The media online and offline has been reporting of the decision for next year’s Big Brother to be the last. Davina herself has even mentioned it on her Twitter site and George Lamb on the spin-off show Big Brother’s Little Brother made an official statement that Channel 4 would review its decision after next year’s show.
There has been a lot of hype and speculation for the last couple of years and it seems a little exaggerated in my opinion – with comments like the ratings have suffered, the show isn’t as good as it used to be and hearsay about voting fixes, but does it all really matter? Whether true or not, all good shows come to an end and have a shelf life so it’s nothing new.
I like Big Brother and remember watching the first series religiously but now as BB10 is coming to an end I do think it’s getting less about the viewers’ opinions and more about Channel Four’s own agenda. BB10 Lisa is a prime example of this, she’s been sneaky, bitchy and a complete pain throughout and the only week that viewer’s had a chance to vote her out, Big Brother changed the way to evict, to voting on who you want to stay – perfectly engineered to get the ‘quiet one’ Hira out who seemed to have more going for her than anyone else in there.
Poor Halfwit/Freddie was also a victim of this year’s show as manipulative Bea played with his feelings which led to his downfall – if the public had the chance to get her out sooner then possibly Halfwit’s stay could have been a little longer.
All that aside there have been great shows and lots to talk about over the last ten series and I think it’s the right time to end it before it gets remembered for the rebellious behaviour of it’s participants and the unauthoritative nature of BB that has unfolded gradually and peaked this year.
If it is all coming to an end next year then I hope Big Brother does what many shows have before and make the final season one to remember.
Friday 28 August 2009
Tuesday 25 August 2009
"I'm suing Google..."
The Times online reported that Google is to be sued for $15 million (approx £9 million) by a not-so-anonymous blogger who was unmasked by the internet search company.
Rosemary Port said that Google had failed to protect her right to privacy when the company obeyed a court order to reveal her name after she used her blog to accuse a former Vogue model of being a "psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank".
Liskula Cohen, 36, won a landmark case in a New York court last week, forcing Google to disclose the online identity of Ms Port, 29, a Fashion Institute of Technology student, who created her "Skanks in NYC" blog a year ago using Google's Blogger.com site.
The New York Supreme Court ruled that Google must reveal the identity of the blogger.
Judge Joan Madden rejected Ms Port's claim that the blogs were a "modern-day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting" and should not be treated as factual assertions.
After the court ruling Google turned over the e-mail address and IP addresses from each time the blogger had logged on to the blog, allowing Ms Cohen to discover the identity of her tormentor.
She said she was relieved to discover that the woman who created the blog was not someone close to her and decided not to continue with a defamation suit. The blog was deleted in March.
Google said that users of Blogger.com agree to a privacy policy that allows the company to share personal information if required by legal action.
Firstly, is it me or are the lawsuits getting crazier by the week across the pond? Okay, I know that people will be flying the freedom of speech flag in support of this nasty coward – I have read the comments online already.
That’s a good flag to fly – but not in this instance! Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if that opinion is defamatory and expressed to an audience (in print or by word), why shouldn't the person making the statement be liable for it? All this decision does is stop Ms Port hiding behind a wall of anonymity.
If Ms Port's comments aren’t defamatory, then she has nothing to worry about. Insulting people or holding a public opinion is not automatically defamatory. Her right to free speech is not infringed in any way.
Problem is, what she wants is freedom to abuse/insult/possibly defame people, in a manner designed to bring them anguish and degradation, in a highly public manner, anonymously. It's the fact that she is embarrassed and concerned that she has been outed that has angered her – not the fact that Google revealed her details – as a result of a court order I must add. Somewhat hypocritical to say the least.
That is not what free speech is about - free speech is the right to say what you want to say, not the right to be unaccountable for your vicious tongue. People should be responsible and accountable for their words and actions - that's part of enjoying these freedoms.
Please tell me this lawsuit will be dropped before it wastes any time or money in court. Someone should also try to contact the victim here - the model that has been called what can only be described as childish names and tell her to take a u-turn and sue Ms Port – not for cash, just for the principle and teach the nasty creature a lesson.
