Those who thought London could never resemble Pyongyang & that the BBC wouldn't offer up a bemusing mix of sychophancy & banality over this extended Bank Holiday weekend may well feel disoriented.
Certainly, the scant number of Merseyside neighbourhoods which applied for council permission to hold jubilee parties attests to a general indifference towards the Monarchy in these parts. However, that didn't stop the Oldham Echo from banging the royal drum yesterday (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/06/04/what-makes-britain-great-100252-31107103/).
A half-hearted stab at populism, its editorial trumpeted:
"There's the fact that we are a proud little island kingdom with an NHS which is still the envy of the world and a belief in fair play and democracy that allows a free press and fierce pressure on the politicians who so often let us down."
Leaving aside the inconvenient fact that Cameron, Clegg, Osborne, et al are hell-bent on policies which will effectively dismantle the NHS, the claim that "a free press" holds the powerful to account is risible, particularly with regard to local politics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't get the feeling that Oldham Hall Street has exerted "fierce pressure" on Peel Holdings, Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson, or his much-missed predecessor, Warren "War Zones" Bradley.
Moreover, the supposedly robust media has been conspicuous by its unctuous & tedious coverage of the Windsors' weekend; the Daily Show with Jon Stewart expertly & forensically dissected CNN's coverge (http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/06/05/watch-jon-stewart-rips-queens-jubilee-coverage/ ).
As ex-Echo hack Vicki Kellaway writes in a guest post for Dale Street Blues, there is sufficient local evidence that we live in a very dis-United Kingdom (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2012/06/vicki-kellaway-forget-rios-inf.html ).
Adding to this unarguable presentation of a grim reality facing an increasing number of people (including those who once thought they were safe from the vagaries of market forces) is a story from the Guardian which truly warrants the adjective Dickensian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/04/jubilee-pageant-unemployed ).
Those jobless "volunteers" who were forced to sleep beneath London Bridge, told they had to change in public, denied access to toilets for 24 hours & paid the not-so princely sum of £2.80 per hour for their labour would beg to differ with the Echo's contention that "a belief in fair play and democracy" is a defining characteristic of life in Elizabeth Windsor's Britain.
Tuesday, June 05, 2012
Friday, June 01, 2012
Anfield's Decade Of Atrophy
Alexei Sayle once remarked that, as someone who grew up in the Anfield area, the football stadium seemed to be a squat, unwelcome presence, sucking revenue in while the adjacent neighbourhoods were left to neglect & decline. Such an observation was once tantamount to heresy for many. Sayle's pronouncement, however, is now tacitly accepted by many, including those who are loath to criticise Liverpool Football Club.
The sorry saga of a new Stanley Park stadium has taken on the appearance of a little-noticed & scarcey-viewed daytime TV soap opera; to a wider audience, its irrelevance has deepened with just a miniscule number of followers still hoping that work will eventually begin. It now looks pretty much as if the proposed stadium will remain on the architects' drawing board.
Despite the city council's "ultimatum" to Fenway Sports Group, the club's owners (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/2012/06/01/liverpool-fc-given-council-ultimatum-over-anfield-stadium-future-100252-31091366/ ), it looks likely that the club has already decided to remain at an expanded Anfield (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2012/may/31/liverpool-new-anfield-stadium) .
David Conn's Guardian piece lays bare the physical reality of a lost decade: "Outside the walls of the ground in which footballers play for multimillionaires' salaries, for a club owned principally by John W Henry, a billionaire in Boston, people are living amid dereliction and decline approaching the country's grimmest."
FSG's revamped plans for Anfield may well make economic sense. Spending £300m on a stadium in Stanley Park which affords the club a mere 15,000 extra seats would have been questionable before the crash of 2008. In today's changed business world it looks financially dysfunctional. However, the residents around the Anfield ground have been kept in the dark about this change of policy by the club, making a mockery of the claim by the club's managing director, Ian Ayres, that there has been a "great dialogue" with those who live in the stadium's shadow.
There is also the question of financial assistance/compensation for the residents whose properties will be demolished. Conn reports the comments made by Liverpool City Council's assistant director for regeneration, Mark Kitts, who says that "homeowners will be paid the market rate plus 10% 'loss of home payment' but said the council is 'very sympathetic' and he hoped this would be enough."
Doesn't sound completely reassuring, does it?
Like most parts of North Liverpool, the Anfield area has long been a festering eyesore & bereft of real economic growth. The wider Liverpool Walton constituency has the highest benefit claimant count in the whole city at 8.5% (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/nov/17/unemployment-and-employment-statistics-economics ) & the decision to remain at the current stadium will do nothing to reverse the neighbourhood's long-term decline (Conn refers to the area around the ground, a good deal of which is now largely uninhabited, as "sunken", a brutally candid assessment).
So has anyone gained from this depressing saga? Well, yes, there is. Step forward David Moores, the former club chairman, who, as Conn reminds us, pocketed a cool £89m from the sale of the club he professed to love to Tom Hicks & George Gillett. When it became clear that Hicks & Gillett were a couple of con artists whose business methods have since been excoriated by the courts, Moores bleated to the local media that he felt dismayed & somehow betrayed by them. However, Moores donated not a single penny of the £89m he made to the cost of the campaign to get Hicks & Gillett out of the club. The Spirit of Shankly group invited him to address one of their meetings. He declined.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Plus Ca Change (Plus C'est La Meme Chose)
Observation of the month: Elvis Costello's remark that you normally know you're getting older when police officers look younger than yourself. In his case, however, it was when Tory Chancellor George Osborne reminded him of Noddy ("and not in a good way"). His comments prefaced a blistering performance of Tramp The Dirt Down during his superb gig at the Empire a couple of weeks ago (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1emSMioJsg ).
Saturday, May 26, 2012
A Loathsome Layout
Family paper, the Oldham Echo, isn't it? Yep, you can rely upon those who remain at Oldham Hall Street to cover stories in a manner which isn't sensationalist, crass or tasteless. Right? Er, well actually, no. Jeremy Vine, no less, has been prominent in the Twittersphere today, expressing his dismay at the front page of the paper that always likes to claim it speaks for Merseyside:https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/206431182345355264/photo/1 .
Vine isn't alone in deploring this wretched layout & deplorable juxtaposition.
With its circulation figures in long term decline, the Oldham Echo is demonstrating why its days as a mass circulation daily in the city are a matter of nostalgia rather than present-day reality.
Vine isn't alone in deploring this wretched layout & deplorable juxtaposition.
With its circulation figures in long term decline, the Oldham Echo is demonstrating why its days as a mass circulation daily in the city are a matter of nostalgia rather than present-day reality.
Monday, April 02, 2012
In Deep Water
Never make a mountain out of a molehill, it is said. Quite right, we don't want to get things out of proportion, do we? After all, what possible benefit could there be in distorting stories, particularly when said tales emanate from sources which may be seen as partial. We wouldn't look favourably on such practice at work or with friends & acquaintances.
With the Oldham Echo, however, such qualms & reservations do not apply.
A characteristically breezy & saloon-bar smug Echo editorial last week looked askance at a walk-out by staff employed by services company DHL at Land Rover's Halewood plant.The reason for the walk-out? A laughably trivial one, as far as Oldham Hall Street is concerned: a shortage of water coolers (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/03/28/no-time-for-hot-heads-100252-30640151/ ).
The Echo smirked:
"Come on, we know it's been unseasonably warm but this was no reason for anyone to lose their cool and down tools."
It went on to trot out the usual mantra that is obligatory for those with a logic-defying belief that Merseyside can remain immune from wider economic forces & that it's entirely healthy for the Echo to play the role of chief fluffer for Peel Holdings. You know the sort of thing, don't return to the bad old days, lads, when we were called strike-happy, let's not have a resurgence of that nasty Militancy, etc., etc.
So far, so tiresome & tedious.
However, a spanner in the works lurked in the shape of the online commenters below the piece. One in particular, "Flobalob", introduced the Echo to some much-required accuracy. He/she works for DHL at the plant & declared: "DHL have fed the Echo a load of lies, we have water coolers on the site and DHL decided to halve the water order from 140 bottles a fortnight to just 70. They did this going into summer and after taking on an extra 440 workers. So on Tuesday [March 27th] the site ran out of bottled water and we were told by management that under DHL cost-cutting, they have stopped supplying fresh drinking water."
Anyone au fait with employment legislation will know that this is in clear breach of statutory working regulations. We can presume that Oldham Hall Street is either ignorant of the law, or deliberately mendacious. Being a charitable soul, I'll opt for the former over the latter.
Such a gross journalistic failing needs to be viewed in a wider context. The ailing Echo is clearly in long-term circulation decline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation & http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=48861).
Moreover, its owner Trinity Mirror, forced to explain to Leveson its own culpability in questionable practices, is not, as they say these days, in a good place (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2012/feb/02/trinity-mirror-sly-bailey-overpaid & http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/mar/13/slybailey-nationalunionofjournalists).
One can only surmise that the "hot heads" in question dwell at the top of the Oldham Echo's parent company, the heat (alas, no light) from the corporate cranium being dutifully sustained in the paper's editorial office. I'd suggest a cool beaker of water for each of them. Assuming there's enough to go round.
With the Oldham Echo, however, such qualms & reservations do not apply.
A characteristically breezy & saloon-bar smug Echo editorial last week looked askance at a walk-out by staff employed by services company DHL at Land Rover's Halewood plant.The reason for the walk-out? A laughably trivial one, as far as Oldham Hall Street is concerned: a shortage of water coolers (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/03/28/no-time-for-hot-heads-100252-30640151/ ).
The Echo smirked:
"Come on, we know it's been unseasonably warm but this was no reason for anyone to lose their cool and down tools."
It went on to trot out the usual mantra that is obligatory for those with a logic-defying belief that Merseyside can remain immune from wider economic forces & that it's entirely healthy for the Echo to play the role of chief fluffer for Peel Holdings. You know the sort of thing, don't return to the bad old days, lads, when we were called strike-happy, let's not have a resurgence of that nasty Militancy, etc., etc.
So far, so tiresome & tedious.
