And another thing…

“Also, some of the articles are written by Fraser Nelson and Rod Liddle…”

Teh funneh! )

This blog may contain traces of irony, and is written in an atmosphere where irony is used.

Just think, when the New Statesman drags itself into the 21st century, you’ll be able to enjoy the left-wing rantings of Mehdi Hasan and James Macintyre, not to mention the not inconsiderable talents of the unbiased Steve Richards.

Oh what joy to behold. I might even buy a Gooseberry, sorry I meant a Blackberry.

I’m not sure anyone buts either the Statesman or the Spectator in order to read “unbiased” journalism.

I’d quite like to hold the Spekkie in the palm of my hand too…..

“Also, some of the articles are written by Fraser Nelson and Rod Liddle…”

I laughed.

I also laughed when everyone on Question Time last week kept calling him Nelson or Nelson Fraser. His indignant, upper-class grimace was truly a thing of beauty.

Scots people may be able to enlighten me, but what, exactly, is Fraser Nelson’s accent and where does it come from? Dr Finlay’s Casebook?

Isn’t the important thing WHAT THEY SAY? Who says it and how it is presented is irrelevant, unless you think that ‘presentation’ is the most important thing in communication.

I’m sorry, but that idea will not do anymore. The internet is, gradually, making people think about WHAT is being said rather than HOW it is being said. The awful spelling and grammar may be irritating, but once one gets used to it, the IDEAS become the most important thing. Horrible for politicians, but good for The People.

Take this idiotic situation with the two police ladies who had a reciprocal arrangement for looking after their children. I feel sure that you would have voted ‘for’ the legislation that caused the problem because it would have been presented PERFECTLY. But it was, in fact, far from perfect, wasn’t it? But you voted for it! Therefore, you are responsible for this farce.

You are in danger of making similar errors as regards Global Warming, for example. The fact that the arguments are presented PERFECTLY does not mean that they are true. You must surely recognise that there are so many ‘professors’ world-wide who are predicting disaster that SOMETHING MUST BE DONE to ensure that they cannot be shown to be wrong. And so, these ‘professors’ become more and more hysterical in their predictions.

And so, we have this ‘professor’, Simpson, saying that hiding tobacco displays is justified DESPITE THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT THAT DISPLAY BANS ARE EFFECTIVE. He said that himself.

‘Professors’ were, and still are, dictating government actions. It seems to me that Government Ministers have become missionaries for whatever new religion that the ‘professors’ have thought up.

Just for a moment, let us say that the USA, China, India and Russia say, “We are not convinced about Global Warming. We will wait and see for a few years” ‘Professors’ are predicting global disaster, but suppose that nothing went wrong?

The interesting thing is that, if nothing went wrong, it would show that all the predictions of epidemiology in general are seriously flawed. That cannot be allowed.

Somehow or other this bluff has to be called, and it is up to you parliamentarians to call the bluff. ‘Professors’ CAN be wrong.

I do not suppose that you will take any notice, but the Internet will catch you out eventually. And this is from a lifelong Labour supporter!

Everyone (ok, every media outlet) seems to be going daft for “micro-transactions”, but the trouble is, the consumer is wise to the fact they represent a pretty poor investment. Add to that the fact that there’s always a free option on the web, somewhere; OK, maybe not quite as good, but “free” is hard to tackle, and you come to a situation where Murdoch et al are seriously getting scared by this interweb-tubes-thingymajigg.

Give it 5 years and the industry will have settled down a bit.
The AppStore is a good case-in-point. When it started up, most of the “big-hitters” were games and iFart apps.
Now we’re starting to see more user-based content apps and some mature apps, dealing with serious usage. We’re also seeing a rash of micro-transaction stuff post3.0, but I think in a couple of months time, the low-hitters will have died out.
Don’t be expecting to continue your digital subscription past the New Year, Tom…

The FT basic package is £2.99/week.

I wouldn’t bother reading the Spectator if it was a facility on my glasses.

Usual witty comment but you are right. This is the future of newsprint and everyone will need to do this well to survive.

@ Quietzapple: I know what you mean, but there are some little gems tucked away in the Spectator – take for example Diary of a Notting Hill Nobody, which rips the p*** out of the Tories something rotten:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/politics/diary-of-a-nh-nobody/

Tom Have you seen the new Tory site. its strets ahead of anything else.

http://www.myconservatives.com/

Ok Nicky, one of the mice smiled a bit nervously when I read the bit about cutting . . .

Fancy the Tories being stretes ahad – eh?

I voted in their last poll, perhaps I should get the mice to sign up to their latest polls re should they increase museum charges or VAT to 20%?