Борцы за свободу речи выступают против притеснения блоггеров по всему миру в Интернете. Особый резонанс вызвал блог Юани Санчез, которая довольно резко высказывалась в своих записях против правительства Ф.Кастро. После публикации на девушку в Гаване было совершено нападение. И этот случай вовсе не единичный. Чаще всего подобные ситуации происходят в Египте, Сирии, Иране, Китае, Тунисе. После выборов президента в Иране 12 июня по меньшей мере 100 человек, высказывавшихся против правительства в глобальной сети, были задержаны и 23 человека все еще находятся в заключении.

Двое мужчин, которые в 1990 году убили актера, предъявили иск энциклопедии Википедия. Их обвинения были основаны на том, что на данном интернет-ресурсе были подробно описаны детали совершенного ими преступления, а это нарушает право на неприкосновенность частной жизнь. Адвокат мужчин, представлявший дело в суде, смог с легкостью выиграть процесс. В дальнейшем в случаях, которые могут нарушать права человека, ресурсу придется изменять реальные имена участников событий на вымышленные.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/13/wikipedia-sued-privacy-claim

In its last full month London Lite circulated around 400,000 copies per day

I read the final copy of the London Lite on Friday – I say read, I skimmed through the pages of gossip and dumbed-down news reports in about four minutes on the tube, mainly looking at the pictures. This is how most people read the London Lite, and its equally awful opponent The London Paper. In the past two months both papers have closed down, marking the end of a three-year experiment which resulted in huge financial losses for both News International and Associated Newspapers, and an increase in paper litter of approximately 1,000 tonnes a year according to Westminster Council.

The Evening Standard, which became free last month after more than 180 years as a paid-for title, is not as bad as the now-defunct freesheets, but still not exactly a quality newspaper. I think editorial standards will slip even further now that the cover price has been dropped – the paper will have no direct competition, and readers tend to demand less from a publication they haven’t paid for.

This got me thinking about the newspaper and news website market, and the slightly strange trend of free news that we’ve seen in recent years. Why do we expect quality news from websites such as guardian.co.uk, timesonline.co.uk and telegraph.co.uk for free? Yes we tolerate their advertising, but in many cases this is not particularly intrusive, and in the traditional newspaper model we pay around £1 for a daily newspaper in addition to viewing their advertising.

I think £1 is too much for a daily newspaper, but I also think ‘free’ is too little for unlimited access to a quality news website such as guardian.co.uk  Major problems created by the digital revolution include a decrease in the number of journalists required for each publication, a rise in the power of PR firms and a decrease in investigative journalism. These trends are a result of both small and large media organisations having less money to invest in their staff – hence the massive hit that the media industry, and specifically journalists, have taken during this recession.

In the current climate, most undergraduate and postgraduate journalism students are facing a less than 40% chance of getting a job in the media industry within six months of graduation. This is not just an unfair crushing of the ambition of today’s youth, it also creates unemployment, which creates benefit claims that the taxpayer has to support.

Could revenue from paid-for content on national news websites be hypothecated for a journalism talent fund? The Guardian, the Telegraph and the Daily Mail attracted more than 30 million unique users each to their websites in September; Times Online and Sun Online each attracted more than 18 million – why is all of this free? Lets say we charged each of these users £2 for a monthly subscription (offering unlimited news, features and reviews for 50p a week – an undeniable bargain), that would raise in the region of £260 million each month, or £3.1 billion a year.

There’s a strong argument that many users wouldn’t pay – fair enough, but even if only half of them paid then it would still bring in at least £1.5 billion each year. That would employ an awful lot of journalists, with funds left over for investigative journalism projects which, as the MPs’ expenses scandal has shown, can attract readers in vast numbers.

As one blogger comments in response to the Guardian’s ABCe figures:

“Please charge me £1 a week for this site/paper. This is not in a sarcastic tone, we need to pay for this content, however unpopular it initially will be.

Of course you won’t have 33 million ppl paying but even if a 1/4 or 1/5 of that number signed up we could keep quality journalists in work without bowing to the demands of commercial and advertising-led interests. Make me pay!”

In the past week Rupert Murdoch announced plans to introduce paywalls for Times Online and Sun Online in the near future. In the same week the Guardian announced that it plans to cut more than 100 jobs, as annual revenues fell by a worse than anticipated £33 million. If the Guardian took the advice of many of its readers and began charging a small monthly subscription, these job cuts could be avoided.