Rosemary Port said that Google had failed to protect her right to privacy when the company obeyed a court order to reveal her name after she used her blog to accuse a former Vogue model of being a "psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank".
Liskula Cohen, 36, won a landmark case in a New York court last week, forcing Google to disclose the online identity of Ms Port, 29, a Fashion Institute of Technology student, who created her "Skanks in NYC" blog a year ago using Google's Blogger.com site.
The New York Supreme Court ruled that Google must reveal the identity of the blogger.
Judge Joan Madden rejected Ms Port's claim that the blogs were a "modern-day forum for conveying personal opinions, including invective and ranting" and should not be treated as factual assertions.
After the court ruling Google turned over the e-mail address and IP addresses from each time the blogger had logged on to the blog, allowing Ms Cohen to discover the identity of her tormentor.
She said she was relieved to discover that the woman who created the blog was not someone close to her and decided not to continue with a defamation suit. The blog was deleted in March.
Google said that users of Blogger.com agree to a privacy policy that allows the company to share personal information if required by legal action.
Firstly, is it me or are the lawsuits getting crazier by the week across the pond? Okay, I know that people will be flying the freedom of speech flag in support of this nasty coward – I have read the comments online already.
That’s a good flag to fly – but not in this instance! Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if that opinion is defamatory and expressed to an audience (in print or by word), why shouldn't the person making the statement be liable for it? All this decision does is stop Ms Port hiding behind a wall of anonymity.
If Ms Port's comments aren’t defamatory, then she has nothing to worry about. Insulting people or holding a public opinion is not automatically defamatory. Her right to free speech is not infringed in any way.
Problem is, what she wants is freedom to abuse/insult/possibly defame people, in a manner designed to bring them anguish and degradation, in a highly public manner, anonymously. It's the fact that she is embarrassed and concerned that she has been outed that has angered her – not the fact that Google revealed her details – as a result of a court order I must add. Somewhat hypocritical to say the least.
That is not what free speech is about - free speech is the right to say what you want to say, not the right to be unaccountable for your vicious tongue. People should be responsible and accountable for their words and actions - that's part of enjoying these freedoms.
Please tell me this lawsuit will be dropped before it wastes any time or money in court. Someone should also try to contact the victim here - the model that has been called what can only be described as childish names and tell her to take a u-turn and sue Ms Port – not for cash, just for the principle and teach the nasty creature a lesson.
Wednesday 19 August 2009
Are there still people who don't realise the dangers of Facebook?
I received an email from a friend with this attachment and thought that everyone had realised by now that PEOPLE CAN READ what you write online - especially when you are friends with them on Facebook.
It seems that no matter what happens with technology & communication there is still dim people out there who don’t think about their actions or how to utilise it effectively.
Before this, emailing or texting your whole address book with a personal email was a popular blunder of many and embarrassing enough but insulting your boss and your work has got to be one of the dumbest of all – especially in the current economic climate.
I can’t imagine this particular individual is going to be filling out applications and putting reason for leaving last job: “I was asked to leave for insulting my boss on Facebook”. Perhaps, prospective employers would be sympathetic if her work was s**t, as she said but I don’t think anyone wants to employ someone with such lack of common sense.
To summarise then, hate your boss, hate your work, slag your boss to close friends if it won’t get back to your boss – that is all acceptable , but don’t do it on Facebook when your friends with your boss – that’s just plain STUPID!
Thursday 6 August 2009
Swine Flu Skivers Costing Companies
Thousands of healthy workers are thought to have taken advantage of official guidelines on the pandemic to extend their summer holidays.
By simply phoning the NHS swine flu hotline or visiting its website, sneaky workers can get themselves a course of antiviral medicine and do not need a sick note from their GP for the first seven days’ absence – don’t anyone reading this get any ideas.
And to make matters worse, the Government is considering doubling this period to a fortnight, which companies fear could make the situation worse and cost them millions of pounds in lost productivity at a time when they are struggling with the effects of the recession.
There are also predictions that more healthy workers will be tempted to call in sick as the weather improves over the next week, after the wettest July on record.
The Employment Law Advisory Service, which provides legal advice to companies on personnel problems, disclosed yesterday that it had begun receiving calls from concerned managers as soon as the self-diagnosis website was set up last month.
