It occured to me this evening (whilst looking through friend's blogs that haven't been updated in months)that I've disappeared off with very little explanation. In a manner akin to top politicians (apparently Political Satire is in vogue at the moment for some reason) I have set up a cushy second blog over at this address. It's all about advertising. Usually pretty/thought provoking/creative advertising, and sometimes crap advertising. It still contains my special brand of uninformed opinions and bitter rants, but this time about something I should know slightly more about.
On the other hand, I actually do update it at least once most weeks, and in bitesize chunks (and although this particular choice of phrase sounds like it has been stolen from an ad of somekind, it is actually fitting) which is much better than 1500 word diatribes about Piers Morgan's face. Probably.
Anyway, here is tonight's post...
"Just a very quick post, as I’ve been relatively busy over the last week or so, it might take a while to get what the advert actually was for (I got it from the hair tussling).
I thought it was quite a creative approach to attempting to change attitudes on wind power- the lack of hippies and men in white lab coats threatening us with imminent drowning probably made it slightly more accessible.
That’s all for now, as some spam in my inbox today might have said: expect something longer, soon."
Feel free to follow it
Wednesday 5 May 2010
Thursday 25 March 2010
I'm a video gamer. Not a murderer.
Anyone who plays games and spends a large amount of time on the Internet will probably have seen this video at some point in the last few days:
It shows a debate (I use this term loosely, as debates typically take place in a manner approaching fair to an audience willing to listen) on the Alan Titchmarsh show, between editor of Computer and Video Games Tim Ingham, insufferable waste of air- read TV personality- Julie Peasgood, and Kelvin Mackenzie, who was largely inconsequential to the argument- admitting that he doesn’t play war games, and making the comment that the age of the average gamer is 33 and bringing up the irrelevant fact that one of the Jamie Bulger murderers used to play games.
A great deal of praise has to go to Tim Ingham, who, in the face of this blustering, belligerent bint shouting down his claims with apparently non-existent- and definitely not named- studies, stayed calm and composed, making the point that games such as Modern Warfare do have BBFC certification in the same way that films do and that they should be viewed in the same sort of way.
When he brought up the government-commissioned Byron report into games, which found no links between violent video games and behavioural problems- precisely the opposite of Peasgood’s mystery piece of research- he was jeered by the audience in the manner you would only expect to find in a pantomime. Or possibly question time with Nick Griffin.
Peasgood (who it should be noted, despite being “categorically against violence for entertainment” actually voice acted for the game Martian Gothic: Unification) spent the entire interview spouting unsubstantiated, crowd-pleasing rhetoric, which made the audience cheer, and the entire game industry cringe.
An audience less horrendously set in their narrow, archaic mindset could possibly have been open to hearing some of the benefits of games- including improving cognitive skills in older people to mention one which would be directly of interest to the Daily Mail wielding viewers of the show (the link, by the way tells of a named study by real scientists).
The games industry is in something of a renaissance period, the relentless march of technology is giving developers finer and finer brushes with which to perfect games that appeal to all ages. Modern Warfare 2 has demonstrated that a game can be as cinematic- violence and all- as any war film (also as dumb). Games such as the original Bioshock or Heavy Rain have proven that games can be as challenging and thought provoking as any novel and the fact that you play as a character means that they can be far more immersive.
The wide availability of broadband connections and games which support online play give me the opportunity to play with my friends in Norwich- which is a good 80 miles away, often talking for hours at a time (a fact I think even Peasgood would have to concede is indicative of good social adjustment) whilst we play games that actually reward team work.
And once you get past the baying idiocies of some online game lobbies, I’ve actually had a lot of interesting conversations with Americans and even some English speakers from European countries, giving me a small glimpse into their world.
And these are the benefits that I, personally have experienced. I’d like to consider myself well adjusted- and I certainly have never killed anyone, even though I used to play games like Grand Theft Auto or Doom (both of which collected controversy in their days). I also used to play games like Animal Crossing.
I chose games not for their violence, but for their interesting presentation of ideas and for their ability to provide escapism, and in a world were a moronic audience can jeer a piece of rational thought, whilst their mouthpiece spewed fallacious, irrelevant claims to further approval, can you blame me?
It shows a debate (I use this term loosely, as debates typically take place in a manner approaching fair to an audience willing to listen) on the Alan Titchmarsh show, between editor of Computer and Video Games Tim Ingham, insufferable waste of air- read TV personality- Julie Peasgood, and Kelvin Mackenzie, who was largely inconsequential to the argument- admitting that he doesn’t play war games, and making the comment that the age of the average gamer is 33 and bringing up the irrelevant fact that one of the Jamie Bulger murderers used to play games.
