leyton.org

Robert Peston is a man who rarely seems off the airwaves at the moment, from his Northern Rock news last year, through to his coverage of the financial meltdown we’re seeing today.

Whilst I can’t fault the substance of what he says, and it seems he’s got some substantial contacts, I’ve a few gripes with Mr Pestons presentation style (in particular his elocution), and his seeming self importance, matched solely by seeming self-belief. Most particularly his choice of language can be clumsy, and possibly even self-fulfilling. Watching his body language when being interviewed on television, particularly in the studio when he has to try and sit still for a little while whilst the presenter sets context, is always interesting.

But this exchange on Radio 4’s Today, this morning (at about 7:30 this morning) was delightful, and an example of something I’d suggest are real ‘Pestonisms’:

Evan Davis: Morning Robert, what do we know now [about the Treasury Statement]?

Robert Peston: Well, what we know Evan is that absolutely, well it confirms really, what I’ve been saying for 24 hours. Absolutely colossal sums going into RBS and HBOS. RBS raising £20b from taxpayers. HBOS £11.5b from taxpayers….

‘Pestonisms’ have been mentioned before, but I’d suggest that a true ‘Pestonism’ isn’t purely his spoken style, but also something that captures the raw essence that is Robert Peston.

Other examples gratefully received.

Returning home from a rain soaked running training session this evening, I caught the end of an interview on Radio 4’s Front Row with sculptor Richard Serra. Towards the end of the interview (28 minute offset) he made a fascinating aside about graffiti, specifically tagging, after being asked about a mark that the interviewer had seen on a recent installation:

If you notice, kids never tag advertisements because advertisements, they think, are something they aspire to, even though advertisements are probably what represses them and makes them conform more than anything else. Yet they’ll tag something they think has no useful function. And the interesting thing about art is that it’s purposely useless. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a use in terms of evoking feelings and sensations that nothing else can do, but it means it’s not useful in the utilitarian way that a doorknob is.

Thinking about it, I can’t think of any graffiti or tagging I’ve ever seen on adverts. But maybe other factors are at play – that adverts are replaced frequently, that they’re slightly out of the way, or maybe that I’m not paying attention. 

But I can’t shake the feeling that it hits a truth about the process. It struck me as a fascinating observation, and presents an interesting insight into the mindset of the perpetrators.

A change at the BBC for which I have mixed feelings, but in a good way. The change? Evan Davis is moving to the Today programme from his post as BBC Economics Editor.

Evan Davis is, to me, amongst the very best of the BBC’s editors. I enjoyed his pieces when he was ‘just’ the Newsnight Economics editor, and his move to the top Economics role at the BBC was entirely deserved. He is engaging to listen to, incisive in his analysis, presumes intelligence on the part of his listeners, but uses a language, examples and terminology that is accessible to all. I always look out for his reports: He is everything a journalist should be, and as the financial world experiences a historic period of uncertainty, his incisiveness will be missed. Stephanie Flanders knows she has big shoes to fill, but she’s got formidable experience: I look forward to seeing her approach.

But he’s going to become for a year at least, a presenter on the Radio 4 Today programme, a programme that has been a regular part of my day for many years. It’s the flagship news programme, and has a huge audience largely because the presenters are the very best at the BBC, with a wide range of issues to cover, and able to call on the worlds leading politicians. It’s a great step for Evan Davis to make, and hope that his wit and skills will be put to the test, despite the fascinating economics story he has to leave for his successor. I suspect the Chancellor, and even Prime Minister’s and Presidents will find Evan Davis a difficult and challenging interviewer, and that’s going to be a great gain for us the public!

The US elections are proving absolutely fascinating after Hillary Clinton won the latest primary, and there are some top-class BBC journalists doing an excellent job reporting this interesting process to us Brits.

Jon Snow, former ITN Washington correspondent (My review of his autobiography here), has charged over there the last week or so, and has presented some fascinating conversations with ‘ordinary voters’. I doubt Sarah Smith isn’t too put out by his arrival on her patch, they seem to be complimenting each other well.

James Naughtie, from Radio 4’s Today programme is presenting some absolutely fascinating, and dare I say for a foreigner extremely insightful, analysis pieces during his excellent coverage for Today.