It has since heard from more than 1,000 companies that believe staff have exploited concern about the spread of the H1N1 virus to take an extra week off. It believes that the Department of Health’s guidance risks creating a “skiver’s charter”.
Peter Mooney, the service’s head of consultancy, said: “Managers feel that some staff are simply taking advantage of concerns about the transmission of swine flu to take an extra few days off work. Because the emphasis has been on not going to your local GP but using websites to assess the infection and the risk to others, those who stay at home are not going to need a doctor’s note or have too many people calling on them to see how they feel.
“Based on the volume, and the nature, of calls we have been taking, the number of deliberate false cases of the condition is having a significant impact on workplaces across the country — something bosses are keen to tackle.”
The flu service website and phone line handed out over 150,000 doses of Tamiflu in its first week. However, there is evidence that only about one in four recipients actually has the H1N1 virus.
GPs have said that they are being inundated with calls from patients claiming to have swine flu and requesting a note to sign them off work for longer than a week. Many are concerned that they are being asked to certify that people are ill without having seen them, meaning shirkers could take advantage.
Recent figures suggest the average worker takes 7.4 days off sick a year at a total cost of £17.3 billion to the economy, so the impact of staff taking another fortnight off for self-diagnosed swine flu could cripple some small businesses.
I have also read an article in a newspaper recently about a student Emily Morgan who was sacked from the National Pandemic Flu Service call centre for having swine flu - peculiar I know. After feeling ill during her first shift at her holiday job, the 21-year-old was later diagnosed with the H1N1 virus and prescribed Tamiflu.
She phoned in sick the next day, but when she returned to the Plymouth office 10 days later Miss Morgan said she was told she had lost her job. The international business student said: "It's kind of ironic. I feel I would have been better at the job now because I'd know what people were going through.
Miss Morgan said: "I rang them several times and they were well aware I had swine flu, and kept telling me to get well soon. I couldn't believe it when I turned up and I was told to hand in my security pass.”
Miss Morgan had been employed through recruitment agency Reed and when contacted by the press their response was, "There are procedures to follow in cases of absenteeism."
In terms of the ‘swine flu skivers’, I personally think it’s like anything, there are always people out there who will take advantage of a loop hole or opportunity to benefit themselves – I don’t think it’s crime of the century but if it does have a detrimental effect on a business then I suppose they will have to deal with it legally and appropriately.
For all genuine swine flu sufferers – Get Well Soon x
By simply phoning the NHS swine flu hotline or visiting its website, sneaky workers can get themselves a course of antiviral medicine and do not need a sick note from their GP for the first seven days’ absence – don’t anyone reading this get any ideas.
And to make matters worse, the Government is considering doubling this period to a fortnight, which companies fear could make the situation worse and cost them millions of pounds in lost productivity at a time when they are struggling with the effects of the recession.
There are also predictions that more healthy workers will be tempted to call in sick as the weather improves over the next week, after the wettest July on record.
The Employment Law Advisory Service, which provides legal advice to companies on personnel problems, disclosed yesterday that it had begun receiving calls from concerned managers as soon as the self-diagnosis website was set up last month.
It has since heard from more than 1,000 companies that believe staff have exploited concern about the spread of the H1N1 virus to take an extra week off. It believes that the Department of Health’s guidance risks creating a “skiver’s charter”.
Peter Mooney, the service’s head of consultancy, said: “Managers feel that some staff are simply taking advantage of concerns about the transmission of swine flu to take an extra few days off work. Because the emphasis has been on not going to your local GP but using websites to assess the infection and the risk to others, those who stay at home are not going to need a doctor’s note or have too many people calling on them to see how they feel.
“Based on the volume, and the nature, of calls we have been taking, the number of deliberate false cases of the condition is having a significant impact on workplaces across the country — something bosses are keen to tackle.”
The flu service website and phone line handed out over 150,000 doses of Tamiflu in its first week. However, there is evidence that only about one in four recipients actually has the H1N1 virus.
GPs have said that they are being inundated with calls from patients claiming to have swine flu and requesting a note to sign them off work for longer than a week. Many are concerned that they are being asked to certify that people are ill without having seen them, meaning shirkers could take advantage.
