Leader of the Pack

Today we were granted an opportunity to briefly interview Keith Johnson. The newly appointed captain of Wolverhampton football club. A man with self proclaimed "typically English" values, he believes in hard work and perseverance. This will be a far cry from the champagne guzzling lifestyle his players originally enjoyed.
A former manager of Blackpool: Johnson lent his hand to successfully raising his former team high in the league. A feat that had Johnson noticed and admired.

With a new challenge to hand, he willingly admits that his new team has a reputation with the press. The Wolves are well known for their late night parties, typically becoming tabloid fodder. With this in mind, Johnson is treating this behaviour with the kind of punishment they should have grown out of: a curfew and an alcohol ban. Johnson claims he wants his players to remain in their houses as opposed to seeing them falling about in the papers. He states "they have a job to do", and adds, it may even be short-lived. Although his comments and techniques appear harsh, he is driven by high hopes. He claims that he has his eyes set on a few (unnamed) players he believes could make the 2010 championship.

Johnson's strong beliefs in hard work are reflected in everything he says. His role model is David Moyes; for the fact that Moyes' success at Everton is down to pure hard work as opposed to money. When asked what he believes his Wolves strongest points are, he claims that it's team work-something that will bring in success on the pitch.

Though he states he still needs to find a premiership goal keeper and bring in supporters to watch them play; Johnson seems happy with his career move. He believes his natural leadership means that a job like this has always been in the back of his mind. Lets just hope the head of this team can subdue his unruly pack in time.

The Impact of the Victorian Press

The impact of the press in Victorian Britain was pivotal for many reasons. Not only did the papers set standards the public willingly followed: for example with its theatre reviews, but it also created mass opinion and was an inspiring role in society. That inspirational role originally belonged to the now increasingly redundant church.
This mass opinion was welcomed in a city where urbanisation and immigration were high. The recent Industrial Revolution, which had brought about train tracks and better roads, meant that the newspapers could reach people within hours of publication. This meant a huge expansion for the press, mirrored by a country whose literacy rates were also steadily expanding. This slow rise in education meant that the public welcomed the simple and factual reading style of the then weekly papers.
The success of the newspapers in the Victorian era eventually prompted other kinds of progress. Emily Faithfull, born in 1860, was a member of “The Society for Promoting the Employment of Women”. Faithfull believed, much to the annoyance of men, that women could become successful compositors. This was of course correct, and by the nineteenth century, Faithfull had achieved her goal. According to general society, women lacked the mechanical ability to be compositors. With this opinion aside, Faithfull taught herself typecasting and then went on to train other women to work for her. Faithfull’s press, which included “The English Woman’s Journal” and “The Victoria Magazine”, continued successfully for years. The publications produced would discuss such things as equality in the employment industry and employment opportunities, becoming for the first time, a social hub just for women.
Amongst the many reporters who worked for this new press, none became quite so renowned as Charles Dickens. The famous English novelist started his writing career under the pseudonym `Boz`. Dickens would later claim that his reporting afforded him a “wealth of experience”. Even Dickens’ first novel: “The Pickwick Papers”, was to be published as a series of articles instead of the book it eventually became. Having taught himself shorthand, Dickens greatly enjoyed his short-lived career as a reporter, even falling in love with one of his co-workers.
Among the myriad of people Dickens met in the industry, their jobs in the press give some indication as to what material would have been included in a Victorian newspaper. For example Catherine Hogarth: the woman Dickens ultimately married, was the daughter of a newspaper music critic. Not unlike the music critic’s we have today, in Victorian times this opinion would have set the standard amongst high society: proclaiming what type of music or theatre they ought to listen to or see. Dickens himself originally reported parliamentary debates in the papers, showing how political opinion was also a heavy influence in Victorian Britain. Humorous and satirical essays were also a regular feature in these nineteenth century papers.
The success of the Victorian media, along with the emergence of women’s newspapers, demonstrates the influence this era had on our current newspapers. Though the context has changed, the content has remained the same throughout the decades. The Victorian press successfully set the standard for society, and it continues to set the standard for what we read in our newspapers and media today in the 21st century.