However, a spanner in the works lurked in the shape of the online commenters below the piece. One in particular, "Flobalob", introduced the Echo to some much-required accuracy. He/she works for DHL at the plant & declared: "DHL have fed the Echo a load of lies, we have water coolers on the site and DHL decided to halve the water order from 140 bottles a fortnight to just 70. They did this going into summer and after taking on an extra 440 workers. So on Tuesday [March 27th] the site ran out of bottled water and we were told by management that under DHL cost-cutting, they have stopped supplying fresh drinking water."
Anyone au fait with employment legislation will know that this is in clear breach of statutory working regulations. We can presume that Oldham Hall Street is either ignorant of the law, or deliberately mendacious. Being a charitable soul, I'll opt for the former over the latter.
Such a gross journalistic failing needs to be viewed in a wider context. The ailing Echo is clearly in long-term circulation decline (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation & http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=48861).
Moreover, its owner Trinity Mirror, forced to explain to Leveson its own culpability in questionable practices, is not, as they say these days, in a good place (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2012/feb/02/trinity-mirror-sly-bailey-overpaid & http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/mar/13/slybailey-nationalunionofjournalists).
One can only surmise that the "hot heads" in question dwell at the top of the Oldham Echo's parent company, the heat (alas, no light) from the corporate cranium being dutifully sustained in the paper's editorial office. I'd suggest a cool beaker of water for each of them. Assuming there's enough to go round.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Oxford's Posthumous Libel
What may have shocked those families, however, was today's leaked report to the BBC concerning the role played by Kenneth Oxford, the then chief constable of Merseyside Police (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/15/hillsborough-relatives-liverpool-fans-claim).
Despite the fact that Oxford did not attend the game, he eagerly fed Thatcher's government with additional ammunition in its thinly-disguised plan to denigrate the fans:
"According to the letter, addressed to Mrs Thatcher and headed 'Merseyside Police views on Hillsborough', the Merseyside chief constable told officials: 'A key factor in causing the disaster was the fact that large numbers of Liverpool fans had turned up without tickets. This was getting lost sight of in attempts to blame the police, the football authorities, etc.' "
Oxford's clumsy syntax, if anything, only serves to emphasise the desperation felt by senior police officers in the days following the tragedy; they were terrified that they would be nailed & were prepared to do anything to escape such a fate. What followed ensured that the smears would linger for two decades. Thatcher's government, grateful to the role played by the cops during the miners' strike a few years' earlier, waded in. Bernard Ingham, Thatcher's poodle, aka press spokesman, spoke of "a tanked-up mob" causing the disaster. Then, of course, there was The Sun's contemptible lies.
It's notable that Oxford was keen to embroider his own smear with what he presumably thought would be a passable anecdote: "One officer, born and bred in Liverpool, said he was deeply ashamed to say that it was drunken Liverpool fans who had caused the disaster, just as they had caused the deaths at Heysel."
Oxford didn't & wouldn't identify that officer. Why? Because he didn't exist. He was a figment of Oxford's lurid & loathsome imagination. [As a personal anecdote, I recall the decision to let the fans leave the stadium some two hours after the tragedy. As the fans walked away from the Leppings Lane gates, I overheard a supporter identify himself to a South Yorkshire officer as a serving constable with Merseyside Police. He expressed his disgust, in no uncertain terms, with the force's handling of the day's events.]
The families may wonder why the chief constable of Merseyside Police, their police service, was happy to feed Thatcher with those poisonous lies. An answer lies, in large part, in Oxford's toxic tenure at the head of the local force. The 1981 Toxteth riots gave Oxford a chance to express & demonstrate his almost feudal view of policing, as an Independent obituary of him in 1998 observed (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/obituary-sir-kenneth-oxford-1187338.html).
Some may protest that the dead can't answer back. True. However, Oxford's utterances during the riots should be damningly recalled. His reign over the force on Merseyside was marked by rank racism & a level of arrogance that often warranted the adjective autocratic. Think that's harsh? Then consider this shaming passage from a Big Issue piece last year (http://www.bigissueinthenorth.com/2011/07/toxteth-riots-push-people-and-they-will-fight-back/2992):
"Policing in Liverpool was certainly informed by dubious attitudes at the top. According to the then Chief Constable Kenneth Oxford, Liverpool had a problem with 'half castes' who lived 'well outside recognised society'. In testimony to Lord Scarman's inquiry into the riots, Oxford spoke of the 'natural criminal proclivities' of people in Liverpool 8."
Given his open prejudice against one particular part of the city's population, it isn't entirely surprising that Oxford sought to libel Liverpool fans. He can no longer be called to account for his actions but this report & his period at the top of Merseyside Police confirm what has long been felt by many in the city: Oxford was a bully & a bigot who was prepared to lie in order to please his political masters.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Local MP Caught Offside
Last year's parliamentary debate on the Hillsborough disaster was notable for an eloquent & moving speech by Steve Rotheram, Labour MP for Liverpool Walton (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlqCCg8pThY).
He spoke for countless people in reflecting upon the day itself as well as its aftermath, & delivered a measured & poignant address at the annual memorial service in 2009 (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/04/appropriate-address.html).
There have, however, been instances when, to put it charitably, his comments haven't been fully thought through (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-suspected-it-wouldnt-be-long-before.html).
You might have concluded that Mr Rotheram had learned a lesson about choosing your words carefully. If he had, it's unfortunate to observe that the honorable member for Liverpool Walton has forgotten it. Hugh Muir noted in his Guardian Diary column the other day that the MP put his foot in it over a tweet he sent on March 2nd (https://twitter.com/#!/SteveRotheramMP & http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/08/hugh-muir-diary-tax-barclays).
Apparently siding with those Liverpool supporters who continue to believe that the club handled the Suarez affair brilliantly, the MP accused anti-racism campaigners of "causing trouble" & that the best thing to do was to ignore them. Not surprisingly, such comments have been countered & rightly so. Mr Rotheram has duly delivered his mea culpa, or act of "evasive action", as Muir puts it. All very unfortunate & oh so avoidable, too had he watched a Channel 4 News report which described how the club privately accepts its failings over the affair (http://www.channel4.com/news/john-barnes-liverpool-is-right-to-back-suarez ).
This episode also draws attention to what is a disturbing ambivalence among many Liverpool supporters over Suarez' incendiary remarks to Patrice Evra in October of last year & the subsequent antics (the proffered & spurned handshake at Old Trafford). It's been said before but bears repeating, blind loyalty is not a virtue & the unthinking, tribal claque who continue to champion Suarez' case just don't understand that. It's sad that an MP who should know better ( & who knows full well about distorted accounts as well as smears) temporarily allied himself with such an ignorant audience.
He spoke for countless people in reflecting upon the day itself as well as its aftermath, & delivered a measured & poignant address at the annual memorial service in 2009 (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/04/appropriate-address.html).
There have, however, been instances when, to put it charitably, his comments haven't been fully thought through (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/01/i-suspected-it-wouldnt-be-long-before.html).
You might have concluded that Mr Rotheram had learned a lesson about choosing your words carefully. If he had, it's unfortunate to observe that the honorable member for Liverpool Walton has forgotten it. Hugh Muir noted in his Guardian Diary column the other day that the MP put his foot in it over a tweet he sent on March 2nd (https://twitter.com/#!/SteveRotheramMP & http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/08/hugh-muir-diary-tax-barclays).
Apparently siding with those Liverpool supporters who continue to believe that the club handled the Suarez affair brilliantly, the MP accused anti-racism campaigners of "causing trouble" & that the best thing to do was to ignore them. Not surprisingly, such comments have been countered & rightly so. Mr Rotheram has duly delivered his mea culpa, or act of "evasive action", as Muir puts it. All very unfortunate & oh so avoidable, too had he watched a Channel 4 News report which described how the club privately accepts its failings over the affair (http://www.channel4.com/news/john-barnes-liverpool-is-right-to-back-suarez ).
This episode also draws attention to what is a disturbing ambivalence among many Liverpool supporters over Suarez' incendiary remarks to Patrice Evra in October of last year & the subsequent antics (the proffered & spurned handshake at Old Trafford). It's been said before but bears repeating, blind loyalty is not a virtue & the unthinking, tribal claque who continue to champion Suarez' case just don't understand that. It's sad that an MP who should know better ( & who knows full well about distorted accounts as well as smears) temporarily allied himself with such an ignorant audience.
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Decision Day
Cometh the day, cometh the judgement. As Liverpool City Council prepares to vote on the Liverpool Waters scheme, the opposition to Peel's potentially ruinous plans has been noted by a wider audience, Hugh Muir casting his gaze over the affair in today's Guardian Diary column (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/mar/05/hugh-muir-diary-liverpool-unesco).
Moreover, the penny has dropped for those local players who have hitherto been less than exercised by the issue. However, it's always welcome to receive a sinner back into the fold of the righteous after he's repented. Take a bow, Larry Neild (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Crunch-time-looms-for-Liverpool-Waters-after-Peel-ultimatum). Larry has realised that shilling for Aurora Media (formerly October Communications) is no job for a proper journalist; he leaves the PR cesspit sadder, but wiser.
Nonetheless, there remain the siren voices of support for Peel's proposed behemoth &, yes, they largely emanate from Oldham Hall Street. Once again, the Oldham Echo trumpeted its blind loyalty to Peel in a typically sychophantic editorial last week (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/02/29/liverpool-waters-plans-must-proceed-100252-30427746/).
Trotting out the tiresome buzz-phrases about "the exciting and exceptionally-ambitious Liverpool Waters scheme", "the most radical regeneration of the city's northern docklands" & "a fantastic opportunity for countless new jobs", the piece was heavy on hype & anorexically light on substance.In fact, the Echo went so far as to proclaim that Peel's plan was "a wonderful chance to allow this part of the city to join the Liverpool revolution."
Revolution? It would be more accurate to describe what's been done to the city in the name of progress as a coup d'etat.
Oh yes, that minor matter about the waterfront's World Heritage Site status. Well, the Echo displays all the breezy dismissiveness of a teenager who wants the latest iPad & is willing to ditch the laptop (so last year):
"It's a great accolade to have, but some things are more important."
Yes, like sucking up to Peel & forsaking any half-hearted attempt at investigative journalism.
