote for me and this blog.
Because of your vote my blog and I ended up:
219 Overall political blog.
32 Labour blog.
66 Left wing blog.
38 Media blogger.
46 left wing blogger.
I could be in more categories for the blogger awards, but unless they return we shall sadly never know. For me these blog awards are important. As a young journalist, studying journalism, doing freelance and wanting to go into political journalism - I'm sure you can see why.
More impressively though the media blogger award made me so very shocked. I was surrounded by professional journalists, people with resources, people with offices of people to vote for them, people that read their blogs as part of the news source website and such like. It might seem over the top, but I got in there - I bet chief political editors, political reporters and the like.
So thank you to you all, you made me very happy. Next year I might actually have to try to get some votes on purpose!
Total politics blog awards for 2011 are out. I know some people that asked their readers to vote for them, and that shows - they beat me.
The blogger awards seem to have completely disappeared off of their pages at the minute and they weren't completed - in the same way as the twitter accounts aren't their. However, I hope they will return.
However, I would like to thank you as readers that voted for me when I didn't ask, that listened to other people to say to vote for me and this blog.
Because of your vote my blog and I ended up:
219 Overall political blog.
32 Labour blog.
66 Left wing blog.
38 Media blogger.
46 left wing blogger.
I could be in more categories for the blogger awards, but unless they return we shall sadly never know. For me these blog awards are important. As a young journalist, studying journalism, doing freelance and wanting to go into political journalism - I'm sure you can see why.
More impressively though the media blogger award made me so very shocked. I was surrounded by professional journalists, people with resources, people with offices of people to vote for them, people that read their blogs as part of the news source website and such like. It might seem over the top, but I got in there - I bet chief political editors, political reporters and the like.
So thank you to you all, you made me very happy. Next year I might actually have to try to get some votes on purpose!
Sunday, September 18, 2011
A review of the New Statesman - week commencing 19/09/11
Dear reader hello,
As a subscriber to the New Statesman I get my copy on the Friday and the magazine comes out on the Monday. So I got my magazine and finished it today, before you can buy it in the shops.
Some people buy magazines every issue, but some people only buy it if they like the sound of the content - so let me review it and convince you.
I'm not going to tell you all about every page, I'm just going to talk about a couple of the things that are in here this week and what they made me think. The thought process they created, and if you want to know exactly what I'm talking about you'll have to buy the issue and find out.
But firstly I must say that even though it has 78 pages, and you have to read it in a week - it's easy to do. Don't be put off by that, and remember it's 100% eco friendly recycled paper so don't worry you're making trees be chopped down.
There's a lot of focus in this issue about the MPs that have the potential to become the next big thing in politics. There's some great ones but there's still a common trend of Oxford and Cambridge - while there are some women and people from different backgrounds most of them seem to have had the same outcome. I don't have anything against people from Oxford and Cambridge getting into government. But when I see there are people there from real diverse backgrounds, I think 'what if' they'd gone to another university, stuck to the diverse side and created a true break in the trend. While these might make great prime ministers, so would many people that didn't get into Oxford and Cambridge.
The Arab spring mess continues. So yes there's a piece on that. Talking from new view points, but I don't really know what to say about this. Because really, stuff is happening and I don't know what else to say because we can see the events constantly happening, we can only predict what is going to happen. Whether this piece or any other journalism piece will turn out correct, time will tell.
The Gaddafi talk continues. I must admit I'm getting a little tired of hearing about this man and his family and regime. Yes what he has done is wrong, but we all know that now. Stop giving them time and making people think of them! And yes many people in our country have been connected with the family, there's been strong bonds. But we've had strong bonds with many people that have done something wrong, lots of people in life know at least one bad person. But the whole discussion is still all very thought provoking, at least they're not repeating the same stuff we already know, so it's still worth a read.
Talking of people that make bad choices and know people they wish they didn't, Tony Blair is in this issue - or at least being talked about. Remember when he said we must go to war? Then remember when he became a peace envoy? Well yes now he wants to go to war with Iran. It's a very interesting read, raises good points and is just a good piece of journalism - but whether you really want to read more about Tony Blair being the big eared idiot he is, is entirely up to you.
Laurie Penny makes a good point. Though I thought most people in this country were aware of how many people in this world don't want girl children? Maybe I just take it forgiven, because I've never met somebody that doesn't know. It's still sadly heart breaking though. That people choose to get rid of children before they are born or give them away afterwards - purely because of them being women. The point Penny raises about the rules of children in China possibly not helping to cure the issue, is indeed an interesting one. It's also interesting at the calls to stop doctors being able to tell people the gender of their baby, because really that's not fair. It's an interesting discussion starter and something thought provoking, but I think some of the suggestions are questionable and that's it's not the most shocking hidden thing in the world.
Constituency boundary changes have been in the news this week. There's much discussion about how they will affect certain MPs and parties. It's interesting to see how the New Statesman figures vary to what has been shown on the news. However, I point one thing out that they didn't mention in the articles - while they make very good points throughout. I don't think the changes are set out to hit labour as much as they make out, more to hurt the Lib Dems. Because as it is, they are likely to miss out on seats anywhere and combined with losing areas that they normally hold - it's going to make the next election results look even worse for the Lib Dems. Hurting Labour is just a bonus for the Conservatives I think. There's not too much coverage on them, which is good - seen as these plans aren't the final plans.
