Not to be relied on as an accurate statement of the Law
Please send comments and corrections so the opinions expressed can be amended and eventually validated
If you ever take a chance and park on waste ground make sure you look out for notices which might tell you the consequence. You should do this wherever you park, even in your friendly local supermarkets such Asda, Aldi and Netto to name but a few. Number Plate recognition will be used to log your entry into the car park as well as your exit and if you out stay your welcome you will get a threatening letter demanding you pay a ‘fine’ or else you can expect the bailiffs to come round and take your life away. Some Supermarkets have permitted areas as short as 30 minutes, Aldi 1hour 30 minutes. At the last named store we were 10 minutes late leaving their Leominster branch having had a major shop and having eaten some of their sandwiches we had bought before setting off. We have not shopped in an Aldi store since. I must get round to telling them that we have managed to do without them for14 months. The good ne2ws is that these systems do not involve clamping but they are given access to your details through the DVLA on payment of a fee. Yet another privatisation of civil liberties?
This blog is about what I shall call thug clamping operations. Alternatively you could call them protection rackets, demanding money with menaces outfits or opportunists blackmailers and extortionists. Such firms will rent a bit of waste land that may have been used for parking by the owner or tenant but the clamping firm comes along and offers an attractive rent so that they can run it as a non-car park. That is, a location for the entrapment of unsuspecting drivers who erroneously think that few minutes stay will not matter. It won’t if you don’t mind parting with a £250 ‘fine’ and a recovery vehicle charge of £100. Seems a great business opportunity, because that is what the Security Industry Act of 2001 calls such firms: ‘immobilization businesses’. These firms are separate from local authority run schemes which have the benefit of a detailed legislative framework. As far as I can see The Security Industries Act 2001 is the only legislation which applies and is naive and ineffective as things currently stand. (Although further research might prove me wrong on this, although I doubt it!). The Act seems to leave in place the common law as to what the clampers can charge for at civil law within the law of contract and assumes they will act within the law as to trespass to property and the person. If they step outside what may be lawfully done by a landownner when dealing with a trespass, or a breach of contract, the clampers are still liable in the same way as anyone else. All the Act seems to do is require them to have a licence if they want to clamp a car, with exceptions for disabled drivers and emergency services etc.
The ideal place is somewhere near a facility which does not have parking and where people will call in for a temporary stop. The whole operation is based on the misleading use of the word 'Fine'. One of the great difficulties people have in legal matters is keeping civil and criminal law apart. The word ‘fine’ refers to a criminal penalty for which criminal procedure will usually apply although the rise of the fixed penalty ticket has blurred the edges.( Possibly now to be extended to careless driving!) Thug clampers operate in most of our city centres so be careful
If a civil claim is being made against a driver then all that can be claimed is damages for the loss suffered. This can be done in advance by agreeing in the contract a reasonable amount which is supposed to reflect any anticipated loss, but it cannot be an arbitrary sum. Calling the fees claimed 'fines' is just part of the intimidation process which is based on the belief that most decent people will pay up for a quiet life. The phrase ‘civil penalty’ is nearer the truth, but can still have the same effect in a drivers mind.
This sum is only enforceable if it is 'reasonable' and can only be contractual damages if there is a properly displayed warning notice. The damages are in theory linked to the value lost by the loss of the parking space. If a clamper is present and starts to clamp the vehicle before the driver has even got out of the car the loss to the occupier would have been very little had the clamper simply told the driver to leave. Since these operators are not really trying to make money from parking fees, but by entrapping people, that is the last thing they want. To detain the vehicle and demand money in such circumstances could amount to blackmail. To simply pluck a sum out of the air is not a true attempt to assess the damages in advance and amounts in my opinion too an unenforceable penalty at civil law. Contract law does not allow penalties, it only allows 'liquidated damages 'i.e., the genuine attempt to assess damage in advance, as explained above.
If there is no notice reasonably displayed then the law which applies is trespass and damages can again only be reasonable. Usually damages for trespass to land can only be nominal i.e., small, what is some disturbed gravel worth? Unless specific loss can be shown the best remedy for trespass is better fencing or eviction by request or reasonable force.
