Aunty's new 'passions'

BBC Good Food website relaunches as social network

I remain a tad intrigued, if a little concerned as to how this all works. I am sure they would not be so crass as to use my licence money to fund the service, but certainly it has been used to build the brand.

What do those* with whom this service on these sites now competes feel about all this?

*ps: I am not that happy.

BBC - BBC Trust report says news coverage is failing the regions - maybe becuase that £3.5B is not going to where some think it is... should?

Press Gazette - Regional publishers renew criticism of BBC local web plans

Press Gazette - 'BBC colossus threatens to undermine other websites'

Suffer little children

Today I am watching two teenagers on the BBC Breakfast sofa who have been tasked to speak on behalf of 'our traumatised youth in the UK'.

Why does the BBC pander to every interest group with an axe to grind and funding (four children commissioners?) to justify, and especially become equally complicit in setting up youngsters on national TV to feed the ratings frenzy for any news at any cost, no matter how valid (or not) the substance and what the impact may be on kids being used by adults to push certain agendas.

I am sure getting on TV is thrilling, and these kids can often be admirable, but in many cases they can prove less than comprehensible and frankly either waffle or end up unconvincing representatives of the causes they have been set up to advocate.

One today was asked something like 'how awful it is being a child in the UK these days'. Faced with such a loaded question the poor kid froze and in an near politician-perfect manner fobbed off the answer on 'someone else'.

And only yesterday I was watching two Girl Guides under the same glare, as part of some 'the world and its dog is making us want to be things we shouldn't' effort by another interest group. When challenged on what they did want, the whole thing fell apart when one tried to articulate what is patently not going to happen, namely that media should only cover the good stuff that celebs do and ignore the negatives.

This is just cheap time-filling at best, made worse by using kids to make already dubious points about kids that are blatantly steering certain adult agendas, whilst serving the poor individuals being toyed with in the spotlight poorly.

Whatever the merits of these youngster's feelings, my two just thought these 'representatives' seemed inarticulate, sad and daft. Not what should be portrayed to encourage our youth on living in the UK today.

BBC - UK society 'demonising' children - If anyone is messing with our kids, I can think of a few more pressing guilty parties

Watched, but still defiant

Genius. Not sure if it counts as bias, but...

I am just watching the latest episode of Newsexcuse.... sorry... watch.

A viewer makes some truly brilliant points about plain bizarre reporting standards (a story on the North/South 'health divide', illustrated to serve the agenda du jour by focusing on middle-aged, beer-swilling, fag-smoking Mancunians ...in a pub, and in comparison young, buff Devonians... working out in a gym).

I will give presenter Ray Snoddy full marks for trying but, surprise, surprise, the editorial BBCer in a blazer simply says no, he didn't see an issue.

I truly do wonder what the point of this show is, at least in this form. Is it just to log a complaint as 'addressed' (7.45am on a Saturday to compensate for 10pm primetime news) and give some smug senior type a chance to vent at being got up early at the weekend by saying 'It didn't happen. Or if it did it doesn't matter. Or if does what are you going to do about it anyway?'

Comment is now.... confusing

Must be something in the water.

In the past few days (months, if you include the BBC) a few blogs I play with have 'revamped', all claim, for the better.

In almost every case* this has not been my experience.

A case of 'It ain't broke so let's fix it to make more money'?

Welcome to the new Comment is free

At the end of the day

Better late than never

Answers to your questions

At least I now have a few more entries in the 'what to avoid ' box on our designs.

* Bar one - Brand Republic - kudos - Welcome to Brand Republic 2.1

You're f...ull of it

Is The Apprentice killing marketing?

I am glad your piece went on to qualify, though in my view still nowhere near enough.

'BBC TV’s The Apprentice is a rare thing...'

And long may it remain so, though now its ratings success is proven, if nothing else, we will be cursed with the rush and glut of '1st to be second' inferior me-toos that will already be in can. However...

'.. – an example of broadcasting that not only entertains,'

Without a doubt, as does Dragon's Den. Or any spectacle that is the TV of the Coliseum. Only at least there the protagonists are seen on their actual merits, even if the fight is rigged, without key aspects being consigned to the cutting floor if they do not fit the 'narrative'.

'... but also educates...'

Sorry, can't agree. It shows 'something' as real that is not. That is not education.

'... and promotes the world of business to the wider UK population.' Again, sorry, no way. It presents a notion of business to sofa surfers who also think that X Factor is how you get rich and famous in music. Which serves but a minute sliver of society who make bazillions out of the lie. Mainly in media.

'Not only that, but it does so very, very well – it’s hugely popular across all demographics.' Latter, yes, self-evidently, though I suspect for all the wrong reasons. The former? Well, as you'll gather, I fear I must take another view.

Them. And us.

I used to be us. Now I am more them.

Us was the ad world, where perfectly good ads were dropped well before their sell-by date mainly because we got bored and fancied a change.

I am minded of this when I read this: As Honda's skydivers plummeted, its brand was heading heavenward

Thing is, as a normal(ish) viewer and despite reading more than my fair share of ad industry stuff, it all totally passed me by.

I recall some ads that now make sense, with guys practicing for a skydive and a URL something like 'difficult is hard to do.com', but it really didn't interest me enough to retain and check, and certainly I had no clue about Honda being the reason.

So, yet again, as with the recent Sex in the City hype, I feel I am being told something is a No1 Bestseller without much evidence that it is anything like.

I am all for creativity, and this is certainly innovative, but like with so much, the process seems to have become more important than the result.

Brand Republic - No more retreat. We must admit to advertising’s failure!