Believe in Better? (Part 2)

Like the last one, except selling "Art". Yip "Art" and "Sky" in the same sentence. Anyway some old soak, stands playing a saxophone, telling us about the great the "Arts" coverage on Sky. You know grey hair, balding blah blah blah. "Sky" and I'm paraphrasing here "has great arts coverage. You never know what you'll see" more saxophone action and then he's off.

Except you can't just subscribe to Sky Arts. No way. You have to take out their "Style and Culture" pack which includes such er gems as Discovery Shed and Sky Travel. Which is at odds with Sky's long held opposition to the TV licence, based on the proposition that the viewer is forced to pay for channels they don't want.

They even make the following statement on their website

"Start building your TV package with Sky TV. We've organised our fantastic range of digital TV channels into six themed Entertainment Packs, so you only ever pay for TV you want to watch. Take one Entertainment Pack, for £17.50 a month, and add more for an extra £1 a month each. All six Entertainment Packs are just £22.50 a month, plus you will automatically receive over 200 free-to-air TV channels."

Which means that if you want to watch Arts on Sky programming you also must want to see Current TV and Sky Real Lives, as "you only ever pay for the TV you want to watch" That's a pretty specific demographic Sky have sown up there. I wonder what research they did to identify the demand for lumping all these unrelated channels into one lovely, tasty morsel? Still what do you expect from a crowd who advertise unlimited broadband with a download limit and unlimited calls with a time limit? Obviously their definition of "unlimited" is as at odds with reality as their definition of "Knowledge"

Of course it's bollox. What's even more entertaining is if you phone up to ask why you have pay for channels you don't watch*. The answer? If you were able to pick and chose your own channels rather than taking the ones bundled by Sky, then the unpopular ones would go bust.   

Sky. Paying for the TV you want to watch. Kind of. 


*Just on this. There are many things you can do on the Sky website, such as manage your account. Now by "manage" I mean buy additional services. It is impossible to downgrade or cancel your account online. Which is odd. Even more peculiar is that if you try to use the FAQ to help you find out how to cancel or downgrade your package then you are in for a disappointment. There isn't a single word about this in the FAQ . Not a peep. Clearly this suggests that no-one has ever decided to change their channel package, or, god forbid, cancel the whole thing. Ever. Or, if it does happen, it's so rare that there is no fixed procedure to deal with if.. I mean you'd think if such circumstances had arisen more than say three times (hard to believe I know, but the annual higher than inflation subscription price rise might be enough for some tightwads to at least consider the value for money aspect of Sky) you'd think there'd be some indication on their website how you go about doing it. Wouldn't you? Funnily enough the last time I rang Sky I asked about this omission. "Why can't I cancel or downgrade my channel package via the online account management screen?" "Because" I was told "that would put me out of a job."

Believe In Better?

There's an advert for Sky TV on at the moment, trying to sell a subscription to their so called "Knowledge Pack". I say so called as Sky's definition of "knowledge" is fairly narrow. Think TV channels filled with documentaries about World War II, Nostradamus and things exploding. This particular advertisement features a stereotypical Camford student. She can be seen wandering around a university, poking at dead insects, claiming that watching documentaries on Sky (presumably including "Inside the World's Fattest Man" and "Miami Ink") inspired her to pursue a degree in Entomology. Now unless her degree has a large part of it's content devoted to the study of how Nostradamus predicted fat, tattooed Nazis would breed exploding insects, then I'm understandably sceptical about her claims 

But that's not the point.

So, you ask, what is?

The ad then goes on to tell us that her granny (who'd got Sky in before her parents did) would phone or text (to gloat no doubt) about the unbelievable shows she was missing out by not having Sky ("Fuck, you wanna seen the show about how Nostradamus predicted that fat, tattooed Nazis would breed exploding insects....)

Sorry? Did I miss something?

Call me suspicious but a "granny" using a mobile phone? And texting? Not about her medication or what the neighbours dog is leaving in the garden, but about TV shows on Sky? Right. You can only imagine the content of these texts. Either "Saw gr8 doc on sky 2 inspire u 2 uni luv u gran" Or "f off ur prnts r a par ov tite cnts thy shud gt thr own sky lolz".

So what I've taken from the ad is if you aspire to be like our plummy heroine then you don't need to subscribe to Sky. What you need to succeed is an elderly relative, with good eyesight and non-arthritic thumbs, texting you about how good some programmes you don't watch are.

"Top" UK University here I come.

What do you want?

I finally managed to negotiate a meeting with the agency who've been playing silly buggers. And the outcome? I'm no further on. If I hadn't bothered my hole I'd be no worse off. Now I'm not saying it was a complete waste of time, I mean I got to see the new public art in Cornmarket. Hurrah! Culture saved the day! I bet you that's not a claim you'll often hear about sculptures anywhere, let alone Belfast. 

There's a pattern to these chats with agencies. They asked the usual things. When the "what do you want?" question rolled into view I was tempted to say "I want to see me stretch forth my hand again and command the stars. I want a rebirth of glory, a renaissance of power. I want to stop running through my life like a man late for an appointment, afraid to look back or to look forward. I want to be what I used to be! I want it all back, the way that it was.*"

But I didn't. Anyway they promised to put some feelers out and swore on a big pile of Bibles that they'd be in touch. 

So that'll be the last I'll ever hear from them then. 

 *If I'd replied "I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favours come with too high a price" it would have been more appropriate. Yes I'm re-watching Babylon 5. Again.

Angry Since 1967+1 Now whinging in two places

I've put a review (kinda) up of the new (and frankly awful) Porcupine Tree album "The Incident" up on +1

And then I took it down. What I'd posted was as bad as the album I'd been laying the boot into. Which, I suppose, at least has symmetry. As soon as I work out what the hell I'm trying to say I'll post it up again. 

 

  

Worst Agency Contender - Update

I rang them again yesterday afternoon.

Unavailable.

In a meeting.

Delivering famine relief.

Rescuing a child from a burning building.

Or something.

So they couldn't take the call.

My psychic senses are tingling. This doesn't bode well.

Worst Agency Award? We have a contender.

Anyway where was I? 

Still looking for a job. At the moment I'm in negotiations with a recruitment agency as to whether or not they should be put me forward for a job that I reckon I'm qualified to do. They on the other hand reckon, on the basis of a CV I sent them two months ago for a completely unrelated job, I'm not suitable. Now you'd think they would simply ask me to update my CV, so that it was more appropriate. Then make a decision. Seems logical. Sensible even. But no. The CV they have, for an non IT job, is one they are using for this new IT job. Not surprisingly it doesn't match the job so they won't consider putting me forward for the role. 

And people wonder why I think recruitment agencies are a bunch of useless, inept, two-faced, self-serving fuckers. 

I've rang them a few times chasing this asking what the fuck are they at?, Predictably the person I've been dealing with is mysteriously unavailable. And has been since late last week. No doubt they'll be "no longer with us" the next time I ring.

You couldn't make it up.

Lack of Updates - Update

I'm just not in the form to post anything here at the moment. 

I'm sure I'll get my muse back shortly.

In the meantime here is some music.

Angry Since 1967+1

I'm going to start posting stuff that doesn't fit here on the +1 blog. I haven't quite decided exactly what though. More than likely it will be reviews of things. If you've read the stuff I post here you'll get an idea of the tact I'll be adopting.

