gimpyblog's posterous

12 Oct 2011

October 12th, 11:33am 1 comment

A question for economists...

Tonight on Channel 4 news I watched Chris Grayling, a Minister at the Department of Work and Pensions, give an abject performance trying to explain the woeful economic situation the country is in, and the huge rise in youth unemployment.
http://www.channel4.com/news/unemployment-hits-17-year-high

Grayling made a bizarre comment, if I remember correctly, that even though youth unemployment was at a high at least interest rates were low.

So, economists, was Grayling trying to hide a massive pile of shit with a sprinkling of tinsel, or is keeping interest rates low a priority over keeping unemployment down?

If so, why?

15 Sep 2011

September 15th, 7:25am 13 comments

You are all Johann Hari

Following the closure of the News of the World as a result of its involvement in the phone hacking scandal and Johann Hari's plagiarism I posted this suggestion, to little acclaim.

Now the Independent have reported on Hari and stated that he has plagiarised, embellished and conducted a pseudonymous smearing campaign against his critics as well as an embiggening project aimed at boosting himself.

For this he was allowed to publish a self-serving apology and was punished with a short suspension, despite being stripped of his Orwell Prize.

Frankly, I find this bemusing. There are few professions where such behaviour, at absolute odds with the minimum expectations of acceptable conduct, would go punished so leniently.

However, I am not surprised.

Newspapers, for the most part, do not seem to take particular care in reporting accurately, scrutinising the behaviour of their employees nor do they care when their wrongdoing is exposed, unless it has a financial cost.

Those on the right of the political spectrum will publish smears against climate scientists, wilful misinterpret their data and give a platform to intolerant rants from Libertarians angry at a world that does not see virtue in selfishness.

Those on the left will push an anti-GM and anti-nuclear argument beyond the points of legitimate concern the data permits, into the realm of fabrication and fantasy, while publishing opinions that place the blame for all the world's ills at the feet of democratic and mostly law abiding nations.

Journalism is corrupt from top to bottom and utterly amoral as an industry. There are, of course, many decent and moral people who are journalists, but there is no movement within the trade to ensure that standards are kept, that responsibilities are accepted and that misbehaviour is driven out.

Its recruiting practices are also suspect, it is no secret that almost all senior staff, even at ostensibly leftish publications, come from private education and Oxbridge - a narrow and unrepresentative section of society, a demographic whose opinions, and the experiences that form them, are alien to almost all their readers. Even the rise of the web and blogging has not changed things. You get into journalism, not by the quality of your prose or your investigative ability, but who you know and what you tell them about yourself, even if it is not true.

There seems to be little formal recruitment process, and no means of weeding out those who would share some of the traits that ultimately undid Johann Hari. I know of people in journalism who have plagiarised, lied about their qualifications, appropriated private discussions for public consumption, confused fantasy and reality and built their reputation on the hard work of others. There is little it seems can be done about this, complaints are seen as vindictive or petty, notes of concerns are politely acknowledged but no action is taken.

There will always be Johann Haris, but the question that should concern journalists is whether or not they want to be associated with them. Until there is some form of strict regulation within media organisations then they are collectively responsible for the failings of those who would call themselves journalists.

Ignoring a problem is to become complicit in it.

8 Sep 2011

September 8th, 1:40am 1 comment

Privatising public services?

In an inexplicable mix up I seem to have found myself on an emailing list where I receive the following marketing bollocks. Anyway, I think events such as this belie Coalition claims that they are not privatising the public sector.

===========================================

Public Sector Income Generation
Seizing Opportunities
12 October 2011
The Barbican, London

At the very heart of the Localism Bill measures, a general power of competence has given local councils new freedoms to run services 'free from Whitehall diktat'. The legislation gives local authorities the opportunity to innovate. Not only in service provision and driving down costs, but to own assets, develop property and generate revenue.At Public Sector Income Generation you can learn how to raise funds, provide a return of surplus or help to offset service charges. Income can be generated by providing chargeable services, advertising space, cash-collecting services, utilising renewable energy and delivering back office functions for other organisations.

