In a recent discussion with friends we tackled the tricky question of why I haven't seen ITV's new comedy sketch show Monkey Trousers. The less than tricky answer is that it's on ITV. Rather than launch into a rant about why this is so, I'll allow Charlie Brooker to provide a clue:
"It's easy to see why ITV's audience has collapsed. Having spent years relentlessly pursuing the lowest common denominator, it's inadvertently become a specialist channel for the very, very thick, while its traditional audience (the slightly thick) is now openly courted by Channel 4."
And that's without getting started on the Big Brother 'phenomenon'. I'll add my pint of bile to that topic on another day when I can give it the treatment it deserves. Don't tell me that if I don't like it I can turn it off. I already do that and I still don't like it.
Back to ITV. You've only got to check out the cast list for the aforementioned Monkey Trousers to guess that it ought to be good comedy. Good comedy I like. So is it a form of snobbery that prevents me from watching? No. Well, not just that. By tuning in to ITV, you guarantee its future, as they deliver the audience (us) to their advertisers (scum). And you thought it was about providing programming? Still at least we've got ITV2 and 3 now. What bounty!
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
An interesting piece in today's Guardian G2 about the ongoing file sharing debate. There's a particular bit that got me, bearing in mind that I believe the record 'industry' is the architect of its own problems:
"...the decline of the CD is a more intriguing tale than it may at first seem. Album sales actually reached a record high in the UK in 2003; it's singles that have suffered the biggest catastrophe."
A few years back, the BPI decreed that for a single to be included in the singles chart it could not contain more than two tracks (it might be three: sue me. They're doing it to everyone else). Before this, artists could choose to give the buying public a bit of added value in the form of extra tracks, material that didn't make it to the final album, live stuff etc. Oasis used to do it (in fact they even managed to squeeze a pretty damn good album out of B-sides by getting fans to vote for their favourites. The Masterplan turned out to be better that anything they've produced since, but I digress...) This practice could be traced back through a number of other big bands (not least The Smiths).
Then one day you find yourself picking up a CD single, scanning its contents (2 tracks) then its price (usually £2.99 minimum) and comparing this unfavourably with the £10 or so you'd pay for 12 to 14 tracks on the album a week later. Bear in mind this was before mp3s were everywhere. We all did the maths and stopped buying singles altogether. Simple. As soon as the pony-tailed, Porsche-driving, coke-snorting, penthouse suite-dwelling record executives began to feel the squeeze from this crappy bit of legislation they devised a solution which Stalin would have been proud of (perhaps a little OTT): blame Napster, release the hounds and sue 14-year-olds for every penny their bewildered parents can raise.
A slight shift from the orthodox 'Home taping is killing music' argument.
"...the decline of the CD is a more intriguing tale than it may at first seem. Album sales actually reached a record high in the UK in 2003; it's singles that have suffered the biggest catastrophe."
A few years back, the BPI decreed that for a single to be included in the singles chart it could not contain more than two tracks (it might be three: sue me. They're doing it to everyone else). Before this, artists could choose to give the buying public a bit of added value in the form of extra tracks, material that didn't make it to the final album, live stuff etc. Oasis used to do it (in fact they even managed to squeeze a pretty damn good album out of B-sides by getting fans to vote for their favourites. The Masterplan turned out to be better that anything they've produced since, but I digress...) This practice could be traced back through a number of other big bands (not least The Smiths).
Then one day you find yourself picking up a CD single, scanning its contents (2 tracks) then its price (usually £2.99 minimum) and comparing this unfavourably with the £10 or so you'd pay for 12 to 14 tracks on the album a week later. Bear in mind this was before mp3s were everywhere. We all did the maths and stopped buying singles altogether. Simple. As soon as the pony-tailed, Porsche-driving, coke-snorting, penthouse suite-dwelling record executives began to feel the squeeze from this crappy bit of legislation they devised a solution which Stalin would have been proud of (perhaps a little OTT): blame Napster, release the hounds and sue 14-year-olds for every penny their bewildered parents can raise.