A great deal of praise has to go to Tim Ingham, who, in the face of this blustering, belligerent bint shouting down his claims with apparently non-existent- and definitely not named- studies, stayed calm and composed, making the point that games such as Modern Warfare do have BBFC certification in the same way that films do and that they should be viewed in the same sort of way.
When he brought up the government-commissioned Byron report into games, which found no links between violent video games and behavioural problems- precisely the opposite of Peasgood’s mystery piece of research- he was jeered by the audience in the manner you would only expect to find in a pantomime. Or possibly question time with Nick Griffin.
Peasgood (who it should be noted, despite being “categorically against violence for entertainment” actually voice acted for the game Martian Gothic: Unification) spent the entire interview spouting unsubstantiated, crowd-pleasing rhetoric, which made the audience cheer, and the entire game industry cringe.
An audience less horrendously set in their narrow, archaic mindset could possibly have been open to hearing some of the benefits of games- including improving cognitive skills in older people to mention one which would be directly of interest to the Daily Mail wielding viewers of the show (the link, by the way tells of a named study by real scientists).
The games industry is in something of a renaissance period, the relentless march of technology is giving developers finer and finer brushes with which to perfect games that appeal to all ages. Modern Warfare 2 has demonstrated that a game can be as cinematic- violence and all- as any war film (also as dumb). Games such as the original Bioshock or Heavy Rain have proven that games can be as challenging and thought provoking as any novel and the fact that you play as a character means that they can be far more immersive.
The wide availability of broadband connections and games which support online play give me the opportunity to play with my friends in Norwich- which is a good 80 miles away, often talking for hours at a time (a fact I think even Peasgood would have to concede is indicative of good social adjustment) whilst we play games that actually reward team work.
And once you get past the baying idiocies of some online game lobbies, I’ve actually had a lot of interesting conversations with Americans and even some English speakers from European countries, giving me a small glimpse into their world.
And these are the benefits that I, personally have experienced. I’d like to consider myself well adjusted- and I certainly have never killed anyone, even though I used to play games like Grand Theft Auto or Doom (both of which collected controversy in their days). I also used to play games like Animal Crossing.
I chose games not for their violence, but for their interesting presentation of ideas and for their ability to provide escapism, and in a world were a moronic audience can jeer a piece of rational thought, whilst their mouthpiece spewed fallacious, irrelevant claims to further approval, can you blame me?
Tuesday 23 February 2010
6 Lessons learned from the last 2 weeks
Just a quick post to indicate that I’m still alive. Regular readers may be disappointed by this. Nothing has particularly irritated me (other than a film below) over the last couple of weeks, so here are some things (films and stuff) that I have liked and one thing that I loathed:
(500) Days Of Summer: This film was a smart and savvy appraisal of being one of those pathetic hopeless romantic types- featuring the gorgeous Zooey Deschanel and “The Kid From 3rd Rock From The Sun” (more popularly as Joseph Gordon-Levitt), they were believable characters and shared reasonable chemistry- both in a coalescing and combusting sense. Quite brutal in places, it lightened up a bit at the end, but still didn’t result in being overly schmaltzy. Unlike He’s Just Not That Into You; a film which spent 2 hours saying that women are not the exception to the rule (he WAS a player but he’ll change for you etc.) and then ended with the most desperate lady ever seen on film gasping “I am the exception” whilst a man- who had spent the film being completely uninterested in her- was in the act of ravishing her. This made me far angrier than any film should.
The Lovely Bones: Peter Jackson back with that superb directorial eye of his- juxtaposing lavish dreamscapes with visceral scenes and some astoundingly tense moments in a rather horrible story of a girl who is brutally murdered and continues watching the repercussions of her murder- her family’s slow descent into ruin, her killer continuing to go free. Mark Wahlberg subtle turn as the father of the murdered daughter and Stanley Tucci’s equally restrained- and frankly quite terrifying- role as the murderer (who probably could evade suspicion more easily if he didn’t dress like a stereotypical serial killer) are both worth the price of admission- although I should add a special mention goes to Laura for paying for me to see this.
Bioshock 2: The long-awaited (by me at least) sequel to the original Bioshock game came out. I got it a day early- thank you very much zavvi- and went about completing it.