You've heard how to save money, now hear how to make money!

Faculty of Homeopaths fundraising for dangerous quack charity

The Faculty of Homeopathy (FoH) are the medical wing of the UK homeopaths. in the past they have chosen to keep some distance between themselves and the lay homeopaths, perhaps because of the breadth and depth of the eccentricities of the latter. Via @rbhinkley (no link as this is not a public channel) I have learnt that they are holding a fundraising dinner for the Homeopathic Action Trust, who you may remember from their funding of the dangerously deranged Jeremy Sherr. This is quite a remarkable turn of events, not least because the FoH are on record as opposing the use of treatments that HAT fund.

I have sent the following letter to the FoH and will keep you updated with any replies.

======================

i note with alarm your fundraising dinner for the Homeopathic Action Trust (HAT) [1]. HAT are on record as funding trials on the use of homeopathy for malaria and HIV/AIDS without going through the appropriate Ethics Committee or other assessments [2].

The Faculty of Homeopaths (FoH) are on record as opposing the use of homeopathy for malaria treatment [3]

"“Malaria is a serious and life-threatening disease and there is no published evidence to support the use of homeopathy in the prevention of malaria,” comments Dr Peter Fisher, a member of the Faculty of Homeopathy and Clinical Director of the Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine. “The Faculty of Homeopathy recommends following the HPA guidelines.”"

Could you explain why you are holding a fundraising dinner for an organisation that advocates treatments the FoH condemn?

Yours Faithfully

[1] http://www.facultyofhomeopathy.org/events/data/homeopathy_action_trust.html
[2] http://gimpyblog.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/homeopathic-action-trust-still-fund...
[3] http://www.facultyofhomeopathy.org/media/position_statements/malaria.html

16 Aug 2011

August 16th, 3:54am 3 comments

Are banks restricting the use of their cards to their own cash machines?

I received an email from the Royal Bank of Scotland this morning informing me that one of my accounts was changing to a new Basic Account from October, which comes with the following restrictions on the use of the associated card.

What is changing?

The main change to your account relates to withdrawing cash. Once your account has changed, you will only be able to withdraw cash from:


	RBS, NatWest or Ulster Bank branded cash machines within the UK or Gibraltar

	any RBS or Post Office^® branch counter

	any cash machine outside the UK and Gibraltar which displays the Visa logo (but the owners of these cash machines may charge a fee) and

	retailers that offer cashback to their customers.

Has anyone else received similar from their bank?

*update*

Just to clarify, this new measure doesn't seem to apply to my other accounts. Without going into too much detail about my financial arrangements I maintain separate accounts to cover different outgoings I have, the account mentioned above is a simple account that I deposit money into each month for everyday spending. It has no associated credit or debit card.

10 Aug 2011

August 10th, 8:56am 1 comment

Really dumb attempt at phishing

From: sylviaharding@hotmail.com
To: sylviaharding@hotmail.com
Subject: Account alert update.
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:52:04 +0000

Welcome to Hotmail

The efficient way to do email

Dear Account User,

This message is from our data base center to all Hotmail account owners. We are currently upgrading our data base and e-mail account center. We are deleting all unused accounts to create more space for new accounts. To prevent your account from closing, you will have to update it below so we will know that it's a presently used account. To do this, You have to click on your reply button to reply back to this message and then you fill the information below.

* Name:

* Username:
* Password:
* Date of Birth:

* Country Or Territory:

Warning!!! Account owner that fails to verify his/her account after two weeks of receiving this warning will lose his or her account permanently.

AFTER VERIFICATION,A MESSAGE WILL BE SENT TO YOU AFTER WHICH YOU ARE ADVISED TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORD IMMEDIATELY.

Sincerely,
The Windows Live

Hotmail Team

11 Jul 2011

July 11th, 9:37am 0 comments

Blagging bank details

An observation based on the latest revelations concerning the blagging of Gordon Brown's bank details:

Many years ago I temped for a large Scottish high street bank. For a couple of pounds above minimum wage I would laboriously convert financial information in paper folders into a digital spreadsheet and annotate customer's accounts (mainly business accounts, but the occasional personal one too) with the detail. I had complete digital access to every bank account after signing a non-disclosure form and 2 hours training.