"Meh"

Like I said "meh"

Three years later

I started Angry Since 1967 three years ago today.

Where has the time gone?

God only knows. 

Odds and ends

I spent the weekend down at the Tall Ships festival in Belfast. And had a great time. There was a buzz in the city that I've never experienced before. Certainly it contrasts with the last event like this I attended. New Years Eve 1999. Belfast City Council, decided to set the fireworks off to celebrate the new millennium at twenty past midnight rather than disturb the Bjorn Again concert they were holding. I remember hundreds of people standing at the Queen Elizabeth Bridge looking at each other wondering what the hell was going on. I've never realised it before but it now seems somehow appropriate that I toasted the New Millennium with a tin of warm Harp.

Of course there's been the usual whinging about the event, missing the entire point. I'm as cynical as the next person, but even I was able to mute my cynicism for the duration and saw a side of Belfast that was totally unexpected. The city, round the docks, down High Street, around Custom House Square was packed to the rafters, filled with people out celebrating. 

Incredible.

My interview with the Jobcentre (I've decided that it's one word rather than "Job Centre") was brief and to the point. They've now got 2000 people signing. They've not seen it this bad in 15 years. The harsh reality of the situation was reinforced as I drove down, passed Nortel's old factory and saw the Union pickets outside, protesting at how employees had been dismissed with no notice and no redundancy, and then just a bit further along posters in support of similarily dismissed workers from FG Wilson. 

The interesting thing about Nortel (or "The Standard" as it's still known round here) is that for as long as I can remember it's existed in a state of perpetual job losses. I was quite surprised to find there was anyone left to make redundant. Nonetheless it's damning for Nortel that people are so aggrieved they have to protest to secure some sort of redundancy package. I wish them success.

 

Quick update.

I've had a letter. From the Jobcentre. They want me to come in for a chat next week to see how my "progress in looking for work" is getting on. They want some evidence that I'm still looking, just in case (god forbid) I'm getting comfortable being on the dole. I've already been told that they will change my job criteria, specifically my salary expectations (already reduced) to be more in line with the minimum wage.  

It's depressing to reflect that in the 3 months I've been signing the Jobcentre's contribution to my search has been two jobs, barely earning minimum wage, both of which required fluency in a foreign language and a not so subtle hint to lie on my CV.

With such sage advice I'm as baffled as they are why I haven't got a job yet. 

If they want proof I've been looking for a job, I'm tempted to print out this blog, and then give them the telephone numbers all the resolutely useless recruitment agencies I spend my days chasing.

 

This one's optimistic....

I like Mondays now. It's the day when I set the stall out for the week. The disappointments of last weeks failures put behind me, assured that success lies just around the corner. Or something. My optimism this week lasted until 11:00 am. The jobs advertised last week are still there, some unchanged, some slightly amended. Now I've been very coy about the agencies I've been using  - mainly because of paranoia. If they were to discover what I was saying about them I reckon they'd be even less inclined (assuming that a reduction from "not inclined at all" was possible) to assist in my search for a job, Today though? I'm fucking tempted. But I won't. Well not at the moment anyway. I think if I'm still sitting here unemployed at Christmas then Angry Since 1967 is having an awards ceremony, honouring the worst recruitment agencies. People are sometimes too keen to laud greatness, forgetting that it takes a special skill to be completely useless. Moreso to be useless and yet still have people queuing up to avail of your services. Surely this must be acknowledged? If nothing but for the scary thought that, even in these credit crunch days, there are some companies who flourish not due to talent or ability, but despite an obvious lack of talent or ablity. 

More whinging

Nothing has changed. I was down for my last chat with the Job Centre for a month last week. The nice person at the desk did another job search for me. This time I needed to speak Dutch. Who knows maybe next time there'll be an IT job in Northern Ireland with a requirement to speak English?

In another development. I had some subtle hints I should be less accurate on my CV. Not in the "before I walked on the Moon, I discovered penicillin while climbing Everest" sense but rather to give it a "I can barely read or write" feel.  In other words, strip anything out that might intimidate or dissuade the bottom feeders who advertise in the Job Centre from offering me a £9000 a year job. It seems that's the way it works in Northern Ireland at the moment. Don't strive to be better, pretend to be worse.

I'm sure you can imagine my response.   

But I did get a unsolicited email from an agency I'd applied to months and months ago. My cheeriness evaporated when I saw the job spec was in German.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. 

Tilting at windmills

Well that's what it feels like, 

Today I had another chat at the Jobcentre. It seems the job situation in Northern Ireland is much grimmer than the statistics would suggest. Why do I know this? Well this centre is being swamped with new applicants. This time last year they had 600 people claiming. Now? It's closer to 2000. It's become so bad that they've had to introduce signing monthly rather than the usual fortnightly to cope. Perhaps, I said, they could employ some of the unemployed to help out until the "green shots" of recovery are a bit more tangible than the smoke and mirror recovery the media are determined to talk up. 

The silent response spoke volumes. 

 

More of the same - depressing I know.

To be honest I'm a wee bit pissed off right now. I've had no joy with any of the many jobs I've applied for, and speaking to a couple of the "tame" recruitment agencies the situation at the moment does look pretty bleak. They aren't expecting things to pick up until August. 

I've also had another one of "those" phone calls from a non-house trained agency. Or rather I haven't. "Yes, stick me your CV across and I''ll phone you tomorrow". That was Tuesday two weeks ago. So I rang. The person I was dealing with has left. Or to use their words "is no longer with us. Can you send your CV? again? And we'll be in touch"

Seriously.

Right back at square one. 

Jesus. 

I can feel a full on rant about recruitment agencies brewing,  They put up vague job descriptions, that may or may not accurately reflect the "real" job, don't tell you in advance who the job is with, stick the same job, with slight variations  on websites of different, but related agencies, arbitarily change the job description when they aren't getting any applicants, have a staff turnover at a rate even Curry's would be ashamed of, don't return calls, can't be fucked reading or understanding the content of your CV, meaning you have to phrase it in fashion that would patronise a 3 year old whose only exposure to English is matching cow shaped pieces to the word "cow" and, worst of all, are completely fucking disinterested. 

And, if they do touch lucky and place you? Well they expect to be paid. I'm not sure for what though. They sow not neither do they reap. They just skim off 10%. I wonder if they'd feel less soiled if they mugged pensioners or sold crack to toddlers. I certainly would.

And breathe. 

It's an odd thing. When you're in work, all you can do (okay I'm speaking for myself) is think about not being in work. The opposite seems to apply when you're out of work. Perhaps the worst thing is trying to fill the days. I know that when I finally do get a new job, I'll look back at this period and think "why did I waste all that time I had". But, and this is the truth, I am at a loss as to what to do with all this free time. I don't really know what it is, but after a few hours fruitless searching for a job my will to "do" something evaporates, I simply can't be bothered. Clearly this a manifestation of my "fucked-offed-ness". I suppose (he kids himself) the fact that I recognise it as such is a good thing, But trying to shake this feeling off is very, very difficult. I'd say it was as tricky as anything I've done recently. Perhaps the most dperessing sign of the times is that I've reached the point were Star Trek Voyager at 2 O'clock on Virgin 1 is the highlight of the day.

