j'accuse | Tag Archive

Clueless at Bondiplus

Posted on 17. Aug, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

This has to be the facebook quote of the week. After last season’s ‘controversial’ programmes Bondi+ will be back again with more of the topical, relevant and cutting edge investigative journalism. Don’t hold your breath though, judging by today’s facebook post we are in for another mind-numbing ride:

Lou Bondi: This is the time of year when I start getting a knot in the stomach: how can we come up with another 9 months worth of topics for Bondiplus? Then the knot goes away by mid-September and before I know it its June. 18 years in the business and the same thing happens every year.

Go figure.

Is Facebook Evil, or Just Clueless? (crenshawcomm.com)

Dangers of Facebook

Posted on 21. Jul, 2010 by jacques in iTech

It’s only recently that Facebook has finally given in to installing a “panic button” that should allow young, vulnerable browsers and users to alert the authorities whenever they perceive a danger. Facebook dangers are not only about paedophiles and sex-offenders though. There’s the risk of scavengers for information and personal data gaining access to your inner sancta sanctorum. Knowing how to manage the information that you make available on facebook is just as important as the panic button for youngsters.

One of the most common ways of gaining access to other peoples’ profile and photos is by creating a fake identity and then befriending people on facebook. Most people are flattered by a friend request and more so when the person in question looks rather “attractive” in his or her profile pic. Which is why probably more men fall for the add a friend bit than women. Men are suckers for what they assume to be another admirer. I was alerted to the activities of a supposed “Anne Borg” on facebook.

So I checked out Ms Borg. The profile photos aren’t exactly revealing – a single photo taken of a woman looking sideways – and a supposed location of Los Angeles (California). There’s little or nothing by way of clues and activity only a long list of friends. The usual suspects really. Semi-celebrities who might have been flattered by another “fan” and politicos – quite a few of those. Funny how nobody’s suspicion was piqued by a one photo character with the commonest surname in Malta and innocuous name living in LA. I was.

So I did an image search. An easy thing to do nowadays. Anne Borg’s photo turns out to be for sale on a professional photographers’ site. Here is Nathan Rupert’s site. Now check out Scream Daisy loving Anne Borg. You gotta love the anonymous fecker behind the site. The face doesn’t get as anonymously harmless than that.

"Anne Borg" on Facebook

"Anne Borg" by Nathan Rupert

There you go. Not so difficult to tell the fake from the real is it? So to all you who have gotten sucked in by this impostor don’t forget to unfriend asap (quick Bocca if you’re reading this … it’s not a fan it’s a stalker).

Some tips from another website about security awareness are in order:

Consider restricting access to your profile. If the site allows it, it’s a good idea to limit access to your profile. Don’t allow strangers to learn everything they can about you. It’s just not safe.
Keep your private information private. Never post your full name, Social Security number, address, phone number, financial information or schedule. These will make you vulnerable to identity thieves, scams, burglars, or worse.
Choose a screen name that is different from your real name. Avoid using any personal information that would help someone identify or locate you offline.
Think twice before posting your photo. Photos can be used to identify you offline. They can also be altered or shared without your knowledge.
Don’t post information that makes you vulnerable to a physical attack. Revealing where you plan to meet your friends, your class schedule, or your street address is almost an open invitation for someone to find you. Remember that a photo in front of the Co-op tells strangers you are in Austin, and quite likely at the university.
Use your common sense. If you are contacted by a stranger online, find out if any of your established friends know the person, or run an online search on them (after all, you can use these things to your own benefit too!). If you agree to meet them, make it in a public place and invite others to join you.
Trust your instincts. If you feel threatened or uncomfortable during an online interaction, don’t continue the dialogue. Report any offensive behavior to the social networking Web site administrators.
Be suspicious. Don’t take any information you receive from a new online contact at face value. The Internet makes it easy for people to say or do things they would never say or do in public or in face-to-face interactions. Protecting yourself is the smart thing to do.

BE PREPARED!!

This has been J’accuse. Snooping so you don’t have to.