I don’t think I’m as puzzled by what the Americans are doing as some people in the media seem to profess outsiders to be. It seems largely a simple process. What I don’t understand (and maybe somebody can help me out here), is how Americans can be comfortable being registered as a Republican or Democrat? The ’state’ knowing your general political preference seems marginally ominous to me. I still get rather unnerved by the fact that (if I recall correctly) ballot papers in this country have serial numbers, and your ballot paper number is noted next to your name when it’s given to you when you vote. Of course, it’s largely to prevent fraud, and never used in reverse, but it could be with enough time, and that worries me a bit, at least in my more paranoid moments.

But the idea that, say, “Liberal Democrat” (as the party I associate myself with, but, I should state, I am not a member of) would be associated with me in some public record enabling me to vote in Liberal Democrat leadership elections (stop sniggering the back there)…. Now that’d worry me, and that’s comparably how I think it works in the US.

The other thing that’s struck me is, once more based on the reporting I’ve been watching over here, how different the views of the electorate, and media, appear to be regarding John McCain (age 71) and Menzies Campbell (age 66). Campbell experience some utterly shocking and deplorable press coverage regarding his age, and that ultimately led to falling opinion polls and then his resignation. McCain is older still and not (from the coverage I’ve seen) suffering any ill affect. It reflects extremely poorly on Britain’s public attitudes to age, and extremely well of America’s.

The reporting hasn’t led me to many conclusions about who I’d like to see win. Certainly a Democrat, but whether Obama or Clinton I don’t know. I think they’d both do well for America, and for the relationship Britain (and the rest of the world) has with it. Both talk of ‘change’, but I’m simply not familiar with the subtleties of that, perhaps other than the international element. Both would of course be historic, either as the first Black President, or the first female President. Or even vice-president, perhaps? Clinton strikes me as the more accomplished, but Obama the fresh-face that may be what America needs. A difficult decision, certainly, but America is so much the better for having such an excellent choice available to it.

Is it just me, but is the news today that house prices have fallen ’sharply’are ‘turning down’ a self-fulfilling media prophecy, along the same line as the run on Northern Rock not so long ago.

Also, why is a monthly -0.8% drop, but an annual rise of 6.9% considered a ’sharp tumble’? That’s the BBC speaking, not me (Update: I see the Beeb has seen the error of it’s ways, and rephrased the article. More at end of post.). Sure things have to turn at some point, but let’s keep things in perspective… an average £100,000 house (goodness knows where, but it’s a nice round figure for arguments sake) last year is still worth an extra £6,900.

We’ve had years of angst and hand-wringing by over indebted and reactionary Daily Mail readers about the looming property market crash. The rises have clearly gone on for too long, such that buying houses are out of the reach of far too many people. But does it have to be a crash? The rises are more a function of a growing economy, increasing demand, and the wrong sort of new houses being built, and even when they do build them, cookie cut houses rather than anything genuinely interesting. Small falls in prices aren’t necessarily a bad thing if they make houses more affordable. The infamous ‘cooling’, I suppose.

But the media, and especially the BBC right now, seem keen to latch on to and push every bit of bad news, because it’s such a politically hot potato (Like Mr Brown needs another. If the public feels ‘poorer’, and blame him, he’s going to be in real trouble). By latching on to the story and featuring it rather prominently. Case in point is their infuriating business editor Robert Peston (who badly needs some elocution/presentation lessons to reduce his distracting lilt that is, in my view, very badly suited to broadcast media; It also detracts from his (usually) solid reporting) on Radio 4’s Today, this morning, who said, and I quote:

In October … before the impact of the credit conditions… there was quite a sharp fall in house prices, so what I would extrapolate from all of this, that there is a risk that this fall in house prices could continue, don’t know for long but it could turn out to be for quite a long time and it could turn out to be quite severe.

I love it when the press turn to forecasting rather than simply reporting facts. Nice to get some emotion in the whole thing.

Back to my point – remember the Northern Rock issue – it’s the same thing as here (and indeed was originally broken by Peston). The BBC reported the problems at Northern Rock: A few people figured they’d go get their money out. The BBC reported a few queues. People see the queues on the TV. SO more people start panicking (frequently denying they were doing just that as they joined the very queues). The cycle repeats. Add the big dab of Government faffing over the course of a few days which didn’t help matters, but the media feedback loop exacerbated the problem and was something quite scary to behold.

