Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Internet’

Rule by poorly-educated is looming

July 12th, 2016 Comments off

Gove tells Islam that nobody wants to hear from experts

Gove tells Islam that nobody wants to hear from experts

God, or Allah, might still be in his heaven, but all is definitely not right with the world. Brexit! A woman prime minister takes over from the rarely flappable David Cameron in Britain; in Ireland, the leader who just hauled himself onto the beach of high office after months of negotiation to form a government is now under challenge; in the US, the prospect of President Trump cannot be discounted; and a highly-paid TV presenter, Chris Evans of Top Gear, falls on his sword because of low ratings.

What the hell is going on? As the aforementioned Trump would say, punctuating each word with a shake of his raised hand, index finger pointing up.

Well, I have a theory, and again it has been indicated by that Great Pointer, the Man with the Golden Hair, DJ Trump. Some months ago, during his unforeseen barn-storming of the Republican primary circuit, Trump declared at a rally that “I love the poorly-educated”. Rapturous cheers met this of course, even though it seems odd that people would cheer to hear themselves described as dim. But that seems to be part of the Trump shtick, and there’s a certain amount of evidence that poor education was also a predictor of voting for Leave in the British EU referendum. Read more…

On Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat – the ‘asocial media’ emerge

November 21st, 2014 Comments off

It’s good to see the Irish authorities have reached the stage of public consultation on fine-tuning changes to existing laws so they cover bad behaviour on digital platforms.

But why not a whole new law, even a suite of laws? As netizens [ugh], or rather people who overwhelmingly both work and play via the internet, we should have controls that refer specifically to this environment. It’s no longer possible to pretend that the wonderful freedom and openness of the web can be a highway without road-signs and restrictions.

More and more, the unlovely side of the internet comes into view. And that’s without discussing the Dark Web, hard-core porn and its trade, ditto for drugs and weapons.

Up in the sunny, noisy, hillsides of ‘social media’ it’s becoming ever more clear, to anyone with sensitivity and clear sight, that the term ‘social’ denoting a big open party is a misnomer. Even the implication that social implies a concern and regard for one another is often inaccurate.

More often it should be ‘asocial media’. ‘Asocial’ means ‘without society’. And individuals such as those who threatened athlete Jessica Ennis-Hill with sexual violence after she stated she would not support the re-employment of a convicted rapist at Sheffield football club should not be welcome in any society. They have no regard from others, except for those who confront them in the flesh. Read more…

Why aren’t there more women in the digital business world?

November 6th, 2014 Comments off

As I write these words on November 6 2014 [there’s a classic intro for you], the Web Summit in Dublin is about to hear a talk about the topic of the scarcity of women at such gatherings, and in the world of digital technology in general.

Coincidentally, I’m watching a webinar from the US, sponsored by the Knight Foundation, on open data and ‘the next big thing’. There’s a lot of talk about open data and emerging platforms, and the first panel featured four men and one woman.

In the second session, a woman did give the presentation, but, to the relief of the stereotype-seekers, she was dressed in shapeless jeans, shirt and jumper and messed up hair. Just like a male geek (the term will not give offence, I hope, for it is so short and handy).

I’ve been to so many conferences and hackathons, so many meetings on digital issues of interest, such as open data, and yes, females are in the minority. At a BBC-sponsored hackathon in Dublin earlier this year I handcounted the crowd of around 120, and put it at about eight to one. But why the hand-wringing? Why oh why aren’t there more women in this field?

I’ll tell you why. Read more…

Longform journalism is dead! You read it here first

May 20th, 2014 Comments off

Longform shmongform. If you’re emulating Marcel Proust, don’t do it online.

“Why do you spend so much time reading those long boring articles in the New Yorker?” my husband inquired sniffily, before resuming his enjoyment of Neatorama.

Why indeed, I ask myself – well, not when it’s an instructive account of Berlin’s hipp-est clubs , as in a few issues back, or Lizzie Widdicombe’s fascinating “The End of Food” in the May 12 issue.