The 5 biggest Facebook ‘don’ts’ (techburgh.com)
Five things that could topple Facebook’s empire (cnn.com)
5 Killer Social Media Tools for Facebook Addicts (bloggingot.com)
Letter: The Ghosts of Facebook (nytimes.com)
25 Common Facebook Faux Pas That College Students Make (onlinecollege.org)

I.M. Jack : The Secular Post Edition

Posted on 21. Jul, 2010 by jacques in Rubriques

Gode di Immunità Ecclesiastica
The sponsors of the anti-divorce billboard erected by the Zebbug Parish are performing all sorts of cartwheels in order to make it clear that they are actually fence-sitters of the prime order and are neither for or against divorce. I guess it is important to know that Mega Tech of Mdina Road, Zebbug, fine purveyors of electronic gaming, have absolutely no opinion whatsoever in favour or against divorce though I am sure you could buy a copy of The Sims (check out the Guide to Marriage in the Sims at the end of this post) from the establishment – complete with married couples and all.

I like the way Jason Grech of Mega Tech used the smoking metaphor for an analogy as to why sponsors should not be associated with the message. Rothmans used to sponsor the football league, he says, but it does not mean that smoking is good for footballers. Bank of Valletta are into their tenth year of sponsoring the MFA’s premier league and we are inching towards legislation that bans advertising of cigarettes completely. That’s the thing about advertising Jason, it’s full of those irritating messages you can’t control. You should stick to the PLPN way – you give them the off the books bung and the Curia/Parish will give you a highway to heaven.

Apparently the church billboard did not need a permit because it fell under socio-religious classification which means it can be erected for 21 days without a permit. I wonder if some company is willing to sponsor the J’accuse Billboard that we could erect in Zebbug square for 21 days – it would state “God has no vote/ Alla m’ghandux vot”. Anonymous bungs accepted.

Tut Tut Flies and Aedes Albopictus

Image via Wikipedia

No new sightings have been made of the dangerous Asian Tiger Mosquito in Malta. The albino-like varmint had shaken a few feathers with two sightings in September and November. It is a carrier of such niceties as dengue and yellow fevers. Thankfully the committee specially appointed by the government for the search and destroy mission did not make any further sightings. What Malta is still full of is the local “tut tut” fly. People complaining endlessly about the heat (justified), prices (not entirely justified) and anything they can complain about in mid conversation. Speaking of mid-conversation, J’accuse spotted fellow a fellow Luxembourg dweller bravely wearing these pink crocs at the Embassy in Valletta.

Driving Maniacs

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why we should wonder at all the accidents happening this summer. How can you marvel when walking or driving involves exposing your self to manifest danger for life and limb. Students equipped with almost half a brain pop out at the most improbable of places to cross the road. Yesterday I risked a head on collision from behind in order to slow down for two absolute nincompoops who were crossing a dark road on Regional Road at Saint Andrew’s right at the blind corner after the lights at Jessie’s Bar (direction Qawra). If I was not risking a mad bus ramming my rented 107 I would have got out of the car and given them a good beating myself such was the anger they provoked with their nonchalant attitude towards safety.

Students living at the Coastline hotel are waiting for the lights to turn green before crossing. (Green for them not for the cars of course). Which does not mean that an accident will not happen there any time soon. It just takes one hair brained crosser or worse one of those arseholes who think that the coast road is Le Mans revisited and boom you have your “tilef il-kontroll tal-vettura” and “ghal xi raguni ma hix maghrufa” all over again. Bugger to all that. We should reintroduce impaling as a punishment for serious traffic offences.

Valletta & Paceville

The capital is getting nicer and nicer what with all the embellishments and road works. At least they are worth something ad maiorem popoli commoditatem unlike the cacophonic chaos that are the works in the streets of the suburb that never sleeps. Check out my funky snapshots of the city (on my facebook album). I enjoyed taking them with my little Nikon Coolpix. You’ve just gotta love the Public Convenience in Strait Street. I also managed to be in VLT at midday to witness the St George’s Square spitting to music thingy. Water bounced and jumped to Charles Camilleri.