На конференции СМИ в Лондоне уделялось особое внимание Twitter, который, по мнению некоторых участников, приносит особую прозрачность в политическую жизнь. Люди могут, оставаясь дома, обсуждать политику, высказывать свое мнение. Другие же считают, что если Twitter и способен влиять на политику, то вовсе не с положительной стороны, так как он используется для предвыборного пиара, а пользователи, зачастую не интересующиеся политикой, поддаются влиянию рекламы.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/nov/11/digital-media-twitter-sustainable-for-politics

Правительство планирует запретить страдающим педофилией использовать социальные сети. Однако, сделать такой шаг скорее всего не удастся, так как в таком случае будут нарушены права человека. Министерство внутренних дел сообщило, что ограничения на посещение сайтов, пользующихся особой популярностью у детей, все же будет наложено на педофилов. При отказе следовать такому запрету преступнику грозит до 5 лет заключения.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/08/facebook-sex-offenders-law

Детская образовательная передача празднует свое сорокалетие. Ранее она была широко распространена только на телевидении, однако теперь широко популярна и в сети интернет. Как заявила первая леди США Мишель Обама: “Я выросла, смотря эту передачу, и она помогла мне много понять и осознать”. В зависимости от страны, в которой проходит трансляция, может меняться оформление, но содержание все сорок лет остается неизменным.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/nov/04/google-doodle-sesame-street-bigbird-40

63 миллиона человек играют в онлайн симулятор под названием “Фермер”, и большая часть из них – дети. Стоит задуматься, ведь несовершеннолетние тратят огромные суммы реальных денег для того, чтобы получить виртуальную наличность для прокачки своего аккаунта в игре. А ведь кто знает, возможно дети, которые используют деньги для игры, пользуются финансовыми ресурсами третьих лиц, а это может привести к отнюдь недетским последствиям.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/nov/04/farmville-game-zynga-facebook-criticism

Интернет-корпорация Yahoo сообщила, что для нее кризис закончился, а квартальная выручка взлетела до 224%. Доход компании приблизился к сумме в $1,58 миллиарда. Трудно представить, что совсем недавно выручки компании были катастрофически малы, а в руководящей верхушке происходили перемены. Кроме того, в тяжелые для компании времена сокращению подверглись 2 000 сотрудников корпорации.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/21/yahoo-profits-rise-stability-returns

В новом Windows 7 будет привлекательное оформление, созданное с учетом предпочтений пользователей. В отличие от Vista, которая предназначалась, по большей части, для компьютеров в достаточно высокими техническими показателями, новый Windows 7 будет подходить для компьютеров с любыми показателями. По сообщениям аналитиков, многие крупные фирмы уже готовы или планируют перейти на новую оперативную систему. Создатели Windows 7 надеются, что эта система заменит запущенную в январе 2007 Vista и XP, которая была запущена в сентябре 2001, но все еще используется большим количеством пользователей.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/21/microsoft-windows-7-launch

Еще десять лет назад мы не пользовались интернетом, а теперь не можем и представить жизни без него. Хотя, вероятно, некоторые могут: около 10 миллионов человек в Великобритании не имеют  доступа к глобальной сети (4 миллиона из них – люди с ограниченными возможностями и пожилые люди). Экономия при этом составляет £560 в год. Важно отметить, что использование всемирной паутины таит в себе множество опасностей, наиболее коварной из которых является интернет-зависимость, которой в большей степени подвержены молодые люди и девушки школьного возраста.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2009/oct/25/internet-uk-martha-lane-fox

Около 500 000 человек могут быть подвергнуты атакам хакеров на сайте Guardian для поиска работы. При помощи электронной почты администраторы сайта сообщили пользователям, что некоторая информация могла стать доступной хакерам. Кроме того стало известно, что пираты не получили доступа к паролям сайта, а значит, пользователям нет необходимости удалять свой аккаунт. Владельцы сайта, в свою очередь, делают все возможное для сведения к минимуму последствий атаки и предотвращения подобных ситуаций.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/25/guardian-jobs-site-hack

Пользователи Facebook рассержены, так как тип подачи информации был изменен таким образом, что обновления больше не расположены в хронологическом порядке. 1 175 000 пользователей присоединились к группе “Измените Facebook назад в его нормальное состояние”, и это не единственный случай. В группе ”Пожалуйста, верните все назад!” состоят, к настоящему времени, 530 000 участников, и численность очень быстро растет. 23.10.2009 администраторы социальной сети приступили к обратным изменениям на Facebook. Единственное обновление, которое останется нетронутым – обновление информации о статусах друзей в режиме реального времени.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/oct/27/new-facebook-newsfeed-protest