Joe Riley weighed in with his backing for His Master's Voice a few days later (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/liverpool-columnists/joe-riley/2012/03/01/joe-riley-liverpool-waters-scheme-must-be-given-the-go-ahead-100252-30435388/).
Accompanying his, erm, thoughts with a risible PR video for Peel at the top of his piece (warning: it starts automatically), Joe harrumphed:
"It is nonsense to suggest that even skyscrapers of 700ft, placed at such a distance from the Pier Head, would detract from or diminish the symmetry of the historic waterfront."
For good measure, Joe described any one with the temerity to question the Peel line as "stick-in-the-mud whingers."
There's nothing like informed, intelligent debate, is there? And that was nothing like it.
Joe, Joe, just a quick word: if your definition of "symmetry" involves a future white elephant which creates a grotesquely lop-sided effect for those who view the waterfront from the river itself, I really think you need to consult a dictionary.
Liam Fogarty certainly doesn't share Joe Riley's meaning of "symmetry". The Independent Mayoral candidate for the city is scathing about Peel's architectural record (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Peel-record-on-architecture-questionable):
"Peel's record at delivering good architecture is questionable. What is proposed for Peel Ports' dock estate in Liverpool is mediocre and soulless. It's just not good enough for our city. We shouldn't be afraid to insist on the highest design standards."
Alas, Peel, Oldham Hall Street &, as seems likely tonight, Liverpool City Council, equate "the highest design standards" with the highest carbuncles to have ever scarred the city's skyline. Never mind the fact that Fogarty describes Liverpool Waters as representing "a discredited global model of property development that died the day Lehman Brothers went bust", the ugly certainty is that, fresh from penning a third-rate epistle for the Guardian's Northerner column (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/mar/05/liverpool-electedmayors-joeanderson), Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson will lead his flock to Peel's promised land this evening because, as he so memorably put it in his Guardian piece, "showing strong, effective leadership is what I do best."
Cllr Anderson's "strong, effective leadership" will be toasted by Peel tonight. Hope he's got an invite to the party afterwards.
Moreover, the penny has dropped for those local players who have hitherto been less than exercised by the issue. However, it's always welcome to receive a sinner back into the fold of the righteous after he's repented. Take a bow, Larry Neild (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Crunch-time-looms-for-Liverpool-Waters-after-Peel-ultimatum). Larry has realised that shilling for Aurora Media (formerly October Communications) is no job for a proper journalist; he leaves the PR cesspit sadder, but wiser.
Nonetheless, there remain the siren voices of support for Peel's proposed behemoth &, yes, they largely emanate from Oldham Hall Street. Once again, the Oldham Echo trumpeted its blind loyalty to Peel in a typically sychophantic editorial last week (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/02/29/liverpool-waters-plans-must-proceed-100252-30427746/).
Trotting out the tiresome buzz-phrases about "the exciting and exceptionally-ambitious Liverpool Waters scheme", "the most radical regeneration of the city's northern docklands" & "a fantastic opportunity for countless new jobs", the piece was heavy on hype & anorexically light on substance.In fact, the Echo went so far as to proclaim that Peel's plan was "a wonderful chance to allow this part of the city to join the Liverpool revolution."
Revolution? It would be more accurate to describe what's been done to the city in the name of progress as a coup d'etat.
Oh yes, that minor matter about the waterfront's World Heritage Site status. Well, the Echo displays all the breezy dismissiveness of a teenager who wants the latest iPad & is willing to ditch the laptop (so last year):
"It's a great accolade to have, but some things are more important."
Yes, like sucking up to Peel & forsaking any half-hearted attempt at investigative journalism.
Joe Riley weighed in with his backing for His Master's Voice a few days later (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/liverpool-columnists/joe-riley/2012/03/01/joe-riley-liverpool-waters-scheme-must-be-given-the-go-ahead-100252-30435388/).
Accompanying his, erm, thoughts with a risible PR video for Peel at the top of his piece (warning: it starts automatically), Joe harrumphed:
"It is nonsense to suggest that even skyscrapers of 700ft, placed at such a distance from the Pier Head, would detract from or diminish the symmetry of the historic waterfront."
For good measure, Joe described any one with the temerity to question the Peel line as "stick-in-the-mud whingers."
There's nothing like informed, intelligent debate, is there? And that was nothing like it.
Joe, Joe, just a quick word: if your definition of "symmetry" involves a future white elephant which creates a grotesquely lop-sided effect for those who view the waterfront from the river itself, I really think you need to consult a dictionary.
Liam Fogarty certainly doesn't share Joe Riley's meaning of "symmetry". The Independent Mayoral candidate for the city is scathing about Peel's architectural record (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Peel-record-on-architecture-questionable):
"Peel's record at delivering good architecture is questionable. What is proposed for Peel Ports' dock estate in Liverpool is mediocre and soulless. It's just not good enough for our city. We shouldn't be afraid to insist on the highest design standards."
Alas, Peel, Oldham Hall Street &, as seems likely tonight, Liverpool City Council, equate "the highest design standards" with the highest carbuncles to have ever scarred the city's skyline. Never mind the fact that Fogarty describes Liverpool Waters as representing "a discredited global model of property development that died the day Lehman Brothers went bust", the ugly certainty is that, fresh from penning a third-rate epistle for the Guardian's Northerner column (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/mar/05/liverpool-electedmayors-joeanderson), Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson will lead his flock to Peel's promised land this evening because, as he so memorably put it in his Guardian piece, "showing strong, effective leadership is what I do best."
Cllr Anderson's "strong, effective leadership" will be toasted by Peel tonight. Hope he's got an invite to the party afterwards.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Liverpool To Play On Hillsborough Anniversary?
That said, cack-handed PR isn't the sole preserve of an Australian billionaire who adopted US citizenship in order to increase his business interests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch ). The Football Association, too, can lay claim to the prize for crass, inappropriate & callous decision-making; shortly after the Hillsborough tragedy, the FA demonstrated its empathetic side with a strident insistence that the FA Cup competition shouldn't be derailed or delayed by the minor matter of 96 deaths for which it was partly responsible.
Moreover, it seems possible that the FA could, once again, give the Murdoch empire a run for its money in the race to win the award for Bad Timing decision of 2012. If Liverpool get through to the FA Cup semi-final, the club might be requested to play its fixture on the anniversary of Hillsborough (http://www.thefa.com/TheFACup/More/round-dates ).
Of course, any sensible person wouldn't even countenance such a possibility. However, common sense is not something that springs to mind when one thinks about the dysfunctional, ego-driven institution that is the Football Association.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Liverpool Waters Will Sink The City
A hitherto imposed "concensus" has started to crack since the Oldham Echo was moved to acknowledge the other side of the argument over the future of the city's north docks (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/01/24/unesco-calls-for-change-to-liverpool-waters-scheme-to-protect-city-s-world-heritage-site-status-100252-30187372/ ).
David Bartlett's piece was keen to stress that "the report does not say what will happen to the city's WHS status if no changes are made to the [Liverpool Waters] project."
Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson popped up to say that he wanted both the Liverpool Waters scheme & a continuation of the waterfront's World Heritage Status. Given Cllr Anderson's belief that he can lead a Labour council whilst inflicting Tory cuts on the people who elected him into office, such contradictory thinking shouldn't raise too many eyebrows.
What was refreshingly different, however, about Bartlett's article was the nature of the online comments. True, there were the usual suspects (Peel trolls?) who called for WHS status to be dumped (Mogger1: "World Heritage Site, time to move on, I think, we have bigger fish to fry." & SteMcK83: "Get it built and let's become a 'Champions League City' for others to admire." To which one can only respond that the scheme would relegate the city to League One status.)
That said, other commenters refused to toe the Echo/Peel line (L_12: "There is no demand for these buildings/office space. A fancy view of the city of Liverpool will not be a consideration in whether companies seek to invest here.....When the business plan fails it will become derelict, run down and a terrible eyesore. If this project is not a success, it will not only blight the city but become a massive expense to the taxpayer for generations to come." & olderndwise: "If an apartment in the new developments is let then an apartment elsewhere in the city will become vacant. If one of the new offices is let then an office elsewhere in the city will become vacant. If someone is frequenting one of the new bars then they will not be frequenting an existing one.")
That latter point is unarguable in its logic.
Bartlett followed up his article with one the following day (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/01/25/unesco-inspectors-attack-liverpool-waters-scheme-100252-30193588/ )which contained this damning observation:
"THE Three Graces would play 'second violin' to the huge £5.5bn Liverpool Waters development if it is approved, Unesco inspectors have warned.
"The inspectors also warned Liverpool's World Heritage Site would be 'damaged beyond repair' if the plan goes ahead."
There can be little doubt that a World Heritage Site which is "damaged beyond repair" ceases to be one. Indeed that was, to all intents & purposes, confirmed by a Unsco inspector late last year (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/11/22/unesco-set-to-strip-liverpool-of-its-world-heritage-site-status-100252-29817930/ ).
The latest development in this saga comes with English Heritage's qualms over the scheme (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/feb/23/english-heritage-objection-liverpool-development ).
Helen Carter's report reminds us of Peel's gradiose vanity project: "It features thousands of flats and hundreds of offices, hotels and bars, as well as the 55-storey Shanghai Tower and other skyscrapers."
Just how Peel intends to find individuals & businesses willing to live & work in the aforementioned flats & offices has never been explained. In truth, it's an illusory business plan. The banks aren't lending to mortgage applicants (assuming they can afford a deposit) & small businesses are equally unhappy with the banks' parsimony. The current economic climate will prevail for at least another four or five years. Both Peel & the Oldham Echo know that, though they refuse to admit it.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
A Bibliophile Writes
Recommended reading: a blogpost by local writer Cath Bore last week which reminded local book buyers of News From Nowhere's merits (http://cathbore.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/please-help-support-liverpools-independent-bookshop-news-from-nowhere/ ):
"Workers at the shop are either voluntary or on a minimum wage and provide a top notch service; they're extremely knowledgeable and passionate about what they do."
"Workers at the shop are either voluntary or on a minimum wage and provide a top notch service; they're extremely knowledgeable and passionate about what they do."
Where's My Stetson?