Ah there's crisis in Europe. So lets all jump on the media bandwagon and say how this pleases all the euro-sceptics. Well don't worry - while they talk about Europe, they're not too stereotypical from the media perspective. At least they are willing to consider the good and bad points, without focusing too much on those negative bods. They also talk about the Kenyan killing and kidnapping - which yes is bad and it can be evaluated, but as the writer points out it was highly predictable. We can make both these issues sound like the worlds biggest surprise, but the magazine points out these issues in a calm way and shows it's not something shocking, just down to earth reality.
I've talked about the upcoming American elections myself in the past, but now the real media are starting to do that too. I was slightly frustrated by this article, not because of the way it was written. For it makes some good points and highlights that the politicians of America really need to focus on those middle voters. However, they could have made it a bit more positive instead of cramming all the positives into one paragraph. Because of that it ruins the article by forcing too much into one spot, there's a whole page of writing there why give good stuff one paragraph. It might be against Obama the piece but it isn't very balanced. If you want to read a good written piece ripping Obama apart then here's your piece. Owwh, I think I forgot to mention that they also talk about the way that America and the UK are handling jobs or rather not.. But don't worry, it really isn't too much American talking.
Ah this is a piece you might like. The New Statesman are brave enough to talk about the break down in police and between the government and police. It's a good long lengthy piece that really shows evidence and yet makes you make up your own mind. Not only do we get to find out about the past that we might have missed, we get to find out about the present and the deep down reality. I think many people have realised that there are serious relationship issues between the two, but finding out why is interesting. I already knew that many people were a bit annoyed about the selection of new met commissioner but knowing people say more than just owwh that was the wrong choice is really interesting.
As you might have spotted on the cover, it says plus a Lib Dem special - but I must admit the only thing really Lib Dem that I can see is an interview with Menzies Campbell MP and ex leader of the party. Which is very interesting and when reading it I was glad to learn that there is a reason he's on the Olympic committee not just on there as a random MP who doesn't even watch sport. I've not really heard much about him, so reading this article was fascinating.
Critics pages = great and interesting. With a wide range of topics the New Statesman critic pages show something of interest for everybody. I know it's encouraged me to see Page one when it comes out, and I hadn't even heard of it before then - this shows the way they bring new things into peoples eyes and persuade them to be interested. Now of course, I'm mainly interested in it because I'm a journalist - but general public would be interested too I think. These reviews get more than the average space given in most magazines, allowing for some in depth discussion for a change.
There are other good bits too, but I don't have much to say about them. I hope I haven't given too much away for you, but really I think I've just told you minimal and added some opinion in. If you've never bought it before then give it a go, it's a great read and there's always something different to the usual magazine type.
Until next week keep reading, keep thinking and keep debating!
As a subscriber to the New Statesman I get my copy on the Friday and the magazine comes out on the Monday. So I got my magazine and finished it today, before you can buy it in the shops.
Some people buy magazines every issue, but some people only buy it if they like the sound of the content - so let me review it and convince you.
I'm not going to tell you all about every page, I'm just going to talk about a couple of the things that are in here this week and what they made me think. The thought process they created, and if you want to know exactly what I'm talking about you'll have to buy the issue and find out.
But firstly I must say that even though it has 78 pages, and you have to read it in a week - it's easy to do. Don't be put off by that, and remember it's 100% eco friendly recycled paper so don't worry you're making trees be chopped down.
There's a lot of focus in this issue about the MPs that have the potential to become the next big thing in politics. There's some great ones but there's still a common trend of Oxford and Cambridge - while there are some women and people from different backgrounds most of them seem to have had the same outcome. I don't have anything against people from Oxford and Cambridge getting into government. But when I see there are people there from real diverse backgrounds, I think 'what if' they'd gone to another university, stuck to the diverse side and created a true break in the trend. While these might make great prime ministers, so would many people that didn't get into Oxford and Cambridge.
The Arab spring mess continues. So yes there's a piece on that. Talking from new view points, but I don't really know what to say about this. Because really, stuff is happening and I don't know what else to say because we can see the events constantly happening, we can only predict what is going to happen. Whether this piece or any other journalism piece will turn out correct, time will tell.
The Gaddafi talk continues. I must admit I'm getting a little tired of hearing about this man and his family and regime. Yes what he has done is wrong, but we all know that now. Stop giving them time and making people think of them! And yes many people in our country have been connected with the family, there's been strong bonds. But we've had strong bonds with many people that have done something wrong, lots of people in life know at least one bad person. But the whole discussion is still all very thought provoking, at least they're not repeating the same stuff we already know, so it's still worth a read.
Talking of people that make bad choices and know people they wish they didn't, Tony Blair is in this issue - or at least being talked about. Remember when he said we must go to war? Then remember when he became a peace envoy? Well yes now he wants to go to war with Iran. It's a very interesting read, raises good points and is just a good piece of journalism - but whether you really want to read more about Tony Blair being the big eared idiot he is, is entirely up to you.