Согласно опросам общественного мнения, идея о том, что интернет-провайдеров будут обязывать отключать от глобальной сети тех пользователей, которые незаконно закачивают информацию, не получила одобрения в обществе. Не стоит забывать, что  в этом случае интернет-провайдеры понесут колоссальные убытки. 70% опрошенных считают, что пользователь, которого подозревают в незаконной закачке информации, должен получить возможность отстоять свои права в суде. И только 16% выступили в пользу автоматических ограничений, основанных на обвинениях обладателей авторского права. Сайон Саймон, министр Интернета, настаивает на том, что правительство не будет позволять произвольное отсоединение от глобальной сети.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/18/public-poll-filesharers-internet-ban

В Англии в два раза увеличилось число пользователей социальных сетей, находящихся в режиме онлайн, что помогло сделать Facebook самым популярным сайтом страны. Примечательно, что количество людей, использующих всемирную паутину для поиска информации или по работе, сократилось на 13% за два года. 41% пользователей интернета ежедневно посещают социальные сети, через которые поддерживают связь с друзьями и знакомыми. За последний год количество посещений социальной сети Facebook увеличилось на 86,1%. По данным Hitwise время, которое тратит пользователь на просмотр своего профайла в Facebook увеличилось с 19 минут 59 секунд в сентябре 2008 года до 26 минут 14 секунд в том же месяце 2009 года.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/oct/16/social-netwrkign-facebook-internet

Italian news and media references on G8 eNewsReference.com
G8 leaders ‘hopeful on economy’ BBC News
World Leaders Meet for G8 Summit in Italy Voice of America
G8 summit begins amid fears global economy is sinking back into … guardian.co.uk
G-8 leaders meet on economy, climate The Associated Press
G8 causes tremors in Italian town Marketplace
World leaders arrive for G-8 quake zone summit CNN International
G8: Obama and Napolitano meet ANSA.it
Italy: Obama meets Italian president

Ex-Leon chef, Allegra McEvedy has been running a series of live virtual cookery sessions on the Guardian’s website. The next one is tomorrow night and I’m planning to take part if I get home in time. the idea is that you arm yourself with all the required ingredients (listed below) and then set up a laptop in the kitchen and await real-time instructions from Allegra. They’ve run several of these events – they call them ‘clickalongs’ – already; punters who’ve got involved have posted their culinary efforts onto the Guardian site.

Ingredients:

• 2 pork escalopes, each weighing in at 150-200g, about 1.5cm thick (NB: you can also do this with chicken – get a breast, peel off the fillet at the back, put it between 2 layers of clingfilm and beat it thin with the flat of a large knife).
• 320g sweet potato
• Half a tin coconut milk
• A few fennel seeds
• A handful of peanuts, salted is fine but plain roasted better
• Ground cumin & coriander
• Bunch of coriander
• 2 red chillies
• Couple of spring onions
• Couple of cloves of garlic
• A cucumber
• Couple of limes
• A few tbsp groundnut or plain oil (ie oil with not much flavour)

“Documenting dissent is under attack” – The Guardian.

“Photographers fear they are target of new terror law” – The Guardian.

The Guardian reports on section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 today here and with a comment is free post from me here.  See you all on Monday!

 or: adventures in the compulsively mediated, PC prison of totalitarian decorum

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2009/jan/26/sebald-hughes-and-smith-three-modern-greats?showallcomments=true&commentpage=2&commentposted=1

Unlike Zadie Smith¹, I really was just “passing through the book pages” (of the Guardian’s blog section) yesterday. What I found was a blog article, by Robert McCrum, titled Sebald, Hughes and Smith: three modern greats.  I sneered, of course, but it was a sneer devoid of passion. Not that the picture posted under the blog heading, of Zadie Smith, looking measurably less ugly than J.L. Borges, wasn’t nice. It was nice. Not (for me) write-a-hyperbolic-headline-about-her nice, but nice enough.

I scanned the comment thread and came to something by the writer Oscar MacSweeny. His comment (now deleted) was something to the effect that McCrum’s calling Zadie Smith a “modern great” was beyond the pale unless McCrum was “screwing her”, in which case the hyperbole would be understandable. To which I chipped in with the fatal qualifier (now semi-deleted), “…or would like to,” along with a sarcastic bit about some other commenter’s notion that Sebald is “boring” and Hughes is unread “outside the English language” (and therefore of no consequence), though Zadie is tops.