By clamping a vehicle the clampers are seeking to seize the vehicle as security for payment of the ‘fine’. A car repairer can hold onto a car against payment and this would be a legal lien. Holding onto an entrapped car where it is done immediately is probably an illegal lien as it is not need. Trespass could however apply to the clampers themselves if their actions are unnecessary. They will commit trespass to goods when they interfere with the car or trespass to the person if they purport to detain the driver, or reasonably give that impression. This would amount to the civil wrong of false imprisonment. If the driver is put in fear then this could be the civil wrong of assault. If the driver is restrained then this makes these civil wrongs easier to show. Consequently the driver could claim damages for these trespasses.
Whether the money with menaces was used in the context of either contract or trespass any money paid above what is reasonable can be claimed in an action for money had a received, sometimes known as a claim for unjust enrichment. In such an action the driver might be able to claim that his losses were aggravated by the trespass to his goods and/or person, and would be entitled to ask the court to award punitive damages where the clampers actions were oppressive. This gives the civil courts an opportunity to show that they think the behaviour is unacceptable and should be punished.
These sites have little to t do with parking but amount to protection money rackets which if it is not prohibited by any legislation should be. A Government consultation exercise finished at the end of July but publicity only seems to have been attracted just before the closing date.
Clamping fines might well be a breach of our human rights but they are more importantly probably a breach of several of our own common laws. The firms rely on the citizen’s ignorance of the law and/or their reluctance to take on the clamping bullies, knowing full well that ignorance of the law is no defence as well as knowing that it is a business opportunity well worth exploiting with the support of the pathetic Act of 2001 piece of legislation.
PLEASE COMMENT: if you think this statement of the law is wrong and/or can be improved. Also, keep an eye out for any draft legislation that emerges out of the consultation process. This could be very helpful as I am helping a victim of clamping at the moment and it would be good to have a strong case and get some publicity against these firms.
Case law needs to be researched further with full citations and any statutory points missed out need to be dredged up.
If you have had a bad ‘clamping experience’ in the UK then please leave your story.
Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Thursday, 13 August 2009
The Case for English Devolution
I raised this issue in company a few months back. The discussion was brief as it was clear that the idea was seen as rather eccentric, even coming from me. Devolution for every other national part of the United Kingdom is now seen as common place, but for England, it is seen by many who live there as somewhat comic. This all comes back to the ‘West Lothian Question’. Why should Scottish and Welsh MPs be allowed to vote on issues which are already dealt with within their devolved powers for their own national area. In other words, why should they votes on matters which apply only to England? Its no longer any of their business. I suspect its all to do with the distribution of MPs from across the borders. If that’s the case then it looks like vote rigging.
As a starting point why not replicate a bundle of devolved powers for England, the English Assembly could see Parliament at Westminster revert to an English Parliament for such measures. There would have to be some adjustments with regard to the Cabinet for English matters, whilst non-devolved powers (these still vary as between Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) could be dealt with by the Westminster Parliament acting as the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Foreign policy and defence would be the principle among these. For the English regions the Regional Assemblies, (whatever they do) could be scrapped, and the role of Local Government revised to give it more local meaning.
Surely to stake a claim for English Devolution is not eccentric? To have the British Cabinet heavily influenced by non-English MP’s and a second chamber that is neither one thing nor the other, is far dafter. The problem with ‘Englishness’, whatever that is, is that the ‘English’, whoever they are, are too embarrassed to discuss such matters. This of course, is very English.
Dacier
As a starting point why not replicate a bundle of devolved powers for England, the English Assembly could see Parliament at Westminster revert to an English Parliament for such measures. There would have to be some adjustments with regard to the Cabinet for English matters, whilst non-devolved powers (these still vary as between Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) could be dealt with by the Westminster Parliament acting as the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Foreign policy and defence would be the principle among these. For the English regions the Regional Assemblies, (whatever they do) could be scrapped, and the role of Local Government revised to give it more local meaning.
Surely to stake a claim for English Devolution is not eccentric? To have the British Cabinet heavily influenced by non-English MP’s and a second chamber that is neither one thing nor the other, is far dafter. The problem with ‘Englishness’, whatever that is, is that the ‘English’, whoever they are, are too embarrassed to discuss such matters. This of course, is very English.