A slight shift from the orthodox 'Home taping is killing music' argument.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
I couldn't let the day go by without mentioning the delights offered by the UK's top two television channels last night. What a clash! At 10:50PM on BBC1: Under Seige 2 with Steven Seagal (Tagline: A top secret nuclear satellite. A team of international terrorists. A government held hostage. An undetectable moving headquarters. Only one hero stands in the way... Give me strength). I don't think it matters if you haven't seen the first one. In fact, I'd recommend you don't.
Competing for our attention on ITV1 was Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (Tagline: Prepare For Battle/Take Back The Planet/Prepare to go Psychlo/On May 12, We Fight Back and so on...) which I stuck with for the same reasons that people slow down to look at road accidents. In that context it was compulsive viewing. The story was beneath contempt so I won't try to elaborate here but suffice to say it was no less that you'd expect from L. Ron Hubbard. I should mention that Earth has been enslaved by an evil race from another galaxy. They're called Psychlos from the planet Psychlio. Can you see what they did there? What an imagination! From the mind that introduced Scientology to the world. Thinking about it, even the word Scientology is embarrassing (and the concept is more than a little creepy. How about this from their manifesto: "The aims of Scientology are a world without insanity, without criminals, without war, where the able can prosper and where Man is free to rise to greater heights." Where the able can prosper? Not especially inclusive then...)
But I digress. Poorly written, awfully shot, terribly acted by all (some of the least...convincing...evil...laughter...ever, to paraphrase the Comic Store Guy from the Simpsons), more plot holes than plot, if you get my drift. I want to say so much more but I'm afraid it may send my day into a negative spiral. I just wonder how these films get made. So many people are involved in the production that you wonder why nobody stood up and said: "I hate to say it but this is rubbish!"
But hey, we've all got bills to pay.
Competing for our attention on ITV1 was Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (Tagline: Prepare For Battle/Take Back The Planet/Prepare to go Psychlo/On May 12, We Fight Back and so on...) which I stuck with for the same reasons that people slow down to look at road accidents. In that context it was compulsive viewing. The story was beneath contempt so I won't try to elaborate here but suffice to say it was no less that you'd expect from L. Ron Hubbard. I should mention that Earth has been enslaved by an evil race from another galaxy. They're called Psychlos from the planet Psychlio. Can you see what they did there? What an imagination! From the mind that introduced Scientology to the world. Thinking about it, even the word Scientology is embarrassing (and the concept is more than a little creepy. How about this from their manifesto: "The aims of Scientology are a world without insanity, without criminals, without war, where the able can prosper and where Man is free to rise to greater heights." Where the able can prosper? Not especially inclusive then...)
But I digress. Poorly written, awfully shot, terribly acted by all (some of the least...convincing...evil...laughter...ever, to paraphrase the Comic Store Guy from the Simpsons), more plot holes than plot, if you get my drift. I want to say so much more but I'm afraid it may send my day into a negative spiral. I just wonder how these films get made. So many people are involved in the production that you wonder why nobody stood up and said: "I hate to say it but this is rubbish!"
But hey, we've all got bills to pay.
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Monday, June 13, 2005
It is a fantastic sunny afternoon and I am here, hunched over a keyboard compiling my CV. How many days do we get like this every year? In this part of the world? Not bloody many, let me tell you.
If that wasn't bad enough, I have just realised why I have never attempted to write a CV before. One reason is that I've never needed one before (although when this baby hits the streets and the job offers come flooding in I may reconsider this statement...). All the jobs I've had have come through contacts, friends and former colleagues. In one respect I count myself lucky, having thus far avoided all that nasty interview business, although this may soon be to my disadvantage when I find myself peeing myself in front of one of those panels brandishing clipboards. We'll see.
The main reason the CV malarky is so depressing is because it forces you to take a long, hard look at yourself. This in itself isn't too bad. Self-delusion is a skill I've developed to quite a high standard. But it's not one you can put down to make you an attractive prospect. The worst bit of all is staring at the big, blank section headed 'Achievements'. Time for a little creative writing, anyone?
