July 2009 Archives

'This means having to stop off several times on the journey to rob a bank'

It's coming up to the height of the summer and over the last few years three things have been certain to take place around this time.

Firstly, the Met Office will apologise for promising a hot summer. The amount of rain that has fallen so far will mean that the name 'barbeque summer' will consist of redundant barbeques collecting rainwater in the garden - unless people turn them upside down, climb aboard, and use them to float down towards Cornwall on a flooded M5.

Secondly, MPs have embarked on their mid-year, 82-day break - meaning that the state of the country should improve slightly between now and September. They'd better be sure to spend their holiday on British beaches, showing their support for the environment and making sure the press photograph them with as many pensioners, children, and culturally diverse people as possible while they stand in the freezing sea with their trouser-legs pulled up.

And thirdly, Prince Charles, the Archbishop of Narnia or [insert hypocritical figurehead here] will tell everyone that we are destroying the planet with our greed, gluttony or trips to Florida in a Land Rover. Before deciding where to invest their next £billion.

The environmental debate usually reaches its peak in the summer where MPs make the headlines once again as they jet set across the world and get criticised if they venture out of the UK for their summer holiday.

Every summer, people come on the television and say that to save the planet we must not get aboard a plane and they'll try and make you feel guilty if you do.

But it's also said that the planet has been through worse events than the proliferation of the human being. They say that the earth has undergone earthquakes, volcanoes, extinction, magnetic storms, hundreds of thousands of years of being bombarded with asteroids, continental drifts, solar flares, cosmic rays, flooding and recurring ice ages. But if you buy an energy-saving light bulb, put your left leg in, your left leg out, in out, in out, and you shake it all about we'll save the planet and make the world safe so that people of the future can happily drive around in their Volvos.

The debate as to whether Heathrow should have a third runway looks like one that is set to last and will continue to divide the Labour and Conservative parties throughout the rest of the year and beyond.

The Conservatives oppose the decision to build a third runway because of the damage to the environment. Some have even suggested that the site could be used to create a wind farm where environmentalists can go and spend some time hugging wind. But the Labour Party are standing in favour of the new runway because of the benefit to the economy that it will bring or because a new wind farm will mess up Gordon Brown's hair.

So, as it's summer and everyone is ready to go on their holidays, those who don't want to face the ecomentalists that will scowl at you as you board a plane will be heading off for a holiday in the UK.

But Britain isn't known for its seaside hotels and they are frequently said to be among some of the worst in Europe. We may have one or two decent beaches, respectable scenery, and excellent cream teas but the latest report from mystery shoppers has suggested that British hotels are particularly bad.

A 4-star hotel would probably be the equivalent of Fawlty Towers. And a 3-star hotel would probably be less comfortable than a South American jail.

The toilet paper may be folded into a little V, the breakfast may be something people would describe as 'hearty', and you may have a quaint little view of the ocean. But the maids have a habit of vacuuming at 3am (scoring extra points if they hit the skirting board), there's bacteria in the bathroom that's so big it's sitting and reading a newspaper, and in terrible British fashion you find that the previous occupant has actually pooed in the kettle.

Yet, to go on holiday in Britain it is likely that you would travel by car. And this means having to stop off several times on the journey to rob a bank so you can afford the petrol.

If, on the other hand, you want a hotel with revolving doors, lots of plants, and a chirpy wake-up call, you'll probably have to step on a plane.

But this is a nightmare in itself.

Taking a plane usually involves arriving at the airport early so you can be stripped naked in front of hundreds of people and poked and prodded to ensure you haven't got anything sharper than a tissue.

But at least going on a plane is more interesting than travelling by car. Children can spend time looking out of the window at the clouds as oppose to listening to their parents making an announcement every time they see a sheep or having to hold their noses. Because it's a well-known fact that the countryside stinks.

It's also a well known fact that, when looking through an aeroplane window, only posh houses can be seen. Usually surrounded by hedgerows that look like Jilly Cooper.

A downside to travelling on a plane is having to listen to the safety announcements telling you how to put on your seatbelt and the dubious phrases that they use.

In the 'unlikely event' (= an interesting expression coming from a company who lie about departure times) of a sudden change in cabin pressure (= fuselage splits in two), oxygen masks will fall down. Place the mask over your nose and mouth and breathe 'normally'. (= 'Normally' as in the way that a person breathes when they are in vertical freefall at 1,000 miles per second inside a large aluminium can that is heading for a cornfield.) During a 'water landing' (= the plane plunges into the ocean), life vests are available under your seat and the cushion on the seat itself can be used as a floatation device (= you will be stuck in the middle of the Pacific Ocean for several days holding on to a cushion that smells of farts).

Another downside to flying on a plane is the change in people's behaviour when they are several thousands of feet in the air. When a member of the cabin crew tell you to 'be aware of the nearest exit' you start to look around and make a plan in case the plane crashes into the sea.

You form a master plot in your mind that involves surveying the other passengers to see who you can push aside to get to safety if something does go wrong.