I think the term is "bollox"

This simply isn't sustainable. I need to do something that'll improve my chances. And although I'm reluctant to sign up for any courses (thanks to poisonous previous experiences with post graduate education) I think that if by September the options are watching an even worse version of Star Trek or doing a course, then the course gets it by a nose.   

Odds and Sods

I've changed my profile thing. There's something about my current plight and the phrase "They not only refuse to applaud mediocrity, they howl it down with morose glee" that is either deeply ironic or pathetic. So off it comes. 

I was in HMV last week. Not buying (too skint) just noseying. A couple of things stood out. Firstly Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" was £16. Remind me again why CD sales are failing? More surprisingly the new Manic Street Preachers album on vinyl was £18.99.The fight back against mp3 starts here. 

Speaking of mp3 I read yesterday Amazon had made a mistake, offering downloaded versions of albums for 29p. Leaving aside the choice of albums available, 29p is still too expensive for these low resolution facsimiles. 

I've discovered Spotify. My reservations still stand about streaming with adverts, but I'm kidding myself that it's just like a commerical radio station, but I get to pick the playlist. If it was a real commerical radio station though I suspect it would be taken off the air. I'd end up barricaded in my studio as the police broke the doors down.

Northern Ireland is now in "holiday mode". The job vacancies have packed their bags, rubbed on the factor 15 and headed south for a bit of sun, foam parties, cheap cocktails and casual sex with strangers. They'll return in a couple of weeks feeling both elated and slightly ashamed, wondering where the money went and what the strange rash is. 

 

  

The Specialist?

Still looking. Things haven't moved. One of the things that I get from talking to the agencies I trust (well up to a point) is that the skills that used to benefit me, are now actually a disadvantage. People don't want generalists in IT. They want specialists.

A generalist? Er? Well that's a good question, I suppose the unkind way to describe it s "jack of all trades, master of none"  Really though (without using terms like "helicopter view" or other phrases from the Management Bullshit Thesaurus) is that I see everything. I understand everything - at a level higher than the client, but less than a specialist. Unlike a specialist though, I see how all the specialisms fit together and how they shape the "whole" (or "hole" if you prefer. And yes it does sound like I'm talking out of it).

The majority of the jobs I see are aimed at specialists. Some I've a good chunk of what they ask for. Now given that I'm working on the assumption that the worst a potential employer can say is "no" I'll stick my CV in anyway, So far, at least, the results have been predictable. (Or rather I assume "predictable" as most of the companies who advertise online can't quite stretch to an automated acknowledgement receipt, let alone an email saying "cheers for applying but piss off". So if I haven't heard in a day or so I figure it as another another rejection. I did get one nice response from an agency saying (in words to the effect of) "stop applying for jobs with us. We don't want you. Ever". I'll reveal the name of the shower of shit responsible for this gem once I'm happily re-employed) So what to do?  Keep plugging away. I've considered doing a couple of courses in an effort to add some shine to the CV, but I've been strongly advised against this (wear sunscreen), which has dampened my enthusiasm for spending the couple of grand (I don't have) on the course I planned to do. 

So I'm left  to just get on with it. No choice really. But it is disheartening when the only opportunity the Jobcentre could conjure up today was one 60 miles away (in Omagh), for a temporary, part time IT support job, requiring fluency in Mandarin.

Like I said. "Specialist"   

Careers Advice?

Anyway I was going to post something here about how small, seemingly inconsequential decisions can have unforeseen consequences, But it I couldn't phrase it in such away that it didn't sound like a 90's TV movie about chaos theory. And no matter how much I'd like to, I can't lump the blame for my current predicament on a butterfly flapping it's wings. This thing is little better. I've been stewing over this for the past week or so and I just can't get it to make the point I'm trying to make. But I thought I'd post it anyway

I've applied for more jobs, via the new modern wonder that is the "internet". I have to say that as a tool for job hunting, the internet is unsurpassed. Well up to a point. In the very old days my job hunting would have consisted of waiting for the Belfast Telegraph to be delivered on a Friday evening. Now? I can look for a job any time I want. I'm not restricted to Northern Ireland anymore either. With all this choice, I hear you ask, why haven't you got a job yet?

Well there are a couple of answers to this, The first is that this choice isn't all that it seems. A couple of weeks ago I applied for job via one particular site. There was the usual vague spec on the description, an e-form to fill out and a place to upload a CV on. 

Roll on an hour and I got a phone call. They've got my CV and the agency want me to come in for a chat. In passing they tell me who the job is with. Now I'm someone who likes to be prepared, so I did some digging. An hour or so later I'd found the original job description the agency distilled their ad from. So far so good. Anyway after a long meeting they said thanks but no thanks, however they'd "keep their eye out" for something else. 

Of course I was a wee bit disappointed. But that's the breaks.

A day or two later I'm looking at another job site. I spy a job. "This looks good"  and clicked on the link. Strangely though it looked very familiar. Mmm. One quick phone call to this different agency (who weren't interested in me at all) confirmed it. Same job They'd just amended the Job title.

You know the old thing about not spotting something obvious until someone points it out? As far as I can now tell this same job is on a national job site 4 times and on a regional job site 9 times. Each one is subtly different but the meat is the same - a spectfic requirement for knowledge of a pretty obscure application, exposure to some fairly esoteric procedures, based in Belfast, all with the same salary range. Now either Belfast has become the cluster point for the obscure and esoteric (possible I suppose), or these 13 jobs are in fact, the same one job. 

Now I can understand the rationale behind this. It makes perfect sense to have multiple agencies chasing candidates, each one knowing that they are competiting against another agency. Nothing like a bit of competition. But I'm not sure that it's good for prospective candidates. Sometimes the choice is no choice at all. Okay maybe I've been naive about job hunting, perhaps I don't understand the realities of what it's like for the agencies, I simply don't appreciate the demands their clients make, The bottom line is I don't care. It's waste of my time and energy trying to decipher if the job I'm applying for is a reheated version of a job I applied for previously. Worse is that several of these competing agencies are in fact, one in the same.  

I'd say there were steps that could be taken to make things more transparent. Agencies should be made to name names ie. state in the ad who the job is with. At the moment it's usually treated it as a secret, only to be revealed on the pain of death (Name, Rank and Company who added job reference NI8901). This attitude serves no useful purpose. Secondly if I was using an agency or agencies to recruit then I'd insist they stick explicitly to the job description and job title I've defined, rather than let them apply their own interpretation to what you meant by a vague term like "Manager" 

To be honest this has been a pretty sharp learning curve. Now that I think about this - really who prepares you for the pitfalls of job hunting? Isn't it just one of those things that people do when they have to? Yeah I've bought a few advice books books on the subject and dug around the net, but the advice is so vague to be useless How do you find out the tricks and tips of looking for a job? And through it all whose advice should I listen to? Theirs? Mine? Stuff on the internet? Perhaps as one (er) philosopher said 

"Be careful whose advice you buy, but be patient with those who supply it. Advice is a form of nostalgia. Dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it's worth"

And there's the problem. Everyone knows. Everyone has a view. But no-one actually knows. Hell this is starting to sound like me dishing out advice as well.