The art design- both character and location- is superb, having been set a decade after it’s predecessor, most of the underwater city in which Bioshock 2 takes place is becoming increasingly derelict and the inhabitants are less human in appearance (having messed with their DNA), and these are generally well thought out. This means that whilst it doesn’t look as realistic as say Modern Warfare 2, it still manages to look quite superb. If you’re into barnacles and Art Deco furnishings.
The story falls a little short of its predecessor, but there is still some mildly interesting philosophical debate to be had, if you’re willing to search hard enough, but nothing that you wouldn’t hear from a drunk student at the union after a few pints. The game is also fairly easy, even on the hardest difficulty. Still, despite these flaws, Bioshock 2 is a game that does a good job of capturing the tone and style of the first, and I’d recommend checking it out if you’re gaming inclined.
I finally got around to listening to The Shins’ “Wincing the night away” the other day, after “Black Wave” came on in a pub and I decided that I needed to own it, the rest of the album is quite wonderful as well.
Finally, in a surprise at number 6: Engineering works on Valentine’s day are awesome, having serendipitously introduced me to a girl who had skived off work in order to try and win her ex-boyfriend back. Thus restoring my faith in people attempting to make life more like a romantic comedy. Even if she failed in winning him back.
Honorable mention goes to "The Devil In Ember" by Mark Gatiss, a book which I have been enjoying for the last couple of days.
Monday 1 February 2010
6 Lessons Learned From Facebook Fan Pages
The Internet, it truly is a fabulous thing. I use it daily, I imagine you use it daily. In fact I bet you’re on it right now.
Anyway, I came across a superb site- a recommendation from my sister- this week: Stumbleupon.com, basically it is a website which directs you to other websites which people have recommended to it, when you’re bored of that particular site, click the “Stumble!” button and it will put you onto something else. The websites can be anything from webcomics to psychological journals explaining quirks of human behaviour, from flash games to playlists of songs that make you happy. It really is excellent and shows you how good the Internet can be.
Unfortunately the internet can also be a place for rampant idiocy. I, like many people in the 21-35 bracket, harbour something of an addiction to Facebook, spending most of my free time on it- a fact that becomes even more concerning when I consider the abundance of free time that currently I have.
Whilst doing what amounts to very little on facebook, I’ve noticed that with the advent of fan pages there has a new selection of moronic bandwagons for people to jump on. So here are 6 lessons learned from facebook fan pages:
1: The Fan Page: Behind every untrusting girl is a boy who made her that way.
Number of members: c.115,000
The Lesson: The internet is made up of sadists, or people who are pathetic.
Number one on my list of perplexing facebook fan pages is this one. I’m not even certain what the members are professing to be a fan of? Is it applauding the boy who broke the eponymous girl’s heart, because that would mean that there are a lot of emotional sadists on facebook.
Alternatively, it may just be for people who like untrusting women, which suggests it would be a call to arms for like-minded fans of distrustful women to get together to discuss the best way of breaking a woman’s trust.
Dropping the facetious-tinted lenses that I view most facebook fan pages with, this is obviously a page for people who consider themselves untrusting, presumably as a means to get even at whoever betrayed their trust.
Perhaps it is because I’m male, or perhaps it is because I’m British, but something seems intrinsically wrong about advertising the fact that you’re: a) untrusting, and b) the fact that you’ve let a boy hurt you in the past, to your entire network of friends. I can’t help but feel that this group single-handedly puts back the cause of feminism a good half decade.
2: The Fan Page: The sexist legend who put this on his maths paper
Number of members: c. 115,000
The Lesson: 1950s views of women are not only socially acceptable, but also funny.
To be honest, I’ve seen this before and it caused a small amount of mirth, it’s a question from a maths paper featuring a woman- Tracey- quoting an equation, the question then asks the participant to say why Tracey is wrong. The answer given on this particular paper is “She’s a woman”, which, as I said, did raise a smile. However, I did not find it funny enough to warrant starting, or even joining a group supporting the bloke (or woman with no self-esteem) who wrote it.
Then again, whoever started the group wasn’t applauding the joke itself, but “The sexist legend” who wrote it, which sort of implies that he likes people who are sexist, and that he also lacks the intelligence to produce the curt response himself.
He also uses the word “legend” in a stupid place- which for some reason really irritates me. I doubt that the story of “The sexist with a sense of humour” will endure as long as that of say, King Arthur, but then again I’ve done my part to pass it on.
3: The Fan Page: ALARM…Snooze…ALARM…Snooze…ALARM.*Checks Time*…SHIIIIT
Number of members: c. 1,559,000
The Lesson: Some people are not good at waking up
It is one of the fundamental truths of human existence that after a decent night’s sleep, people do not enjoy getting up, and that some people may, on occasion, hit snooze a couple of times and regret it. I don’t understand why it is necessary to become a fan of something so utterly banal. Unless it’s crumpets. Crumpets are awesome.