If that wasn't bad enough, I have just realised why I have never attempted to write a CV before. One reason is that I've never needed one before (although when this baby hits the streets and the job offers come flooding in I may reconsider this statement...). All the jobs I've had have come through contacts, friends and former colleagues. In one respect I count myself lucky, having thus far avoided all that nasty interview business, although this may soon be to my disadvantage when I find myself peeing myself in front of one of those panels brandishing clipboards. We'll see.
The main reason the CV malarky is so depressing is because it forces you to take a long, hard look at yourself. This in itself isn't too bad. Self-delusion is a skill I've developed to quite a high standard. But it's not one you can put down to make you an attractive prospect. The worst bit of all is staring at the big, blank section headed 'Achievements'. Time for a little creative writing, anyone?
Thursday, June 09, 2005
I find anything to do with Watergate fascinating. It must be the idealistic journo in me struggling to get out ("Keep strugglin', sunshine..."). Great article in today's Guardian linking the events from 1972-74 with the current state of play in the US today. My favourite bit?
For more than 30 years the secrecy around Deep Throat diverted attention to who Deep Throat was rather than what Deep Throat was - a covert FBI operation in which Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward was almost certainly an unwitting asset.
And:
But now George Bush is building a leviathan beyond Nixon's imagining. The Bush presidency is the highest stage of Nixonism. The commander-in-chief has declared himself by executive order above international law, the CIA is being purged, the justice department deploying its resources to break down the wall of separation between church and state, the Environmental Protection Agency being ordered to suppress scientific studies and the Pentagon subsuming intelligence and diplomacy, leaving the US with blunt military force as its chief foreign policy.
Plus, of course, the general anti-Bush sentiment throughout.
For more than 30 years the secrecy around Deep Throat diverted attention to who Deep Throat was rather than what Deep Throat was - a covert FBI operation in which Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward was almost certainly an unwitting asset.
And:
But now George Bush is building a leviathan beyond Nixon's imagining. The Bush presidency is the highest stage of Nixonism. The commander-in-chief has declared himself by executive order above international law, the CIA is being purged, the justice department deploying its resources to break down the wall of separation between church and state, the Environmental Protection Agency being ordered to suppress scientific studies and the Pentagon subsuming intelligence and diplomacy, leaving the US with blunt military force as its chief foreign policy.
Plus, of course, the general anti-Bush sentiment throughout.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Sometimes there are advantages to maintaining this site. For example, today I am going off-topic but when it comes down to it there is no topic so I can post what I want. So as today's Guardian points out if you work in the distribution industry you're going to be forced to become a robot. More so than previously as according to this workplaces are being turned into 'battery farms'. Suddenly, all this technology doesn't seem so benevolent
There's some irony here, because according to a site I chanced across today provides a sort of league table for the uptake of WiFi hotspots. Perhaps it's not an indication of technological progress in the way that the spread of broadband is claimed to be, but it's probably a fair insight. The UK, whilst in second place by a long way, still has nearly twice as many hotspots as Germany, in third place. I would have thought this was encouraging. But if you place it in the context of the UK gulags from the Guardian piece, it becomes a bit depressing. Big brother is watching you. (Clearly a more palatable alternative to the other way round)
What do you think?
There's some irony here, because according to a site I chanced across today provides a sort of league table for the uptake of WiFi hotspots. Perhaps it's not an indication of technological progress in the way that the spread of broadband is claimed to be, but it's probably a fair insight. The UK, whilst in second place by a long way, still has nearly twice as many hotspots as Germany, in third place. I would have thought this was encouraging. But if you place it in the context of the UK gulags from the Guardian piece, it becomes a bit depressing. Big brother is watching you. (Clearly a more palatable alternative to the other way round)
What do you think?