So I will

"Wear sunscreen"

A Blast From The Past

Many years ago I was contributor to, and then editor of, a student newspaper at Queen's in Belfast. Recently, I tripped over a bag full of old issues while trying to pack my worldy possessions into cardboard boxes (see previous post). There was something cathartic about nearly falling out of a roofspace after getting tangled up the handles of a bag full of forgotten newspapers. I couldn't help but read them. And 20 years later? Amusing yet disturbing. Amusing, because of how earnest it is. Disturbing, as it seems like yesterday. Anyway I thought it would be interesting to stick an article from the paper (or "Press Release" to give it it's full name) here. To save anyone else's blushes it's something I wrote. I've made some light changes for spelling and grammar.
As a student paper there are things that need to be taken as read. Protests - check. Union politicking - check. But sometimes, between the endless articles about students waving "Honk If You Hate Loans" placards at the passing traffic, we interviewed celebrities. Truthfully I can't remember how or why I ended up speaking to Brian Cox. As editor I could have delegated. Which was what normally happened. Usually at the first sign of "fame" there'd be queue of people wanting to press the famous flesh. But, in this instance at least, I don't recall having to elbow anyone aside. I suppose back in 1990 "Ian McKellern" or "Brian Cox" were still relative unknowns. Or something. Still it made an change from spending hours (in those pre-DTP days) laying out pages at the printers, or re-writing articles into a language (broadly at least) resembling "English"
And so, without further delay, I give you 
Shakespeare Thespian meets Philistine


"Look I haven't a clue about Shakespeare — get somebody else to do it"
But my complaints were to no avail and so, photographer in tow, "Press Release's" resident philistine went to interview Ian McKellern who was recently in Belfast performing in Richard III. Unfortunately Mr. McKellern* was already taking part in an interview so instead we drafted in Brian Cox who played “King Lear” in another production. As he approached I looked at Rick (The paper's photographer), as if to say 'who the hell is this?** What am I going to ask him?' So being the probing journo that I am***, I asked him that old Chestnut 

“So what do you think of Belfast?”
Instead of going for my throat after that old cliché**** he looked calmly and said 

“Great. This is the third time I've been here. Last time I was filming (Ken) Loach's 'Hidden Agenda'".
He seemed quite pleased (to) announce it had won a prize at Cannes.
I asked him chestnut number 2 

“What's the schedule like?”
“It's an impossible, crazy schedule. Seven shows a night, week here, week there. We've been all over Britain. Europe and Japan... It's getting so we don't know where we are”.

So down to the play. King Lear? was it still relevant? I saw the look of disbelief in his eyes that I'd asked such a question.

“It's perennial brilliance doesn't change. It asks fundamental questions about life that are, if anything, more relevant today. It's both modern and classic, it transcends fashion. This is also true in Richard III. We are using and magnifying parts of it to bring out the metaphors for fascism'
. . . and off he went into long account about Richard III. Being completely unfamiliar with the play I nodded agreement, but kept my mouth shut.***** 

The interview began to flounder, so I asked old chestnut number 3.
"Did you always want to be an actor?".

“Yes. I was almost conditioned to be an actor. I grew up in the 1950's and the cinema was my minder. Sitting in a Dundee cinema watching 'On the Waterfront' something clicked I wanted to do it”
Did he enjoy working in the cinema? 

"Time to time I still get a kick out of it but the writing has declined. There's so much pap produced.”

He preferred working in the Theatre then? 

“It's more acute. It challenges perceptions. Touring makes theatre a 24 hour a day job. It's an alive, immediate and exhausting experience. The theatre can still address controversial issues - “Hidden Agenda” is unusual for a film because it deals with controversy — the shoot to kill investigations.I had a lovely time working with Ken but Belfast is an unusual city. There tends to be an avoidance of the facts here. More concentration on the positive side. There's a state of war here but people put it to the backs of their minds. I love Belfast peoples wit and humour but that can't disguise the fact there's a shadow hanging over Belfast".

Time was getting on and there was some uncomfortable 'foot shifting'. Recognising the signal that time was up I asked him about changing theatre styles.

"It's important that in your work you try to be current . . to address current issues. But not to the extent were you become hostage to fashion. Things have to balance".
(Photo Richard Adams)


*Still just a "Mr" at this point.
**Seens odd. Brian Cox is a familiar face now. In between blockbusters and TV, he crops up as a narrator everywhere. But in '90 I didn't know who he was. My kid brother did. He wasn't very impressed I didn't ask him about "Manhunter". For the first time my ignorance was displayed for all to see. You'd think I'd learn.  
***It's weird reading that now. To think I harboured dreams of being a journalist. What went wrong? 
****The above question answered a sentence later
*****In my defence I've only ever read Romeo and Juliet. For my "O" Level. I've never had the inclination or interest to ever read any more. I blame my dreary, dreary English Literature teacher. Needless to say I'm still a philistine as far as Bill's works are concerned.

Givus a job. Go on. I can do that

Two posts in as many days. Flip. I've become profilic.

I was going to post about a chat I had with an agency today, but there's not really much to report. If you've ever dealt with Recruitment agencies you'll know the form. A run through of the CV and a promise to call me back if any thing arises. Much the same as the others have said. Still the more people who are out there with my CV looking at jobs the better. 

As they say "the more the merrier"  

I'm back

Since my last post things have changed - quite considerably. I'm now the guts of 400 miles further west and north of where I was before. Unfortunately the credit crunch(tm) claimed a casualty much closer to home than I expected. Okay that's not true. It was expected. Now I don't propose to go into the why's and wherefore's of what happened, other than to say that being right isn't any consolation. I think it's more constructive to focus my energies on the future rather than dwell on the past. So after 5 1/2 years I find myself back where I started. Well kind of. Older? Certainly. Wiser? Definitely. I'd actually say that I'm not the same person I was in 2003, but a little project that I'm entertaining myself with, suggests I'm same person I was 20 years ago, albeit with less hair and more chins.

One good thing that has come out of this is a long conversation I had with a recruitment consultant recently. Truthfully I learnt more about job hunting in two hours than in the previous 15 years. It certainly gave me an insight into the mechanics of recruitment agencies, how they work, their expectations compared to my expectations and how their agenda will almost always differ from mine. Very interesting. And something that I've put into practice when dealing with them.

I'll update this as and when. I'm not saying that normal service is suspended (it isn't) it's just you might see more steam being vented here (I suspect about recruitment agencies who advertise on job sites yet can't quite manage an automated acknowledgement email when they get an application or companies who ask you to put confidential information (DOB, NI number, Address etc) on non-secure websites 

The day the music died...

There's hardly a week goes by now when people are decrying that it's the end of music as we know it. CD sales are down, piracy is endemic and the entire music industry is frantically thrashing around trying to find some way of stemming the tide. Usually this manifests itself in the head long rush to offer new ways of offering music via the internet in the ubiquitous mp3 format. Now I don't pretend to understand the complexities of this, nor am I really that interested, however it strikes me that the problem the music industry faces is broadly due to mp3. Normally when people make statements like this, they use the term “mp3” in the same way “CD” or “vinyl” was used in previous generations. I'm not using it in this sense. No I think the problems lie with the limitations of the mp3 format itself.

So why do I think this? I need to put this into context. Way back in the 1980's CD was introduced, becoming the de facto music delivery format. Neat shiny discs delivering music in a robust, high quality package, with sound quality that has only recently been surpassed - but more of that later.