Laurie Penny makes a good point. Though I thought most people in this country were aware of how many people in this world don't want girl children? Maybe I just take it forgiven, because I've never met somebody that doesn't know. It's still sadly heart breaking though. That people choose to get rid of children before they are born or give them away afterwards - purely because of them being women. The point Penny raises about the rules of children in China possibly not helping to cure the issue, is indeed an interesting one. It's also interesting at the calls to stop doctors being able to tell people the gender of their baby, because really that's not fair. It's an interesting discussion starter and something thought provoking, but I think some of the suggestions are questionable and that's it's not the most shocking hidden thing in the world.
Constituency boundary changes have been in the news this week. There's much discussion about how they will affect certain MPs and parties. It's interesting to see how the New Statesman figures vary to what has been shown on the news. However, I point one thing out that they didn't mention in the articles - while they make very good points throughout. I don't think the changes are set out to hit labour as much as they make out, more to hurt the Lib Dems. Because as it is, they are likely to miss out on seats anywhere and combined with losing areas that they normally hold - it's going to make the next election results look even worse for the Lib Dems. Hurting Labour is just a bonus for the Conservatives I think. There's not too much coverage on them, which is good - seen as these plans aren't the final plans.
Ah there's crisis in Europe. So lets all jump on the media bandwagon and say how this pleases all the euro-sceptics. Well don't worry - while they talk about Europe, they're not too stereotypical from the media perspective. At least they are willing to consider the good and bad points, without focusing too much on those negative bods. They also talk about the Kenyan killing and kidnapping - which yes is bad and it can be evaluated, but as the writer points out it was highly predictable. We can make both these issues sound like the worlds biggest surprise, but the magazine points out these issues in a calm way and shows it's not something shocking, just down to earth reality.
I've talked about the upcoming American elections myself in the past, but now the real media are starting to do that too. I was slightly frustrated by this article, not because of the way it was written. For it makes some good points and highlights that the politicians of America really need to focus on those middle voters. However, they could have made it a bit more positive instead of cramming all the positives into one paragraph. Because of that it ruins the article by forcing too much into one spot, there's a whole page of writing there why give good stuff one paragraph. It might be against Obama the piece but it isn't very balanced. If you want to read a good written piece ripping Obama apart then here's your piece. Owwh, I think I forgot to mention that they also talk about the way that America and the UK are handling jobs or rather not.. But don't worry, it really isn't too much American talking.
Ah this is a piece you might like. The New Statesman are brave enough to talk about the break down in police and between the government and police. It's a good long lengthy piece that really shows evidence and yet makes you make up your own mind. Not only do we get to find out about the past that we might have missed, we get to find out about the present and the deep down reality. I think many people have realised that there are serious relationship issues between the two, but finding out why is interesting. I already knew that many people were a bit annoyed about the selection of new met commissioner but knowing people say more than just owwh that was the wrong choice is really interesting.
As you might have spotted on the cover, it says plus a Lib Dem special - but I must admit the only thing really Lib Dem that I can see is an interview with Menzies Campbell MP and ex leader of the party. Which is very interesting and when reading it I was glad to learn that there is a reason he's on the Olympic committee not just on there as a random MP who doesn't even watch sport. I've not really heard much about him, so reading this article was fascinating.
Critics pages = great and interesting. With a wide range of topics the New Statesman critic pages show something of interest for everybody. I know it's encouraged me to see Page one when it comes out, and I hadn't even heard of it before then - this shows the way they bring new things into peoples eyes and persuade them to be interested. Now of course, I'm mainly interested in it because I'm a journalist - but general public would be interested too I think. These reviews get more than the average space given in most magazines, allowing for some in depth discussion for a change.
There are other good bits too, but I don't have much to say about them. I hope I haven't given too much away for you, but really I think I've just told you minimal and added some opinion in. If you've never bought it before then give it a go, it's a great read and there's always something different to the usual magazine type.
Until next week keep reading, keep thinking and keep debating!
Saturday, September 17, 2011
An open complaint to the bus company
Hello,
I am writing this blog to show my disbelief in local buses. Later on I shall be writing to the bus company Arriva and to Metro to let them know how unsatisfied I am. This blog is also going to be like a travel log, you'll see exactly why I am so annoyed the more you read.
Saturday 10 September:
Mum and I go food shopping in Normanton (it's where the nearest ASDA is). We get the 147 from Pontefract to Wakefield. It's the only Arriva bus to come through Ackton, at one an hour. On it's way the bus was only a couple of minutes late - which is acceptable.
On our return however, we went to the nearest bus stop and realised we'd missed the bus by five minutes. We wait there a couple more minutes just in case it's running late. No bus, okay. We decide to walk nearer home where we can get the bus from there. We arrive at that bus stop at 12:55, where the bus is due to arrive at 1:25 - at 2 the bus finally turned up. The bus was due to leave Wakefield at 12:50. It doesn't take a genius to realise that the bus that is supposed to turn up every hour and we waited for over an hour. (You'll see why this makes me angry later on).
Monday 12 September:
First day back at college (Leeds City College) and I have to be there at 9. So I have to get the first bus which is due at 6:50 at Ackton, at 7:05 the bus finally turns up. This then put pressure on me to get the 110 to Leeds and hope that there wasn't any traffic.
On returning the bus didn't leave the bus station till 10 minutes after it was due to. And frankly after my first day back, getting home at 5:40 after finishing college at 2 is not what I want.