I think I like what they’ve done to the square (whose surface looks like an Olly and Benjy football pitch) but it still will never justify the expenses that were dispensed for the launching concert. It’s benches, lampposts and a couple of water spitters. At least we can console ourselves that urban planners have finally discovered the pleasures of open spaces. Slowly, slowly.

***

Guide to Marriage in the Sims (from ask.com)

A gay proposal in The Sims (yes, it also means happy)

“The Sims” is a fun simulation that gets some parts of life right. We all get cranky if we don’t have enough fun, food, and rest. But when it comes to marriage, the game is very different.

Steps to Getting Married
Friendship is a requirement for Sims to get married. They have to have a relationship score of 70. Then it is safe to turn on the heat, by lots of kissing and hugging. The proposal action becomes available once the relationship score is met. In order for a proposal to be accepted, the potential spouse needs to be in a good mood. They can easily refuse the proposal just because they aren’t hungry or need to empty their bladder. Once you are sure they are in a good mood, then propose. But even then, nothing is guaranteed.
The Wedding

When the proposal is accepted the Sims will immediately have a wedding. They change into wedding clothes and that’s it!

After the Wedding
The visiting sim will move into the home adding their assets to the bank account. The last name of the Sim moving in is changed. Children of the new spouse will move in as well, except if there is another adult at the original home.

Divorce? New Spouse?
Once married, that’s it! No divorce for Sims. They can, however, marry other Sims. Each Sim can have multiple spouses. A male Sim could have 7 other wives living with him, as long as he proposed to each in his own home.

The Sims Get the Party Started in EA’s New Expansion Pack to Massively Popular The Sims 3 (eon.businesswire.com)

J’accuse : Friends

Posted on 06. Jun, 2010 by jacques in Articles

I am happy to say that I have a lot of friends who vote Nationalist (or Labour). I am not, if I may add, particularly ashamed to be seen with them. There. I’ve said it. I’ve come out and said it. It was killing me really, having to keep this secret to myself all this time, but now that I’ve come out and relieved myself of this bit of info burdening my conscience I feel much better.

If my declaration does not sound ridiculous enough, then what would you think if I felt the need to specify that “Actually I have some friends who are black”? You’d think me to be some weirdo living in some pre-Rosa Parks world of racial segregation. Incidentally, this is the 50th anniversary of the publication of that magnificent book by Harper Lee To Kill a Mockingbird – published only five years after Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on a bus. I owe Harper Lee much of the inspiration for taking the legal career path, thanks to her unflinching Atticus Finch. Ironically, Harper Lee lives a very segregated life in Monroeville, Alabama (the real Maycomb from the story), conceding few interviews and having written pretty much nowt since the book that was voted into the top 10 must-reads of a lifetime (beating the Bible in the process).

It is very probable that the Mockingbird is a fictionalised autobiography of Harper Lee and that the character Scout in the book is actually Lee herself. Her best friend in the book, named Dill, is thought to be Harper Lee’s childhood friend Truman Capote. Though the friendship drifted apart in later years, neither of them was ever heard to say that they were ashamed of knowing one another.

Gays in the village

You know where I am coming from with all this “I have X friends” business – and no I do not mean Facebook. I am obviously referring to Prof. Anthony Zammit’s remark during the proceedings before the House Social Affairs Committee (HSAC) at the temple of conservatism and bigotry. The subject was “the situation of homosexuals and transgender individuals” in Malta, and the information that we have at hand comes with the courtesy of a very “xarabankified” Times as one of my readers described it. For it is important to bear in mind that, in fulfilling its reporting duty, the Strickland House product seems to have shifted towards a more “provocative” approach in the presentation of its material – in some cases denaturing the very subject being reported.

It was thusly that The Times’ David Schembri kicked off with a very titillating title What Happens in the Bedroom is the Government’s Business only to fall foul of the timesofmalta.com inquisition and retract to a more moderate Parliament discusses gay rights (technical geeks did notice that the permalink (article’s web address) remained the same though – baby steps for The Times tech). So yes, as in Malawi, gay rights are still an issue for Malta’s democratic institutions to discuss.