Roll on a few years and CD's main competitor Compact Cassette was starting to look, well lets be blunt a we bit clunky, but as it was the only real way to deliver music on the move it had its place. Realizing that the writing was on the wall two of the companies who had most at stake with cassettes (Philips the inventor of the format and Sony the people who gave us the Walkman) started working on replacements. Each came faced the same problem – people, used to the sound of CD wanted something that sounded as good as CD, but without the bulk. Philips, in a brilliant, if doomed, piece of lateral thinking came up with a digital version of the standard compact cassette. Sony used the CD template and came up with Mini Disc. So far so different. But what these two companies realized was that to fit digital music on their formats they'd have to reduce (or compress) the amount of information stored. And the first mp3-esque formats were introduced. Each one worked on the belief that around 90% of the sound information on a CD was masked meaning that the file sizes could be reduced considerably, allowing music tracks to fit on these more compact formats, with their reduced storage capacity (there's a more technical explanation for this but I'll end up boring myself let alone anyone else reading this). When they were launched the publicity blurb told us that “they sound as good as CD”

Which, and not to beat about the bush, was utter, utter bollox. They barely sounded as good as FM radio. 

Roll on a few years. DCC, died on it's arse. Mini Disc struggled on in the face of newly introduced CD copiers. Compressed music seemed to have been consigned to the dustbin. What possible use was there for music tracks that jettisoned 90% of the detail so that the size of the file was small enough to fit on devices with tiny storage capacities? 

And then, someone realized there was a use. The the old days of dial-up modems downloading any big file was a slow, unreliable process. It didn't take long for someone to put two and two together. Small music files, slow download speeds where made for each other. Further sound quality wasn't that important as people would only ever listen to their downloaded music through the (appalling) speakers supplied with their PC's so it wouldn't be an issue. And anyway, we where told “mp3 sounds as good as CD”. 

Just before we go any further here I think its worth nailing that lie. - mp3 sounds as good as CD only if you need your ears syringed. There is no mid range. The mp3 sound is very much like the sound you would have got if you tweaked an old graphic equalizer, putting the bass and the treble up full and putting the bits in between down low. It is utterly crap. But if your idea of hi-fi is a stereo that costs £99 from tescos or one of those god awful ipod dock things well. Don't believe me. Find a track you like. Rip it to mp3 – even at the highest setting. Play the mp3 version against the CD version. Pretty conclusive*.... But I digress. 

All very interesting (or not as the case may be) but what does this have to do with the end of music as we know it? For the last 10 years or so the media has perpetuated the myth that mp3 sounds as good as CD. Therefore why should I buy a CD in a shop when the mp3 I download for free from a dodgy file sharing is just as good? And what does the music industry do? Do they try and counter this? Do they say mp3 has it's place, alongside CD, filing the role that cassette used to? No. Instead they go on a head long rush to release more stuff via the internet, trying (and largely failing) to sell mp3's (which sound as good as CD's remember) which people can get for free elsewhere. And what happens? CD sales fall, they release more tracks on mp3, tracks people can get for free elsewhere, which means fewer people buy CD's and so on and so forth. 

The demarcation between legitimate and illegitimate downloads vanishes. And the record companies are complicit in this. And it's too late. If they think that allowing gimmick websites to offer the albums for free if people listen to some advertisements, or charging a monthly subscription for the privilege of streaming some low resolution approximation of an album is going to save them then it is proof of the old saying. “There is no worse delusion, than self delusion” If on the other had they said buy CDs. They are the same price as these downloads, offer better quality sound, you can copy them to whatever device you like and you get something tangible to hold onto then they aren't competing with the people who are offering the music for free. 

But this won't happen. The die is, as they say, cast. 

Lets make no mistake about it. Mp3 is an old crap sounding technology that was only used because of technological limitations that existed a decade ago. And yet we are stuck with it. While it's too early to say that CD is dead, it is obvious that the hi def audio formats that were designed to replace CD (DVDA and SACD) are dead (if you ever get the chance to hear either of these going take it. Then scratch your head why people don't / won't buy then) . And why? For the first time it's because they are better than what has gone before. Let me put it a different way. Today people are falling over themselves to buy High Def TV's and Blu ray players – because they are better than what we've had before. They improve the viewing experience. Mp3 makes the experience worse. It's comparable having a device that could show thousands of TV channels but only in black and white.

No doubt, though someone would tell us “Black and white? It looks exactly the same as colour”  





*if you can't hear a difference between the two pop along to Boots or any reputable high street chemist and invest in some some cotton wool buds. 

Something new and / or currently popular "causes health risk"

"Something new and / or currently popular" causes health risks claimed a Doctor. Writing somewhere they said "something new and / or currently popular" can have a detrimental effect on the health of those participating, using, looking at, thinking about or wearing this thing that is new and / or currently popular. Symptoms include amongst others general malaise, hyper activity, loss of appetite, hunger pangs, dandruff, baldness, loss of vision, tennis elbow and fallen arches"

The Doctor also claimed "something new and / or currently popular" has had proven history of being risky to health "everything from ra-ra skirts, Rubic's cube, the Walkman, platform heeled shoes, skateboarding, riding a BMX, travelling on trains going faster than 15 miles an hour, television, diddly boppers, Heely's, the internet, trainers and indoor toilets have contributed to the current state of the general public's health. Although this "new" new and / or currently popular thing was particularly dangerous." They added "the risks are clear, people should do everything to lessen them. Take frequent breaks and drink plenty of water. Alternatively people could simply not engage in, wear, look at, or use this "new and / or currently popular thing" until it's been superseded by the next new and / or currently popular thing.  At this point all symptoms will vanish"

Although stopping short of demanding a ban on "something new and / or currently popular", the Doctor stated that as long as "new" "something new and / or currently popular" things continued to arise then health professionals would point out the risks as quickly as possible, conveniently blaming them for all humanities ills and, more importantly, providing an opportunity for getting their ugly bakes on daytime TV or, better still,  being quoted as an authority on the topic in the lifestyle sections of the Daily Mail.  

Breaking News. New Post On Angry Since 1967.

Sky's fixation with breaking news reached a new low on the evening of 31st December when at the stroke of midnight the yellow banner told us "London Celebrates 2009". Now call me "picky" but that isn't quite breaking news. Breaking News in this instance would have been "No one celebrates New Year. People finally realise New Years Eve is a complete bucket of fuck".


Of course the point is if Sky deem one day ending and another commencing as "news" then they should run Breaking News "New Day Starts" every night at midnight.  
Watching the coverage of the Obama parade last week we were treated to the unedifying sight of BBC reporters killing time until the parade started. One reporter was asked "can you speculate on what you expect to see?" Unfortunately the answer wasn't "A frigging parade, you moron". No we got something about "crowds" "car" "president" "bands".  Of course we now take this type of crap in our stride. The inanity of it just bypasses us. It doesn't register when reporters are asked to speculate on what either going to be in front of them shortly, or worse is in front of them now. Nor does it seem unusual for two reporters to speculate together, usually the one in the studio acquiesces to the one at the scene. Of course the simple fact there is a reporter at the scene makes them an expert, regardless of the fact that they've only just arrived or can't tell us anything that someone with eyes in their head couldn't work out from the pictures. But the reporter at the scene is able to tell us what's going on. They may have only have just arrived but in the 10 minutes since they got there they've managed to get the pulse of the community and feel so ingratiated within it that they can speak on it's behalf. "The community has been deeply impacted by this" as they report the latest back street tragedy. How the frig do they know? They can't. But they say it anyway. Because that's what they'd like to think the "community" they are in would think that way. They become experts in an instant. Much like the named columnists who suddenly become experts on things they know nothing about. By the end of this week, columnists will be pontificating about something that today they are completely ignorant of.