One incisive participant, a thing called “Greenball”, who then got the coveted pat-on-the-head from a tetchy Guardian Unlimited functionary who wields her modicum of power firmly, wrote:

“And shame on Steven Augustine for writing such offensive things. And shame on Oscar. You small pathetic men. I think it’s outrageous that the Guardian allow this kind of personal abuse in the name of journalism.”

Is a personal opinion “journalism”? Are comment threads comprised of “journalism” or personal opinion? Are all personal opinions, by decree, to be for the  “good” things and against the “bad” things consensus decides?

Was Oscar’s comment, accusing McCrum of positive sexism (or Luvism), a form of negative sexism? Only if said comment could only have been used “against” a particular gender. Was my addition, a comment on the possible spot where Robert McCrum’s possible libido intersects with his possible literary judgment, negative sexism? Again: only if I couldn’t (or wouldn’t) have quipped exactly the same way about some blogger’s hyperbolic estimation of the value of Jonathan Franzen’s oeuvre.

I mention Franzen because of the controversy I remember about the glamour photo his publisher used for the jacket of early printings of The Corrections. The photo was a sexed-up (photoshopped?) confection that made Franzen look not just better than he had ever appeared to in real life (presumably), but better than most actors depicting crusading hot lawyers on primetime American television. The complaint (but why complain?) being that the book’s rapturous reception was, in large part, extra-literary. Imputations of wave upon wave of fainting Franzenmaniacs at book-signings and so forth.

Clearly, a subtle sub-theme of this longish comment of mine is the Faustian pact that younger, cuter writers enter into with the Beelzebuboid PR wings of their publishers, though the logical conclusions of that implied essay (about petards and elevation) are too obvious to belabor here. So, back to my plea to famous writers (who, surely, are compensated in advance for the pain) to either, A) resist the self-Google demon or B) respond not snippily to what they subsequently find…

Mr. Franzen has taken quite  a “beating”, in the years since that photo flap faded, from “print” and “blog” critics alike. The criticisms are sometimes expressed with immoderate diction, as private opinions often are and public opinions sometimes are and political and/or corporate speech is very, very rarely. An important question emerges: is there a place for immoderate diction in this world?

Sarah Crown, some kind of higher functionary of the GU’s online business (the business of generating web traffic, no matter the content), claims not. She writes (emphasis mine):

“I’ll certainly be asking the moderators to remove the remarks from MrStevenAugustine and iamoscarmacsweeny. Absolutely no place for them on here (or anywhere, for that matter). Sorry they weren’t spotted sooner.”

So, now we know: there’s no place on Earth, and no possible situation, in which it’s proper to imply (or opine outright) that X commenter adores Y writer for any other than literary reasons. Especially if the extra-literary reasons are romantic/sexual and the adored writer is a woman. Because placing a woman’s name in a sentence or paragraph that also contains a reference to sex, no matter the gist of the sentence, is “sexist”, by default? One supposes. Here’s an experiment:

“Robert McCrum, ranking Jonathan Franzen’s work on a level with Rod McKuen’s and Robert Ludlum’s is only forgivable if you’re screwing him (or them)!”

Is that better? It feels less “sexist”.  But it’s still immoderate diction. The question remains: is banning immoderate diction a triumph of PC culture (that high-strung web of proscription and taboo, thickened and thriving during an arguably illiberal, anti-intellectual, crypto-fascist convulsion of the “West”)? Immoderate diction is banned unless the “good” are using it, of course: I’m quite sure it’s okay to refer to Oscar and me as “louts” and “idiots” and “bedwetters” and  “small pathetic  men”. I’ve just checked the etiquette book and it says, on page one, that it is².

Even Zadie Smith, having stumbled upon Oscar MacSweeny’s personal (if indirect) opinion of her work’s merit (and my quip appended to Oscar’s opinion), did not like it. She wrote, among other things (emphasis mine):

¹Hello. This is zadie smith. I know this is pointless, but I was just passing through the book pages, and found this thread and wanted to add two things…

(etc., etc., until)

3. Oscar and Steve Augustine: everyone is free to dislike whichever book they dislike. But read what you’ve written, below, again. Is this what women novelists are to expect? Would any male writer, no matter how poor a writer, be spoken of like this?