What makes an individual (you’ve got to love the stressed use of the term ‘individual’ in the title on the HSAC’s agenda) gay? What is a gay couple? And what roles do they perform in the household? These are some of the crucial questions that seem to be automatically raised in this committee that feels and acts very much like some Victorian committee questioning Darwin’s preposterous assertions on apes, men and the like.

Only that here, thanks to a mixture of confused (and I may add unfair) reporting and clueless honourable gentlemen, we were not discussing the evolutionary merits of the opposable thumb but rather issues of a more personal nature of thousands of ‘individuals’ who inhabit the islands of Malta in the 21st century. We needn’t go so far as examining the red-hot issue of “gay adoption” that inevitably sparks fires and heats debates even in the most liberal of nations. We are talking of basic rights and liberties – such as the right to marry (and I speak of the civil law right for people not giving two hoots about sacraments humanly concocted in some Diet or Council in Trent).

Queer folk

The news from the HSAC was not promising though. There seemed to be much banter about whether it was the government’s business to have an eye in every bedroom. Edwin Vassallo’s assertion that “Yes it was” because we bear the consequences of such things as “teenage pregnancies and single parenthoods” looked slightly out of place in a forum discussing couples whose ability to reproduce among themselves can best be described as impossible. So unless some new religion is in the making, complete with dogma of “impossible conception”, something was definitely wrong with the perspective of the lawmakers in the House. Sure The Times correspondent peppered his “report” with anecdotes about MGRM’s ideas on “creative ways to have children” but surely this was not the original point of the agenda?

It then moved to the slightly queer (sorry) when Honourable Conservative Member Beppe Fenech Adami resorted to ballistic logic (in the sense that he approached the subject with the same level of convincing logic as a suicide terrorist strapped with explosives): What roles for gay partners? Who’s the man and who’s the woman in a relationship? Given that it is already hard to determine such “roles” in the post-nuclear family – we’ve all heard the one about the one who wears the trousers – the questions were as anachronistic as they were offensive. As BFA proceeded to prove that, since switching roles is not done in his domus, it couldn’t work anywhere else, the gods of logic threw a tantrum and collectively resigned.

At which point you can picture Prof. Anthony Zammit making his dramatic entry armed with a Damocletian sword and delivering the coup de grace to a discussion that never really stood on tenable grounds. “I have gay friends and I am not ashamed to be seen with them in public”. Ta-da indeed. I must confess that I do not know much about Prof. Zammit beyond what I read in the papers, but even had the pinker corners of the web not led to my discovery that he had more than a passing interest in the discussion, the kind of statement he came up with is flabbergastingly ridiculous. The only conclusion we could draw from the “xarabankified” report was that our current crop of representatives is far from representing a large crop of the voting population.

Friends of friends

There’s that phrase again. Programmes on TV this week were rather amusing. Lou (of Bondiplus of Where’s Everybody?) got spanked on the backside by the BA for his Lowell programme, so Peppi (of Xarabank of Where’s Everybody?) set up a programme discussing freedom of expression and Lou’s spanking. Guests on the programme? Another ta-da moment. Lou Bondi and the ubiquitous media guru Joe Borg Father. I spotted WE’s Norman Vella on Facebook claiming that “In this programme Lou Bondi will not be the only guest. He will face people who publicly expressed themselves against his programme with Norman Lowell”. Incidentally, he was replying to a comment by Borg Cardona who had just implied that the Xarabank programme had an incestuous element in it.

The criteria used by the Xarabank crew reminds me of certain Times’ editorials (or of a conversation between Lou and Fr Joe) where they seem to assume that they are the only people to have a relevant opinion or to have actually expressed an opinion on any given subject. All three – Xarabank, Bondiplus and The Times – have become an institutionalised form of their relative medias and it is in that spirit that they are criticised. Frankly, all three could hold whatever opinion they like but their constant editorial position that obliterates any opinion they consider irrelevant (for irrelevant read uncomfortable to deal with) is worrying and stinks of a systematic effort to retain the stranglehold that they have built over a large chunk of the fourth estate.

