I would like tv reports to play down the hysteria that follows intermittent successes - wicket taken, goal scored - otherwise, next thing would be batsmen hugging and kissing every time someone scores a boundary; and what about the goalie? why does he not get a snogfest (sometimes with acrobatics) for a noble save?
- it is just remotely possible that the BBC might agree (if under strong and sustained pressure) to return to a more restrained style of sports depiction - but cricket is all on sky now - and there is no control on them ...
- I suspect that it might be better for players to contain their energy after a success; go back to the play and direct the energy into subsequent performance; a cricket captain might usefully advise an incoming batsman to look at it this way - that the bowler and fielders who have just taken a wicket need a little while to regain their aggression - it is not necessary to comport oneself as a rabbit and think oneself into failure ....likewise, a soccer side encouraged to think this way might more likely strike back very soon after letting in a goal - realising that their opponents may be deluded for a short time by bliss ...of course, a poor manager may not realise this and allow his side to tailspin after an initial setback.
Whatever the psyche of the sport players, I suspect it is corrosive for viewers - and players - to have short term rejoicings reinforced.
By the way, have sports writers (in their excessive and vapid legions) given choreographical labels to the various antics performed - high fives we know - but the knee slide? the Voluntary Abu Ghraib (where players lie upon each other in a starfish configuration) - the Man Mountain (where they jump upon each other, standing - and do we know whether this brings on back injuries?)
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Dengl 29 MYTE-ology
My wife Bea has bought a book called Green Cleaning - by Margaret Briggs and VIvian Head.
This is very keen on soda bicarb and lemon and one or two other things... I agree - good.
I cant resist quoting from a paragraph:
"Over the years soda and potash were defined as both natural and artificial products and as vegetable and mineral. Imagine playing the old favourite '20 Questions' with the ancestors - it was hard enough trying to define substances as animal,vegetable or mineral as a science game with primary school children, but at least they have a better understanding of materials through the National Curriculum. Another nugget of information that might corner your imagination for a split second: it wasn't until the beginning of the 19th century that Sir Humphrey Davy decomposed both alkalis and called them sodium and potassium, which are really Latinized versions of soda and potash".
No doubt curriculum is a latinised version of something or other in newly nuggetised English - defined to "corner your imagination" (a latinised version of image - and - ation?) - well - only for a split second ...(a latinised version of secondary - as in education - which is itself a latinised version of - eh! an expression of amazement - dook - an expression of social stratification and -tion - (pronounce shun) an expression of dont spend too long with this boring stuff when you can be texting your friends with the whortleberry under the desk ...
... and soon those who have ascended this ladder of knowledge, skill and competence (the National Curriculum of England & Wales?) are going to throw purse power at the university teaching - if and when they arrive to experience it ...
maybe our grandchildren should aim at enrolling in a Scottish or a Chinese University
the book (partly) redeems itself with a proposal for a:
Dry Shampoo
Sprinkle one teaspoon of oatmeal and one of bicarbonate of soda on your head. Massage in for a few minutes*, then comb or brush out. Again, warm air will help to get rid of residue.
(this presumably means wave the electric hair dryer about - one of society's most wasteful devices, I would have thought) ...
(I can see this being marketed as a Fringe Hair experience during the Festival ...)
*the patience required to continue for 5 minutes of this is much more expected than the split seconds available for nuggets inside the skull ...
MYTE is of course Etym backwards, and the ology tacks on for the ride ....
This is very keen on soda bicarb and lemon and one or two other things... I agree - good.
I cant resist quoting from a paragraph:
"Over the years soda and potash were defined as both natural and artificial products and as vegetable and mineral. Imagine playing the old favourite '20 Questions' with the ancestors - it was hard enough trying to define substances as animal,vegetable or mineral as a science game with primary school children, but at least they have a better understanding of materials through the National Curriculum. Another nugget of information that might corner your imagination for a split second: it wasn't until the beginning of the 19th century that Sir Humphrey Davy decomposed both alkalis and called them sodium and potassium, which are really Latinized versions of soda and potash".
No doubt curriculum is a latinised version of something or other in newly nuggetised English - defined to "corner your imagination" (a latinised version of image - and - ation?) - well - only for a split second ...(a latinised version of secondary - as in education - which is itself a latinised version of - eh! an expression of amazement - dook - an expression of social stratification and -tion - (pronounce shun) an expression of dont spend too long with this boring stuff when you can be texting your friends with the whortleberry under the desk ...