I suspect the nodding of heads may have reached headache-inducing proportions on Oldham Hall Street the other day when Richard Wallace, editor of the Daily Mirror, gave The Leveson Inquiry his considered view of bloggers (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/16/leveson-inquiry-sly-bailey-richard-wallace-tina-weaver ):
"The out and out cowboys -- I don't see in the long term they can survive...people want information that is competent and true."
That said, the nodding heads would have been stilled by the bleakly candid assessment given by their boss Sly Bailey of the situation regarding Trinity Mirror's local titles (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=48570&c=1 ).
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to saddle up.
"The out and out cowboys -- I don't see in the long term they can survive...people want information that is competent and true."
That said, the nodding heads would have been stilled by the bleakly candid assessment given by their boss Sly Bailey of the situation regarding Trinity Mirror's local titles (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=48570&c=1 ).
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to saddle up.
Cast Aside
If you took the Oldham Echo as your sole source of information, you would be forgiven for thinking that Liverpool has somehow escaped the worst effects of the double-dip recession & the ConDem cuts (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2012/01/16/liverpool-this-is-the-place-to-be-100252-30128938/).
In fact, you might well see the city as an untouched oasis of economic prosperity while most of the UK suffers under a government which blithely displays its warped sense of priorities (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/15/queen-royal-yacht-diamond-jubilee-gove ).
Today's unemployment figures would both sharply disabuse you of such illusions & starkly emphasise the fact that Merseyside isn't immune (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/nov/17/unemployment-and-employment-statistics-economics ).
Amelia Gentleman highlighted the situation on a Kirkdale estate a few days back for the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/15/below-breadline-liverpool-workless-estates ):
"The high numbers of workless households on this estate help explain startling figures produced by the GMB last week revealing that nearly one in three households in Liverpool have no one in work. It is the legacy of historic industrial decline in this area, suddenly worsened by the recent round of public sector redundancies and a new, downturn-related disappearance of retail and manufacturing jobs."
With the rate of youth unemployment nationally standing at 22%, an all-time high, the rate for Merseyside will be significantly higher. The lost generation is well & truly with us & will remain bereft of opportunities, openings & hope.
In fact, you might well see the city as an untouched oasis of economic prosperity while most of the UK suffers under a government which blithely displays its warped sense of priorities (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/15/queen-royal-yacht-diamond-jubilee-gove ).
Today's unemployment figures would both sharply disabuse you of such illusions & starkly emphasise the fact that Merseyside isn't immune (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/nov/17/unemployment-and-employment-statistics-economics ).
Amelia Gentleman highlighted the situation on a Kirkdale estate a few days back for the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/15/below-breadline-liverpool-workless-estates ):
"The high numbers of workless households on this estate help explain startling figures produced by the GMB last week revealing that nearly one in three households in Liverpool have no one in work. It is the legacy of historic industrial decline in this area, suddenly worsened by the recent round of public sector redundancies and a new, downturn-related disappearance of retail and manufacturing jobs."
With the rate of youth unemployment nationally standing at 22%, an all-time high, the rate for Merseyside will be significantly higher. The lost generation is well & truly with us & will remain bereft of opportunities, openings & hope.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Someone's Knocking At The Door
How else to account for the Phoenix-like ascent of Warren "War Zones" Bradley. How else to explain a dogged determination (to use a cliche he himself might employ) to return to the stage (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2012/01/leaflet-warren-bradley-confirm.html).
As David Bartlett notes, Bradley has printed & distributed election leaflets, declaring his candidacy for the Wavertree ward (the recycling bins in L15 will be busy, I suspect).
All nice & jolly, to be sure. However, there's a snag. Well, there's quite a few, actually, but let's focus on the most pressing one for the friend of a convicted felon (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2009/09/councillor-steve-hurst-steps-down-good.html). You see, Warren isn't a Fib Dem candidate. He hasn't been selected. He has, however, been "selected" as an Independent candidate. I know, strange, isn't it? Then again, it's of a piece with Bradley's occasional connection to political reality. Even David Bartlett, a veritable Mr Sobersides, can't disguise his surprise:
"It is likely to get him expelled from the Liberal Democrats, as it's against party rules to stand against an official candidate, once the police investigation is over.
"The only curious element about his latest leaflet is how an independent candidate can be 'selected' to stand as a candidate."
How indeed.
Perhaps he was "selected" by his partner, the disgraced Facebooking ex-Fib Dem councillor Sharon Green, who jumped ship as it took on another few hundred gallons of water last May (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/05/06/liverpool-lib-dem-sharon-green-defects-and-becomes-independent-100252-28648062/).
Be that as it may, Warren's undaunted. Oh yes, he is, delaring on his leaflet, "Beware of smears". He elaborates thus:
"Local residents should be aware that other political parties have in the past engaged in smearing individuals. Warren Bradley is well aware of this and pledges not to engage in such practice, sadly we believe others won't be as honest."
So it seems that when the city of Liverpool told Warren to sling his hook & not come back (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.com/2011/04/so-long-its-been-good-to-know-you.html) he mistook a city's jeers for cheers.
Has any one got the heart to tell him?
Donning The Tory Uniform
It breaks his heart, it really does, you know. When he isn't calling protesters "scum" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcNLz8C5RAw), Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson never tires of telling friends about his sleepless nights over the Tory cuts he's making. Last week saw further developments which, if Cllr Anderson's claim of insomnia is to be taken seriously, will have him reaching for the sleeping pills (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/01/06/liverpool-council-to-axe-school-uniform-grants-as-part-of-further-16m-budget-cuts-100252-30071158 & http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-16437885 ).
David Bartlett's piece reported:
"Cutting the school uniform grant means parents on low incomes will no longer receive £20 to help buy a uniform for primary school children or £40 for secondary school pupils.
"Stopping free school milk was included in the list of today's cuts but will no longer be axed."
Not for the first time (&, sadly, not the last), we have, to paraphrase Neil Kinnock, the grotesque chaos of a Labour council (a Labour council!) kicking those it's supposed to represent in the teeth whilst trying to persuade those on the receiving end of such treatment that the Tories have made them do it.
As for the free school milk, it might well be asked what's stopping Joe & his apologetic axemen from going ahead with this measure; in the week when Meryl Streep tried her thespian best to convince us that Thatcher was a truly heroic figure (the Americans have got their Oscars prepared, I'm sure), it would have been fitting to emulate the original Milk Snatcher.
It would be nice if Cllr Anderson realised that Kier Hardie didn't form what became the Labour Party simply to implement Tory cuts. However, it's impossible for an invertebrate to develop a spine.
Lurking around the edges of this civic circus is the Fib Dem group leader, Paula Keaveney. You might think she'd keep schtum out of embarrassment at the role her Westminster colleagues have played in the ConDem coalition, the political fluffers for Cameron, Osborne, et al. Sadly, she hasn't, bleating pathetically:
"Surely something less harmful than removing school uniform grants could have been found instead of this particular saving."
Such Janus-faced hypocrisy is, in its own distorted & twisted way, quite remarkable.
David Bartlett's piece reported:
"Cutting the school uniform grant means parents on low incomes will no longer receive £20 to help buy a uniform for primary school children or £40 for secondary school pupils.
"Stopping free school milk was included in the list of today's cuts but will no longer be axed."
Not for the first time (&, sadly, not the last), we have, to paraphrase Neil Kinnock, the grotesque chaos of a Labour council (a Labour council!) kicking those it's supposed to represent in the teeth whilst trying to persuade those on the receiving end of such treatment that the Tories have made them do it.
As for the free school milk, it might well be asked what's stopping Joe & his apologetic axemen from going ahead with this measure; in the week when Meryl Streep tried her thespian best to convince us that Thatcher was a truly heroic figure (the Americans have got their Oscars prepared, I'm sure), it would have been fitting to emulate the original Milk Snatcher.
It would be nice if Cllr Anderson realised that Kier Hardie didn't form what became the Labour Party simply to implement Tory cuts. However, it's impossible for an invertebrate to develop a spine.
Lurking around the edges of this civic circus is the Fib Dem group leader, Paula Keaveney. You might think she'd keep schtum out of embarrassment at the role her Westminster colleagues have played in the ConDem coalition, the political fluffers for Cameron, Osborne, et al. Sadly, she hasn't, bleating pathetically:
"Surely something less harmful than removing school uniform grants could have been found instead of this particular saving."
Such Janus-faced hypocrisy is, in its own distorted & twisted way, quite remarkable.
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Liverpool FC Takes Its Eyes Off The Ball
August 1987: I travel to Arsenal's old Highbury stadium to watch Liverpool's first fixture of that season. During the game a banana is thrown onto the pitch not far from the feet of John Barnes, who is making his debut in a Liverpool shirt.
The banana is thrown from the section of the Clock End terracing reserved for Liverpool supporters.
That memory has come back to me as I've read the contorted syntax & lurid pledges of defiance on messageboards & comment sections from too many of the club's supporters over the Suarez/Evra affair.
The controversy has been well-documented elsewhere & I've viewed it with a mixture of dismay & anger as the club's handling of the situation has been crass & cack-handed; accepting the FA's eight-game ban for Suarez while muttering about unreleased information & hidden agendas is, if nothing else, lousy PR (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16404023.stm & http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/04/kenny-dalglish-luis-suarez-transcript ).
It suggests that Liverpool FC don't get it; it suggests to a wider audience that the club doesn't take the issue of racism in football as seriously as it should.
Moreover, at the risk of inducing a couple of coronaries on Oldham Hall Street, Paddy Shennan (yes, hello, Paddy!) was correct to question the team's highly dubious t-shirt stunt in support of Suarez (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/liverpool-columnists/paddy-shennan/2011/12/28/paddy-shennan-ponders-whether-liverpool-fc-s-shirts-of-support-were-the-best-response-to-the-luis-suarez-situation-100252-30020155/ ).
He got a lot of flak for his article, many indulging in juvenile & puerile "banter" about his support for Everton & other equally irrelevant concerns.
