the union forever? hot air in oxford

Some interesting debate has been bubbling away about tonight's debate at the Oxford Union. Racist politician Nick Griffin and Holocaust denier David Irving are in the line up for a debate about free speech.

I paid over a hundred quid for membership to the Union and all I got was a bent spoon from Uri Gellar (I think he mistook my hysterical laughter at his act for awe), so I have sympathy with those who urge us not to give the institution so much respect and attention. As Charlie Beckett has pointed out, it is far from the distinguished forum of national debate that it claims to be. It is a school for future MPs, CEOs and professional gas-bags.

In principle I agree with the liberal defenders of the event, but I think many are missing an important part of this particular case: how do we have a useful and enlightening debate about free speech?

The crux of the issue is the appropriate limits to free speech, particularly when we find what is said abhorrent. But Griffin and Irving don't believe that their views are unacceptable, so they won't be engaged with the fundamental question that needs tackling. No doubt the debate will descend into acrimony, with them playing the victim and defending their oddball views.

To really address the issue of free speech, I'd like to hear intelligent speakers who are engaged with the issue. Perhaps the defense lawyer for the 'lyrical terrorist' who was recently convicted for owning violent and subversive manuals and poetry, or a leading liberal thinker like Alan Ryan or Nancy Rosenblum.

There might be some sort of a case for inviting Griffin to a debate about immigration, or Irving to a debate about the nature of historical enquiry, but I don't see that they have very much at all to contribute about the nature of free speech in a modern democracy.

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

not for girls: how teachers are limiting horizons

phooey to boris johnson

why today is just like yesterday

boyzone: together, they're better by far

I couldn't let Boyzone's reunion last Friday night, or their upcoming tour pass without comment. They were my personal teenage obsession for at least five years, and while I can now look back rather more objectively on the quality of their output, their connection to those formative years of my life means that I can't wait to get to Wembley and see them perform.

Plus, their shoddiness was always part of the charm for me.

Anyway, with the awareness that not everyone shares my irrational love for the Dublin quintet, I've posted a video that the most hardened pop-cynic will revel in. Even more hysterical than the dancing is the fact that when asked where he comes from on a national TV show, Stephen Gately gives his street name!

 

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

the spice girls reunion: why it will flop

britney's comeback

this ain't a scene it's a goddam marketplace

feeling good about: thinking allowed

It is all too easy to use a blog to criticise, moan and grumble, so here's introducing an occasional new series called 'feeling good about...' In which we lavish (almost) unconditional praise on our favourite things.

To start the ball rolling, one of my favourite new finds during the past year has been Thinking Allowed, BBC Radio 4's 'social science' programme.

It is actually far broader and more accessible than the academic description suggests, and covers everything from media analysis, to policy discussion, and happiness and well-being. The latest episode covered suicide bombing as a social phenomenon, and the changing nature of luxury brands.

Each subject handled with intelligence and charm by the extremely likeable presenter Laurie Taylor, who has a voice that is a cross between George from Rainbow and warm honey. Like the best Radio 4 programmes it is informative without ever talking down to you.

Given its scheduling (4pm Wednesdays) it is little known or talked about, but everyone who is fortunate enough to stumble across it seems to fall in love with it. Hopefully its availablity as a podcast (via itunes and the bbc website) will bring it to a wider audience.

 

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

dick and dom: the saviours of radio one

vegetarian individualism and community values: a necessary trade-off?

are they terrorists? a response to steven levitt

gemma jones in spooks

Spooks is one of lamentably few good British TV drama series airing at the moment (though even the American networks aren't performing to their usual high standards of late).

Not only does Spooks have consistently high production values, it combines tight plotting and suspense with characters we really care about.

Even better, recent episodes have seen the introduction of Connie James, played by Gemma Jones.

How fantastic to see an older woman portrayed as heroic, witty and independent in a mainstream drama.

More stereotype-busting characters like this please!

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

over and out: voice overs in tv dramas

what makes a real family

faking it: how rdf killed genre television and ate its babies

best of the week: stuart jeffries' hatchet job on Boris

The funniest bad review I've read in quite a while

Congratulations to Stuart Jeffries for being one of the few writers who sees through the 'charms' of Boris Johnson.