Another news bugbear is how people are captioned on TV programmes. Not "famous" people but rather those who happened to be in the vicinity. There is no programme worse at this than BBC Breakfast. In recent weeks we had some girl, sharing Bill and Sian's cosy little sofa*, whose name was captioned with the word "teenager" beneath it.  For those, presumably, who don't know what a teenager is, or what one looks like. Cheers for that, The next time I see a girl with a plummy accent and spots I'll know what the name for such a creature is. It's "a teenager".

*You know BBC Breakfast really gets on my tits. It's a fucking awful, awful programme. Bill (it has to be "Bill" not Bill Turnbull) and Sian (ditto) sit on that frigging sofa radiating patronising smugness that if harnessed could probably curl the toes of most of the Western world. It's not news, it's info-tainment. When it's serious "Bill" furrows his brow. For twenty seconds. Then it's back to plugging some BBC talent show, tutting about Marks and Spencer latest sales figures, looking earnest when the house trained doctor appears, a wee bit of  joshing with the sports presenter, then it's over to Carol for the weather (which come rain, hail or sun she delivers in tone of someone pleasuring themselves with a Black and Decker drill on the hammer setting). This programme is so utterly fucking worthless it makes GMTV look authoritative. I'll bet that's a sentence that's not been written too many times in the past. It takes a special skill, an ability that should somehow be rewarded, to make a programme that is actually worse than a predecessor that featured Russell Grant. So well done all concerned.
  

The Sound Of No One Listening

You know one of the things I dislike about blogs is when you find one you like and the person writing stops updating. It's ironic that this one has gone the same way. I don't know why. I suppose it's much like when you got a diary. For the first couple of weeks your enthused with writing all the minutae of the day. As time progresses though, well it becomes less of joy and more of a chore.

Not that this is a chore, there's still just as much bile beating in my heart as there was when I started this little thing, there just isn't the same will. The word “meh” seems a good away of describing it as any.

Of course I still post on the net. It would be interesting to count up the amount of stuff I've actually posted around the internet. I reckon if I totaled up the 1000 posts there, the 4000 posts somewhere else, the posts on boards that don't exist anymore, the posts on boards that shouldn't exist anymore or the places I've been banned from (you know I don't care. 2000AD is shitter now than it has been in 15 years and the last three Porcupine Tree albums have been utter crap. Deal with it.) plus the assortment of other stuff out there I reckon it would probably amount to three or four books worth of stuff. While a collection of my writing probably wouldn't have much broad appeal i would be fascinating to see those first tentative posts on the old Spaced forum from 2001. (I think they were about Flash Gordon. Go figure)

But I digress. The point is that I do post on the internet a lot, I just don't post very much here. Which is puzzllng as this is the only place where I can stick things without someone going “yer taking out yer hole” - well people can write that (they haven't) but I can decide whether it appears or not. Perhaps I like the debate, perhaps I like the company, perhaps there's other reasons, but mainly I think it's because here it feels like I'm taking to myself..

Which I am. So you'll excuse me if the next rant I post seems reflect this.

Back to life, back to reality

Nothing much to report. Okay then just a couple of things then.

Currently reading "Is It Just Me Or Is Everything Just Shit?". Don't remember writing this book but it does sound (a lot) like what's on this blog. If only I hadn't abandoned the old, traditional styles of communication in favour of a blog I'd have a nice  quote from the Guardian on the back of a best selling book I'd written.

Perhaps I should just make a Guardian quote up for my blog  "sour, miserable whinging that would make a baby panda cry. Try beating youself with a stick. It would be better crack than reading this shit"

Anyway I'll stick more up soon. Including the much anticipated "Clapping At Lottery Numbers" more "I Frigging Told You So's" and "The Rise of the Experts" which is a pun (a bad pun granted) only about three people will get

 

 

Mine's better than yours

Post purchase reassurance. Not a thing many people have ever really heard of. But it does exist.

The buying process is a complicated thing, more complicated that you’d ever realise. Not because the steps to actually owning something are “complicated” rather that people rarely stop to think what these processes actually are. Indeed we’ve become so used to the process it simply doesn’t register. The “want” the “need” the “justification” and then the “purchase” are all so well ingrained in us that it seems automatic, a reflex action.

Of course it isn’t. It’s wrong to overstate that people are manipulated into buying products, but it is equally wrong to suggest that it is something free from external factors and pressures. Of course we are aware of advertising, but in the main people claim to be “unaffected” by it’s teasing, tantalising and temptations.

Which, is of course, utter rot.

You buy something because there is a need. The need may be that you have to eat, or the need may be that you want a games console. One is biological one is entirely mental.

Of course what advertising doesn’t really deal with is what happens once you’ve bought the thing. You’ve swallowed the bumpf and that shiny new consumer durable is now proudly residing in your front room. Now what?

That’s were “post purchase reassurance” raises it’s head. Put simply it’s that thought, “have I bought the right thing?” Now this manifests itself in a variety of ways. Perhaps the most obvious and depressingly common is something I’d refer to as “mine’s better than yours”. Even a casual browse of the internet will see how much of cyberspace is devoted to sites which can be boiled down to this simple phrase.

It’s part of human nature for people to seek out others with common interests and is nothing new. However I wonder if people whose common interest is a slickly marketed consumer durable realise just how odd a phenomena it is? More so how downright peculiar it is attacking others who’ve chosen a different consumer durable. This isn’t corporate evangelism; it’s a corporate inquisition. I know I’ve touched on this before but as religion declines I wonder if it is being replaced with a doctrine of loyalty to corporations? Again people deny this, “no” they state solemnly “I can see through the corporate hype, mine is definitely better than yours”. And of course it is.

Now you may think that doesn’t happen, people aren’t that stupid. But they are. Just to prove it I conducted a little experiment on a forum I occasionally post on just to see what would happen. Now this wasn’t a particularly scientific experiment but the response was interesting. I offered an alternative to the received wisdom. It didn’t take much. I was wrong. No explanation was given, I was simply wrong. Theirs “was better” all backed-up with evidence from other “mines better than yours” websites. The reaction to daring to suggest they’ve made the wrong choice gets to the core of “post purchase reassurance”.

Perhaps before the internet you just dealt with it. I’ve bought it, I’ve got to live with it.. But I can’t really believe that’s true. The myriad magazines that predate the internet demonstrate that this as long been a feature of what has become know as consumerism. “I’ve bought the right thing because a magazine dedicated to the product tells me so”.

However the internet has merely provided a new vehicle for people to ask for, and receive validation, from others who’ve looked for and received the validation. And as this is what you are specifically looking for, this is what you’ll specifically find. But the whole thing of defining yourself by the consumer durables you have and the validation you think you get from get from strangers because you own it is a thoroughly depressing thought.

I wonder what it says?

Nothing good.

But none of this matters. You might as well be arguing with a Canary about Schoenberg’s theories on serialism. “Their” one is always going to better than “my” one. In the same way that “my” one is better than “theirs”

New REM album...."a triumphant return to form"

or so the Independent reckons

And of course it is. Just like their last three albums have been "triumphant returns to form" or every single Oasis album since "What's The Story" or the rest...