Monday, June 06, 2005
Live 8. Heard of it? Most probably by now as there's not been such blanket media coverage since the bombing of Baghdad. There may even be a joke in there somewhere. In fact, it's fair to say that the more we hear about it the less we remember about what else is going on (One or two ongoing wars immediately spring to mind). This wasn't going to be a rant until the BBC interviewed some students in Leeds this morning and left me seething over my (possibly non-fair trade) coffee. Apparently people want to go to the Live 8 event at Hyde Park so they can say they are a part of history.
What a load of self-serving, hypocritical nonesense (trying hard to avoid swearing). 'I was there on the day' they'll say. Tossers, like that's what counts. If they cared that much, perhaps they'd consider increasing their donation from £1.50 (plus the standard text messaging rate: check with your network operator for details). Oh, it's not about raising money but raising awareness. About making poverty history and giving people the means to support themselves. I'm not saying I'm some heart-on-my-sleeve activist individual with intimate knowledge of the issues at stake, nor am I a complete hard-hearted cynic. Maybe I'll be in Hyde Park too, lighter aloft, although having no credit on my mobile may impact upon my chances of answering the bloody-ridiculously easy question.
For a more measured perspective on this, I tend to agree with the author of this article. It refers to another article in last week's Times (which you can't link to because they charge for access to the archives. Information wants to be free? Knowledge is power? These seem mutually exclusive to me):
In the Times on Wednesday, for example, Bruce Anderson wrote that Geldof "would like his young followers to believe that the west is to blame for all of Africa's difficulties" and that his solution is to "stop encouraging Africa to participate in global trade and content ourselves with providing enough aid". Yet, no doubt to the disappointment of many who will descend on Edinburgh via Seattle, Make Poverty History is manifestly not promoting an anti-capitalist, anti-free trade revolution. Indeed, although it wants developing countries to be able to protect some of their markets, on the whole, its goal is to make trade more free by abolishing punitive import tariffs in the west and ending Europe and America's huge farm subsidies, in order to open up western markets to developing economies.
I'm sure something will inspire me to follow this thread. Later.
What a load of self-serving, hypocritical nonesense (trying hard to avoid swearing). 'I was there on the day' they'll say. Tossers, like that's what counts. If they cared that much, perhaps they'd consider increasing their donation from £1.50 (plus the standard text messaging rate: check with your network operator for details). Oh, it's not about raising money but raising awareness. About making poverty history and giving people the means to support themselves. I'm not saying I'm some heart-on-my-sleeve activist individual with intimate knowledge of the issues at stake, nor am I a complete hard-hearted cynic. Maybe I'll be in Hyde Park too, lighter aloft, although having no credit on my mobile may impact upon my chances of answering the bloody-ridiculously easy question.
For a more measured perspective on this, I tend to agree with the author of this article. It refers to another article in last week's Times (which you can't link to because they charge for access to the archives. Information wants to be free? Knowledge is power? These seem mutually exclusive to me):
In the Times on Wednesday, for example, Bruce Anderson wrote that Geldof "would like his young followers to believe that the west is to blame for all of Africa's difficulties" and that his solution is to "stop encouraging Africa to participate in global trade and content ourselves with providing enough aid". Yet, no doubt to the disappointment of many who will descend on Edinburgh via Seattle, Make Poverty History is manifestly not promoting an anti-capitalist, anti-free trade revolution. Indeed, although it wants developing countries to be able to protect some of their markets, on the whole, its goal is to make trade more free by abolishing punitive import tariffs in the west and ending Europe and America's huge farm subsidies, in order to open up western markets to developing economies.
I'm sure something will inspire me to follow this thread. Later.
Saturday, June 04, 2005
A very interesting article (and even more lucid comments) on the videogames and violence debate which is a personal fascination of mine. I wrote my dissertation on the same subject although now I've read this I feel like I might have missed the mark. I'm not bitter, the clever sods.
In fact, it gets even more highbrow over at Other Players. Centre for computer games research. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that's a sweet area of study. Count me in.