Tuesday 13 September:
I have to be at college at 9 again. This time the bus is only a couple of minutes late. Everybody waiting at my stop seems surprised.
The bus on the way back is also only a couple of minutes late. I start to think that things are looking up.
Wednesday 14 September:
I don't have to be at college until 10:45, but as the second bus is 7:50 then the third is 9:20 I have to get the 7:50 bus - that after my change gets me into Leeds for just before 9:30. The 7:50 bus was only about 5 minutes late, but standing in the cold is not something I like doing or I think is healthy.
I return via my aunt and uncles, getting a much more regular and on time bus. Then just walk the rest of the way as after that and my council meeting it's simply not worth waiting 55 minutes for the last bus home.
Thursday and Friday - I avoid buses.
Saturday 17 September:
Mum and I go to Wakefield to get some things I need for college and just to have a general look round and get some food items. On the way in the 9:20 bus is only a couple of minutes late. Yet again this is suitable.
We arrive at the bus stop at 12:30 to return back on the 12:50 bus. At 1:50 we actually get on the bus. Yes correct, the same bus has missed again, just like last Saturday!
While Metro has announced that our bus service is not due to be cut or affected with the recent changes, I feel that the service we currently have is highly inadequate and unreasonable. My travel card costs £31 a month to travel in west Yorkshire. My Mum has to pay for this rubbish bus service. And yes while we was sitting waiting for the bus the old people all piled on another bus, because they didn't have to worry about paying because they are lucky enough to get it free.
I hope that you have a better transport service where you are then I do. I'll be doing a much more complex letter to Metro and Arriva showing that I am totally unhappy about this service. As I hope you can see why.
Good luck travelling!
I am writing this blog to show my disbelief in local buses. Later on I shall be writing to the bus company Arriva and to Metro to let them know how unsatisfied I am. This blog is also going to be like a travel log, you'll see exactly why I am so annoyed the more you read.
Saturday 10 September:
Mum and I go food shopping in Normanton (it's where the nearest ASDA is). We get the 147 from Pontefract to Wakefield. It's the only Arriva bus to come through Ackton, at one an hour. On it's way the bus was only a couple of minutes late - which is acceptable.
On our return however, we went to the nearest bus stop and realised we'd missed the bus by five minutes. We wait there a couple more minutes just in case it's running late. No bus, okay. We decide to walk nearer home where we can get the bus from there. We arrive at that bus stop at 12:55, where the bus is due to arrive at 1:25 - at 2 the bus finally turned up. The bus was due to leave Wakefield at 12:50. It doesn't take a genius to realise that the bus that is supposed to turn up every hour and we waited for over an hour. (You'll see why this makes me angry later on).
Monday 12 September:
First day back at college (Leeds City College) and I have to be there at 9. So I have to get the first bus which is due at 6:50 at Ackton, at 7:05 the bus finally turns up. This then put pressure on me to get the 110 to Leeds and hope that there wasn't any traffic.
On returning the bus didn't leave the bus station till 10 minutes after it was due to. And frankly after my first day back, getting home at 5:40 after finishing college at 2 is not what I want.
Tuesday 13 September:
I have to be at college at 9 again. This time the bus is only a couple of minutes late. Everybody waiting at my stop seems surprised.
The bus on the way back is also only a couple of minutes late. I start to think that things are looking up.
Wednesday 14 September:
I don't have to be at college until 10:45, but as the second bus is 7:50 then the third is 9:20 I have to get the 7:50 bus - that after my change gets me into Leeds for just before 9:30. The 7:50 bus was only about 5 minutes late, but standing in the cold is not something I like doing or I think is healthy.
I return via my aunt and uncles, getting a much more regular and on time bus. Then just walk the rest of the way as after that and my council meeting it's simply not worth waiting 55 minutes for the last bus home.
Thursday and Friday - I avoid buses.
Saturday 17 September:
Mum and I go to Wakefield to get some things I need for college and just to have a general look round and get some food items. On the way in the 9:20 bus is only a couple of minutes late. Yet again this is suitable.
We arrive at the bus stop at 12:30 to return back on the 12:50 bus. At 1:50 we actually get on the bus. Yes correct, the same bus has missed again, just like last Saturday!
While Metro has announced that our bus service is not due to be cut or affected with the recent changes, I feel that the service we currently have is highly inadequate and unreasonable. My travel card costs £31 a month to travel in west Yorkshire. My Mum has to pay for this rubbish bus service. And yes while we was sitting waiting for the bus the old people all piled on another bus, because they didn't have to worry about paying because they are lucky enough to get it free.
I hope that you have a better transport service where you are then I do. I'll be doing a much more complex letter to Metro and Arriva showing that I am totally unhappy about this service. As I hope you can see why.
Good luck travelling!
Thursday, September 15, 2011
The dreams of the council
Hello,
Yesterday I attended a town council meeting. Now I must stress, I am not about to report on anything that was said in that meeting. But it did lead me to think about where I want to go in life.
Obviously, I want to be a political journalist. That has not changed. But I have considered for several years now, that when I am old enough I stand for councillor. After attending the meeting yesterday, I feel that I want to even more.
Of course I'm only 17 - and will be till next August. So it'll be a good year and a half before I can even stand. Doing something for local people and the community really drives and motivates me, and being a councillor would be a way to really get involved.