... and soon those who have ascended this ladder of knowledge, skill and competence (the National Curriculum of England & Wales?) are going to throw purse power at the university teaching - if and when they arrive to experience it ...
maybe our grandchildren should aim at enrolling in a Scottish or a Chinese University
the book (partly) redeems itself with a proposal for a:
Dry Shampoo
Sprinkle one teaspoon of oatmeal and one of bicarbonate of soda on your head. Massage in for a few minutes*, then comb or brush out. Again, warm air will help to get rid of residue.
(this presumably means wave the electric hair dryer about - one of society's most wasteful devices, I would have thought) ...
(I can see this being marketed as a Fringe Hair experience during the Festival ...)
*the patience required to continue for 5 minutes of this is much more expected than the split seconds available for nuggets inside the skull ...
MYTE is of course Etym backwards, and the ology tacks on for the ride ....
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Dengle No 28 Broadcasting Research in a Surbiton Kitchen
Discovery and Significance of Weekly Reach
“Weekly Reach” means the percentage of the population who are served, at some point during a week, by a broadcast channel or station.
In 1975, audience measurement was mostly a matter of a ‘snapshot count’. The BBC ran a Daily Survey – this asked a nationwide sample “what did you see yesterday” and identified the proportion of a population who had seen each programme listed. ITV ran a “TV Ratings” system replete with falsehood; it measured the proportion of “homes” in which “the set”, being switched on supposedly denoted “homes viewing”. Later, at least partly in response to repeated criticism from the IBA (and its research department – ie, me) the “homes rating” was multiplied by a figure supposed to represent the number of people in a room for that time of day, to give the number supposed to have watched a programme.
In the 1980s commercial television measurement introduced keypads on which each individual (supposedly) pressed a button to show when they entered or left the room; this, with the data from the set meter, gave a better estimate of those who might have seen a programme.
In both cases, of the BBC’s audience research method and that of the commercial system, the focus was on the programme or the time slot – and the size of its audience. The focus was not on the individual viewer, what he or she thought, or felt, or did cumulatively over a day or over a week. During the 1980s the Commercial system of audience measurement was accepted by the BBC (with the – deeply unscientific – quid pro quo that the results of Appreciation measurement – still carried out – would be suppressed). This Broadcasters’ Audience Measurement system was adapted to be able to state how many of a sample will have been present for at least a ‘quorum segment’ of a broadcaster’s provision, during a week; but the system was still (and in the 2010s remains) not focused on individuals.
In 1975 the IBA had been running a weekly diary system whereby those who said they had seen a programme gave it a mark for how much they had Appreciated it. In so doing, they indicated they had seen the programme. As the diary ran for a week it was relatively easy to find who had seen at least one programme on a given channel during that week. This figure, of “weekly reach” – first calculated by hand after data entry on spread sheet on a kitchen table in Surbiton with the whole of a week’s diaries (some 500 in the sample – I well remember doing it) – was gradually recognised within the industry as being of some interest.
In subsequent decades – even over 30 years later – Weekly Reach has become a litmus test of the value of a broadcaster’s contribution. Weekly Reach can be calculated across the population represented at large, or amongst a segment of it (by sex, age, class or whatever social criterion). I argued (in pieces published occasionally since the 1990s) that the test of effective Public Service Broadcasting is a Reach as near universal as possible (probably across more than one channel) combined with a high level of average appreciation, for services delivering the widest possible range of programme genres and approaches – over a broadcasting schedule cycle – ie: a week.
“Weekly Reach” means the percentage of the population who are served, at some point during a week, by a broadcast channel or station.
In 1975, audience measurement was mostly a matter of a ‘snapshot count’. The BBC ran a Daily Survey – this asked a nationwide sample “what did you see yesterday” and identified the proportion of a population who had seen each programme listed. ITV ran a “TV Ratings” system replete with falsehood; it measured the proportion of “homes” in which “the set”, being switched on supposedly denoted “homes viewing”. Later, at least partly in response to repeated criticism from the IBA (and its research department – ie, me) the “homes rating” was multiplied by a figure supposed to represent the number of people in a room for that time of day, to give the number supposed to have watched a programme.