On the same site there's an amusing page (at least I thought so) which describes the blurring of online life with reality. Although when they start abbreviating real life to RL, my solidarity starts to evaporate. Quickly.
In fact, it gets even more highbrow over at Other Players. Centre for computer games research. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that's a sweet area of study. Count me in.
On the same site there's an amusing page (at least I thought so) which describes the blurring of online life with reality. Although when they start abbreviating real life to RL, my solidarity starts to evaporate. Quickly.
Friday, June 03, 2005
An esteemed ex-tutor of mine recently described me as 'evil'. I haven't given too much thought to what he meant, being as I am busy hatching nefarious plans for world domination to worry about such things. But it reminded me of an acquaintance from some years back who was known as 'Evil Dave (The Bastard)'. Evil Dave, from what I could make out, was not really evil. If anything he was a bit of a nobody who, from what I saw, revelled in the name as it invested in him something close to a personality. Amusingly to these eyes he was neither evil or had any real personality of which to speak. The origins of his monicker (I assume he really was called Dave) are lost to me and of little interest. Where my evil reputation comes from, and whether to sustain it, are my focus here. Okay, so I have a few dark thoughts. Quite a few in fact, but who doesn't? What could be the possible advantages to being evil? And do evil people really think of themselves as such?
I hate to jump on another bandwagon but if you really want to stare into the face of evil, sign up for a Hotmail account and get on MSN Messenger. This apparently simple process will strip your patience from you piece by piece and nudge you gently but inevitably towards insanity. And into the bargain you may find you've rewarded the Microsoft Corporation with enough personal information for one of their employees to assume your identity so comprehensively that they'll be eating Sunday lunch at your mum's table and even she won't notice.
Avoid. Yeah, you're stuck with Windows. Yeah, the new one's the best version yet if only because when it crashes spectacularly it informs you politely that you're work is screwed. But leave the rest well alone and let the new evil on the block get a look-in. Now I'm off out in the rain to kick some puppies.
I hate to jump on another bandwagon but if you really want to stare into the face of evil, sign up for a Hotmail account and get on MSN Messenger. This apparently simple process will strip your patience from you piece by piece and nudge you gently but inevitably towards insanity. And into the bargain you may find you've rewarded the Microsoft Corporation with enough personal information for one of their employees to assume your identity so comprehensively that they'll be eating Sunday lunch at your mum's table and even she won't notice.
Avoid. Yeah, you're stuck with Windows. Yeah, the new one's the best version yet if only because when it crashes spectacularly it informs you politely that you're work is screwed. But leave the rest well alone and let the new evil on the block get a look-in. Now I'm off out in the rain to kick some puppies.
This has to be one of the funniest sites I have ever seen. Perhaps it just appeals to my sense of humour. Whatever indeed.
An amusing email found its way here this morning and it would be remiss of me not to post some of its contents on this site. This is for anyone who ever hated exams. Eventually I will educate myself in the ways of hosting these nuggets elsewhere when my snazzy new site is up and running. But not today.
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Let's briefly revisit last week's swearing theme. It's hard not to agree with this ranting maniac. Takes one to know one and so on.
A theme appears to be emerging here...
What a way to start the day. This morning's Guardian provided me with a boost in saying that graduates ain't what they used to be and degrees are worth less than they once were. Not a huge revelation to many of us. Well, me at least. In summary:
Simply put, the more people go to university, the less special the word "graduate" is, and the narrower the gap between graduate and non-graduate lives. In the era of Lucky Jim and CP Snow, with only around 5-7% of people going to university, the lucky few really did find their lives transformed, as if by a magic wand that took them from factory lines to middle-class plenty.
Good points, but it doesn't take into account that, despite the facts, some people study for a degree for their own personal development, whatever you take that to mean. I'd like to comment further but I must now continue my hunt for gainful employment in the light of my last three years having been an apparent waste of time.
Ho hum.