However, providing all goes well through my education this year, I'll be going to university next September. If so, the first time I'll be able to stand for councillor will be in my university area, an area where I'll have only been for a while and for all I know could be anti labour.
That wont put me off though, I'm willing to give it a darn good go. There is one thing that always saddens me though. i can't do it now, in fact I can't do anything really political now - yes I can join a party and get involved in the community - but there's nothing to give youths a real chance. Yes there's UK youth parliament but round here that's just a waste of time.
At one point there was serious talk of there being a young persons council, but well that never came about. So until I'm 18, I'll just have to learn off of everybody around me - nothing wrong in that I must point out. But it would be lovely to find out how my own style is.
Being a councillor is similar to being a journalist. You're in the public eye, you express what's happening in the community and what you say and do influences the community. And yes, at the same time they're worlds apart - councillors make the news, journalists break the news. Making them both equally popular or unpopular. Both need to be strong, have the ability to talk, listen and understand and they both need the ability to fight to get to number one. As well as have an understanding of their patch.
All these things are very similar. Being a training journalist is also training me to be a voice of the community, a councillor and whatever else I decide to be alongside journalism. But until I'm 18, I can't really start to be taken seriously by anybody that I'm able to do anything locally in a political capacity.
I'll just wait and become stronger - but I'll make it. And I'll carry on developing my knowledge, passion and ability until then - and when I can stand I will, because I know that I'm strong enough and dedicated enough.
But this blog isn't just about me ranting and saying where I want to get to. It's also about reminding you that you don't have to just follow one path, but another path you wish to pursue could be linked hand in hand together. If so follow both paths and make the most of it. Whatever dreams you have you can catch them, you just have to find a way.
Yesterday I attended a town council meeting. Now I must stress, I am not about to report on anything that was said in that meeting. But it did lead me to think about where I want to go in life.
Obviously, I want to be a political journalist. That has not changed. But I have considered for several years now, that when I am old enough I stand for councillor. After attending the meeting yesterday, I feel that I want to even more.
Of course I'm only 17 - and will be till next August. So it'll be a good year and a half before I can even stand. Doing something for local people and the community really drives and motivates me, and being a councillor would be a way to really get involved.
However, providing all goes well through my education this year, I'll be going to university next September. If so, the first time I'll be able to stand for councillor will be in my university area, an area where I'll have only been for a while and for all I know could be anti labour.
That wont put me off though, I'm willing to give it a darn good go. There is one thing that always saddens me though. i can't do it now, in fact I can't do anything really political now - yes I can join a party and get involved in the community - but there's nothing to give youths a real chance. Yes there's UK youth parliament but round here that's just a waste of time.
At one point there was serious talk of there being a young persons council, but well that never came about. So until I'm 18, I'll just have to learn off of everybody around me - nothing wrong in that I must point out. But it would be lovely to find out how my own style is.
Being a councillor is similar to being a journalist. You're in the public eye, you express what's happening in the community and what you say and do influences the community. And yes, at the same time they're worlds apart - councillors make the news, journalists break the news. Making them both equally popular or unpopular. Both need to be strong, have the ability to talk, listen and understand and they both need the ability to fight to get to number one. As well as have an understanding of their patch.
All these things are very similar. Being a training journalist is also training me to be a voice of the community, a councillor and whatever else I decide to be alongside journalism. But until I'm 18, I can't really start to be taken seriously by anybody that I'm able to do anything locally in a political capacity.
I'll just wait and become stronger - but I'll make it. And I'll carry on developing my knowledge, passion and ability until then - and when I can stand I will, because I know that I'm strong enough and dedicated enough.
But this blog isn't just about me ranting and saying where I want to get to. It's also about reminding you that you don't have to just follow one path, but another path you wish to pursue could be linked hand in hand together. If so follow both paths and make the most of it. Whatever dreams you have you can catch them, you just have to find a way.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Another messed up generation
Hello,
The youth of the miners strike are now growing up well. Many are at that point in their life when they have decided where to go, how to get there and what to do with their lives. Many themselves have their own children and family.
Some aspire to great things. To improve their communities, to improve their own lives, to improve their families lives and to just make a difference. Those are the people that realise they cannot let themselves and the people in their area by ruined again. They are the people that want to stand up even stronger, louder and braver than they did in the miners strikes.
Those are the people that can see past the ends of their noses. They are the people that can aspire to get out into the big wide world. But many from the miners strike era, don't see it like that. There are so many that don't inspire to get further, because they think there is no point. Because they don't think that anybody is interested in them.
Sadly, that generation is passing it down to the next generation. At least around where I live. What a load of rubbish you're thinking? Well actually no. While I was at high school I heard several people say in my 5 school years there, that 'what's the point, we wont get out of here' and 'there's nothing to do round here for us'.
That attitude does exist. Not just in people that were alive when the miners and the like went on, but it exists in younger people too. The fact that the area still is seen as a deprived ex mining area is bad enough, the fact that there's nothing to make you go wow about it is sad.. but what is more sad is how people cannot see past that.
Your whole life does not revolve around one single place. Just because it has two little supermarkets, some doctors, chemists, schools, churches, shops, train tracks and bus routes does not mean you shouldn't aspire further. Yes certainly, there's nothing wrong with living there all your life. There's nothing wrong with working there all your life. But, there is a choice. People should be able to see that.