In the 1980s commercial television measurement introduced keypads on which each individual (supposedly) pressed a button to show when they entered or left the room; this, with the data from the set meter, gave a better estimate of those who might have seen a programme.
In both cases, of the BBC’s audience research method and that of the commercial system, the focus was on the programme or the time slot – and the size of its audience. The focus was not on the individual viewer, what he or she thought, or felt, or did cumulatively over a day or over a week. During the 1980s the Commercial system of audience measurement was accepted by the BBC (with the – deeply unscientific – quid pro quo that the results of Appreciation measurement – still carried out – would be suppressed). This Broadcasters’ Audience Measurement system was adapted to be able to state how many of a sample will have been present for at least a ‘quorum segment’ of a broadcaster’s provision, during a week; but the system was still (and in the 2010s remains) not focused on individuals.
In 1975 the IBA had been running a weekly diary system whereby those who said they had seen a programme gave it a mark for how much they had Appreciated it. In so doing, they indicated they had seen the programme. As the diary ran for a week it was relatively easy to find who had seen at least one programme on a given channel during that week. This figure, of “weekly reach” – first calculated by hand after data entry on spread sheet on a kitchen table in Surbiton with the whole of a week’s diaries (some 500 in the sample – I well remember doing it) – was gradually recognised within the industry as being of some interest.
In subsequent decades – even over 30 years later – Weekly Reach has become a litmus test of the value of a broadcaster’s contribution. Weekly Reach can be calculated across the population represented at large, or amongst a segment of it (by sex, age, class or whatever social criterion). I argued (in pieces published occasionally since the 1990s) that the test of effective Public Service Broadcasting is a Reach as near universal as possible (probably across more than one channel) combined with a high level of average appreciation, for services delivering the widest possible range of programme genres and approaches – over a broadcasting schedule cycle – ie: a week.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Dengl 28 Obama as Shylock?
Obama As Shylock?
The USA - in the form of the President or Congress or some other institution - is seeking to exact a substantial payment out of BP as compensation for damage inflicted on US animals/beaches/people. This arises from a mishap (we shouldnt misuse the word 'accident') in non territorial waters over which I dont see that the US has any more jurisdiction than does Cuba ...) from an installation which, one is given to believe, was accepted in place by a US regulatory authority (Minerals and Mining something or other...). One can see how cross they are, and one can accept that they do want compensation. BP has ceded that it WILL pay some huge amount.
In doing this, it is said that there will be substantial effects on UK - and indeed on US share values and prosperity. It might be useful, then, to consider how to mitigate the HARM which will be passed along or spread, while alleviating the damage and suffering imposed on US individuals and society.
It also raises the matter of whether reparations in this case will be the catalyst for reparations in other similar cases which may have passed by without any such recognition or restitution, thus far. To my non-professional mind there are the cases of:
a US ship spilling oil on Breton and Norman beaches some years ago
EXXON's Valdez spilling oil on Canadian shores as well as Alaskan ones
Union Carbide's killing of Indian citizens in Bhopal, and of subsequent attributable physiological birth defects
The US military's detritus of explosives and chemicals which, over the years and after the cessation of wars which we may agree were politically justified, have maimed very many people in Asia
Somewhat more subtly, the President's advocacy may be shown to have accomplished two goals - one of earning restitution for victims of the Caribbean oil spill - and that is good; but the other (and perhaps NOT unavoidable) consequence is to depress BP share values with loss to those whose pensions are paid partly out of the dividends therefrom. In this latter function might there be a CLASS ACTION against the President for his ill judged advocacy - in bundling the two consequences together? (Hence the allusion to Shylock, above ...who wanted his pound of flesh, imagining it could be delivered without loss of blood and injury to its human source...) ...
Britain might also consider an action against the President for repeatedly referring to the company by a false name ("British" Petroleum) ((I agree, it was a surprise to me, too, before I learned about "Beyond"* ...but Obama should have known better ...)) thus engendering commercial and trading difficulties for other British concerns..
Of course, we might prefer NOT to explore or take such actions, but this might best occur in a less heated context.
How does one SAY such things - to any useful effect?