Felony Facebook

This morning, while doing mundane things such as guzzling coffee, wondering what I'm going to wear and settling down to read the paper-I stumbled upon a column in the `Life and Style` section of The Daily Mail. A page claiming that people can suffer from an addiction to the internet. Of course the usual targets were sighted and taken aim for. Twitter, Facebook and the habit of constantly checking emails.
Yes, I am in no way denying that people do spend more time on the internet now than they ever used to. Partly because sites like Facebook and Twitter enable socialising when you are alone, and partly because internet is now available on your mobile. With many a shop boasting that they have free Wi Fi. I don't deny that these sites have highly negative consequences such as the recent Vanessa George incident, but as a whole, claiming that there is now an `addiction disorder` to technology, is just another way of not taking responsibility as parents, police, society as a whole. If a child misbehaves, it's of course ten times easier to blame his video game addiction, or her constant obsession with Twitter. "She's detached from the real world", "he has been brainwashed into violence by Grand Theft Auto". If these accounts fail, how about the classic of just branding them with a behavioral disorder. This approach never fails, as proven by the "Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders". A handbook that contained 112 genuine disorders in 1952 when it was first published, and now contains 374. A rise that has coincidentally risen with the decline of society's morals. In a time when "The Great British Family" is no longer present other than in a select few. The Government, rather than address the situation, seems to prefer to bury their heads in the sand and churn out some initials. Initials which can then claim to be a medical disorder, condoning some ridiculous behavior that would otherwise have been sorted out with some kind of discipline.
The recent claim to have people being addicted to the internet, may contain grains of truth. I near have a panic attack if I lose my Blackberry, I Twitter throughout the day and lest we forget checking Facebook for things such as new photos, notifications or events. But so what? I've done well in school, I got through college, I have a close knit group of family and friends, and currently reside in university. At the end of the day, when something new comes along the way to mesmerize us all, that will be held responsible for whatever society decides to do.
The government and police etc should just be grateful they have a virtual safety blanket to blame for their mishaps. For the rest of us, make sure you never die with something like your Ipod earphones in. No matter what kind of overlooked condition you had, your poor little Ipod will only take the fall.

Doing It For The Fame

"Comment is cheap, fact is priceless"

It sounds like a slogan for MasterCard but is in actual fact a live by rule for Journalists.

Though people would like to say that they live by this rule, a life of good, researched fact containing no errors and slander-it's the sad truth that the best kind of chat is the kind that starts with something along the lines of; "Oh did you hear Amy Winehouse caught her beehive alight last night?". Journalists are all to aware of this fact, hence the sudden influx and rapid sales of magazines like Heat and OK!. It's the kind of chat that's easy small talk. It offers people the chance to laugh, to offer an easy opinion, to mock and then to spin their chair around and tell their neighbour. It's lighthearted and fun, and more importantly, carefully avoids any kind of defamation or slander. The kind that a record producer could use as an argument never to work with Winehouse again or that would have her fans deserting her for lack of decent hair control. To be honest, there isn't a lot to be said that could ruin someones career in such a way that these celebrities don't do themselves, but the law of defamation is just another way to make it sound like we have society under control more than we do.

Of course defamation doesn't solely apply to celebrities, it also applies to the common law abiding person. The average hard working citizen who could suffer business closure for a vicious and untrue rumor, or public humiliation for something they didn't do.

When it comes down to it there will always be a victim on the tail end of good gossip.

No one wants to be that person but everybody likes to talk.

It's the same circumstance on a wider scale when it comes to papers and magazines. The best and most widely spread stories are the ones that include humiliation or contain a shock. Defamation and celebrities often end in a suing case when they can. In my opinion, this is the worst kind of conclusion. Gossip is well known for it's fleeting behavior. You may be a good talking point one morning and by the afternoon someone else has been printed about that knocks you out of the park. Suing and the act of going to court for it serves merely to bring about more attention and prolong the story, as opposed to letting it run it's course.

Here is a list of just some of the doubtless many defamation cases against celebrities.

http://www.personal-injury-info.net/celebrity-lawsuits.htm

In the world of Hollywood, sometimes any press is good press.

Seminar Lecture on the Italian Renaissance

The Italian Renaissance, which spanned from the 13^th century to about 1600, marked a shift in ideas that saw Italy change from a largely medieval, to an Early Modern Europe. Though this Renaissance and its effects were largely confined to only the elite, the ideas and values it represented can still be put into use today.

The period of time after the Renaissance, named `Early Modern Europe`, was defined by the failing authority of the church in the face of scientific advances.

This is exemplified in the Copernican theory. Copernicus, who lived from 1473 to 1543, claimed that the Earth was in fact, not the centre of the universe. This scientific theory went against Christian theology that everything orbited our Earth as a symbol of man’s cosmic importance. At the time, ecclesiastical rule rejected Copernicus’ theory for the writings of the Bible. It wasn’t until years later that Kepler reinstated the theory with cold, unarguable fact that it was accepted. Showing how our ideas and beliefs had shifted in favour of scientific discovery.

This was largely very positive progress for a number of reasons. There are no punishments for not accepting it’s beliefs (as in the Church’s idea of Heaven and Hell), it exists on it’s appeal to reason and common sense, rather than the Church’s theories based upon no substantial evidence, and lastly it does not force itself upon the people, with an attempt to cover every aspect of their lives such as their morality, or their hopes, past present and future. It simply lays out facts, giving people the opportunity, and the free thought to make their own judgements, and choose for themselves.