What a way to start the day. This morning's Guardian provided me with a boost in saying that graduates ain't what they used to be and degrees are worth less than they once were. Not a huge revelation to many of us. Well, me at least. In summary:
Simply put, the more people go to university, the less special the word "graduate" is, and the narrower the gap between graduate and non-graduate lives. In the era of Lucky Jim and CP Snow, with only around 5-7% of people going to university, the lucky few really did find their lives transformed, as if by a magic wand that took them from factory lines to middle-class plenty.
Good points, but it doesn't take into account that, despite the facts, some people study for a degree for their own personal development, whatever you take that to mean. I'd like to comment further but I must now continue my hunt for gainful employment in the light of my last three years having been an apparent waste of time.
Ho hum.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
More job hunting-related activities today. I've set myself a list of tasks for today and managed to get everything dome that I intended. Paltry as some of those tasks were admittedly pretty paltry. But that's not the point. The point is that you've got to have a plan, as far as I keep hearing.
So, what was on this list? I had to give the new Coldplay album a good listen for a start. You've got to keep abreast of these things. Then there's the job business. Searched the web until my eyes stung. Then I did it some more. So far there's not much to shout about, although I might not be looking in the right places. It's good for ideas and focusing the mind. Plus it makes you think about new strategies, like writing to some people who I'd like to work for. That would be quite novel. There's more to the list but it really doesn't merit the bandwidth. Trust me, it was all crucial, grown-up stuff.
Anyway, I met a colleague in uni today and we had a very brief chat. He asked if I'd seen this job and that bloody job and if I'd gone for that and applied for that. I said I hadn't and I could sense he felt quite pleased with himself. Maybe I was bit touchy about it. Of course I should have looked ahead with a little more clarity and blah blah blah.
The way I see it, I just thought I'd give the poor bastards a fortnight's head start.
So, what was on this list? I had to give the new Coldplay album a good listen for a start. You've got to keep abreast of these things. Then there's the job business. Searched the web until my eyes stung. Then I did it some more. So far there's not much to shout about, although I might not be looking in the right places. It's good for ideas and focusing the mind. Plus it makes you think about new strategies, like writing to some people who I'd like to work for. That would be quite novel. There's more to the list but it really doesn't merit the bandwidth. Trust me, it was all crucial, grown-up stuff.
Anyway, I met a colleague in uni today and we had a very brief chat. He asked if I'd seen this job and that bloody job and if I'd gone for that and applied for that. I said I hadn't and I could sense he felt quite pleased with himself. Maybe I was bit touchy about it. Of course I should have looked ahead with a little more clarity and blah blah blah.
The way I see it, I just thought I'd give the poor bastards a fortnight's head start.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
So, here it begins.
The job hunting starts in earnest on this very day. I have no illusions about finding anything at the first attempt although my financial situation and the impending need for to pay the rent means I don't have the luxury of unlimited time. That and the fact that I'm on the verge of inciting my long suffering girlfriend into killing me. Anyway, I'm sure it'll all turn out just fine...
The job hunting starts in earnest on this very day. I have no illusions about finding anything at the first attempt although my financial situation and the impending need for to pay the rent means I don't have the luxury of unlimited time. That and the fact that I'm on the verge of inciting my long suffering girlfriend into killing me. Anyway, I'm sure it'll all turn out just fine...
Friday, May 27, 2005
While I've got time on my hands (but no money) allow me to recommend some worthwhile sites. Apparently there's a popular series of films called Star Wars something-or-other which are getting a lot of attention at the moment. One of the main characters has been keeping a weblog which is certainly worth a look.
On a slightly different note Modern Toss is great, particularly if you like swearing. I've only ever met one person who didn't.
On a slightly different note Modern Toss is great, particularly if you like swearing. I've only ever met one person who didn't.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Well, that's it then.
Yesterday saw the end of my degree (although I've been celebrating this intermittently for some weeks now) so before too long I'm going to have to find another way to occupy my time. What better way than to visit mediawatch. Ah, satire is alive and in reasonably rude health if this is anything to go by. An exerpt if you will:
Arse. Cock. Shit. Bugger. Bollocks. Bastard. Bitch. Wank. Twat. Fuck. Cunt.