4: The Fan Page: Kill The Lot: Paedophiles, rapists, abusers of all kinds
Number of members: c. 29,200
The Lesson: Paedophiles, rapists and abusers of all kinds are bad.
Yes, much like the previous point, this group points out the blaringly obvious. Only this group goes much further and suggests that they kill Paedophiles, rapists and abusers of all kinds, presumably “all kinds” includes abuse of human rights, and with one member advocating that the any of the above groups should be shot on site [sic], bypassing the right to a fair trial, I suppose that suggests that some members of the group should also be shot. And not just for their abuse of the English language.
5: The Fan Page: WOW…YUH DON’T LYK ME…>What do you expect me to cry or summink
Number of members: c. 1,774
The Lesson: People are so, so stupid
This group, just going by name, irritates me in so many ways, the lack of punctuation other than ellipses, the lack of spelling, the apparently aggressive demeanour of whoever created it, defending their right to be a moron in as loud and as objectionable a way as possible. I read this title and I am immediately reminded of a 14 year old chav who I once saw on the bus, who was near enough chewing the ear off anyone who looked at her, this brought her further attention.
6: The Fan Page: 6 Lessons (and other miscellaneous ramblings by Jonathan Crouch)
Number of members: c. 80
The Lesson: The internet is awesome and has a great deal of fun and readable content. It also fosters shameful amounts of self-indulgence and shameless self-promotion.
And in a surprise entry at Number 6 is my very own facebook fan page, I suggest that you join it if you haven’t already, and invite all of your friends to it.
The majority of the fan pages I have joined have been local bands or DJs who I am friends with, and the fan pages of facebook are perfect for helping them keep in touch with their fan base (the fact that having a group of people being you can refer to as your fan base is wonderful in itself) and publicising their events to people who may be inclined to see them. For evidence for fostering of self-indulgence and shameless self-promotion, look no further than the previous 1,000 or so words.
Thursday 21 January 2010
6 Lessons 2.0
HELLO! And welcome to the J.J Abrams-esque reboot of 6 Lessons, now with 32% more CAPITALS.
Now that I have your attention, any eagle-eyed readers may have noticed a distinct lack of posts for a good 2 or 3 months. This was largely because I started an article entitled “6 Lessons learned from 80s rock music”, but found that, in reality there were so few lessons to learn from 80s rock music (unless you count different ways of snorting cocaine off a groupie’s body) that it became something of a sticky wicket -an appropriate analogy, considering the fact that most lyrics from the 1980s seemed to be about Tommy Lee’s wicket and the manner in which he got it sticky.
Anyway the whole experience of researching (see what I do for you?) the exploits of Lee and company left me feeling somewhat disgusted with the capabilities of drummers of rock bands, and humanity as a whole. I committed myself to solitude, embarking on a mental detox made up of 18 hours a day looking at videos of kittens on youtube, and watching reruns of The Good Life. Also I couldn’t be arsed.
But it’s a new year, so I figured I’d end the silence and start writing the blog again, with some small changes- I’m going to keep the “6 Lessons” moniker, but drop the 6 Lessons formula. Except for when I feel like doing it. Hell, I may even do 5 Lessons when I feel like it. This isn’t a democracy.
Anyway, whilst away, I have done some little non-list based rants for a new London-based online magazine This Weekend (What was 2009 for?, page 22) I finally landed my dream job (or at least the dream job of my 16-year-old self) at HMV- seasonal temp. Which meant I got to deal personally with lots of the idiots who got Susan Boyle to number 1. In a fashion so cordial the 16-year-old me would be ashamed, but screw him, he’s an idiot.
I witnessed an interesting sight the other day. A gentleman standing in front of a group of thirty women, wearing nothing but a butler’s collar and a pair of boxers, wheeling about a tea trolley. The women then pressed a button decide whether they would like to date him or not. No, this wasn’t Virgin Atlantic’s new attempt at sexing up air travel (although kudos to them for trying to make terrorist targets sexy again with the new ad doing the rounds), this was prime time television- ITV’s “Take Me Out” (Saturday, 7:30pm on ITV1)- a new dating programme to fill the void left behind by Blind Date.
Yes, it’s ITV’s. The premise is simple, a man comes on, talks a bit about himself, does some needless bit of showboating, and women decide if they’d like to date him or not. It sounds like an empowering new front of the feminist movement. Hosted by that guy from Max and Paddy.