This idea of free thought, and the belief of a persons individual rights was a main component and result of the Italian Renaissance. The shift from medieval Europe to early modern celebrated an individuals right to have opinions and free thought, something unheard of before the Renaissance, as Russell states at the beginning of A History of Western Philosophy, Chapter 2 “very few Italians of the fifteenth century would have dared to hold an opinion”. Although Italy during this period in time was still largely under the rule of the church and ecclesiastical authority, many citizens among the elite gained the opportunity to think and write freely about the rule of the popes and the system they were in.

At the time of the Italian Renaissance, the reigning popes were essentially, tyrants. They were considered to be vain and without an ounce of religion in them. They frequently gave way to pomp and grandeur (not unlike our popes today).

Desiderius Erasmus was a Dutch philosopher who spent time away in Italy during the period of the Renaissance. His book “The Praise of Folly” contains his strong views on the Italian popes, in that they were “brainsick fools” who were “fond admirers of their own happiness”. He goes on to write that “their only weapons ought to be those of the Spirit” rather than the material goods that they were well known to surround themselves with. An Italian historian also wrote a passage along the same lines, claiming that “no man is more disgusted than I am…all of them are most unbecoming in those who declare themselves to be men in special relations with God.”

This freedom to write, have and pen your ideas down to paper, even with a fear of retribution, reflects modern journalism, with it’s pitfalls but with the freedom to express your opinions, outrage against the Government in power or commentary upon the human life and the society which you live in (for example Erasmus’ `The Praise of Folly`).

The Renaissance liberated the educated from the strict and unrelenting laws of medieval culture. Scholars became aware that there were a variety of opinions to be had on many subjects and individual genius was able to flourish.

This onslaught of free thinking was brought about by choice. There were now choices to be made between the church, with it’s ancient beliefs, and new science, with brand new facts and theories. If an individual’s choice was to follow science, they were then granted the opportunity to voice their thoughts about it. Did they agree with that specific theory? Was there anything else that was still left unanswered? The world became suddenly new. People were looking towards the future, rather than the antiquated world of the ancients. New animals and lands were rapidly being discovered. Real life became a lot more interesting than that which they read about in their classical literature. Folk tales were being discarded in favour for this new way of living and thinking. No longer were people dictated to, they could themselves make a discovery and then become the ones to dictate. The world was all of a sudden ripe with possibility.

Men who became a product of the Renaissance, men such as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo are renowned today for their incredible artwork and talent. Men such as these were, during the Renaissance, against the traditional ideas of antiquity. They were new, and no doubt crowd pleasers to those who were amongst the masses. They were a symbol of changing ways. Nowadays, artists such as these are classics, and a symbol of high culture. This is a reflection upon our present ideas and arguments of mass culture versus high culture. How ideas are constantly changing with time.

The Italian Renaissance, although stressed by Bertrand Russell that it was of little philosophical importance, nonetheless brought about the idea of progress.

Pre Renaissance, the world was burgeoning with potential. Theorists and philosophers, all had ideas but as of yet they had no substantial evidence to back it up. Original thoughts were slowly being formed but there was nowhere to speak it, or even write it down for fear of retribution and for going against strict and traditional beliefs. Copernicus with his theory was ultimately shot down, yet it was still there in the back of people’s minds. It was almost like the world was teetering on a breakthrough. Once Kepler provided the evidence needed for Copernicus’ theory to prove the Bible wrong, it raised questions, providing the seeds for individual thought. Soon after, the world became almost obsessed with practicalities. The realisation that time was best spent on advancing the way we live, rather than focusing on theories of the past. The practicalities of integrating science into warfare, the practicalities of understanding blood circulation and bacteria, the microscope, the thermometer and the improvement of clocks. All are progressions that have helped us even today and all are ideas that we are essentially still progressing.

 

A Journalist's Playground

The laws of the law just keep coming at us like a round of bullets, and I really don't think i'll be able to spend my career missing all of them.

What I have learned so far in my freshman life of a budding journalist is this; people don't like us.

Yet they depend on us in a way I feel they'd rather not admit. We're the eyes and the ears of this society. We gossip and bitch and whisper secrets round the world. The public feed off of what we hand them, eat out of our hands, and then watch us take one for the team as the onslaught of rules and regulations hail down upon us from the wig wearing, gavel wielding hands of higher judges.