All these words are highly offensive and the mere utterance of any one of them could cause the complete collapse of civilisation at any time. Here at MediaWatch-UK we are acutely aware of the damage foul language causes on a day to day basis, in fact recent studies1 have shown that swearing causes more deaths worldwide every year than war and famine combined!
It is essential for the good of all mankind that swearing be prevented immediately. MediaWatch-UK volunteers have done extensive research into the causes of swearing and have discovered a highly worrying trend.
Every swearword in the English language contains alphabetic characters!
It has become alarmingly clear to us that the root cause of all swearing and therefore all problems inherent in British society is this so called "alphabet." We are therefore calling on all good white Christians in the UK to write to their MP's and local newspapers urging them to support a ban on the alphabet forthwith.
Whilst liberals, socialists and other commie scum are almost certain to moan about the "erosion of civil liberties" and "freedom of speech" is it not worth giving up a tiny amount of freedom in order to protect future generations of children from all the problems caused by bad language? It is obvious to us at MediaWatch-UK that it is.
By banning the alphabet the only way to swear will be to do so in a language which does not use the traditional English character set. After extensive research we have discovered that such languages include Chinese, Russian and Arabic - the languages of communists and terrorists! Proof if further proof were needed that terrorism and swearing and intrinsically linked.
As such we at MediaWatch-UK are also calling for the restoration of the death penalty for the crime of swearing in a language other than English. Only once these goals are achieved will society be truly safe.
1 We actually made this up but hopefully that won't stop the Daily Mail from publishing it as fact anyway.
There's more where that came from. Have a look. Like you've got anything better to do.
Yesterday saw the end of my degree (although I've been celebrating this intermittently for some weeks now) so before too long I'm going to have to find another way to occupy my time. What better way than to visit mediawatch. Ah, satire is alive and in reasonably rude health if this is anything to go by. An exerpt if you will:
Arse. Cock. Shit. Bugger. Bollocks. Bastard. Bitch. Wank. Twat. Fuck. Cunt.
All these words are highly offensive and the mere utterance of any one of them could cause the complete collapse of civilisation at any time. Here at MediaWatch-UK we are acutely aware of the damage foul language causes on a day to day basis, in fact recent studies1 have shown that swearing causes more deaths worldwide every year than war and famine combined!
It is essential for the good of all mankind that swearing be prevented immediately. MediaWatch-UK volunteers have done extensive research into the causes of swearing and have discovered a highly worrying trend.
Every swearword in the English language contains alphabetic characters!
It has become alarmingly clear to us that the root cause of all swearing and therefore all problems inherent in British society is this so called "alphabet." We are therefore calling on all good white Christians in the UK to write to their MP's and local newspapers urging them to support a ban on the alphabet forthwith.
Whilst liberals, socialists and other commie scum are almost certain to moan about the "erosion of civil liberties" and "freedom of speech" is it not worth giving up a tiny amount of freedom in order to protect future generations of children from all the problems caused by bad language? It is obvious to us at MediaWatch-UK that it is.
By banning the alphabet the only way to swear will be to do so in a language which does not use the traditional English character set. After extensive research we have discovered that such languages include Chinese, Russian and Arabic - the languages of communists and terrorists! Proof if further proof were needed that terrorism and swearing and intrinsically linked.
As such we at MediaWatch-UK are also calling for the restoration of the death penalty for the crime of swearing in a language other than English. Only once these goals are achieved will society be truly safe.
1 We actually made this up but hopefully that won't stop the Daily Mail from publishing it as fact anyway.
There's more where that came from. Have a look. Like you've got anything better to do.
Monday, May 16, 2005
Well, Survival Sunday turned out to be nothing of the sort, although you'd be pushed to sense Saints had been relegated from the expression on Jon's face. Depressing? Apparently not, apart from the sheer number of police in town recommending that the pubs lock their doors, preventing us from having a consolation pint.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)