If somebody says there's nothing round here at 15, why cant they imagine moving elsewhere to find that dream job and home? Some people have that dream job and home right here, they're lucky enough to find that. But most peoples dreams mean they need to go further afield - but they can't see that.
If people wont move out of this area to achieve what they want. Then this area needs to change. The mindset of those people need to change. They need some motivation and hope. Because them acting like they are at the minute isn't going to help anybody now or in the future - it'll just let people walk over communities that have one main dependency be walked over again.
Those people are so politicised in what they say. They use it as a reason not to vote for certain parties. But if they just stood up and said something, did something and tried to understand then this place would get it's feet off the ground and suddenly people would have hopes and inspirations.
If we do that, there will be somebody that comes from here to give people somebody to look up too. There are people from round here that are known in the sport world and certain areas - but they aren't known famously. Therefore young people seem not to look up to them. Which is a shame because if they could see what people from round here have become then they might have hope and a new found dream.
Change is difficult and communities struggle with it. And if they wont change it for themselves, then I'll have to do it bit by bit. Changing mindsets of young people around me and going from there. This is just the beginning. This is the beginning of a battle fo politics and this community.
The youth of the miners strike are now growing up well. Many are at that point in their life when they have decided where to go, how to get there and what to do with their lives. Many themselves have their own children and family.
Some aspire to great things. To improve their communities, to improve their own lives, to improve their families lives and to just make a difference. Those are the people that realise they cannot let themselves and the people in their area by ruined again. They are the people that want to stand up even stronger, louder and braver than they did in the miners strikes.
Those are the people that can see past the ends of their noses. They are the people that can aspire to get out into the big wide world. But many from the miners strike era, don't see it like that. There are so many that don't inspire to get further, because they think there is no point. Because they don't think that anybody is interested in them.
Sadly, that generation is passing it down to the next generation. At least around where I live. What a load of rubbish you're thinking? Well actually no. While I was at high school I heard several people say in my 5 school years there, that 'what's the point, we wont get out of here' and 'there's nothing to do round here for us'.
That attitude does exist. Not just in people that were alive when the miners and the like went on, but it exists in younger people too. The fact that the area still is seen as a deprived ex mining area is bad enough, the fact that there's nothing to make you go wow about it is sad.. but what is more sad is how people cannot see past that.
Your whole life does not revolve around one single place. Just because it has two little supermarkets, some doctors, chemists, schools, churches, shops, train tracks and bus routes does not mean you shouldn't aspire further. Yes certainly, there's nothing wrong with living there all your life. There's nothing wrong with working there all your life. But, there is a choice. People should be able to see that.
If somebody says there's nothing round here at 15, why cant they imagine moving elsewhere to find that dream job and home? Some people have that dream job and home right here, they're lucky enough to find that. But most peoples dreams mean they need to go further afield - but they can't see that.
If people wont move out of this area to achieve what they want. Then this area needs to change. The mindset of those people need to change. They need some motivation and hope. Because them acting like they are at the minute isn't going to help anybody now or in the future - it'll just let people walk over communities that have one main dependency be walked over again.
Those people are so politicised in what they say. They use it as a reason not to vote for certain parties. But if they just stood up and said something, did something and tried to understand then this place would get it's feet off the ground and suddenly people would have hopes and inspirations.
If we do that, there will be somebody that comes from here to give people somebody to look up too. There are people from round here that are known in the sport world and certain areas - but they aren't known famously. Therefore young people seem not to look up to them. Which is a shame because if they could see what people from round here have become then they might have hope and a new found dream.
Change is difficult and communities struggle with it. And if they wont change it for themselves, then I'll have to do it bit by bit. Changing mindsets of young people around me and going from there. This is just the beginning. This is the beginning of a battle fo politics and this community.
Friday, September 09, 2011
Compensation culture crackdown crawls into action
Hello,
The government have finally decided to crackdown on all of this compensation mess. It's taken them long enough to actually do something about all of this.
Many of us in society now how the whole culture has got seriously out of hand. People try to get compensation for almost anything these days, even things that are their own fault. Those TV adverts, the one that says 'had an accident, not your fault' - well I hate to break it to them but the definition of an accident is that it is nobodies fault.
Everywhere in this country we are being advised to get money for our own personal gain. For tripping on a paving slab, for a branch falling on us or for a million and one other simple things, we seem to think it's worth it.
But is it? Is taking money from our NHS, from our councils and local services and businesses really good for us? Is taking money from our neighbours and people in the community really helping?
You're right - some people do deserve money. Those injured in war and through serious incidents do indeed deserve every penny, because their lives are ruined and/or effected. But getting a couple of thousand for tripping on a pavement that hurt your leg for a couple of days, well that's just silly isn't it.
It's ruining compensation for the people that really deserve it. It's not just that though, but it's also making everybody scared to do the most simple of things. However, it affects the WHOLE of society. Getting money from the councils and the like for simple silly things isn't good for us at all. If the council has to pay thousands of pounds to several people a year, then that means they have less money to put into the services that we need.