The view from Liverpool's more discerning & less hyperbolic supporters is that the affair has damaged the club. Badly. As Stuart James pointed out in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition), the begrudging & curmudgeonly nature of Liverpool's response invokes disdain from those who rightly see bigotry as a more pressing matter than team spirit. Indeed, coming, as it did, on the same day as the verdict in the Stephen Lawrence case, the club's petulant stance is staggeringly insensitive & ill-judged.
Amongst his many quotes, one particular observation from Bill Shankly seems pertinent:
"The socialism I believe in is not really politics. It is a way of living. It is humanity. I believe the only way to live and to be truly successful is by collective effort, with everyone working for each other, everyone helping each other, and everyone having a share of the rewards at the end of the day."
Such noble sentiments stand in stark contrast to the current stance of the club he managed.
A Scrutiny Of Spin
It's easy to overlook items & events which occur in the run-up to Christmas. However, it's worth noting (& watching) a video of a talk given by Michael Marshall of the Merseyside Skeptics Society at the Head of Steam bar on Lime Street a few weeks ago (http://www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk/2011/12/bad-news-how-pr-came-to-rule-modern-journalism-full-talk-plus-qa/).
The video is almost an hour-and-a-half long, but it's worth staying with if you have the time.
Marshall cites numerous instances of PR masquerading as news in the national press. Sadly, he doesn't mention Oldham Hall Street's own unique contribution to the phenomenon. However, any one familiar with the ways of the Daily Ghost (requiem in pace) & the Oldham Echo will appreciate the parallels.
The video is almost an hour-and-a-half long, but it's worth staying with if you have the time.
Marshall cites numerous instances of PR masquerading as news in the national press. Sadly, he doesn't mention Oldham Hall Street's own unique contribution to the phenomenon. However, any one familiar with the ways of the Daily Ghost (requiem in pace) & the Oldham Echo will appreciate the parallels.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Oldham Echo Misses The Mark Again
It may be the season of goodwill but the howlers from Oldham Hall Street continue. Slow to report last night's breaking story about the 1981 Cabinet Papers on Liverpool (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-16355281 ), today's editorial in the Oldham Echo declares (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2011/12/30/toxteth-riots-so-who-didn-t-care-100252-30032078/ ):
"It can now only be revealed, 30 years after the event, that the then chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Howe, thought we should basically be left to rot."
Not true, guys. This blog & others have quoted Howe's comments on several occasions over the years; Peter Kilfoyle, former Labour MP for Liverpool Walton, referred to the "managed decline" remark in a House of Commons debate during the 90s.
Howe has been on BBC Radio today, saying he has no recollection of the comments. That form of words should not be confused with a denial.
As an aside, Michael Heseltine & most of the broadcast media have today made the lazy & sloppy association between the Toxteth riots & Militant's reign in the city. Whatever one may think of the record & legacy of Messrs Hatton & Mulhearn, the fact is that the city council was under Liberal rule at the time of the riots. The then council leader, & well-known local businessman, Trevor Jones escorted Heseltine on his visit to the city in July 1981. The Militant-led Labour group didn't take control of the council until May 1983.
"It can now only be revealed, 30 years after the event, that the then chancellor, Sir Geoffrey Howe, thought we should basically be left to rot."
Not true, guys. This blog & others have quoted Howe's comments on several occasions over the years; Peter Kilfoyle, former Labour MP for Liverpool Walton, referred to the "managed decline" remark in a House of Commons debate during the 90s.
Howe has been on BBC Radio today, saying he has no recollection of the comments. That form of words should not be confused with a denial.
As an aside, Michael Heseltine & most of the broadcast media have today made the lazy & sloppy association between the Toxteth riots & Militant's reign in the city. Whatever one may think of the record & legacy of Messrs Hatton & Mulhearn, the fact is that the city council was under Liberal rule at the time of the riots. The then council leader, & well-known local businessman, Trevor Jones escorted Heseltine on his visit to the city in July 1981. The Militant-led Labour group didn't take control of the council until May 1983.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Quelle Surprise!
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Letting The Real Scum Off The Hook
You really know that civic life has plumbed dispiriting depths when the leader of Liverpool City Council resorts to the lexicon of the playground. Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson reacted to the presence of protesters outside the Echo Arena last Friday with a rejoinder which, I suspect, won't be regarded as the ultimate bon mot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcNLz8C5RAw ).
The purpose of Cllr Anderson's visit to the venue wasn't to see Sir Macca (that's next week), but to talk to multi-millionaire Tory minister Francis Maude. Something tells me Joe didn't train his infantile invective on a key figure in the ConDem coalition. While it would have achieved nothing for Cllr Anderson to indulge in name-calling with Maude, I'd wager that an excoriating denunciation of the ConDem cuts wasn't issued by the city council leader.
Giving the clearest indication of what he views his priorities to be, Cllr Anderson has defiantly stood by his charming message to those outside the Arena (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2011/12/liverpool-council-leader-joe-a-2.html ).
Declaring that he has "no regrets", Joe is in bullish mood, according to David Bartlett:
"Cllr Anderson said he was responding to shouts of 'Nazi scum' as he entered the waterfront venue, with a protest taking place outside."
Granted, the video is rather brief, so we don't know what was said before the filming began. However, having viewed the clip a few times, I can't hear that particular insult being voiced in Cllr Anderson's direction.
Cllr Anderson goes on to display his gift for cognitive dissonance:
"Today [Cllr Anderson] said: 'The irony is I agree with 95% of what they are saying, but I disagree with them shouting abuse in an obscene way.' "
Just a thought for Joe to ponder: if he agrees with almost all the points made by the protesters, why doesn't he make the relatively short intellectual jump to the logical conclusion here & endorse a programme of resistance to cuts the magnitude of which Thatcher would envy? Moreover, while alleged abusive language can't be condoned, he should ask himself which is the greater obscenity, a few choice, though ill-advised, words on a windy waterfront outside the Echo Arena, or a meek acquiescence to a programme of cuts which will consign thousands to the dole queue & cause misery to those most dependent on council services at the behest of a Tory grandee sitting smugly inside the venue.
Concluding his illusory case for disparagement, Cllr Anderson sneers:
" 'I have been fighting for social justice for longer than some of these people have been alive.' "
Classy, Joe, classy.
The purpose of Cllr Anderson's visit to the venue wasn't to see Sir Macca (that's next week), but to talk to multi-millionaire Tory minister Francis Maude. Something tells me Joe didn't train his infantile invective on a key figure in the ConDem coalition. While it would have achieved nothing for Cllr Anderson to indulge in name-calling with Maude, I'd wager that an excoriating denunciation of the ConDem cuts wasn't issued by the city council leader.
Giving the clearest indication of what he views his priorities to be, Cllr Anderson has defiantly stood by his charming message to those outside the Arena (http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/dalestreetblues/2011/12/liverpool-council-leader-joe-a-2.html ).
Declaring that he has "no regrets", Joe is in bullish mood, according to David Bartlett:
"Cllr Anderson said he was responding to shouts of 'Nazi scum' as he entered the waterfront venue, with a protest taking place outside."
Granted, the video is rather brief, so we don't know what was said before the filming began. However, having viewed the clip a few times, I can't hear that particular insult being voiced in Cllr Anderson's direction.
Cllr Anderson goes on to display his gift for cognitive dissonance:
"Today [Cllr Anderson] said: 'The irony is I agree with 95% of what they are saying, but I disagree with them shouting abuse in an obscene way.' "
Just a thought for Joe to ponder: if he agrees with almost all the points made by the protesters, why doesn't he make the relatively short intellectual jump to the logical conclusion here & endorse a programme of resistance to cuts the magnitude of which Thatcher would envy? Moreover, while alleged abusive language can't be condoned, he should ask himself which is the greater obscenity, a few choice, though ill-advised, words on a windy waterfront outside the Echo Arena, or a meek acquiescence to a programme of cuts which will consign thousands to the dole queue & cause misery to those most dependent on council services at the behest of a Tory grandee sitting smugly inside the venue.
Concluding his illusory case for disparagement, Cllr Anderson sneers:
" 'I have been fighting for social justice for longer than some of these people have been alive.' "
Classy, Joe, classy.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Desperation On Oldham Hall Street
At the risk of sounding like a local historian, what comes to mind when you think of the city of Liverpool? If, like me, you were introduced to cultural assets like the Walker Art Gallery & the neighbouring Museum at an early age, you'll be aware of the city's history, its landmarks & its waterfront.
You'll also have a mixed view of the city's media coverage since the 70s. The Liver Birds? Carla Lane's whimsical take on two young women in Allerton. The Wackers? The first real sign of Scouse stereotypes being projected to a national audience. Boys from the Blackstuff? Bleasdale's urgent missive about the de-industrialisation of a region. Bread? Execrable exercise in local parochialism. Brookside? An early & laudable attempt to present at least one working class family (the Grants) honestly, but which soon gave way to, yep, Scouse stereotypes & soap opera sensationalism (thank-you, "Professor" Redmond).
There is now a new entrant to that curate's egg of a cast, & it is one I've consciously avoided, Desperate Scousewives (the punning title itself is wince-inducing).
Reaction to the programme has been fairly damning, with Seven Streets delivering a dry, dismissive verdict (http://www.sevenstreets.com/talk-and-opinion/desperate-stereotypes-desperate-scousewives/).
So, given the distinctly unimpressed response of many local people to this tacky, vacuous & stereotype-perpetuating programme, are there any voices willing to defend it? Oh yes there are &, guess what, they emanate from Oldham Hall Street.
However, it appears that the Oldham Echo's endorsement of something which depicts the city in a shallow, materialistic & tiresome manner may have reached its nadir with one of those many Echo pieces which eschew journalism & embrace fawning promotion (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/12/07/desperate-scousewives-liverpool-echo-reporter-laura-cox-is-transformed-from-southern-belle-to-liver-bird-100252-29907910/ ).
Oldham Hall Street's hapless hack Laura Cox undergoes a series of cosmetic (in more ways than one) treatments. The cost of her, ahem, journalistic endeavours? £599. A reasonable price tag in these economically-straightened times, particularly on Merseyside, wouldn't you agree?
Alas, the online commenters on the piece don't. Indeed, their responses range from the spluttering to the withering. JimmyCase1977 (great moniker, btw) declares:
"Echo, you have seriously misjudged your readers on this Desperate Scousewives debacle. 99.9% of real scousers are against this stereotyping drivel, yet you continuously big this rubbish up! A once great paper has gone seriously down the pan."