With the housing price indicators fall – The market is always a bit slow this time of year (who wants to move before christmas?), so I would expect that reduced volume will increase volatility, and the credit market is a strange place right now. So why the need to report this issue so prominently?

A small drop really should be nothing to get worried about (remember, they’re up over the course of a year), and could be reported as such, but the use of strongly emotive and exaggerated vernacular (’severe’ and ‘tumble’ and ‘a long time’) just doesn’t help keep any sense of balance and serves to affect the issue they’re trying to report on.

It serves only to exaggerate and build emotion, precisely what the BBC shouldn’t be doing.

Update 12:46pm :: The BBC appears to have rephrased the title and spirit of their article. The market is now ‘turning down’ (in quotes, but who from I can’t tell in their article). I wonder if Mr Peston will also be more restrained in later bulletins?

I imagine – hope even – that a lot of people were taken aback to hear the news today that a ’senior judge’ is calling for everybody to be put on the DNA database. The main reason cited it’d be ‘fairer’ than the widely acknowledged to be broken and unfair system, where anybody arrested by the Police is permanently added to the database, and it is badly skewed to minority groups. So putting everybody in it as somehow the fix? It really is putting the cart before the horse.

I suppose it’s a highlight of the silly season that we get opinions from judges and retired politicians that generate headlines, as the media hacks champ at the bit in the build up to the political conference season. But what’s worrying here is that the minister put up to respond on Radio 4’s Today programme really didn’t do much to dismiss the idea. He said the right things to avoid being gummed to death by the increasingly tedious interview style of John Humphreys, but it left me feeling this was more a political ‘outrider’ to make the introduction of ID Cards all the more tolerable to the British Public: Introduce the prospect of something awful, dismiss it, and only then introduce the thing you wanted all along as ‘better’, and not the proffered bogeyman that everybody was scared about.

This DNA database proposal, and the ID cards that are surely related, is all part of the same march towards ‘The State Knows Best’, be it judges talking about universal DNA databases, or the government changing the fundamental relationship with the public from that of our servant to our benevolent master.

If this whole proposal yanks your chain at all – and I really hope it scares you as much as it scares me – can I quietly suggest you make a bee-line over to Liberty and sign up as a member? It is the most vocal Civil and Human Rights campaigning organisation in this country, and has been at the forefront of the fight against the campaigns waged by the various Home Secretaries we’ve had over the last few years as they seek to increase Police powers whilst decreasing scrutiny and even basic access to justice. Their campaigning voice – already strong – is all the more influential and effective with more members.

It’s no longer the case that we can tut from the side lines and shake our heads and presume that “it’ll all work out in the end”. This famous poem about apathy in Nazi Germany is increasingly pertinent to this country right now. Can we really presume Cameron’s Conservative party will be any difference if they ever get in power? Can we actually NOT expect to be presumed guilty until proven innocent, as a national DNA database could allow?

I’m deeply worried that OUR collective apathy as a nation is taken as implicit acceptance of everything the Government does to erode our hard-won rights.

It really is time to make our voices heard.

The Repeal vote has opened with a truly disappointing shortlist that is sure to appeal to middle-England, but is sadly reactionary and horribly predictable in it’s contents.

Listening yesterday to the (disappointing) panel wafting it’s way through the nominations, and brushing aside the opportunity to push the debate in interesting directions, I soon lost hope it’d be a relevant list that did little, at least for anybody who doesn’t read the Daily Mail. Certainly no Identity cards act, which is perhaps the most significant ever change in the government-citizen relationship. It’s exclusion demonstrates the ignorance, wilful or otherwise, of the panel and – I fear – the wider public – to the implications of the act.