I am not too sure that the credibility of all three is the same as they enjoyed a while back, even among the more conservative of elements. Having long abdicated one of the primary journalistic duties of proper investigation, they are now lost in a navel-gazing world of their own and they have constantly proved unable to deal with the wider democratisation of the media. While their voices might still be strong enough to be heard, and while they can still afford to ignore the disparate contradictory elements, they are noticing that their grasp is weakening and their efforts to remedy the situation is only leading them to descend into the comically absurd. So yes. We have Lou as a guest on Peppi’s show discussing how Lou and Peppi’s company should be allowed freedom of expression. Jolly good, I say.

Friendly fire

Finally, a few notes on friendly fire. Joseph Muscat was on Myriam Dalli’s TX this week. TX is a programme on Labour’s One TV (did I mention that we STILL have party-owned TVs in 21st century Malta?), so such notions as bias and doctored questions are only to be expected as annoying intervals in between shots of that Mediterranean beauty that is the programme presenter. The other person on the show glared at the camera and warned of the problems of corruption in the country while standing fast behind such weird notions as carte blanche for whistleblowers and promising the people €50 million (take from Peter give back to Peter) for the “unjust tax on vehicles”. Rather than traipsing uselessly with the kangaroos, Joe might want to polish up his knowledge of recent (very recent) ECJ jurisprudence before harping on about the latter subject. (I have friends who studied European Law and I am not ashamed to be seen with them).

Two notes on GonziPN and friends. Well done for the WiFi spots around the country. That is a bit more tangible than all the words about Vision 2015. Surely you should warn interested citizens that “free public WiFi” is not eternal. As in all similar European projects, expect a shift to paid services in the near future – whether big brother tells you or not. Also GonziPN’s little tryst with “non-politicians” at Vision2015+ felt like a very manufactured and simulated business among friends. Funny that name – Vision 2015+. A government plan gets a “+” tagged onto it and it becomes a party meet. A bit like programmes getting a “+” on their name on national TV. All they needed were Lou and Peppi at Vision 2015+ … but wait… they were there. So it’s OK, innit?

www.akkuza.com (j’accuse) has 301 friends on its Facebook page. Would you be ashamed to be seen as one of them?

Selective Defence is Bondi’s Plus

Posted on 21. May, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

J’accuse has received a copy of Lou Bondi’s defence argument before the Broadcasting Authority. It makes for very very interesting reading. Much as we would like to enter the debate on the issue of whether or not Lowell should have been allowed on the programme (and elsewhere we have done just that), we are more intrigued by the manner in which this ‘apologia’ continues to expose Lou’s selective amnesia as well as double-standards with regards to the weight of public opinion.

You will find below a link to the full document presented by Lou Bondi to the BA and you might like to read through it with particular attention to point 12 – regarding public opinion. Two questions stand out: firstly that Lou is arguing a technical point based on the very public opinion he chose to minimise in the Delimara program (Programmes People Watch).

Then there is the blatant selective amnesia – such as has been displayed before on the occasion of the infamous Plategate Bondiplus programme. Just look at point 12 of Lou’s apologia: first he quotes media guru Joe Borg and then he quotes an article in the Times – referring to the comments section. Having thus exhausted (according to Lou) all instances where his programme was mentioned and criticised he concludes:

Jidher car li ftit hafna kienu dawk li argumentaw li l-programm ma’ kellux isir. Interessanti wkoll li hafna minn dawk li qalu li l-programm kellu jsir, jikkritikaw, anki bl-ahrax, lil NL.

Brilliant. But false. Lou would like everybody to believe it. He probably believes it himself but the problem is tha this very forum chronicled the response in the mainstream media for you in the post entitled Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox (The Sunday Quotes). Claire Bonello, Mikela Spiteri and Tanja Cilia – all on the Times – and the Indy in a report all mentioned and criticised Bondiplus without any qualms.

You will notice of course that this assessment of all that Lou left out does not include the boringly irrelevant reality of the “peclieqa” on blogs… still, even without that proof you can see how selective Lou has been.