“MrStevenAugustine
26 Jan 09, 9:03pm (about 7 hours ago)

Oscar:

“…unless you’re screwing her.”

Or would like to?”

This question prefacing Oscar MacSweeny’s/Steven Augustine’s evil work (Would any male writer, no matter how poor a writer, be spoken of like this?) is rhetorical. But what if the answer is “yes”?

As it turns out, that’s exactly what the answer is.

Which would mean that Zadie Smith’s wounded sanctimony, while still humanly reasonable, is rhetorically invalidated. The only fair thing from Zadie Smith, Sarah Crown and the hysterical bluenoses who enliven the thread with their dimwittish celebrity arse-kissing, at this point, is an apology to Oscar MacSweeny and Steven Augustine… and a generously inscribed copy of Zadie Smith’s On Beauty to both of us.

Actually, forget the book.

*

*

²What’s it like being lambasted savagely by a near-idiot not even known to exist before the onslaught? A little like having one’s leg humped by a muddy Spaniel growling fiercely as it humps. Here are my favorite rude comments from the irony-proof  decorum-enforcers on that thread:

1. Greenball

27 Jan 09, 1:58pm

The manuscript scroll of On The Road by Jack Kerouac (BBC)

The scroll manuscript of On The Road, dubbed one of the most important pieces of literature of modern times, is now on show in Birmingham. Jack Kerouac’s genre defining novel was typed out furiously on 120ft of tracing paper so he didn’t have to stop, with only the power of coffee keeping him going. Now 50 years after the book was published in the UK the Barber Institute in Birmingham is showing one of the world’s most valuable and celebrated manuscripts.

The exhibition’s curator Professor Dick Ellis has admitted there was a lot of competition getting the scroll, which ironically has spent most of its life on the road.

“We’re very excited indeed,” he said. “This is an iconic manuscript. It is a record of the huge effort Kerouac put into composing it. It was 20 days of typing 6,500 words a day, flat out, in spontaneous composition. He wanted to record things with the most possible accuracy using the spontaneous technique. His typewriter became a compositional instrument.

“Truman Capote once accused Kerouac of typing rather than writing; I would say he was learning the ability of using the typewriter like a jazz instrument, like a saxophone. He also had an incredible memory. And he had great speed at typing, he became a lightning typist. He came to be able to use a typewriter in a way that has not been seen before or since. Kerouac said he wrote fast because the road was fast.”

Of the total 120ft of printed text around a fifth will be on show in a specially built cabinet. Although visitors may have to tilt the heads slightly to read parts of the script, Ellis believes that it will help give visitor an insight into what Kerouac was all about. The scroll was bought by Jim Irasy owner of American football team Indianapolis Colts and is currently on a worldwide tour of museums and galleries. The scroll will be on show in Birmingham until 28 January.

The Guardian yesterday produced a quality blog post discussing whether or not Kerouac would be able to cope with modern day writing tools such as Word. Have a read here.

Listen to Kerouac read from On The Road accompanied by pretty pictures of the man himself below:

Discussion:
Who will be going to Birmingham to see this amazing artifact of modern literature? Does anyone know of any other quirky ways of writing a novel? Would anyone consider writing a book by hand these days and if so, why?

Words: Seamus Swords

David Cameron and Gordon Brown square up (eNewsReference.com)
Gordon Brown and David Cameron square up over tax policy (Guardian Unlimited)
David Cameron: Tories would give national insurance breaks to save jobs (Guardian Unlimited)
David Cameron promises tax break to fight looming economic ‘disaster’ (Times Online)
Voters prefer Gordon Brown in a crisis but David Cameron in fair weather (Times Online)
Economic crisis hands Gordon Brown poll boost over David Cameron (Times Online)
Race between Gordon Brown and David Cameron to see who’ll cut taxes the most (Daily Mail)
Tories propose business tax cuts (BBC News)
David Cameron: Keep Britain Working (Conservative Party)
Tories pledge ‘tax break’ for firms (Channel 4)

My piece on electronic literature appeared today in the Guardian books blog. Here’s an extract:

“When I first ventured online, the internet struck me as the last word in literary experimentation. I was in good company. For Kathy Acker, and other pioneers who were already pushing the envelope on papyrus, cyberspace (copyright William Gibson) was truly the final frontier. The very first novel to be serialised online — Douglas Anthony Cooper’s Delirium (1994) — made full use of the new medium by allowing readers to navigate between four parallel plotlines. Geoff Ryman’s 253, first posted in 1996, became an instant hypertext classic. A year later, Mark Amerika’s Grammatron transcended the fledgling genre by turning it into a multimedia extravaganza. This, I believe, was a crucial turning point. The brief alliance between literati and digerati was severed: groundbreaking electronic fiction would now be subsumed into the art world or relegated to the academic margins. The subsequent blogging revolution shifted the focus further away from web-based writing to news coverage of dead-tree tomes, thus adding yet another layer of commentary to the ‘mandarin madness of secondary discourse’ George Steiner had long been lamenting….”