We all bought "Automatic For The People", we all bought Moby's "Play", we all bought Air's "Moon Safari" we all bought "What's The Story". Etc. Etc. Etc.

Some of us were so impressed we bought their next new album.

Oh dear......

Of course the album that followed the follow up (ie. the one we didn't buy because it's predecessor was such utter crap) were invariably hailed as a "triumphant return to form".

No-one listened. Or, rather, no-one believed it.

We all know a band reaches a creative peak. Slowly and relentlessly though this passes. Some do the decent thing and split (only to reform a couple of years later) others just provide evidence of the law of diminishing returns.

Returns which are no less just because some hack in a newspaper says otherwise, or rather tells us something they've told us about every follow up to the popular one.

So the next REM album is almost certain to be a triumphant return to form. I guarantee it.

I'll be back

And indeed I am, well for the moment anyway. I've been innudated with worried emails "where are you" they ask? Ok that's not actually true the only thing I've had here is a spam link to getting "a better erection", which is one more email than I got in the previous 18 months. Just goes to show not even the spammers like me. (Low self esteem? Yip)

Any way I've been rereading some of the old nonsense I've posted here and most of it still amuses me, however I've noticed that it does read like a tirade of "whinging". So to counter this I'll be mentioning things I like. Yes it is hard to credit but there are things I like.

Really.

They do exist.

Hard to believe I know.

Obviously it would be nice if someone, after reading what I thought decided "I might just give that a go" and then post here saying "wow you've great taste" but that rather depends on two key things. Someone actually being bothered and more importantly, someone actually reading this bloody thing.

Still the spammers may enjoy the recommendations.

So if you need a tune to keep you going while composing your email touting the cheapest viagra on the net I'd recommend "Industry" by The Modern. Think an updated Human League / OMD but without the obvious attempts at replication which Ladytron (and their like) are so guilty.

He hasn't gone away you know...

And I haven't.

I've just been busy. Very busy.

One question. Why did it feel like I was the first person to ever move house? It was like no-one had ever done it before.

"You wanna do what?"
"Move you say?"
"What's that then?"

Perhaps I'd just be happier if I'd just attached some balloons to my worldly possessions. I mean everyone knows that if you stick a balloon on something it means "fun". So, for example if you have a rusty 1988 Vauxhall Astra, the simple addition of balloons transform it into a fun rusty 1988 Vauxhall Astra.

This rule applies many things. A party isn't fun until you attach some balloons. But perhaps there are just some things that even a balloon, with all it's cheery inflated "fun-ness" can't fix. Funerals, for example.

And house moves.

Cheeses Christ?

There's been an ongoing advertising campaign for Philadelphia cheese, based on the conceit that it's "heavenly". So we've had Angels eating the stuff in surrounded by the paraphernalia of your classic version of Heaven - clouds, pearly gates, harps, the usual. So far, so what?

Until the new one.

The angels we've grown to know and love as the campaign has progressed end up in a being questioned by the heavenly police in a their heavenly police station.

And this got me thinking.

Why are there police in heaven when bad people go to hell?


Next time - cheering at Lottery numbers and what ever happened to....?

Ahhh Comfort....

Anyway I don't subscribe to all the Sky Channels. I scrubbed the Movies and the Sports a long time ago. The "music" channels (one for another day) and the kids went next, then the news and lifestyle as the "shite" to "good" ratio was too high.

Recently (i.e. last week) I happened to catch one of the more vaunted new channels - one which exploits the age of new media - You Tube, Blogging, Flickr, Social Networking and the rest of the buzz words people who haven't the first notion of what they actually are use in an effort to seem "in touch"

Current TV

As they say on their website

"Current is about what's going on: stories from the real world, told by you. We slice our schedule into short segments that we call "pods" — each just a few minutes long. You'll see profiles of interesting people on the rise, intelligence on trends as they spring up around us, and international news from new perspectives. And much of it comes straight from you"

It somehow reminds me of something I've written in jest recently. So I surfed (no pun) to Channel 193 and what did I see....?

An advertisement for Comfort Fabric Conditioner.


"..new perspectives"?


My hole.

Happy Birthday to Angry Since 1967

Yes it's been a year - okay I know it hasn't but as I won't be anywhere near the internet on the actual day so I thought I'd post it now. It's either that or look out the window at the rain.
Usually with things like this there is a wistful look back over the previous 12 months, followed by a pithy prediction list of things to come.

Fuck that.

I will reflect on a couple of things though. I've only just realised that I have a complete free hand here. I can post whatever aul bollocks I like, there's no-one going "you can't do that" or pointing out my "clumsy sentence construction". The other thing is I think I've lost sight of what I'm doing here and what the point was. Fortunately I don't intend trying too hard to remember. Yes there was a point, but it's not really important anymore.

And so with that in mind.

I watched a BBC thing last night about British costumed dramas. Of course it was turgid aul wank, with a procession of movies set in the themeparked, airbrushed, cosy middle class, sub Jane Austen, ghetto-ed version of past the British film industry has been stuck since - well ever. I wasn't expecting a critical reappraisal so I wasn't too disappointed when the great and the good came out to collectively coo at these movies. The clear implication of the contributions (including one from someone called Daisy Goodwin who was described as a writer and broadcaster (hurrah for you Daisy) was that all they were all great. And who am I to disagree? I'm not a member of the great or the good and I'm certainly not a writer or a broadcaster ( Am I a blogcaster though?) so my opinion counts for nothing, as I ain't on the TV and as I don't write a column in a newspaper.

It's sobering realisation. So my mission statement for the next year is to embrace the fact my opinion counts for three fifths of fuck all.

Clarification

The editorial team at Angry Since 1967 made the following statement.

"Over the past few days there has been speculation in the media that Angry Since 1967 is a fake blog. We'd like to take this opportunity to assure our loyal reader that Angry Since 1967 is real and that the allegations I've just made up are entirely false. We'd also like it be noted as a matter of public record that the suggestion that "Phil" is a pseudonym is completely without foundation. Accusations "Phil" is in fact Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, yer man from the news, you know whatisname, the tall patronising bloke on Breakfast, or anyone else for that matter are completely false. Depressingly "Phil" exists, and in real life, is exactly how you'd imagine him (okay wee bit fatter but certainly not as old).

Angry Since 1967 remains focused on it's primary goal and is looking forward to celebrating it's first birthday at the end of August"

Ends.

Angry Since 1967 Web Expansion Accelerates Pace

Angry Since 1967 has announced the launch of additional Angry Since 1967 blogs. Phil, CEO and Chairman of Angry Since 1967 Group, said these "demonstrate the commitment Angry Since 1967 has to delivering it's brand of incoherent, inarticulate rants to as wide an audience as possible." He added "The new blogs will continue to be part of the basic Angry Since 1967 package and will remain available to all subscribers at no additional charge. These are exciting times for the Group and we hope to make further announcements soon"

These include

Angry Since 1967 YO! - Poured into a pair of hotpants, Angry Since 1967 YO! goes beyond the media stereotypes and gets down with the homeboys from the lower east side. Blinging the blogsphere with all that's hip in the world of R'n'B, gangsta and rap, Angry Since 1967 rediscovers it's roots in the projects and sticks it to the man (uh-huh)

Angry Since 1967 After Dark - Angry Since 1967 discovers it's sensual side. All posts are written topless.