If you want a wider assessment of public opinion then dive to the wiked site youropenbook.org and input “norman lowell”. J’accuse has done it for you just click here. Scroll down to the period on and after 3rd May and see for yourself.

The farce continues….

Click to open the “Risposta BA re: Lowell” file.

Facebook’s Fine

Posted on 20. May, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

Some guy gets fined €500 under the Press Act for having commented that the pope should be shot through the hands and feet in order to feel closer to Jesus. This declaration was made within the “confines” (that’s sarcasm guys) of a facebook group called “No to the Pope in Malta”.

The charge was of incitement under the Press Act. Some people including, surprisingly, defence lawyer Owen Bonnici, argue that the publication in question (a Facebook entry) is not made in Malta but wherever Facebook has opted to have as a place of abode. What rubbish. We have repeated time and time again that the important thing with regard to publications is not where the site is registered but where it can be read. Hence anything you write on public forums/sites/comment boards etc is liable to be subject to Maltese law for the simple reason that it can be read on a computer in Malta.

My gripe is more on the issue of “incitement” than anything else. the police must have received a complaint and proceeded thereupon – they are not so much to blame. My worry is how far do we define this incitement and with what limits. For one thing it would be evident to any reasonable minded individual that Karl Farrugia’s comment regarding the perforation of the papal limbs with projectiles is surely not in the same league of seriousness as, let’s say, a loony rightist leader’s intimation of the use of violence methods for the expulsion of immigrants.

I believe that neither in the case of Karl nor in the case of the (fictitious) loony leader are we confronted with an equivocal statement as that uttered by Henry II. History leads us to believe that speaking of Becket Henry said “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest”. In actual fact it went more like this:

“What miserable drones and traitors have I nurtured and promoted in my household who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric!”

Four knights – Reginald Fitzurse, Hugh de Morville, Willieam de Tracy and Richard le Breton – overheard the regent’s appeal and took him to his word. They found Becket in Canterbury cathedral and brutally murdered him. The King lived to regret this deed while the four knights ended up being excommunicated for their troubles. In any case their interpretation of the royal despair as some form of command might be forgiven. Whether we should think that Karl Farrugia’s exhortation is an invitation in the manner of Henry II is something I doubt very much.

: Image via Wikipedia

True, people should be more aware of the consequences of their utterings and postings on such tools as facebook but surely no one in his right mind would believe that Karl Farrugia’s statement was meant to be taken literally?

Security increased for Pope’s Malta visit (telegraph.co.uk)

Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox – the Sunday quotes

Posted on 09. May, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

Some time ago J’accuse commented on how Bondi’s programme Bondiplus represented the death of investigative journalism. Only last week we pointed out the incongruency of the next programme planned by Lou – with Norman Lowell as guest. So. Is it still Gurnalizmu fuq Kollox? Hardly. Here’s what was said in the press today:

The day after last Monday’s show, when people were aghast in that very ‘what was Bondi thinking’ sort of way, disturbed by the exposure he was given, seeing it as some sort of incitement to racial hatred, I on the other hand seemed unable to fathom what all the fuss was about. Lowell worries me as much as Mary Poppins does. The only worrying thing about last Monday’s programme was that we were hardly going to be in for any surprises and we certainly were not going to hear anything we hadn’t already heard before. – Mikela Spiteri (“Our very own inglorious basterd“, Times)

When you consider these factors, it’s not surprising to see why Bondi invited Lowell along during a period when the topic of immigration is not very topical. Put yourself in his shoes. You can root around for a relevant subject (preferably one that puts the Labour Party in a bad light and hasn’t already been done to death in previous editions), spend long hours carrying out tedious research, and then have a programme where people only wake up for the closing credits and Rod Stewart crooning away. Alternatively, you could invite Lowell, choose choice extracts from a book which has been published for years, make a quick photomontage of black icons, and let Lowell do the talking. You’d be guaranteed a much wider audience with minimal effort, and if it was audience survey week, you’d be in with a winner. Never mind the fact that you’re providing a visibility platform for someone who spouts obnoxious and criminal views. That’s just a tiny niggle to be ignored when you’re in the business of producing ‘Programmes People Watch’. I wonder if the earlier Bondiplus slogan ‘Ġurnaliżmu Fuq Kollox’ has been replaced. It would look like it. – Claire Bonello (“Chasing ratings, not respect“, Times)