Anyway, the shortlist…

• The Dangerous dogs act is certainly a poor piece of legislation, but it doesn’t in itself really matter all that much other than to demonstrate knee-jerk legislation is a bad idea, and more scrutiny is needed across all our legislation. Not that I expect any government will pay heed to that.
• The Human rights act brings sensible laws in to our statue book, but has been turned into some bizarre hate-figure by the Daily Mail for entirely superfluous reasons.
• The Hunting ban was inevitable on the list, and is probably going to win. More time wasting. But then the ban is ignored anyway, and until it is enforced I don’t quite see why the hunting lobby just don’t keep a low profile and get on with their vicious past-time.
• Ditto the European union act. The EU has been a huge benefit and brought economic prosperity to this country (just look at who are biggest trading partners are), but again a certain group of newspapers has turned it into a bete noire. People would be voting against a self-created, and self-perpetuating mythical beast, rather than the act itself and what it represents.
• Act of settlement 1701. An act preventing catholics ascending to the throne. Well, let’s get rid of the throne itself and we’re sorted. No more religious discrimination. That we have a head of state that is appointed by accidents of birth is truly ridiculous.

I’ve therefore voted for the last item, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (with reference to the limitations on demonstrating near Parliament), because it’s the only item on the shortlist I feel strongly about that isn’t a sop to middle england. That the government feels it can selectively ban free-speech, no matter how inconvenient, is ridiculous. But it’s a missed opportunity by Today, when there are other pieces of legislation that will affect all of our lives, and could better use the attention this vote will bring.

Vote here

The Holocaust denying ‘historian’ David Irving is back in the UK after having been jailed in Austria for 13 months, and was interviewed this morning on Today.

His views are quite clearly ludicrous, and manage to cause great offence to a large number of people. However, locking him up for espousing those views was wrong. We, and Austria, would do much better to leave his views to fester in the ignored backwaters that they deserve to languish in, or to tear them apart for the extreme right-wing rubbish that they are. Locking him up, and thereby turning him into the right-wing martyr role that I suspect he relishes, is counter-productive in the extreme.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

Interesting, not actually spoken by Voltaire, but a paraphrasing of his attitude. One which I share in this context.

Irving has every right to speak his opinions. He has a right to free speech. But he just shouldn’t expect to be listened to, only laughed at for the bumbling right-wing fool that he quite clearly is, and the sooner the media leave him to slip back into his squalid pool of opinions, the better.

The irony of this post drawing attention to the buffoon is not lost on me either. But I’ve enjoyed the vernacular foray, if not the subject matter itself…

I heard Radio Four are looking for nominations of laws that should be repealed, and no2id Glasgow’s timely e-mail coaxed me in to action.

So regular readers won’t, of course, be surprised to read that I’ve nominated the Identity Card Act 2006 as the single worst piece of legislation that’s appeared in years for the way it undermines our liberties, will cost billions that could be better spent elsewhere, and won’t in any way help solve the problems the Government is claiming.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/vote/2006vote/ is the URL. Feel free to suggest your own if you think there’s something better that should be taken off the statute book.

A mailing list I’m on drew my attention to a phone interview on Radio 5 last night by Stephen Nolan, with Philip Pullman (author of the His Dark Materials trilogy, my review here). What follows is probably one of the most unbelievably rude treatments I’ve heard of a well respected author by somebody who seemed intent on foisting viewpoints on Pullman that he didn’t share or state.

I’ve long stopped listening to music radio for just this reason. Whilst Radio 5 isn’t music radio as such, it’s this sort of mindless blathering on the part of the DJ that I can’t stand, striving to fill silence with something. It’s all so much worse on talk-radio, where it’s merely the size of the DJ’s ego that can fill the gap. In this case, throw in a religiously biased axe to grind, and you’re ready for blood-boiling (in me at least).

The subject was on the teaching of the secular/atheist/humanist perspective in Religious Education classes. Thankfully, the other interviewee (Graham Taylor) did a good job of backing Pullman’s case of taking the religion out of school altogether. I’ve been sent an MP3 of the interview, which I’m hosting for the benefit of the secular mailing list I’m on. Make sure you’ve a sound constitution and an ice-bag nearby to calm yourself if you’re anything like me. (listen to it here). The Stephen Nolan Wikipedia page says it all. “somewhat in the style of Jeremy Clarkson“. Yikes.

If you prefer a DJ-less music experience, and like supporting independent musicians, check out Indie Feed. I’ve just purchased a couple of tracks from the Techno Squirrels (Best. Band. Name. Ever.) on iTunes, and certainly now fear the day I have to go back to listening to pundits with inflated egos wasting valuable music-playing time with opinionated, argumentative and outrightly rude crap, like this guy.