Recent figures suggest the average worker takes 7.4 days off sick a year at a total cost of £17.3 billion to the economy, so the impact of staff taking another fortnight off for self-diagnosed swine flu could cripple some small businesses.
I have also read an article in a newspaper recently about a student Emily Morgan who was sacked from the National Pandemic Flu Service call centre for having swine flu - peculiar I know. After feeling ill during her first shift at her holiday job, the 21-year-old was later diagnosed with the H1N1 virus and prescribed Tamiflu.
She phoned in sick the next day, but when she returned to the Plymouth office 10 days later Miss Morgan said she was told she had lost her job. The international business student said: "It's kind of ironic. I feel I would have been better at the job now because I'd know what people were going through.
Miss Morgan said: "I rang them several times and they were well aware I had swine flu, and kept telling me to get well soon. I couldn't believe it when I turned up and I was told to hand in my security pass.”
Miss Morgan had been employed through recruitment agency Reed and when contacted by the press their response was, "There are procedures to follow in cases of absenteeism."
In terms of the ‘swine flu skivers’, I personally think it’s like anything, there are always people out there who will take advantage of a loop hole or opportunity to benefit themselves – I don’t think it’s crime of the century but if it does have a detrimental effect on a business then I suppose they will have to deal with it legally and appropriately.
For all genuine swine flu sufferers – Get Well Soon x
Wednesday 5 August 2009
Scottish Exam Results Out Today
Nearly 160,000 school pupils across Scotland are receiving their examination results today.
The BBC reported that pass rates at both Higher and Standard Grade level have increased overall, while the numbers receiving the highest grades have also gone up – good news!
Gone are the days when everyone was stuck waiting patiently for the sound of the postman’s steps (I was one of them), as nearly 30,000 students will receive their grades by e-mail or text message; I can see this number increasing year on year.
The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) said the pass rate for those sitting Highers rose 0.8 percentage point to 74.2%. For Standard Grade pupils, 98.5% received a pass, up from 98% in 2008.
The total number of exams being sat overall was down by 8,225, with the biggest falls in Standard Grade. The drop was put down to falling school rolls and more pupils taking Intermediate and Access qualifications instead. However, the numbers sitting Higher and Advanced Higher exams increased to its highest level for five years.
Despite the increases, there were falls in the numbers achieving passes in Standard Grade subjects such as Construction, Gaelic and French, which fell 6.4%, 3.1% and 2.1% respectively.
Scotland's Education Secretary Fiona Hyslop said the results were a testament to the abilities of Scotland's youngsters and a cause for optimism in the nation's economic future.
She said: "These results clearly demonstrate that our young people have high ambitions and are achieving success.
"By continuing to support Scotland's reputation for skills and learning, today's results will help to make Scotland the place to do business even in these difficult economic times."
Well something positive to discuss today, good luck to anyone who is receiving their results today - hope you get the results you need.
The BBC reported that pass rates at both Higher and Standard Grade level have increased overall, while the numbers receiving the highest grades have also gone up – good news!
Gone are the days when everyone was stuck waiting patiently for the sound of the postman’s steps (I was one of them), as nearly 30,000 students will receive their grades by e-mail or text message; I can see this number increasing year on year.
The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) said the pass rate for those sitting Highers rose 0.8 percentage point to 74.2%. For Standard Grade pupils, 98.5% received a pass, up from 98% in 2008.
The total number of exams being sat overall was down by 8,225, with the biggest falls in Standard Grade. The drop was put down to falling school rolls and more pupils taking Intermediate and Access qualifications instead. However, the numbers sitting Higher and Advanced Higher exams increased to its highest level for five years.
Despite the increases, there were falls in the numbers achieving passes in Standard Grade subjects such as Construction, Gaelic and French, which fell 6.4%, 3.1% and 2.1% respectively.
Scotland's Education Secretary Fiona Hyslop said the results were a testament to the abilities of Scotland's youngsters and a cause for optimism in the nation's economic future.
She said: "These results clearly demonstrate that our young people have high ambitions and are achieving success.
"By continuing to support Scotland's reputation for skills and learning, today's results will help to make Scotland the place to do business even in these difficult economic times."