Dacier
Popular Policies are Doomed!
Have you noticed that if ever something turns out to be popular, the powers that be will try to curb our enthusiasm? You name it, it’s been cut back or made more expensive once people see what a good idea something is. Peace, for example, usually has to be seen as an expensive thing to protect and usually has to be fouled up by some governmental idiot or two taking offence or taking liberties. But I digress.
University education was seen a good idea back in the sixties, so much so that quite generous grants were available for some of us of mature years together with some pretty flexible entry requirements.The latter might still be the case but the grants are gone, debts are the alternative, and degrees from anywhere other than Oxbridge or the Russell Group are rubbished, usually by people from such universities. The real underlying motive is resentment that all these ‘Johnny come Latelies’ are muscling in on their nice cosy elite and would rather only see clones of themselves running higher, or even higher and higher, education. Sharing their resources would spoil it for them, while they seek to spoil it for others by asking for higher and higher fees and hoping that not too many comprehensive types get in under the wire. Getting over it would be out of the question of course.
Legal Aid is always a popular idea with ordinary people but always under threat because people use it. In the late seventies the system was improved, became popular and has been the subject of more and more cuts ever since. Once upon a time we were encouraged to take our bikes by train. This was clearly a good idea because loads of people did it so very quickly leaflets started to appear stating the complicated restrictions and where fares had to be paid. This was just a holding operation while they abolished the guards van to be replaced by small cupboards where our newly created ‘conductors ‘ could hide when things got a bit overcrowded or, more usually, late.
There are many other areas where this British disease can be observed. Decent pensions, retirement at 65, housing improvement grant, mortgage interest relief, subsidised transport, civil liberties. At a lower level grants for energy saving and even bus passes are too popular and must either be restricted or preferably made meaningless lotteries. All these ideas are apparently too expensive for the, allegedly, 4th richest economy in the world.
Is it just me but are their no good ideas which will be kept despite their popularity? Now that we are heavily in debt as a nation are we still so rich? Do we have that many great things worth defending? The National Health Service would be at the top of most people’s list, but even that is constantly under threat, as are our traditional liberties and freedoms. These don’t come cheap either. If there is no great list of great achievements to glory in, then what are we defending? Someone somewhere still thinks that there must be. Do these people have safe jobs, good incomes and final salary pensions I wonder? They probably are and will also make sure that we buy some nice new nuclear weapons on the ‘never never’. ‘Some new helicopters that work? Now that’s not quite so easy old boy’.
Dacier ( I feel better now)
University education was seen a good idea back in the sixties, so much so that quite generous grants were available for some of us of mature years together with some pretty flexible entry requirements.The latter might still be the case but the grants are gone, debts are the alternative, and degrees from anywhere other than Oxbridge or the Russell Group are rubbished, usually by people from such universities. The real underlying motive is resentment that all these ‘Johnny come Latelies’ are muscling in on their nice cosy elite and would rather only see clones of themselves running higher, or even higher and higher, education. Sharing their resources would spoil it for them, while they seek to spoil it for others by asking for higher and higher fees and hoping that not too many comprehensive types get in under the wire. Getting over it would be out of the question of course.
Legal Aid is always a popular idea with ordinary people but always under threat because people use it. In the late seventies the system was improved, became popular and has been the subject of more and more cuts ever since. Once upon a time we were encouraged to take our bikes by train. This was clearly a good idea because loads of people did it so very quickly leaflets started to appear stating the complicated restrictions and where fares had to be paid. This was just a holding operation while they abolished the guards van to be replaced by small cupboards where our newly created ‘conductors ‘ could hide when things got a bit overcrowded or, more usually, late.
There are many other areas where this British disease can be observed. Decent pensions, retirement at 65, housing improvement grant, mortgage interest relief, subsidised transport, civil liberties. At a lower level grants for energy saving and even bus passes are too popular and must either be restricted or preferably made meaningless lotteries. All these ideas are apparently too expensive for the, allegedly, 4th richest economy in the world.