So this very first step from government is a step in the right direction, but it is just the first step. People have being saying that compensation adverts, messages and calls ave gone far enough for a very long time. So now they're starting to listen. But trying to stop insurance companies from selling information to compensation companies is going to be very difficult to implement and is nowhere near enough.
If it stops one element of the compensation craze then that's fantastic. But if people decide they want to sue then there is still plenty of places that they can look to, to find numbers and places to get advice and pursue their claim. That and well many people have text numbers to stop these advertising messages getting through, or they sort it out with their land line - and that's generally really effective. So clamping down on text messages and phone calls is great to make it a law type but many people already regulate these things using their own brains and logic.
But well that wont stop all this compensation madness will it? In reality it wont stop insurance premiums from rising. It sounds like it'll do us all a great big favour, but the government and media are frankly bigging it up to make it sound much better.
Now, lets just see how long it takes before anything else gets done to clamp down on this compensation culture - I expect that'll crawl onto the scene as slowly as this simple thing did.
The government have finally decided to crackdown on all of this compensation mess. It's taken them long enough to actually do something about all of this.
Many of us in society now how the whole culture has got seriously out of hand. People try to get compensation for almost anything these days, even things that are their own fault. Those TV adverts, the one that says 'had an accident, not your fault' - well I hate to break it to them but the definition of an accident is that it is nobodies fault.
Everywhere in this country we are being advised to get money for our own personal gain. For tripping on a paving slab, for a branch falling on us or for a million and one other simple things, we seem to think it's worth it.
But is it? Is taking money from our NHS, from our councils and local services and businesses really good for us? Is taking money from our neighbours and people in the community really helping?
You're right - some people do deserve money. Those injured in war and through serious incidents do indeed deserve every penny, because their lives are ruined and/or effected. But getting a couple of thousand for tripping on a pavement that hurt your leg for a couple of days, well that's just silly isn't it.
It's ruining compensation for the people that really deserve it. It's not just that though, but it's also making everybody scared to do the most simple of things. However, it affects the WHOLE of society. Getting money from the councils and the like for simple silly things isn't good for us at all. If the council has to pay thousands of pounds to several people a year, then that means they have less money to put into the services that we need.
So this very first step from government is a step in the right direction, but it is just the first step. People have being saying that compensation adverts, messages and calls ave gone far enough for a very long time. So now they're starting to listen. But trying to stop insurance companies from selling information to compensation companies is going to be very difficult to implement and is nowhere near enough.
If it stops one element of the compensation craze then that's fantastic. But if people decide they want to sue then there is still plenty of places that they can look to, to find numbers and places to get advice and pursue their claim. That and well many people have text numbers to stop these advertising messages getting through, or they sort it out with their land line - and that's generally really effective. So clamping down on text messages and phone calls is great to make it a law type but many people already regulate these things using their own brains and logic.
But well that wont stop all this compensation madness will it? In reality it wont stop insurance premiums from rising. It sounds like it'll do us all a great big favour, but the government and media are frankly bigging it up to make it sound much better.
Now, lets just see how long it takes before anything else gets done to clamp down on this compensation culture - I expect that'll crawl onto the scene as slowly as this simple thing did.
Truanting trouble
Hello,
Truanting is a growing issue in this country - well in reality it's probably not. Just more schools actually now make a point of telling parents and the government about it.
However, the government is so narrow minded at times. It's not just children from families with benefits that truant. People from well off families still skip school. Parents from all backgrounds don't always know that their child is skipping school.
The government is obsessed with destroying dependant families. For a government that claims not to be like Thatcher - well they certainly like to ruin communities and lives in exactly the same way. Just because a child truants or handles stolen goods is not a reason to take benefits from the parents.
Taking benefits from a whole family leads to several members of society being messed up and struggling. And if people end up struggling they get more agitated and annoyed, then the government will have more anti social issues, more people not bothering with their life and will be leaving this country in an even worse mess 10 years down the line.
It's so simple. Cutting benefits from a family doesn't solve anything.
Truanting is a growing issue in this country - well in reality it's probably not. Just more schools actually now make a point of telling parents and the government about it.
However, the government is so narrow minded at times. It's not just children from families with benefits that truant. People from well off families still skip school. Parents from all backgrounds don't always know that their child is skipping school.
The government is obsessed with destroying dependant families. For a government that claims not to be like Thatcher - well they certainly like to ruin communities and lives in exactly the same way. Just because a child truants or handles stolen goods is not a reason to take benefits from the parents.
Taking benefits from a whole family leads to several members of society being messed up and struggling. And if people end up struggling they get more agitated and annoyed, then the government will have more anti social issues, more people not bothering with their life and will be leaving this country in an even worse mess 10 years down the line.
It's so simple. Cutting benefits from a family doesn't solve anything.
Thursday, September 08, 2011
Bingo sites say roll over regulations
Hello,
Let's face it. There are so many bingo websites out there these days, it's frankly amazing and shocking. How do we all know about these those? Through the adverts that are all over our TV screens.
Bingo is a form of gambling - Last time I checked gambling sites aren't supposed to advertise. That's why you don't see casinos and betting shops advertising on our TV screens - because they are recognised as forms of gambling.
However, betting shops work around it - they've now got bingo sites themselves, using the betting shop name that means they are advertising to both. Like 'William Hill bingo thrill' or however it goes. To me this is subliminal advertising (which is also banned or restricted and monitored) as they're promoting the selling of another product in a sly and cunning manner.