* I would have advised BP to employ Beyonce in some publicity, to help sidestep perception of the "British" referent, towards the "Beyond" concept ...
above all, I would have advised BP to anticipate and minimise its risks to a much more convincing extent ...
I would have advised BP, very soon after the explosion, to employ visibly American contractors to try and remedy the situation
The USA - in the form of the President or Congress or some other institution - is seeking to exact a substantial payment out of BP as compensation for damage inflicted on US animals/beaches/people. This arises from a mishap (we shouldnt misuse the word 'accident') in non territorial waters over which I dont see that the US has any more jurisdiction than does Cuba ...) from an installation which, one is given to believe, was accepted in place by a US regulatory authority (Minerals and Mining something or other...). One can see how cross they are, and one can accept that they do want compensation. BP has ceded that it WILL pay some huge amount.
In doing this, it is said that there will be substantial effects on UK - and indeed on US share values and prosperity. It might be useful, then, to consider how to mitigate the HARM which will be passed along or spread, while alleviating the damage and suffering imposed on US individuals and society.
It also raises the matter of whether reparations in this case will be the catalyst for reparations in other similar cases which may have passed by without any such recognition or restitution, thus far. To my non-professional mind there are the cases of:
a US ship spilling oil on Breton and Norman beaches some years ago
EXXON's Valdez spilling oil on Canadian shores as well as Alaskan ones
Union Carbide's killing of Indian citizens in Bhopal, and of subsequent attributable physiological birth defects
The US military's detritus of explosives and chemicals which, over the years and after the cessation of wars which we may agree were politically justified, have maimed very many people in Asia
Somewhat more subtly, the President's advocacy may be shown to have accomplished two goals - one of earning restitution for victims of the Caribbean oil spill - and that is good; but the other (and perhaps NOT unavoidable) consequence is to depress BP share values with loss to those whose pensions are paid partly out of the dividends therefrom. In this latter function might there be a CLASS ACTION against the President for his ill judged advocacy - in bundling the two consequences together? (Hence the allusion to Shylock, above ...who wanted his pound of flesh, imagining it could be delivered without loss of blood and injury to its human source...) ...
Britain might also consider an action against the President for repeatedly referring to the company by a false name ("British" Petroleum) ((I agree, it was a surprise to me, too, before I learned about "Beyond"* ...but Obama should have known better ...)) thus engendering commercial and trading difficulties for other British concerns..
Of course, we might prefer NOT to explore or take such actions, but this might best occur in a less heated context.
How does one SAY such things - to any useful effect?
* I would have advised BP to employ Beyonce in some publicity, to help sidestep perception of the "British" referent, towards the "Beyond" concept ...
above all, I would have advised BP to anticipate and minimise its risks to a much more convincing extent ...
I would have advised BP, very soon after the explosion, to employ visibly American contractors to try and remedy the situation
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Dengl 28 Reflections on the UK ELection 2010
To The Times 7 May
In the uncertain situation facing the nation towards the resolution of this Election, Her Majesty can play a constructive role.
She is not expected to tell party leaders what they might best do, but she can ask pertinent questions.
If Gordon Brown exercises his right to suggest to HM that he can form an administration, she might ask him these questions:
do you intend, as a principled measure, to work first towards the stabilisation and boosting of the economy?
Will you need the help of the Liberal Democrats to succeed in this task?
Will you then introduce some form of Proportional Representation?
Given that you did not introduce that, before the Election, when you had a large majority which would have helped to achieve
such a measure, are you sure that the British public would then see this as a move of high principle?
If Her Majesty does pose some such questions, it might be appropriate for them (and the replies) to be published.
Yours sincerely,
To The Times 9 May
It seems to have received little attention that in England, where there were local elections alongside the national one, there was a swing to Labour. Where I live, Labour have recaptured the council. The implication to my mind is that there may not have been a "real swing back to Labour" but that, had voters turned out in the last local election in the same proportion in which they did now, at the general election (and coincidentally, voting for local councillors), there would have been a larger proportion voting for labour last time.
Prompting a greater turnout for local elections would be a good thing, and thought needs to be given now as to how to achieve this - as we can not rely every time on a parallel polling exercise with the general election.