Ouch! But wait, here's another commenter, Clerkenwell, with this observation:
"The people of Liverpool know that this garbage has been created in order to reinforce previous media-created bad impressions of Liverpool and show the rest of the country an imaginary, crass and uncouth Liverpool filled with grotesques to despise and laugh at...
"Is [the Echo]..so out of touch with the city that they are meant to report upon that they actually think we like this foul series despite the hundreds of comments attacking it after every one of the Echo's articles on it?"
Clerkenwell, that may well be a rhetorical question.
JanMolby (commenters do like to flag up their affiliations, don't they?) complains that his initial comment to the effect that the Oldham Echo should have its bizarre Freedom of the City award reconsidered at least was deleted (wonder why) & concludes:
"I'd suggest doing something important -- like a proper in-depth analysis of what's going on with Peel/UNESCO (rather than the sensationalist, dumb headlines usually offered), not this scousewives drivel."
Jan (can I call you Jan?), let me put it this way, there's more chance of Andy Carroll appearing in ads for mineral water.
So then, any response from Oldham Hall Street to this online barrage? Well, yes, there is. However, the Echo's digital editor pathetically bleats that the piece "was meant to be fun."
As opposed to, say, journalism.
It still claims to speak up for Merseyside, you know,despite its receding circulation (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=47786) but the Oldham Echo's credentials are as suspect as a Stan Boardman routine. From Capital of Culture to Capital of Cringeworthy Caricatures. Only in your Oldham Echo.
You'll also have a mixed view of the city's media coverage since the 70s. The Liver Birds? Carla Lane's whimsical take on two young women in Allerton. The Wackers? The first real sign of Scouse stereotypes being projected to a national audience. Boys from the Blackstuff? Bleasdale's urgent missive about the de-industrialisation of a region. Bread? Execrable exercise in local parochialism. Brookside? An early & laudable attempt to present at least one working class family (the Grants) honestly, but which soon gave way to, yep, Scouse stereotypes & soap opera sensationalism (thank-you, "Professor" Redmond).
There is now a new entrant to that curate's egg of a cast, & it is one I've consciously avoided, Desperate Scousewives (the punning title itself is wince-inducing).
Reaction to the programme has been fairly damning, with Seven Streets delivering a dry, dismissive verdict (http://www.sevenstreets.com/talk-and-opinion/desperate-stereotypes-desperate-scousewives/).
So, given the distinctly unimpressed response of many local people to this tacky, vacuous & stereotype-perpetuating programme, are there any voices willing to defend it? Oh yes there are &, guess what, they emanate from Oldham Hall Street.
However, it appears that the Oldham Echo's endorsement of something which depicts the city in a shallow, materialistic & tiresome manner may have reached its nadir with one of those many Echo pieces which eschew journalism & embrace fawning promotion (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/12/07/desperate-scousewives-liverpool-echo-reporter-laura-cox-is-transformed-from-southern-belle-to-liver-bird-100252-29907910/ ).
Oldham Hall Street's hapless hack Laura Cox undergoes a series of cosmetic (in more ways than one) treatments. The cost of her, ahem, journalistic endeavours? £599. A reasonable price tag in these economically-straightened times, particularly on Merseyside, wouldn't you agree?
Alas, the online commenters on the piece don't. Indeed, their responses range from the spluttering to the withering. JimmyCase1977 (great moniker, btw) declares:
"Echo, you have seriously misjudged your readers on this Desperate Scousewives debacle. 99.9% of real scousers are against this stereotyping drivel, yet you continuously big this rubbish up! A once great paper has gone seriously down the pan."
Ouch! But wait, here's another commenter, Clerkenwell, with this observation:
"The people of Liverpool know that this garbage has been created in order to reinforce previous media-created bad impressions of Liverpool and show the rest of the country an imaginary, crass and uncouth Liverpool filled with grotesques to despise and laugh at...
"Is [the Echo]..so out of touch with the city that they are meant to report upon that they actually think we like this foul series despite the hundreds of comments attacking it after every one of the Echo's articles on it?"
Clerkenwell, that may well be a rhetorical question.
JanMolby (commenters do like to flag up their affiliations, don't they?) complains that his initial comment to the effect that the Oldham Echo should have its bizarre Freedom of the City award reconsidered at least was deleted (wonder why) & concludes:
"I'd suggest doing something important -- like a proper in-depth analysis of what's going on with Peel/UNESCO (rather than the sensationalist, dumb headlines usually offered), not this scousewives drivel."
Jan (can I call you Jan?), let me put it this way, there's more chance of Andy Carroll appearing in ads for mineral water.
So then, any response from Oldham Hall Street to this online barrage? Well, yes, there is. However, the Echo's digital editor pathetically bleats that the piece "was meant to be fun."
As opposed to, say, journalism.
It still claims to speak up for Merseyside, you know,despite its receding circulation (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=47786) but the Oldham Echo's credentials are as suspect as a Stan Boardman routine. From Capital of Culture to Capital of Cringeworthy Caricatures. Only in your Oldham Echo.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Kept In The Dark
It certainly isn't easy for those scribes on the Daily Ghost. Last week's announcement that the paper would go the way of the Dodo must have been a bitter pill to swallow after all those reassurances that things were hunky dory & there was nothing to fret over. All those times when advertorials for Peel Holdings were tolerated with gritted teeth by most hacks because they'd been told it was all for the best must have seemed like a sour series of grotesque pranks played on them. However, the indignity didn't end there. Other media sources were tipped off about the paper's demise before the staff were informed (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Exclusive-Liverpool-Post-and-Echo-journalists-to-be-balloted-for-industrial-action ).
By Your Friends Shall Ye Be Known
The Leveson Inquiry has teased out less than appetising tales from the diverse cast of characters who have already given evidence & it's difficult to dispute the view articulated by Nick Davies, the Guardian journalist whose investigation into tabloid culture was crucial (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/29/nick-davies-leveson-inquiry-newspapers ).
Those who are media-savvy won't be surprised by how low most of the national press can & will go. Alas, their regional counterparts, whilst distancing themselves from the nationals' tactics & tales, as the Oldham Echo strove to do earlier this month (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2011/11/18/the-liverpool-echo-is-here-to-serve-its-readers-100252-29797226/ ), protest just a little too much on the issue. The Oldham Echo declared boldly in its editorial which accompanied its, ahem, "Corrections and Clarifications" column:
"Our readers can trust us to source our stories and content in the correct and proper manner. The ECHO doesn't hack people's telephones -- regional newspapers don't hack people's telephones."
Far be it for me to question the second sentence in that quote. As for the first, well, let's just say it warrants greater scrutiny.
Indeed, the much-vaunted veracity of the regional press is set against the illegality of the national tabloids. Compare & contrast, as they say. However, the trouble with championing your own record is that it can attract some unlikely (& unwelcome) allies. Like David Cameron. Before Leveson was called to chair his inquiry & ex-News of the World hack Paul McMullan revealed his truly venal set of values (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/29/paul-mcmullan-leveson-inquiry-phone-hacking ), "Professor" Phil Redmond's mate was effusive about the regionals' merits (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/sep/13/phone-hacking-local-newspapers ):
"David Cameron thinks that regional newspapers exhibit 'a sort of calm and reasonableness' that is rarely found in national papers."
When Oldham Hall Street has Cameron as an ally who praises its calm & reasonable quality, it makes you wonder what sort of surrealistic milieu you've entered.
Those who are media-savvy won't be surprised by how low most of the national press can & will go. Alas, their regional counterparts, whilst distancing themselves from the nationals' tactics & tales, as the Oldham Echo strove to do earlier this month (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/views/our-view/2011/11/18/the-liverpool-echo-is-here-to-serve-its-readers-100252-29797226/ ), protest just a little too much on the issue. The Oldham Echo declared boldly in its editorial which accompanied its, ahem, "Corrections and Clarifications" column:
"Our readers can trust us to source our stories and content in the correct and proper manner. The ECHO doesn't hack people's telephones -- regional newspapers don't hack people's telephones."
Far be it for me to question the second sentence in that quote. As for the first, well, let's just say it warrants greater scrutiny.
Indeed, the much-vaunted veracity of the regional press is set against the illegality of the national tabloids. Compare & contrast, as they say. However, the trouble with championing your own record is that it can attract some unlikely (& unwelcome) allies. Like David Cameron. Before Leveson was called to chair his inquiry & ex-News of the World hack Paul McMullan revealed his truly venal set of values (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/29/paul-mcmullan-leveson-inquiry-phone-hacking ), "Professor" Phil Redmond's mate was effusive about the regionals' merits (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/sep/13/phone-hacking-local-newspapers ):
"David Cameron thinks that regional newspapers exhibit 'a sort of calm and reasonableness' that is rarely found in national papers."
When Oldham Hall Street has Cameron as an ally who praises its calm & reasonable quality, it makes you wonder what sort of surrealistic milieu you've entered.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
The Last Post
The Ghost will become a weekly one-hundred page publication in the new year, retailing at a humble quid. To change from daily to weekly publication would be seen by many as a retrograde step. Not on Oldham Hall Street, though, where bullishness is presented as confidence; Roy Greenslade is moved to comment:
"Editor Mark Thomas did his best to put a good face on the decision."
The "good face" is, to be frank, a brazen denial of reality which would have shamed Comical Ali during the last days of Saddam Hussein's rule in Iraq (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2011/11/24/liverpool-daily-post-to-switch-from-daily-to-weekly-frequency-in-the-new-year-92534-29835251/ ):
"Post Editor Mark Thomas said today: 'It is never easy to lose jobs but the changes to format and to staffing sets the Post up for an exciting new future.
" 'We are lucky to possess one of the great brands in journalism and we've been serving our city for 156 years. This change sets us up to serve it for the next 156 -- in print and online and through whatever channels readers seek to receive it.' "
Hear that, all you naysayers & cynics? It's "an exciting new future" that awaits the staff at the Ghost. I'm sure their initial reaction when they heard the news was "yippee, that sounds like an exciting new future for us!"