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

phooey to boris

blog fiction: is blogging the future of storytelling?

sunday times style magazine: i love the smell of money in the morning

baby steps: why tv hasn't harnessed the power of the social web

Over the last year or so, TV development teams have been panicking about how to tap into the popularity of facebook, myspace and youtube. After all, this is where young people are spending their time, preferring the internet to the passive experience of watching TV.

Unfortunately most of the attempts to develop 360 formats (as they have become known) rest on a fundamental misunderstanding of the appeal of the social web. Almost as bad, in their rush to integrate online and broadcast technologies, TV execs are forgetting their strengths as professional programme makers.

A good example is Lily Allen's new BBC3 format, described in today's Media Guardian:

"BBC3 is grooming singer Lily Allen as one of its key faces after signing her up to front an entertainment show.

Lily Allen and Friends, which is set to air early next year, will be based on the social networking phenomenon that helped launch her career.

Viewers will shape the show online by becoming her virtual friends and contributing to topical discussions, putting questions to guests and even presenting parts of the show."

TV commissioners should not forget that what draws people to TV shows is professional casting, editing and formatting. After all, if you want to watch niche amateur experimentation you can find it on youtube, if you want to engage in topical discussion, you can do it on salon.com, and if you want virtual friends, you can collect them on facebook. Do I want to go on Lily's website to discover new bands, and present part of her TV show? No - those functions are already provided far better elsewhere online, and TV shows will find it almost impossible to compete.

I still think that the greatest innovations in TV will come from new technologies. However, such progress will only come when producers start inventing amazing websites (with the potential for TV spin offs), rather than tagging poor imitations of successful websites onto old TV formats. What draws people to social media is that it offers them something genuinely useful, whether it be the ability to make friends, speak to the world, or buy and sell.

Imagine, for example that a bright spark at the BBC comes up with the idea for a website called 'Friends Reunited' - a website where we allow anyone to find their old school friends. The website is launched, and is immediately flooded with new members, keen to stroll down memory lane. But it doesn't stop there - because in making the website the BBC has created a treasure trove of great TV and radio content. Cameras can follow old high school sweet hearts who are reuniting for the first time, and they can invite a celebrity to embark on their own journey using the website site in front of the cameras, as a new way to do a celebrity biography...

Of course, the concept of Friends Reunited has been and gone, but it seems to me that this is the approach that TV people should be taking. They should create websites that people genuinely want to use - by no means an easy proposition, but certainly a creatively and financially lucrative one.

 kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy:

blog fiction: is blogging the future of storytelling?

throw the (face)book at them

faking it: how rdf killed genre television and ate its babies

the spice girls reunion: why it will flop

With the risk that always comes with making a prediction in public, I will stick my neck out and predict that the upcoming Spice Girls comeback onslaught will be a damp squib.

The first clue came with the pictures from their reunion announcement. Four of the group were dressed almost identically in black body-con outfits, as dictated by the pages of Grazia magazine, while Geri was clad in a floaty floral maxi dress, also sanctioned by the fashion press.

Unfortunately the winning Spice Girls formula of five distinctive, yet mutually complementary looks had been forgotten. The question of whether the reunion would be a genuine return to form, or an ill-advised vanity project began to form.

N0w I was never a Spice Girls fan, but I could see why so many other people were. When they burst on to the scene in the mid nineties they had an air of not caring what anyone thought about them. They turned platform shoes and Union Jack prints into must have items for under-15s.

It doesn't bode well for their comeback that they seem to have lost their devil-may-care charm and energy.

But as Britney demonstrated this week, the biggest media, marketing, and fashion disasters can be averted by a great pop record. Unfortunately the buzz on the pop blogs about their new song Headlines (Friendship Never Ends) does not look good for the group.

The video that accompanies the song is even worse. Desperate and embarrassing. Look at us gyrating in our bras! Stroking our hair! Gazing wistfully through the shadows! Showing off the bodies that have been ravaged by various eating disorders over the past decade!

For women who have reunited on their own terms, with complete creative control, they are failing to enact even the most basic 'girl power'.

Of course people who are desperate to indulge in pop-culture nostalgia, and have forked out £75 for a ticket to the tour might be able to convince themselves that the group still has what it takes, but it doesn't look like they'll be winning over any new fans.

kate s-b

If you liked this post, you might enjoy

britney's comeback

this ain't a scene it's a goddam marketplace

dick and dom: the saviours of radio one