To The Times 11 May
Gordon Brown: One further Courageous Step Required
Ed Balls is quoted by the BBC as saying (about Labour's procedures towards finding a new party leader) : "It's an important day. But we will take the time we need to take to make sure we get this right."
This is outrageous and unacceptable. It is not for the Labour party to "take the time we need" when it is the nation that needs - and indeed our allies need - that we have a valid government as soon as possible. The first priority is to tackle the national debt; voting reform comes later. Brown blocks progress through the convention that he runs the government until he has the courage to go to Her Majesty and say he can not do it any longer. He has told us, the people, he can not do so; he should now go and formally tell Her Majesty and it is for her to call upon someone else to try and form an administration.
To The Times 13 May
Merits of the Conservative Liberal Democrat Coalition
At least one experienced analyst of the press and politics, Roy Greenslade, has forecast (yesterday) that several influential newspapers will now give Mr Clegg and his team a very hard time, reinforcing the notion of division rather than of working together.
It may be useful though to look at some potentially very useful elements of this coalition, ones which will appeal to the same section of the press which Greenslade says will be alienated and hostile.
One possible development is that, when in Government at Westminster, Mr Clegg and his supporters will come to value this central British institution and understand and even support why so many others want to repatriate powers from Brussels.
The other is that a significant number of MPs from Scotland are now in Westminster Government, rather than what would have been the case had a "blue" England been attempting to rule the United Kingdom manifestly alienating the "red" Scots. To a considerable extent now, the Scots are joined with the Welsh, English and Northern Irish in a project to make the best of this great United Kingdom. I hope the press will realise and celebrate this.
In the uncertain situation facing the nation towards the resolution of this Election, Her Majesty can play a constructive role.
She is not expected to tell party leaders what they might best do, but she can ask pertinent questions.
If Gordon Brown exercises his right to suggest to HM that he can form an administration, she might ask him these questions:
do you intend, as a principled measure, to work first towards the stabilisation and boosting of the economy?
Will you need the help of the Liberal Democrats to succeed in this task?
Will you then introduce some form of Proportional Representation?
Given that you did not introduce that, before the Election, when you had a large majority which would have helped to achieve
such a measure, are you sure that the British public would then see this as a move of high principle?
If Her Majesty does pose some such questions, it might be appropriate for them (and the replies) to be published.
Yours sincerely,
To The Times 9 May
It seems to have received little attention that in England, where there were local elections alongside the national one, there was a swing to Labour. Where I live, Labour have recaptured the council. The implication to my mind is that there may not have been a "real swing back to Labour" but that, had voters turned out in the last local election in the same proportion in which they did now, at the general election (and coincidentally, voting for local councillors), there would have been a larger proportion voting for labour last time.
Prompting a greater turnout for local elections would be a good thing, and thought needs to be given now as to how to achieve this - as we can not rely every time on a parallel polling exercise with the general election.
To The Times 11 May
Gordon Brown: One further Courageous Step Required
Ed Balls is quoted by the BBC as saying (about Labour's procedures towards finding a new party leader) : "It's an important day. But we will take the time we need to take to make sure we get this right."
This is outrageous and unacceptable. It is not for the Labour party to "take the time we need" when it is the nation that needs - and indeed our allies need - that we have a valid government as soon as possible. The first priority is to tackle the national debt; voting reform comes later. Brown blocks progress through the convention that he runs the government until he has the courage to go to Her Majesty and say he can not do it any longer. He has told us, the people, he can not do so; he should now go and formally tell Her Majesty and it is for her to call upon someone else to try and form an administration.
To The Times 13 May
Merits of the Conservative Liberal Democrat Coalition
At least one experienced analyst of the press and politics, Roy Greenslade, has forecast (yesterday) that several influential newspapers will now give Mr Clegg and his team a very hard time, reinforcing the notion of division rather than of working together.
It may be useful though to look at some potentially very useful elements of this coalition, ones which will appeal to the same section of the press which Greenslade says will be alienated and hostile.
One possible development is that, when in Government at Westminster, Mr Clegg and his supporters will come to value this central British institution and understand and even support why so many others want to repatriate powers from Brussels.
The other is that a significant number of MPs from Scotland are now in Westminster Government, rather than what would have been the case had a "blue" England been attempting to rule the United Kingdom manifestly alienating the "red" Scots. To a considerable extent now, the Scots are joined with the Welsh, English and Northern Irish in a project to make the best of this great United Kingdom. I hope the press will realise and celebrate this.