This week, Lou Bondí decided to take a break from the sublime and descend to the ridiculous. This week’s Bondí+ treated us to a people-bashing session by Norman Lowell, wearing his cravat backwards. The arguments were as cohesive as a jigsaw puzzle with several bits missing. But it was unfair of Bondí to try to put words into Lowell’s mouth by dint of repetition. – Tanja Cilia (“Blank versus“, Times)

One wonders whether these assertions will be met with the usual wall of deafening silence. There were also reactions elsewhere. The Indy reports that the BA has issued a charge against PBS for the Bondiplus Norman Lowell programme:

The Bondiplus programme led to mixed reactions and many heated discussions online, particularly on Facebook, with some arguing that the right to free speech should also include Mr Lowell’s right to express his beliefs, while others pointed out that his racist views were tantamount to incitement to hatred of specific groups, and therefore illegal. Other viewers felt that the programme only served to ridicule Mr Lowell, thus neutralising any potential influence he may have on viewers. While there were those who admitted they merely watched the programme “for a laugh”, there is real concern that Lowell’s followers are increasing in number, especially among the younger age group. (Independent)

Meanwhile Lou has been providing his guru expertise to the MZPN. Here’s a link to a pre-UK election discussion where Lou and Refalo discuss the extreme dangers of unstable government. MZPN Vid on Facebook

It’s another we told you so moment for J’accuse. As Chris would say: we’re doing the I told you so dance… all over again.

The Strongest Link

Posted on 30. Apr, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

While we are on the subject of links here are two blogs from the UK Big League that featured J’accuse this week.

Iain Dale – writer, speaker, broadcaster and politician – gave J’accuse a mention on his blog’s feature “the Daley Dozen” on Wednesday. Here is an extract from Dale’s bio:

Iain Dale is one of Britain’s leading political commentators, appearing regularly on TV and radio. Iain is best known for his political blog, Iain Dale’s Diary and football blog, West Ham Till I Die. He is a contributing editor and columnist for GQ Magazine, writes for the Daily Telegraph and a fortnightly diary for the Eastern Daily Press. He was the chief anchor of Britain’s first political internet TV channel, 18 Doughty Street.com and is a presenter on LBC Radio. He appears regularly as a political pundit on Sky News, the BBC News Channel, Newsnight, Radio 4 and Radio 5 Live. He is the publisher of the monthly magazine, Total Politics and the author or editor of more than twenty books. He is managing director of the new book publisher, Biteback Publishing.

Yep a Tory AND a Hammer… still, he did appreciate our critique of his Telegraph article (internet elections) – enough to grant J’accuse a second appearance on the Daley Dozen.

Then there was Charles Crawford, fresh from his latest encounter with the darker side of Maltese blogging. The former FCO diplomatic servant and speechwriter now blogs regularly at charlescrawford.biz and has had a scrape with the Maltese net media thanks to the Conspiracy Theory of the Foreign Consultant. Crawford revised his blog post Malta’s Dramatic Blogosphere to include a reference to both Blogs of Malta and J’accuse.

Not bad for a week of links. Who said netiquette is not useful?

The Digital Election

Posted on 29. Apr, 2010 by jacques in Mediawatch

Still observing the UK Election from the Web angle. J’accuse brings you another possible tool – direct Q&A with the leaders. Of course this entails meeting the leaders of the political parties and that means that they have to accept answering questions but just look at what the use of Youtube and Facebook combined manages to contribute to an election debate.

The Youtube page in question is Ukelection, and there you will find that following a poll with Youtube and Facebook users, a set of questions were put to the three UK party leaders — Brown, Cameron and Clegg. Their answers were available for all to see, compare – and significantly – vote upon.

You can visit the Youtube site now and see the result.This was the original promo ad for the debate.