However it quickly turns into thirty women clamouring for the attention of one awful, attention-seeking prick, and then another. Over and over again.
Over the duration of a show you can really see characters evolving amongst the women. There’s desperate (one slightly overweight fairly short girl who stays in on two-thirds of blokes), quite desperate (one woman sporting a long list of daddy issues, who gives the impression she’d jump on with a trouser based bulge) and very desperate (one incredibly tall woman who it appears wouldn’t say no to anyone).
Ultimately the decision is left to the man, who, having learned nothing about the girls’ personalities, decides (presumably by looks alone) who he is going to take on a date from the women left wanting to date him. A clip of their date is shown the subsequent week, and from what I’ve seen, it typically reveals that the man is a self-obsessed narcissist and that the woman is desperate. They sit in a tastelessly lit restaurant (although it appears to be a studio, no doubt adjacent to the studio that the show is recorded in) and the woman shuffles uncomfortably for a bit, whilst the bloke talks about himself some more. These clips are cut with the happy couple talking about how passable the date was. No doubt before going their separate ways.
Who says romance is dead?
Now that I have your attention, any eagle-eyed readers may have noticed a distinct lack of posts for a good 2 or 3 months. This was largely because I started an article entitled “6 Lessons learned from 80s rock music”, but found that, in reality there were so few lessons to learn from 80s rock music (unless you count different ways of snorting cocaine off a groupie’s body) that it became something of a sticky wicket -an appropriate analogy, considering the fact that most lyrics from the 1980s seemed to be about Tommy Lee’s wicket and the manner in which he got it sticky.
Anyway the whole experience of researching (see what I do for you?) the exploits of Lee and company left me feeling somewhat disgusted with the capabilities of drummers of rock bands, and humanity as a whole. I committed myself to solitude, embarking on a mental detox made up of 18 hours a day looking at videos of kittens on youtube, and watching reruns of The Good Life. Also I couldn’t be arsed.
But it’s a new year, so I figured I’d end the silence and start writing the blog again, with some small changes- I’m going to keep the “6 Lessons” moniker, but drop the 6 Lessons formula. Except for when I feel like doing it. Hell, I may even do 5 Lessons when I feel like it. This isn’t a democracy.
Anyway, whilst away, I have done some little non-list based rants for a new London-based online magazine This Weekend (What was 2009 for?, page 22) I finally landed my dream job (or at least the dream job of my 16-year-old self) at HMV- seasonal temp. Which meant I got to deal personally with lots of the idiots who got Susan Boyle to number 1. In a fashion so cordial the 16-year-old me would be ashamed, but screw him, he’s an idiot.
I witnessed an interesting sight the other day. A gentleman standing in front of a group of thirty women, wearing nothing but a butler’s collar and a pair of boxers, wheeling about a tea trolley. The women then pressed a button decide whether they would like to date him or not. No, this wasn’t Virgin Atlantic’s new attempt at sexing up air travel (although kudos to them for trying to make terrorist targets sexy again with the new ad doing the rounds), this was prime time television- ITV’s “Take Me Out” (Saturday, 7:30pm on ITV1)- a new dating programme to fill the void left behind by Blind Date.
Yes, it’s ITV’s. The premise is simple, a man comes on, talks a bit about himself, does some needless bit of showboating, and women decide if they’d like to date him or not. It sounds like an empowering new front of the feminist movement. Hosted by that guy from Max and Paddy.
However it quickly turns into thirty women clamouring for the attention of one awful, attention-seeking prick, and then another. Over and over again.
Over the duration of a show you can really see characters evolving amongst the women. There’s desperate (one slightly overweight fairly short girl who stays in on two-thirds of blokes), quite desperate (one woman sporting a long list of daddy issues, who gives the impression she’d jump on with a trouser based bulge) and very desperate (one incredibly tall woman who it appears wouldn’t say no to anyone).
Ultimately the decision is left to the man, who, having learned nothing about the girls’ personalities, decides (presumably by looks alone) who he is going to take on a date from the women left wanting to date him. A clip of their date is shown the subsequent week, and from what I’ve seen, it typically reveals that the man is a self-obsessed narcissist and that the woman is desperate. They sit in a tastelessly lit restaurant (although it appears to be a studio, no doubt adjacent to the studio that the show is recorded in) and the woman shuffles uncomfortably for a bit, whilst the bloke talks about himself some more. These clips are cut with the happy couple talking about how passable the date was. No doubt before going their separate ways.
Who says romance is dead?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