It's survival of the fittest.

As the plane splashes down, react fast. Avoid the nearest exit as there is a very large passenger in the way who looks like they may take too long to escape. Make a beeline for the second-nearest exit which involves stepping on the head of the widow with the big hair, knock over the man you've seen rubbing his bad ankle, and push aside the emotionally disturbed passengers before exiting the plane where you can help others. You're of no use to anyone if the large passenger's fallen on top of you during a badly-planned emergency strategy.

Another change in personality occurs when it's meal time. Despite having many meals during their lifetime, people have never been so excited to have a meal on a plane. Just seeing the meal trolley coming down the aisle can make someone so excited they may just experience total euphoria as they all sit up, pull their trays down and repeatedly tap nearby passengers on the leg to announce that the 'FOOD'S COMING!'

People know it will taste like an old sock and yet they get so excited when it arrives.

The meat in the meal, whatever meat it is, usually contains grill marks on either side as if they think people actually believe there's an open air grill on the flight deck. The food is also usually served with some kind dressing that is packaged in something from the space program and the sauce itself tastes like it has been made of rejects from Russia's nerve gas agency.

So, the environment/third runway situation is still debatable and the debate will continue until well after the summer recess.

And the idea of the most environmentally method of travel isn't going to go away anytime soon with large amounts of money set to be offered to scientists who can invent a method of vastly reducing damaging emissions from aircraft.

One of the other interesting reasons why local residents argued that the third runway would be a nuisance was not just because of the noise or the pollution; it was actually having bright airport lights outside their houses.

So, doing my bit, I have come up with an idea that I may even consider taking on Dragon's Den.

Being a wild thing, my idea is to try hanging pieces of material up over the window.

I think I'll call them 'curtains'.

'People use whatever terms they can to create an impact'

Last week the Advertising Standards Agency slapped KFC's chickeny bottom for their advert that suggested that KFC has fresh chicken delivered to each store every day, when this actually isn't true.

But this is hardly surprising. We all know that companies sometimes tell lies to make them seem more appealing: It's said that Bold 2 in 1 is part of the fabric of life, Red Bull gives you wings, and that the government want a fairer, stronger, and more prosperous Britain.

There's been much in the news lately about how companies/executives/political parties have been deceptive. Everyday another group of people are being exposed.

So if you're Al Gore and you make an international film telling everyone they're going to burn in Hell you get the Nobel Peace Prize. If you embezzle the British public of their savings you get a six-figure pension. But if you say your chicken is delivered fresh everyday it will mean the ASA will send a man round with short trousers and a clip board to pull angry faces at you and tell you he's very, very cross.

It's the same with television programmes. If Bear Grylls goes out into a lake to catch a fish and can't manage to find one, the show would not be worth watching. So if they buy a fish from Sainsbury's and pretend he caught it in the name of entertainment it's not the end of the world.

And some viewers complained when it emerged that Andrew Marr doesn't actually drive a Nissan Figaro as is shown in the opening segment of his show. Oh God, no. Say it isn't so.

Some television has to be staged or it would not be worth watching. There would be no point in upsetting housewives who had settled down with a box of tissues to watch a reunion between a woman and her long-lost father on daytime television - only to have the father turn up at the woman's house when she's not in. It would be about as interesting as watching ITV3.

People like to be entertained when they watch television; it's why programmes like Countdown and Through the Keyhole get such low viewing figures. They don't contain any danger, exploding helicopters or car chases. For anyone to want to watch Through the Keyhole, a contestant would have to take the panel hostage and David Frost would have to explode into a million pieces, or at least break a few bones and then escape down a mountain with Keira Knightly while being chased by transvestite neo-Nazis.

It's the same when advertising products. Advertising is the fine art of making you believe that something you've never seen before is what you've been waiting for your whole life.

An advert for shampoo seldom takes place in a shower where most people wash their hair. The advertising agencies seem to believe that the majority of the population frequently wash their hair in the hot and steamy waterfall that they have in their back garden while tropical birds dry their hair with a towel when they're finished.

And it's not good enough to have an advert for shampoo that says, 'It makes your hair clean.' According to advertisers shampoo needs to invigorate, enrich, and cause multiple orgasms.

Back in the old days when people were born in chimneys and were only let out to be beaten, the adverts were much simpler. In magazines and newspapers it stated exactly what the product was, how much it cost, and included a little information about it. These days, an image of an orange on a beach where the sky is slowly turning to cheese is supposed to advertise a car. It's the power of dreams apparently.

Food becomes 'zesty' (sour), a 'delicacy' (something you would never dream of eating), 'cuisine' (an extra 60% above the price of 'food'), 'lemon-flavoured' (contains no lemon whatsoever) and 'old-fashioned' (from when E.coli was a side-dish).

Adverts are full of tedious music - like the Boots advert with 'Here Come the Girls' - who have been coming for nearly 2 years and obviously have no intention of arriving because in every advert they're always on their way and don't seem to be getting closer to their destination.