Bingo is gambling. The people of this country need to have a secure form of income, a proper safety net - not to be gambling their money and creating an unsafe future. These adverts are wrong and seem a little illegal, but have found loop holes.
This needs sorting out. Not just for the sake of our TV screens. But also for the sake of peoples livelihoods and bank balances. People are being sucked into a rotten culture that is NOT as glamorous as these TV adverts mislead us as it being.
Let's face it. There are so many bingo websites out there these days, it's frankly amazing and shocking. How do we all know about these those? Through the adverts that are all over our TV screens.
Bingo is a form of gambling - Last time I checked gambling sites aren't supposed to advertise. That's why you don't see casinos and betting shops advertising on our TV screens - because they are recognised as forms of gambling.
However, betting shops work around it - they've now got bingo sites themselves, using the betting shop name that means they are advertising to both. Like 'William Hill bingo thrill' or however it goes. To me this is subliminal advertising (which is also banned or restricted and monitored) as they're promoting the selling of another product in a sly and cunning manner.
Bingo is gambling. The people of this country need to have a secure form of income, a proper safety net - not to be gambling their money and creating an unsafe future. These adverts are wrong and seem a little illegal, but have found loop holes.
This needs sorting out. Not just for the sake of our TV screens. But also for the sake of peoples livelihoods and bank balances. People are being sucked into a rotten culture that is NOT as glamorous as these TV adverts mislead us as it being.
Presidential candidates need head screwing on
Hello,
As the campaign for the presidential elections start to get underway, I look at whether the candidates really think logically.
In this sad world, political parties only get noticed by spending large amounts of money on advertising and promotion. However, are the candidates really understanding what America needs?
Obama has launched part of his campaign by talking about billions of dollar worth of plans - and in him doing so, it costs him and his party a large amount of money. By the time the elections get here billions of dollars will have been spent, not just by his party but by all parties and candidates.
Naturally, they can spend what they want - but what would be the biggest thing they could do to get publicity? Put that campaigning money into their 'government' - show they actually genuinely care about their country and the financial situation it's in.
Of course, that wont happen - but I imagine the way they spend money so carelessly about this, really will annoy many Americans, especially considering the countries new ratings and recent figures.
Good luck to them all, but I really wish they would consider what the money they're spending could actually do if put to better use.
As the campaign for the presidential elections start to get underway, I look at whether the candidates really think logically.
In this sad world, political parties only get noticed by spending large amounts of money on advertising and promotion. However, are the candidates really understanding what America needs?
Obama has launched part of his campaign by talking about billions of dollar worth of plans - and in him doing so, it costs him and his party a large amount of money. By the time the elections get here billions of dollars will have been spent, not just by his party but by all parties and candidates.
Naturally, they can spend what they want - but what would be the biggest thing they could do to get publicity? Put that campaigning money into their 'government' - show they actually genuinely care about their country and the financial situation it's in.
Of course, that wont happen - but I imagine the way they spend money so carelessly about this, really will annoy many Americans, especially considering the countries new ratings and recent figures.
Good luck to them all, but I really wish they would consider what the money they're spending could actually do if put to better use.
Crazy as a box of.. plants?
Hello,
A scientist is soon to enter a sealed box full of plants. A crazy idea it sounds, makes the scientist sound as crazy as a box of frogs.
Iain Stewart will be entering the box that is air tight sealed, meaning that the only oxygen he will get to survive for 48 hours will be that the plants create.
The project being done at the Eden project in Cornwall, is trying to point out to people how important plants are for us to survive and simply breath. Now this is a simple enough story and does sound a little risky.
However, I'm writing about it because it has links to something else. In Leeds theis a college (or group of) called Joseph Priestley college. Joseph Priestley first tried this project in the 18th century, but decided to use a mouse instead of a human being - probably a sensible risk.
I must admit that I've wondered what was so special about this man to get a college named after him.. now I suppose I know. But then again if this man dies, then well it's Priestleys fault really.
Many things get turned into films and programmes in this day and age - and while perhaps this project deserves some coverage, does it really need to be part of a 3 part series? I don't think so.
Anyway I've told you need to know about this story. Just keep it in mind, that plants really do matter.
A scientist is soon to enter a sealed box full of plants. A crazy idea it sounds, makes the scientist sound as crazy as a box of frogs.
Iain Stewart will be entering the box that is air tight sealed, meaning that the only oxygen he will get to survive for 48 hours will be that the plants create.
The project being done at the Eden project in Cornwall, is trying to point out to people how important plants are for us to survive and simply breath. Now this is a simple enough story and does sound a little risky.
However, I'm writing about it because it has links to something else. In Leeds theis a college (or group of) called Joseph Priestley college. Joseph Priestley first tried this project in the 18th century, but decided to use a mouse instead of a human being - probably a sensible risk.
I must admit that I've wondered what was so special about this man to get a college named after him.. now I suppose I know. But then again if this man dies, then well it's Priestleys fault really.
Many things get turned into films and programmes in this day and age - and while perhaps this project deserves some coverage, does it really need to be part of a 3 part series? I don't think so.
Anyway I've told you need to know about this story. Just keep it in mind, that plants really do matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)