More here.

As cushy numbers go, there aren’t many better ways to make a living than by being a football television pundit; filling in the gaps between the real action and the pre/post match interviews, stating the obvious in a non committal tone, praising the sublime, criticising the gavs; aimed mostly at the referee. As the aged old saying goes, its not exactly rocket-science!

But who’s responsible for determining, whether the quality of punditry spoken is of any merit? Who’s analysing the performance of the TV pundits?

To become a professional football manager you need at least a documented qualification, but to become a football pundit, it would appear the only qualification required is to have been an ex-player of notable recognition.

Most of the pundits responsible for enlightening us already seem to be well established in their roles, but just as players and managers are rotated, could the same be applied to the pundits?

Sky Sports already do this is subtle way, a guess pundit who has some close affinity with one of the days contesting teams plays second fiddle to the turbo charged novice Jamie Redknapp; his outstanding talent, to pontificate the blindingly obvious with asserted confidence, recycling the same expertise each week; “you have to have played the game to understand that move” and the equally sublime “I can’t tell you how good that pass was Richard” – yes, we kind of gathered that Jamie!

Redknapp, who incidently is looking more and more like his dad with each passing Sunday, is part of the new breed, he’s young and has a whole world of punditry skills to master ahead of him, much like his ex-team mate Steve McManaman, who plies his words of wisdom on fledging sports channel, Setanta, as part of a dumb and dumber double act with Tim Sherwood.

Like Redknapp, Macca looks pristine and pretty but, like a stereo-typical blond-babe airhead, the moment he opens his mouth, the prettiness washes away leaving a vacuous, yet expensive suit well out of its depth.

Unfair? Not really. Steve McManaman genuinely offers nothing insightful, yet the real tragedy of the Setanta setup is, Macca is incredibly the brighter part of the duo, as the mumbling dimwit Sherwood resembles more of a Gillian-esq Monty Python character than a professional TV pundit.

But what about the establishment?

Unofficially regarded as the top dog, Alan Hansen has been stating the obvious, backing favourites for years; and the years have certainly helped refine him, as on sporadic occasions he will offer moments of perception. Something his number two is seemingly incapable of doing; astute, alert and sharp as a player, Alan Shearer shows absolutely none of these qualities as a football pundit; he’s more akin to bland, boring and stupid when it comes to the pre or post match analysis – vermently consistant with his view of 2006 World Cup 3rd placed and Euro 2008 Runners-up, Germany, as a poor team?

Yet, licking his lower lip, Shearer never fails to remind Lineker and co of the rare occasions he’s been spot-on with his analysis; a curious tactic and one which highlights insecurities.

Maybe this overall level of criticism is harsh?

The point is, the quality of TV pundits covering the English Premier League is at the standard of League One at best, notable exceptions, Wilkins, Souness, Collymore and the now retired yet proficent Peacock, begging the question when purest’s like Messrs Richardson and Vickery are doing the rounds, do ex-players really make the most competent pundits?

My blog on spam lit was published today by Guardian Unlimited:

“Here’s what happened. In order to bypass increasingly efficient filters, spammers began embedding blocks of text — often pilfered from great literary works via Project Gutenberg — in their junk mail. Techniques like the Dissociated Press algorithm were employed to randomly generate new, essentially meaningless texts or text collages (“word salads”) so that each message would seem unique. Lee Ranaldo has compared the outcome to a “dictionary exploded”. Another early aficionado, Ben Myers, observed that “it was as if the text had somehow been remixed and shat out down the wires of modernity”. “Spam Lit”, as Jesse Glass dubbed it in 2002, uncannily mirrored bona fide literary experiments that were taking place simultaneously: Jeff Noon’s exploration — through textual sampling and remixing — of “metamorphiction” in Cobralingus; Jeff Harrison’s aleatoric poems based on Markov chains; or even Kenji Siratori’s baffling cyber-gibberish”.

More here.