I had legitimate access to the accounts of several very famous household names from entertainment and politics, as well as their businesses dealings. It would be the easiest thing in the world to look at any account you choose with just an account number and certain other detail available in the office if you knew somebody with access. Given the relatively low pay of people with access to such information I would not be surprised if in some offices staff would be susceptible to cash sums offered in exchange for info.

I wonder if such a scenario will prove to be the source of some newspaper stories.

8 Jul 2011

July 8th, 4:47am 2 comments

How to fix the press

The print media are in a little spot of bother. There has been an evident lack of standards and ethics in many parts of the profession, to its considerable detriment. I have a simple solution to this problem. An independent regulator should oversee the profession and hold it to the following standards, breach of which would be punished by a suitable sanction:

A journalist:

1. At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed

2. Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair

3. Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies

4. Differentiates between fact and opinion

5. Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means

6. Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest

7. Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work

8. Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information

9. Takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge

10. Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation

11. Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed

12. Avoids plagiarism.

These are taken from the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) Code of Conduct and are sufficient to cover everything from Johann Hari's plagiarism to the hacking of the mobile phones of murder victims.

Of course journalists should not be obliged to join the NUJ, nor should the NUJ be charged with overseeing this code (as it happens they don't really enforce it anyway) but it does represent a considered set of rules that would increase press standards.

30 Jun 2011

June 30th, 1:04am 0 comments

Fraser Nelson and the picket line

*see update*

Spectator editor Fraser Nelson tweeted this this morning:

"‎frasernels‎: Proudest moment of my childhood was crossing a school picket line with my mum (a teacher). Hope other kids get to defy union bullies today"

in response I asked

"@frasernels was that a strike at Nairn or Dollar academy? what year?"

Fraser Nelson has now deleted his tweet (I have it archived via screen capture).

I think it is petty of me to draw attention to a claim that was retracted, but I'm going to do it because I don't think the claim is true and I think it is illustrates how our political present can impact our recollection of past events.

*Update*

Fraser Nelson has written an article for The Spectator:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/7061743/the-unions-have-miscalculated-...

<i>Shortly before Michael Gove organised a strike for journalists in Dundee, I crossed a school picket line with my mum, a teacher at my local school (Nairn Academy). She was a member of a teaching union, the PAT, that didn't believe in strikes, so when the school closed the two of us went in. It was a perfectly friendly affair: my teachers (and her colleagues) were at the gate, with no one else around. One of her colleagues handed her a leaflet and we went on inside. We never discussed politics at home, and I still have no idea what my mum thought about Thatcher (it was 1985). But then, she and thousands of teachers like her took the basic view that kids should not be dragged into disputes between adults. I didn't think much of it then, but looking back now, understanding the pressures teachers must have been under, it was quite something.</i>

29 Jun 2011

June 29th, 3:24am 7 comments

Plagiarism

This is really bothering me, despite being inconsequential, because I've had stuff nicked from my blog on several occasions without credit*.

The journalist Johann Hari has admitted that when writing up interviews he transplants better quotations by the same interviewee from other interviews and passes it off as being said to him.

In his mea culpla he opens with the following:

Yesterday on Twitter I was accused of plagiarism. This accusation is totally false

[...]

Plagiarism is presenting somebody else's intellectual work as your own – whereas I have always accurately attributed the ideas of (say) Gideon Levy to Gideon Levy.

Here is how the OED define plagiarism:

1. The action or practice of taking someone else's work, idea, etc., and passing it off as one's own; literary theft.

That 'etc' would include interviews.

When you pretend that something said to someone else and written up was said to you you are assuming credit for another person's work.

Hari is guilty not only of plagiarism, but of rewriting definitions to suit his argument.

*Mostly I have had stuff used with permission and have never felt my opinions or words were misrepresented by anyone.