Or everyone seems to be holding their abdomen; walking around saying they're 'bluuurrrttedd', and having to take biffidus fartidium which is good bacteria.

And if they're not bloated they're either constipated or have severe diarrhoea.

I've been on the toilet for days with terrible diarrhoea, but if I take new Imodium Super Bung, I can save it all until tomorrow! So now I can carry on with my super life, run my hands through fountains in the town square, and smile at strangers!

Advertisers run the risk of irritating the public so much that they will never end up selling any products and it wouldn't be surprising if the woman from the Curanail/Criminail adverts has full police protection for her own safety. The advertising campaign is about as useful as having Jo Brand as the face of Actimel.

Comparethemeerkat.com is scientifically proven (we love microscopes, we do!) to lower cholesterol and build a healthy immune system because you're worth it. Terms and conditions apply. Batteries not included. May cause death.

Also, blinding people with vast amounts of information about extra features gets people to buy what is being advertised. A washing machine no longer only washes clothes. It has sat nav and internet and can send photos to mobile phones - which no one's really bothered with since Rebecca Loos.

It's also the same with the news. The language helps to create the tone. The Sun may say 'Dirty Old Pervert Finally in Jail', while on Newsround they may have 'Poor Little Kitty Goes Missing' and Newsnight would say 'George Osbourne to scrap failed FSA.'

The language helps to set the tone and make the audience go 'Ahhh' when there's a bag of puppies that have been found by the canal. Or 'Boooooo' when an MP walks on screen. But there's usually more use of the terms 'Recession', 'Turmoil', and 'Death' on a serious programme like Newsnight and phrases like 'Celebrity', 'Celebrity Wedding', and 'Celebrity Mansions' on the lower-key programmes.

You wouldn't expect Jeremy Paxman to introduce Newsnight and they sit at the desk showing the audience at home pictures of nipple-slips from Heat magazine.

Many companies from advertisers to newsgroups are beginning to be scrutinized about their use of language; creating effect but inadvertently not being technically correct.

But the use of emotive language has taken to the streets. People use whatever terms they can to create an impact.

For example, a thug may stop you in the street, smash the base off a glass bottle and say, 'I'm gonna glass you!' - which certainly creates impact and sounds quite threatening and mean. But you would have to stop and think very carefully and explain to them, in the heat of the situation and in the name of language, that 'glass' is a noun, not a verb, and therefore should not be conjugated.

Then hope this doesn't make things worse.

'You can no longer recognise a criminal'

There was a time when talking about crime would automatically conjure images of burglars climbing through windows, suspicious-looking people on street corners, and having to come back from purchasing a kebab with your buttocks full of lead.

We're told that all children practice criminal activities on their video games to ensure that in real life, by the age of six, they have enough experience to bump off anyone who threatens their drug empire.

But the fastest-rising types of crime in today's society are not coming from thugs in the street. Modern technology has allowed criminals with a higher IQ than that of a daffodil to proliferate. Now corporate and bureaucratic corruption from the top of the hierarchical scale is beginning to dominate - as well as that of identification fraud.

The latest news from the government's National Fraud Strategic Authority last week was not that they have been exposed as a gang of imposters secretly controlled by the Russian Mafia, but that they are launching a cyber security strategy in order to combat information crime.

Information and ID fraud are on the increase and with the latest warnings that it's costing the country £1.7 billion every year - almost as much as MPs - and so planning strategies have been stepped up. People are terrified that someone could be using their identity to take all of their money, carryout illegal activities or worse - order books by Katie Price in their name.

People hate the idea that someone could go looking through their rubbish bins, find their organic yoghurt cartons and past editions of The Polo Times and decide they have far too much money and that they are going to help themselves to some.

The main problem with identity fraud that comes with the advancements of technology is that you can no longer recognise a criminal. You can't just see someone dressed in a black and white striped top with a woolly hat on their head and a sack over their shoulder containing next doors' Kenwwood Smoothie Maker. Today's cyber criminals may wear a suit, call their children Doughnut and Banana, and have a fondness for caviar.

There has been much speculation in the past as to whether a criminal can be defined by their physical attributes, with the debate still open as to whether someone's appearance can give an indication as to whether that person has a violent nature.

A recent study has suggested that members of a jury base part of their verdict on the physical appearance of the defendant. For example, the defendant, a member of parliament, may have evidence to show they were in their luxury French villa when the £9 million was stolen from the Bank of England, and they may bring out Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela as character witnesses. But if they're not wearing Armani, they'd better get used to communal showers. "Off with his head," the jury will cry, "He has a beard and everything!"

It was confirmed this week that ID cards were going to be optional. The initial £5 billion idea was to reduce ID fraud and to curb terrorism - as though all terrorists would have Occupation: Terrorist on their card and that criminals themselves were going to have the knowhow to fill in the complicated application form anyway.

Dear Applicant,

Please note: The Home Office is a highly flawed department and we cannot be held responsible if your personal data or the details of that embarrassingly large boil on your bottom, that you did not want anyone to know about, is left on public transport or sold to the Telegraph.