Well something positive to discuss today, good luck to anyone who is receiving their results today - hope you get the results you need.
Monday 3 August 2009
No Job? Sue Your College or University?
A New York woman, Trina Thomson, 27, has filed a law suit against Monroe College were she completed an IT degree in April this year. She is seeking to recover $70,000 (approx £40,000) that she has spent on tuition the BBC reported. The woman claims the Office of Career Advancement at the college did not provide her with the leads and career advice it had promised.
"The college prides itself on the excellent career-development support that we provide to each of our students, and this case does not deserve further consideration," its spokesman said.
It sounds a little far fetched in my opinion and I would think that she will be unsuccessful but you never know – stranger things have happened. It is hard to prove because there are so many other contributory factors that the college could argue are the cause of her unfortunate jobless situation; her efforts and the current economic climate being the main ones.
It’s definitely not an isolated situation and one that a lot of students Stateside and over here in the UK will have found themselves in. After studying hard and gaining good qualifications they end up either jobless or taking on a job totally unrelated to their chosen field just so they can earn money.
I don’t think it is generally the college or universities responsibility in these situations but I do think that career advisors are pivotal and a major part of the organisation. I think if the “Office of Career Development” at the college in question has been less than helpful then they should be penalised and hopefully it will prevent other departments such as this in the future failing their students – if that is the case.
It’s a bit like many after sales departments, you find companies in all industries are friendly and helpful on initial contact but when you commit to buy, the after sales experience can be very lacking. It sounds like this is what Ms Thomson is trying to argue that she paid the tuition and studied hard but there was no help in the end after she spent all that time and money and promises have been broken by the college.
I remember a career advisor I seen at 5th year in school, he was very unhelpful and patronising when I told him what course I wanted to go on to do at university, he advised me to reconsider – he called it being realistic about my results, I called it giving up on my aspirations. In the end I never listened to him and completed the degree I had wanted to so it just shows how determination often wins over complaining or blaming other people.
The university I attended had a careers service too but I couldn’t fault any of the advice I have had from them – I was always helped, supported and advised and I know their job isn’t to get me a job but to help me find routes or ideas to go down. I think Ms. Thomson should maybe reconsider because I don’ know if she will be looked on favourably by prospective employers, whether rightly or wrongly – no one likes a trouble maker, least of all employers.
What do you think?
"The college prides itself on the excellent career-development support that we provide to each of our students, and this case does not deserve further consideration," its spokesman said.
It sounds a little far fetched in my opinion and I would think that she will be unsuccessful but you never know – stranger things have happened. It is hard to prove because there are so many other contributory factors that the college could argue are the cause of her unfortunate jobless situation; her efforts and the current economic climate being the main ones.
It’s definitely not an isolated situation and one that a lot of students Stateside and over here in the UK will have found themselves in. After studying hard and gaining good qualifications they end up either jobless or taking on a job totally unrelated to their chosen field just so they can earn money.
I don’t think it is generally the college or universities responsibility in these situations but I do think that career advisors are pivotal and a major part of the organisation. I think if the “Office of Career Development” at the college in question has been less than helpful then they should be penalised and hopefully it will prevent other departments such as this in the future failing their students – if that is the case.
It’s a bit like many after sales departments, you find companies in all industries are friendly and helpful on initial contact but when you commit to buy, the after sales experience can be very lacking. It sounds like this is what Ms Thomson is trying to argue that she paid the tuition and studied hard but there was no help in the end after she spent all that time and money and promises have been broken by the college.
I remember a career advisor I seen at 5th year in school, he was very unhelpful and patronising when I told him what course I wanted to go on to do at university, he advised me to reconsider – he called it being realistic about my results, I called it giving up on my aspirations. In the end I never listened to him and completed the degree I had wanted to so it just shows how determination often wins over complaining or blaming other people.
The university I attended had a careers service too but I couldn’t fault any of the advice I have had from them – I was always helped, supported and advised and I know their job isn’t to get me a job but to help me find routes or ideas to go down. I think Ms. Thomson should maybe reconsider because I don’ know if she will be looked on favourably by prospective employers, whether rightly or wrongly – no one likes a trouble maker, least of all employers.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