Angry Since 1967 Beyond - Concentrating on the realm of psychics and mystic beliefs, Angry Since 1967 Beyond investigates the world of spiritualism. Written with the assistance of Spirit bloggers, reknowned psychics and ouija boards, scepticism levels are set to zero as vague, non-specific advice is passed off to the recently bereaved as communications from beyond the grave.

Angry Since 1967 Blogstation - 4 bloggers, each with their own interests available to blog 24 hours a day. Things get more steamy at night when everything is up for discussion with our willing, uninhibited bloggers who can satisfy all your blogging desires and fantasises. Treat yourself to a private blog for a small extra fee.

Angry Since 1967 Science - Looking at how science and technology effects us all, Angry Since 1967 Science investigates the big science topics of the day, seeking to explain and illuminate. Highlights include "Blowing Up Blogs" "How Blogs Get Made" "Blogs Exploding" "Extreme Blog Explosions" "Mega Extreme Blog Explosions", "How Blogging Will End In An Explosion" "Blog Explosions Investigated" "We Make Custom Motorbikes In America" and "Despite Digging Up A Field We Only Found Three Pieces Of Broken Pottery. But From This We Can Tell There Was Big Castle With A Moat And Everything. Here's A Picture Of What It May Have Looked Like"

Angry Since 1967 Nature - Examining the current precarious state of the world around us and the impact Humanity has had on the animals we share this planet with, Angry Since 1967 Nature is aiming to be the definitive resource for things environmental. Launching with a mass blog and a free Music Festival featuring the cream of the worlds music acts who'll be jetting in from around the globe to perform in a specially cleared area in one of the last remaining unspoilt parts of the Amazonian Rainforest, Angry Since 1967 Nature seeks to set the Environmental agenda using it as an vehicle to peddle it's own slightly crazed political objectives.

However the rumoured quiz blog Angry Since 1967 No One Can Win This Quiz As It's Just A Money Making Scam has been put on hold following the recent controversy surrounding the use of premium rate telephone lines by TV companies.

Analysts predict that Angry Since 1967 is on the brink of a major breakthrough into the mass market. Tissu Olies, blog specialist at media brokers Pretend, Madeup and False claimed "Angry Since 1967 is well placed to deliver premium content across a wide range of new media and portable personal devices, however this makes them open to the possiblity of a takeover by a larger player in the market". Down finished up on the annoucement.

Angry Since 1967 Expands Web Presence

Press Release

Angry Since 1967 Expands Blog Presence.

Angry Since 1967 is pleased to announce the establishment of a range of new blog sites. Building on the award winning Angry Since 1967 template, these new sites will expand the brand into exciting new fields covering key demographic segments. Each one will retain the unique attitude and edginess that the original Angry Since 1967 has become renowned.

The first of the new Angry Since 1967 sites is Angry Since 1967+1, a time delay blog that runs behind the main Angry Since 1967 site. This will lead to a range of different blogs, developing an online bouquet of sites, focused on different Internet sectors.

Future sites include

Angry Since 1967 Minus 1. A blog which will publish Angry Since 1967 before it’s written

Angry Since 1977 – Edgy real life attitude for people who think lifestyle supplements in the Sunday papers are a key guide to modern living, but with an anarchic punk slant. Never mind the bollocks you’re only thirty, not dead yet TM

iAngry iSince i1987 – a totally radical blog that is in tune with the youth of today. Written in the language of the street, this blog will cover the wicked issues, which matter to young adults. A blog allowing young people set the agenda, treating them as adults without being patronising or condescending.

More Angry Since 1967 – This will have a mix of old favourites from Angry Since 1967 plus posts from other blogs we’ll pass off as our own

Angry Since 1967 US – The same as Angry Since 1967 but using American spellings.

Angry Since 1967 Business – A blog featuring random numbers scrolling along the bottom, top, middle and diagonally across the page.

Angry Since 1967 Last For Breaking News TM – Aimed a people who understand breaking news isn’t necessarily important news.

Angry Since 1967 Celeb – All the news that’s fit to print about people you’ve never heard of, from shows you don’t watch, going to bars and events and shagging other people you’ve never heard of, from other shows you don’t watch.

Angry Since 1967 Music –This will be a music lifestyle blog with features such as “Pimp My Blog”, “Blog Performing Painful Stunts”, “At Home With the Blog” and “The Real Blog”

Angry Since 1967 Hits – An interactive music blog where the reader can ring in to request a certain blog posting to appear. Readers can also put big shouts out to the rest of their posse allowing them to max their Saturday night via the text banner at the side of the blog.

Angry Since 1967 HV1 – This is aimed at the discerning music fan treating then as well-informed, passionate individuals with varied and eclectic tastes. Designed for those who can see through the hype and aimed at the male 30-45 music fan this blog will discuss the impact of artists ranging from Tina Turner to Elton John. Special weekend events will also be a key feature. Several already planned include “The Top 100 Tina Turner Songs”, “Top 100 Elton John Songs” and “HV1 All Time Top 100 Elton John and Tina Turner Songs”

Angry Since 1967 History – Covering the entire scope of human history, this blog seeks to educate and inform. Launch highlights include “Hitler’s Blog”, “Hitler’s Secret Blog”, “Hitler’s Last Blog Uncovered” “Blogging from the Fuhrer Bunker” and “Hitler’s Henchmen – The Blogs”


Angry Since 1967 Direct – A shopping blog. Need a vacuum strong enough to lift bowling balls? Tired of those instant gazebo's which don't deliver? Can’t find a Miracle Blender to suit your needs? Jack La Lane Liquidiser gone faulty? Too lazy to join a gym? Rotisserie worn out? Don't trust Chef Tony? Doggy Steps not living up to expectations? Why take the chance? Buy direct from Angry Since 1967 your guarantee of kwalitie



Notes for Editors
Angry Since 1967 has quickly established itself as a key blog winning the Blog Of The Year Award for Blogs called “Angry Since 1967” from the entirely fictitious Kinda Official Sounding Consumer Organisation 2007. With a loyal following numbering single figures Angry Since 1967 is considered completely irrelevant, existing purely for my amusement and as an outlet to vent my bile in the vain hope it will reduce my blood pressure

It's just like VHS vs Betamax (2)

The cliché repeated within 24 hours
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6744335.stm

It's just like VHS vs Betamax (1)

As predicted in January
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6718145.stm

I wouldn't mind if it was Nobel, even an Eric would suit me well.

I've decided it's time I won an award. Now obviously I'm never going to win anything for this rubbish, so in time honoured tradition I've simply created a completely new award, and an organisation to present it.So "Kinda Official Sounding Consumer Organisation" asked the Angry Since 1967 editorial team the following question;

Of the blogs called "Angry Since 1967" which one is your favourite?

Now I don't want anyone to think that simply because the editorial team consists of me "Angry Since 1967" was a shoe in to win. It took a long time to collect, collate and produce the result.

But I'm delighted to announce that Angry Since 1967 was voted "Blog Of The Year" by Kinda Official Sounding Consumer Organisation. This means I'm able to display their logo on my site.

I feel so validated.

To be honest I'm humbled by this award. I hope that I can live up to it.