All metaphors and flowery descriptions aside, journalists technically have no more restrictions to abide by then any normal member of the public. No talking of active cases outside of court, personal information belonging to the convicted is not to be broadcast. They're just more decadent and specific versions of what your mother told you at school. Don't talk about people behind their back and don't spread rumors. The moral code of any respectable human being. Of course, moral code is allowed to be discarded in favor of a good story which is rule #2 of being a journalist. But of course, we would all earn a slapped wrist for that as well. No malice. Malice. It sound's like one of the seven deadly sins but in my case it's another one of my old playground rules. "Be nice to the other children!".

However, in the grand scheme of things, maybe the public likes a juicy story even better when it's been struggled for. Like a note hastily passed in class before the teacher sees, or Chinese Whispers. You know at the end of the day that what you're saying is wrong, but it just makes the game all that more fun. So in my new playground of judges, convicts and pushy press, here's to hoping I keep my head afloat. After all, what's life without a little risk?

God save our style

Because I am in the mood to blog something whilst my Itunes library home streams itself from my computer in the corner, to the little pink laptop I'm typing on. Apparently 1000+ songs take their time to travel about 5 feet across the room.

So I'm sat here on my bed, surrounded by countless issues of US and Uk Elle magazines, clothes, bags... and a Teeline shorthand book, which sticks out like a sore thumb, not just because it's the only blue amongst all this pink, but because it's probably the object with the most depth amongst all this...well, pink.

Not to say that my issues of Elle do not contain intelligence. The London Fashion week edition in particular contained some of the best artists and designers, celebrated spectacularly with a splash of London culture. I am fully aware that Britain as we know it is going into the gutters, the gutters from which chavs and other slimy things spawn from in the dead of night. However, believe it or not, a little splash of England still remains. The England that Americans dream of. Red letterboxes, red buses, Mary Poppins and of course the Queen. This kind of London pride is seen in culture, in artwork, designs, in the Union Jack sewn intricately into a pair of skinny jeans, or a distressed image of Big Ben printed onto a baggy t-shirt. It's seen in the posters strewn around the underground as we celebrated 25 years of London fashion week.

England has always had a way of retaining a pure individualism when it comes to music, arts or fashion. We gave the world The Beatles, a hit which then gave us Stella McCartney. Britain's elaborate and unrivaled history gives it's culture a splash of vintage. The most recent styles to have hit the Uk catwalk this season have been the eighties, an era which saw the birth of London fashion week. Not yet mainstream or celebrated, the designers then had a lease of life all their own, expressing themselves with fabric, colors and prints. Looks, which after 25 years, are once more strutting down the runway. A celebration of creativeness and independence.

However, despite it all, we remain humble. Without the fluff and ruffles of the Paris collection (as delightful as it is, God bless Marc Jacobs designing for Louis Vuitton), and without the rigid clean cut lines of New York City's futuristic view (brilliant concept none the less), England retains it's humble origins. With designs that you can see walking down Tottenham Court Road, strolling through Hyde Park or stepping off the tube.

So the next time you see the untalented, with tack dripping from every limb, crawling from the graves of reality television, just hold your head up high and walk into Topshop. Walk over the gutters in your new pumps and be proud to be British.

Tsunami

Just found this article from The New York Times. It's the sheer simplicity of this story which makes it so dreadfully sad.

I know that we always see on television adverts for various charities, for those who have suffered disasters at the hands of nature, yet it always seems so distant, no matter how it tugs on the heart strings. However this article genuinely puts into perspective the normality of how their days begin. Not unlike ours, before their lives are drastically altered.

I think we can all just about spare a thought away from our shorthand.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/opinion/01figiel.html?ref=opinion

"But our hearts were with — are still with — those who cannot say the same, who would sleep for the first time that night without a son, a daughter, a mother, a father, an uncle, an aunt, a cousin. Their loss is our loss."

Welcome to my world.

So who knew that having the ability to write down squiggles and then decipher them into English is apparently very handy. Not having this ability can cost you any future job and possibly even have you sent to jail. Literally translated they are words containing no vowels, last time I checked this was called Welsh, but in the world of journalism, this is called Shorthand. A form of writing which, if ever penned incorrectly, could have me unexpectedly putting words into peoples mouths. In my new world, this a crime. 

But we need to backtrack. Before all this began, back on a day which I believe to have been a Tuesday, I was informed of all sorts of fun and risky things a journalist encounters during their career. Things such as being sued for libel, sued for contempt of court, or, the icing on top of the cake; sent to jail. 

However, according to this observant blogger, the regulations of contempt of court are rather vague when it comes to technology such as blogs. 

http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/03/31/blogs-and-reporting-restrictions/

His article (which was subsequently published in The Guardian) explains the grey matter of bloggers releasing information that would otherwise be restricted in mainstream newspapers and broadcasting channels.

I myself would personally not want to risk it. I have never looked good in convict orange.

Woe betide me if I ever put down the wrong squiggle.