The sour reality is that the Daily Ghost has been on Trinity Mirror's life support system for the last few years. Today the tubes were withdrawn from the patient. Contrary to the view held by Messrs Machray & Thomas, I take no pleasure in seeing the paper's demise (jobs will be lost); this is no time for schadenfreude. Nor, however, is it a time for management bollockese when the paper's staff know full well what this "switch" really means. To entertain the conceit that those who still regularly purchase the daily paper will maintain their habit on a weekly basis is delusional. Weekly papers rarely succeed, particularly in the UK. Moreover, dated content on the newsstands every Thursday will not be an enticing prospect.
Larry Nield remarks on Liverpool Confidential's coverage of the decision (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Liverpool-Daily-Post-to-go-weekly ):
"Let's hope its switch to a weekly is not a case of placing the Post into a media hospice to await its final demise."
Yet that is precisely what it is. Isn't it, Larry?
And yet, and yet, and yet...
It could all have been just that little bit different, as Wayne pointed out earlier (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.com/2011/11/stop-press-liverpool-daily-post-is-now.html ):
"Alastair Machray has let a lot of people go, some skilled and with the experience of decades of writing, with a knowledge of the locality that would be hard to replace."
Retaining such staff wouldn't have saved the paper from its eventual demise, but Big Al's decisions, at the behest of Trinity Mirror, certainly hastened it.
There are those who tonight assert that the Ghost has been less sensationalist than its grotesquely downmarket sister, the Oldham Echo. Not always, as the front page at the top of the screen demonstrates. The city urgently needs balanced, informative reporting without fear or favour, & where certain business interests are not treated with a lack of rigour which borders on the servile.
The death of the Daily Ghost does nothing to change that.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Cast Aside
Recommended reading: Adita Chakrabortty's Guardian piece last week on the de-industrialisation of the north-east (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/16/why-britain-doesnt-make-things-manufacturing).
Although the piece focused on that particular region, there were stark parallels with Merseyside. Like the north east, Merseyside has a large number of people working in the public sector & the cuts will markedly increase the unemployment figures for the region. With the number of NEETS (young people not in education, employment or traning) rising perhaps exponentially, the gravity of the situation will deepen even further. We can all see the social consequences of having what is already acknowledged to be the lost generation (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/18/aspiration-nation-youth-unemployment) on street corners. Indeed, Tony Schumacher recently essayed a dispiriting encounter with an unemployed (&, sadly, unemployable) NEET (anthonyschumacher.blogspot.com/2011/11/devil-and-me.html).
Although the piece focused on that particular region, there were stark parallels with Merseyside. Like the north east, Merseyside has a large number of people working in the public sector & the cuts will markedly increase the unemployment figures for the region. With the number of NEETS (young people not in education, employment or traning) rising perhaps exponentially, the gravity of the situation will deepen even further. We can all see the social consequences of having what is already acknowledged to be the lost generation (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/18/aspiration-nation-youth-unemployment) on street corners. Indeed, Tony Schumacher recently essayed a dispiriting encounter with an unemployed (&, sadly, unemployable) NEET (anthonyschumacher.blogspot.com/2011/11/devil-and-me.html).
Oldham Hall Street Admits It Might Be Wrong
As the Leveson inquiry begins to lift the lid on press practices that range from the dubious to the downright illegal (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/phone-hacking)
it's nice to see that Oldham Hall Street has moved with the media Zeitgeist for mea culpa & admitted that the veracity of its contents are, shall we say, open to question www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/corrections-and-clarifications/2011/11/14/liverpool-echo-corrections-clarifications-100252-29772853/.
So if you feel that the Daily Ghost or Oldham Echo falls short in this regard, you can phone 0151-285 8476 or email Echo editor Alastair Machray (alastair.machray@liverpool.com). Go on, you know you want to. (Some cynical souls may sneer that this is no more than lazy PR. The very thought!) I suspect the minion saddled with this thankless task is in for a busy time.
it's nice to see that Oldham Hall Street has moved with the media Zeitgeist for mea culpa & admitted that the veracity of its contents are, shall we say, open to question www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/corrections-and-clarifications/2011/11/14/liverpool-echo-corrections-clarifications-100252-29772853/.
So if you feel that the Daily Ghost or Oldham Echo falls short in this regard, you can phone 0151-285 8476 or email Echo editor Alastair Machray (alastair.machray@liverpool.com). Go on, you know you want to. (Some cynical souls may sneer that this is no more than lazy PR. The very thought!) I suspect the minion saddled with this thankless task is in for a busy time.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
It's Good To Be Back
They say absence makes the heart grow fonder. Indeed, I suspect that my time away from this blog (been helping Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson to mobilise mass opposition to the cuts) has had that effect in the oasis of calm deliberation known as the Oldham Echo's editorial office (such a shame about Ian Hernon getting the boot, btw). Well, Al, Mark, all the gang on that Titanic of local "journalism" (not forgetting you, too, Paddy!), you'll be delighted to hear that I've returned. Refreshed, reinvigorated & raring to sing the praises of Oldham Hall Street, swear an oath of support for our courageous civic leaders & congratulate Peel Holdings for their continued good work on our World Heritage Site.
There's so much to cover & that's what I intend to do.
There's so much to cover & that's what I intend to do.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Psst, Dave, Behind You!
Looks like the Tory cuts in the police service have finally arrived at Cameron's front door:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnj4LZyjyis .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnj4LZyjyis .
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Yes, Dave, Let's Blame The Parents
Recommended reading: an inspired blogpost by comedy writer Nathaniel Tapley (http://nathanieltapley.com/2011/08/10/an-open-letter-to-david-camerons-parents/ ).
Dealing With The Distortion
Happy to persist with the risk that its inflammatory "coverage" will make its use of the term "Liverpool Riots" a self-fulfilling prophesy, Oldham Hall Street may well have serious questions to answer in the final reckoning.
A reckless disregard for responsible reporting I fully expect from the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo. Sadly, Seven Streets otherwise informative & vivid take on events also makes use of the inaccurate "Liverpool Riots" tag (http://www.sevenstreets.com/blog/liverpool-riots-smithdown-night-2/ ).
It's at times like this that a voice offering perspective & proportion is required. Kevin Sampson provides it in a piece he's penned for the Guardian's Comment is Free website (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/10/liverpool-riots-mob-mayhem ). [Oh, yes, it should be noted, en passant, that the "Liverpool Riots" appellation is the work of a lazy sub editor rather than Sampson himself.]
Sampson opens his piece by reflecting on his memories of 1981 & concludes with salient points & telling anecdotes (which merit full quotation) from Monday night that Messrs Machray & Thomas would do well to digest:
"In spite of isolated incidents and the now symbolic sight of purple wheelie bins ablaze, there was nothing one could describe as insurrection. The police were visible when necessary, but seemingly content to work in tandem with the youth leaders, too. If it hadn't have been for the phalanx of reporters, no one would have known anything out of the ordinary had happened.
"Speaking to reporters, one of the Toxteth youth workers, Jimmy Jagney, said that while he and his colleagues had been able to quell and disperse kids they knew well from around and about Liverpool 8, they had also identified two large gangs of youths, none of whom they recognised. His assumption was the youths had assembled in the hope of opportunistic looting, and his team quickly advised them to take off, and take their ambitions for notoriety elsewhere. Just as myself and my mates did in 1981, they felt a bit foolish when confronted and slunk away home.
"We live in a time of instant news. Whether it is camera crews sitting in medieval European squares as they wait for football hooligans to get drunk and provide rowdy footage, or plucky frontline reporters with pinhole cameras in their lapel as they maraud with the youth, our media suppliers are fanning the flames. They're making a case, and making a story that doesn't -- or needn't -- exist. If our politicians really want to know what's going on, they should give Jimmy Jagney a call. In the meantime, nothing to see here -- move along."
On Sampson's final point, I suspect Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson won't make that call, preferring, instead, to feed Oldham Hall Street with asinine soundbites.
A reckless disregard for responsible reporting I fully expect from the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo. Sadly, Seven Streets otherwise informative & vivid take on events also makes use of the inaccurate "Liverpool Riots" tag (http://www.sevenstreets.com/blog/liverpool-riots-smithdown-night-2/ ).
It's at times like this that a voice offering perspective & proportion is required. Kevin Sampson provides it in a piece he's penned for the Guardian's Comment is Free website (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/10/liverpool-riots-mob-mayhem ). [Oh, yes, it should be noted, en passant, that the "Liverpool Riots" appellation is the work of a lazy sub editor rather than Sampson himself.]
Sampson opens his piece by reflecting on his memories of 1981 & concludes with salient points & telling anecdotes (which merit full quotation) from Monday night that Messrs Machray & Thomas would do well to digest:
"In spite of isolated incidents and the now symbolic sight of purple wheelie bins ablaze, there was nothing one could describe as insurrection. The police were visible when necessary, but seemingly content to work in tandem with the youth leaders, too. If it hadn't have been for the phalanx of reporters, no one would have known anything out of the ordinary had happened.
"Speaking to reporters, one of the Toxteth youth workers, Jimmy Jagney, said that while he and his colleagues had been able to quell and disperse kids they knew well from around and about Liverpool 8, they had also identified two large gangs of youths, none of whom they recognised. His assumption was the youths had assembled in the hope of opportunistic looting, and his team quickly advised them to take off, and take their ambitions for notoriety elsewhere. Just as myself and my mates did in 1981, they felt a bit foolish when confronted and slunk away home.
"We live in a time of instant news. Whether it is camera crews sitting in medieval European squares as they wait for football hooligans to get drunk and provide rowdy footage, or plucky frontline reporters with pinhole cameras in their lapel as they maraud with the youth, our media suppliers are fanning the flames. They're making a case, and making a story that doesn't -- or needn't -- exist. If our politicians really want to know what's going on, they should give Jimmy Jagney a call. In the meantime, nothing to see here -- move along."
On Sampson's final point, I suspect Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson won't make that call, preferring, instead, to feed Oldham Hall Street with asinine soundbites.