Monday, April 5, 2010
DENGL 27 xpropriation of the boat race?
I thought the 2010 boat race was poorly photographed for television
modern "technology" (the term should be subdivided - into technomena - the cameras/hardware etc themselves - and the technology - the knowledge of how to deploy these thingies) was not harnessed to give us a result any better than I recall in 1953, or whenever, with tiny screens but better reporting; the chap in the helicopter (or was it a balloon? seemed to forget his zoom lens much of the time; too much was shown close up of Oxford in the first 5 minutes - leaving out an account of the competitor; not enough integration with the commentator to explain where apparent leads of one boat were illusions of camera angle ...)
at the end there was far too much indulgence in heroising the contestants and then the winners and the neglect of the losers was perhaps not a matter just of decency and tact, as of not finding the time, aside from the wallowing in hugging and kissing and spraying each other with a noble French made bubbly wine - what will we have next - smashing guitars? ...; in boat races of yore I seem to recall a three cheers given by the winning boat - did I miss it this time because of my poor attention, or was it not shown - or did it not happen? (contrast international rugby, where the hosts applaud in the visitors to the dressing room ...)
I know I am hard of hearing and it may have been my fault not to have noticed, but I do not recall being told that this was an exceptionally fast or slow or just an average speeded race - and whatever that may have entailed for having crews made of 28 stone foreigners, and how their performance compared with others in the past, in similar weather or tidal conditions and contested by mere homegrown undergraduates;
also, there was too much xplicit display of what must be the xposor of the occasion - and what happened to my assumption that the BBC anyway was not keen to admit product placement as a form of advertising - ??!!
So, maybe I was one of the few people who, this morning, took to googlestan to xplore who or what may be Xchanging (a group of excaped convicts? a Chinese state about to seceded?) - and incredibly, the first few links I pressed gave me a blank page with some incomprehensible statement along the lines that some Directory (??!!??) had withdrawn access - so WHAT is the point of sponsoring such an international broadcasting event ...) and then, there was the giant vulgar bit of tin the winner was expected to brandish (was that a product of Britain's "vibrant" design culture? - or do we have to have in all sporting events some 'lifting of silverware' - perhaps sponsored by RentaJug?
thank heavens any royal figure kept away from tarnishing themselves with this shoddy scene
What is going to happen with televising the Olympic "Games"?
Eventually, I went to a website which gave me a message I produce below. (I point, in that document, to...):
Procurement services - what is this? buying weapons for dodgy emirates or somali pirates? finding "escorts" for overpaid footballers or eastern potentates?
Immigration services - what is this? finding business courses for punjabi villagers to attend in East Preston or constituencies where a few extra Labour voters might be appreciated by that party, in an other wise close cut race?
Various verticals - what is this? Are some verticals less vertical than others? my imagination fails me ...
We are usefully reminded that London is in the UK ...
and this is what the BBC has found itself internationally advertising, on the back of the Boat Race (I quote) .............
Xchanging plc (Xchanging) is a UK based industry specific processing services provider. The company is principally engaged in offering procurement services, integrated HR and payroll services, and immigration services to its clients present across various nations. In addition, it offers resourcing services, and managed recruitment services to its customers. Further, the company is engaged in offering procure to pay (P2P) accounting services and hosting services to a variety of customers across various verticals. Xchanging has its operations across 9 nations and customers in around 47 countries. Some of the company’s key clients include Citibank, Deutsche bank, Tech Mahindra, Wal-Mart, Cintas, American Express, Southwest.com, Lloyds, illium insurance, etc. The company has its headquarters located at London in the UK.
The company reported revenues of (British Pounds) GBP 557.76 million during the fiscal year ended December 2008, an increase of 19.14% over 2007. The operating profit of the company was GBP 46.46 million during the fiscal year 2008, an increase of 50.10% over 2007. The net profit of the company was GBP 29.16 million during the fiscal year 2008, an increase of 90.11% over 2007.
well, they made money evidently, until 2008 - but this site at least (for all the accounting wizardry they profess) doesn't indicate how they may have weathered the storms of 2009? - or did they perhaps contribute to creating them?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