But sometimes you (that is, I) find the finger sneaking forward to scroll down – and there’s more – and more- and more – and for heavens’ sake, I have a life to live! Part of which includes reading all the other interesting stuff on the internet, and keeping up with the latest viral rabbits-eating-raspberries genre.

Another quote: “Longform is dead,” proclaimed the slender, sensitive, journalism graduate by my side as we quaffed institutional wine and celebrated the surprisingly good magazine which he and his peers had produced as a final-year assignment.

The magazine was both on paper and online – there was more content online, but the editor, my companion, assured me that it didn’t run on and on like Beowulf. “Always loved reading,” he said, “but I’ve realized there’s no point in putting long articles on my own website. It’s all about music, and I can see from the views and hits that people will watch the video, but just about nobody reads the equivalent article.” Read more…

Categories: Blog Tags: , , ,

Bah, humbug, that Olympic opening ceremony was a mess

October 8th, 2012 No comments

Why I’m the curmudgeon over Danny Boyle’s Olympic distract-a-rama

 

It’s the internet, stoopid. And the crumbling of our brains. That, I’ve realised, is why I’m the blight at every enthusiastic mass-praising of Danny Boyle’s Olympics opening ceremony.

“Wasn’t it marvellous!” Brit-crowds crow. The gang was still burbling about it when I was in London last week. Mass adoration always irritates me. Unless I am the recipient.

But the lemming-like rush to declare it was such a fabulous event made me think of Leni Riefenstahl or Cecil B. De Mille and those grandiose cinematic extravaganzas which were calculated to make the poor schmuck in the cheap seats drop his popcorn.

Well, it was technically astonishing, and an awful lot went on. Then you’d expect at least those qualities for your £27 million.

However it was all over the place, and to my mind failed to fulfil three key requirements: was it a good piece of entertainment for the people in the Olympic Stadium?

Was it lucid and compelling for the vast television audience?

Did it act as an introduction to the great sporting event it was to usher in?

Taking the last first, the spectacular obviously meant to knock people’s socks off and be the memorable part of the evening. But the Olympics is about talented and dedicated athletes, not about directorial ego.

Was it lucid for a television audience? Probably more so than for the punters in the arena, who could only see bits and didn’t have the long-lens benefit of the cyber- and TV viewers.

But it was still very bitty – ooh, there’s Kenneth Branagh, now forget about him because the grass is all disappearing, there’s Tim Berners-Lee who invented the World Wide Web, now there are people on hospital beds and lots of dancing and finally, finally, it stops. It was a mass of ideas and half-ideas stuck together with verve, chutzpah and lots of money.

Had the theme been Berners-Lee’s incalculable gift to society (he’s a Brit after all) and that alone, it would have been clear, clean, and obviously afforded all sorts of spin-offs. You can get anything on the Internet, and a brilliant creative person like Danny Boyle could have chosen from a myriad possibilities. Choice, however, was not the keynote of the night, but rather a philosophy of throw everything in. And that does, in fact, mirror the effect of the internet on our lives, but no clear line was drawn between Berners-Lee’s fleeting appearance and the rest of the show. No, the ambition was bigger than that.

As Charlotte Higgins wrote in The Guardian, “it was bewildering enough, at times, to its domestic audience; abroad it must frequently have been plain incomprehensible.” (Although she went on to explain that it made sense to the British, saving for some stuffy Tories.)

It sounds a bit like the disdain for dreary old ‘facts’ that is being displayed by the Republican presidential campaign in the US. Lord, why should anyone be able to understand this fiesta? That would be commonplace and predictable.

The Olympics opening ceremony ritual has gotten out of hand, with the Greeks and the Chinese much to blame for their ludicrous shows that went on way too long and cost way too much. Maybe Rio will calm things down a little. Maybe.

Categories: Blog Tags: , , , ,