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Oldham Hall Street Fans The Flames
Tensions remain high, the riot vans patrol Toxteth & Oldham Hall Street excels itself with the sort of inaccurate, irresponsible coverage which can only serve to encourage any imbeciles who wish to cause more trouble this evening. The Daily Ghost is running a live blog, at least that's what they call it (http://liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2011/08/09/liverpool-riots-follow-our-live-blog-for-the-latest-news-and-reaction-100252-29203736/ ).
Neil MacDonald opens with the inflammatory & inaccurate words:
"Liverpool descended into anarchy last night as gangs of youths set cars on fire, looted shops and attacked Merseyside Police officers."
For your information, Neil, disturbances took place in one particular part of the city last night. The rest of the city wasn't affected; Liverpool DID NOT descend into anarchy.
Get your facts straight, cut the offensive hyperbole & issue an apology for the sort of "journalism" which could exacerbate the situation in Toxteth tonight. Your "coverage" is beneath contempt.
*I'm indebted to my friend Professor Chucklebutty for pointing this story out to me.
Neil MacDonald opens with the inflammatory & inaccurate words:
"Liverpool descended into anarchy last night as gangs of youths set cars on fire, looted shops and attacked Merseyside Police officers."
For your information, Neil, disturbances took place in one particular part of the city last night. The rest of the city wasn't affected; Liverpool DID NOT descend into anarchy.
Get your facts straight, cut the offensive hyperbole & issue an apology for the sort of "journalism" which could exacerbate the situation in Toxteth tonight. Your "coverage" is beneath contempt.
*I'm indebted to my friend Professor Chucklebutty for pointing this story out to me.
Dispatch From The Front Line
Recommended reading: Jake Mills gives an excellent first-hand account of last night's disturbances in Toxteth (http://mills88.posterous.com/the-liverpool-riots-my-account ).
Meanwhile, the signs, sadly, look ominous for this evening. Grosvenor-pool is closing early (though many wouldn't necessarily regard that as a cause for regret) & the Twittersphere is buzzing with claims that the mood around Upper Parliament Street is decidedly ugly.
Meanwhile, the signs, sadly, look ominous for this evening. Grosvenor-pool is closing early (though many wouldn't necessarily regard that as a cause for regret) & the Twittersphere is buzzing with claims that the mood around Upper Parliament Street is decidedly ugly.
Toxteth: Thirty Years Down The Line
Far more heat than light is still being generated by the events around Smithdown Road & Upper Parliament Street (http://yfrog.com/gykhxhgj ) overnight (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-14455814 ). The siren voices of the local lock 'em up brigade have wasted no time in phoning Radio Merseyside &/or leaving erudite comments online.
In the midst of the mayhem that raged around the south end of the city, such as the scene on Smithdown Road (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ps7_Q5IiK8&feature=related ), Seven Streets at least maintained a responsible, yet suitably urgent, stance on events (http://www.sevenstreets.com/blog/riots-return-to-liverpool/ ).
To be sure, there was a large element of copycat criminal activity emanating from the city's feral "scallies", taking their cue from a burning London. That said, factors particular to the situation in Toxteth were also at play, & to downplay, dismiss or dispute that takes us no further in attempting to establish what set in motion the train of events.
In the midst of the mayhem that raged around the south end of the city, such as the scene on Smithdown Road (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ps7_Q5IiK8&feature=related ), Seven Streets at least maintained a responsible, yet suitably urgent, stance on events (http://www.sevenstreets.com/blog/riots-return-to-liverpool/ ).
To be sure, there was a large element of copycat criminal activity emanating from the city's feral "scallies", taking their cue from a burning London. That said, factors particular to the situation in Toxteth were also at play, & to downplay, dismiss or dispute that takes us no further in attempting to establish what set in motion the train of events.
Monday, August 08, 2011
Tuning Into Cuts TV?
As the ConDem cuts proceed grimly & remorselessly across the land, it's heartening to see that the city's leadership is using new technology to rally opposition to the cuts & organise a fightback. Aren't they? Er, scrap that, it seems we were misinformed (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/08/06/council-to-explain-budget-cuts-via-joe-tv-100252-29187291/ ).
David Bartlett's piece gives notice of a new TV channel starring Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson as he unveils the city's cuts (just as well it's not on cable, otherwise I'd demand a refund from Virgin Media). Bartlett relates:
" 'Dubbed Joe TV' , the webcast will feature Cllr Anderson giving a presentation to councillors on the city's finances.
"The meeting is on Tuesday [tomorrrow] and the webcast is likely to be made available the following day."
So this pathetic PR stunt, an insult to the people of the city he's supposed to represent, isn't even to be webcast live, but will be online after a 24-hour delay. Now that's what I call instant accountability in the internet age. Joe, alas, thinks it's the bee's knees:
"Cllr Anderson said: 'This is a major step for the council being more open and transparent.
" 'We are giving the people who pay for council services real insight into our budget discussions.' "
Joe, you are "giving the people who pay for council services" the insult of watching you & your Labour colleagues implement Tory cuts; far from bestowing "insight" into your deliberations, you are placing an opaque filter on the lens of local civic life.
In such a surreal stew of Pythonesque proportions, a reminder of what the city already faces, before the cuts really kick in, was admitted by the Oldham Echo the other day (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/08/05/liverpool-is-england-s-most-deprived-city-says-new-report-100252-29182869/ ).
Cllr Jane Corbett, Labour representative for Everton ward, is quoted:
" 'The income gap in this country unravelled under the government of Margaret Thatcher.
" 'The present government has shut their eyes to the problems they are creating through their cuts.' "
I'm all for highlighting Thatcher's baleful impact on Merseyside, but thirteen years of New Labour did nothing to change conditions in the Evertons of this world. Additionally, Cllrs Corbett, Anderson et al have elected to shut their eyes, too, rather than show some desperately-required gumption & start justifying their positions.
David Bartlett's piece gives notice of a new TV channel starring Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson as he unveils the city's cuts (just as well it's not on cable, otherwise I'd demand a refund from Virgin Media). Bartlett relates:
" 'Dubbed Joe TV' , the webcast will feature Cllr Anderson giving a presentation to councillors on the city's finances.
"The meeting is on Tuesday [tomorrrow] and the webcast is likely to be made available the following day."
So this pathetic PR stunt, an insult to the people of the city he's supposed to represent, isn't even to be webcast live, but will be online after a 24-hour delay. Now that's what I call instant accountability in the internet age. Joe, alas, thinks it's the bee's knees:
"Cllr Anderson said: 'This is a major step for the council being more open and transparent.
" 'We are giving the people who pay for council services real insight into our budget discussions.' "
Joe, you are "giving the people who pay for council services" the insult of watching you & your Labour colleagues implement Tory cuts; far from bestowing "insight" into your deliberations, you are placing an opaque filter on the lens of local civic life.
In such a surreal stew of Pythonesque proportions, a reminder of what the city already faces, before the cuts really kick in, was admitted by the Oldham Echo the other day (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/08/05/liverpool-is-england-s-most-deprived-city-says-new-report-100252-29182869/ ).
Cllr Jane Corbett, Labour representative for Everton ward, is quoted:
" 'The income gap in this country unravelled under the government of Margaret Thatcher.
" 'The present government has shut their eyes to the problems they are creating through their cuts.' "
I'm all for highlighting Thatcher's baleful impact on Merseyside, but thirteen years of New Labour did nothing to change conditions in the Evertons of this world. Additionally, Cllrs Corbett, Anderson et al have elected to shut their eyes, too, rather than show some desperately-required gumption & start justifying their positions.
Honey, Disconnect The Phone
Alastair Machray, editor of the Oldham Echo, isn't a very happy soul at the moment. Exasperated at the new round of job losses he's been instructed to make, there's another dark cloud on the horizon. And it's a bloody big one, too.
Whenever, Liverpool is graced by a visit from Sir Thumbs-Up, aka Macca (you know, the guy who played bass guitar in the Beatles), both the Echo & Daily Ghost treat it as a local version of the Second Coming. Pages are cleared for lavish, self-congratulatory missives about how four lads from our city made history, how wonderful it all was, etc., etc. The meat in Oldham Hall Street's sandwich at such heady moments is an "interview" with the man himself. It's fearless, investigative journalism at its best ("How do you feel being back home?" "Are you looking forward to the concert?", that sort of thing).
Alas, such treats may be a thing of the past, as Trinity Mirror comes under even greater scrutiny over its own involvement in phone-hacking. It seems that McCartney's voicemails were hacked by the Daily Mirror some years back (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/06/piers-morgan-phone-hacking-scandal?INTCMP=SRCH ).
Given that the Mirror is clearly part of the same publishing stable, & given that McCartney's response has been suitably indignant, there is a deep concern on Oldham Hall Street that, rightly or wrongly, they'll no longer have "access", that risible term in journalism's lexicon, to the ex-Beatle; McCartney's people, always PR & media-savvy, may well view the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo as part of a hostile media conglomerate.
Filling those pages with Pete Best's reminiscences just wouldn't be the same, would it?
Whenever, Liverpool is graced by a visit from Sir Thumbs-Up, aka Macca (you know, the guy who played bass guitar in the Beatles), both the Echo & Daily Ghost treat it as a local version of the Second Coming. Pages are cleared for lavish, self-congratulatory missives about how four lads from our city made history, how wonderful it all was, etc., etc. The meat in Oldham Hall Street's sandwich at such heady moments is an "interview" with the man himself. It's fearless, investigative journalism at its best ("How do you feel being back home?" "Are you looking forward to the concert?", that sort of thing).
Alas, such treats may be a thing of the past, as Trinity Mirror comes under even greater scrutiny over its own involvement in phone-hacking. It seems that McCartney's voicemails were hacked by the Daily Mirror some years back (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/06/piers-morgan-phone-hacking-scandal?INTCMP=SRCH ).
Given that the Mirror is clearly part of the same publishing stable, & given that McCartney's response has been suitably indignant, there is a deep concern on Oldham Hall Street that, rightly or wrongly, they'll no longer have "access", that risible term in journalism's lexicon, to the ex-Beatle; McCartney's people, always PR & media-savvy, may well view the Daily Ghost & Oldham Echo as part of a hostile media conglomerate.
Filling those pages with Pete Best's reminiscences just wouldn't be the same, would it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