Is it just me but are their no good ideas which will be kept despite their popularity? Now that we are heavily in debt as a nation are we still so rich? Do we have that many great things worth defending? The National Health Service would be at the top of most people’s list, but even that is constantly under threat, as are our traditional liberties and freedoms. These don’t come cheap either. If there is no great list of great achievements to glory in, then what are we defending? Someone somewhere still thinks that there must be. Do these people have safe jobs, good incomes and final salary pensions I wonder? They probably are and will also make sure that we buy some nice new nuclear weapons on the ‘never never’. ‘Some new helicopters that work? Now that’s not quite so easy old boy’.
Dacier ( I feel better now)
Tuesday, 11 August 2009
Windmills and Watermills: (P.1) Visual Amenity, what’s it for?
This title conjures up images of quaint rural scenes from another age. The mill race and slowly turning wheel, the sails of the wooden structures that ground corn or pumped water. Where they survive they are a much valued visual amenity.
Wind farms can evoke feelings of anger because of their impact on the landscape. For the moment I would like to argue that not everywhere which has the right wind speed is right for a wind farm. Some, away from centres of population in little visited bleak landscapes, may be seen as acceptable, but even these will be seen as a desecration of a wilderness. On a democratic level it can be argued that whilst such areas may be appreciated by a small number, this is not enough to override the need of the majority for electricity.
Already some will be beginning to wince at the thought of miles of moor land being covered by such spinning monsters. The line of argument I would like to unravel now, is purely a case for visual amenity.
Having lived at the very centre of a provincial county town, and in various London districts, as well as Liverpool 8, I remember the feelings of getting away from the noise and bustle to somewhere more peaceful, dare I say, a bit more civilized. Often it was the dream that sustained, rather than the journey to the distant hills.
I think there are few who would argue against the value the Peak District has to the people of Manchester and Sheffield and the vast conurbations which are now within easy reach due to the motorways. Ewan McColl’s song, ‘A Rambler from Manchester Way’ proudly claims, ‘ I might be a wage slave on Monday, but I am , ‘a free man on Sunday’. Granted things have changed but many of those who feel trapped in their various occupations, be it in a call centre, factory or office, sometimes for not much more that the minimum wage, can still have those feelings and a need for fresh air, and an absence of concrete. So my visual amenity argument is based on the idea that we must not deny the people in the towns the right to see from a distance a reminder that wild places do exist and where mans engineering activities have not despoiled the natural environment. If they want to visit, then so much the better.
To see the clean lines of Cats Back and Hay Bluff from the top of Birdlip Hill, before descending into the sprawl below, is evidence that the built environment is not the only choice.
Dacier
Wind farms can evoke feelings of anger because of their impact on the landscape. For the moment I would like to argue that not everywhere which has the right wind speed is right for a wind farm. Some, away from centres of population in little visited bleak landscapes, may be seen as acceptable, but even these will be seen as a desecration of a wilderness. On a democratic level it can be argued that whilst such areas may be appreciated by a small number, this is not enough to override the need of the majority for electricity.
Already some will be beginning to wince at the thought of miles of moor land being covered by such spinning monsters. The line of argument I would like to unravel now, is purely a case for visual amenity.
Having lived at the very centre of a provincial county town, and in various London districts, as well as Liverpool 8, I remember the feelings of getting away from the noise and bustle to somewhere more peaceful, dare I say, a bit more civilized. Often it was the dream that sustained, rather than the journey to the distant hills.
I think there are few who would argue against the value the Peak District has to the people of Manchester and Sheffield and the vast conurbations which are now within easy reach due to the motorways. Ewan McColl’s song, ‘A Rambler from Manchester Way’ proudly claims, ‘ I might be a wage slave on Monday, but I am , ‘a free man on Sunday’. Granted things have changed but many of those who feel trapped in their various occupations, be it in a call centre, factory or office, sometimes for not much more that the minimum wage, can still have those feelings and a need for fresh air, and an absence of concrete. So my visual amenity argument is based on the idea that we must not deny the people in the towns the right to see from a distance a reminder that wild places do exist and where mans engineering activities have not despoiled the natural environment. If they want to visit, then so much the better.
To see the clean lines of Cats Back and Hay Bluff from the top of Birdlip Hill, before descending into the sprawl below, is evidence that the built environment is not the only choice.
Dacier
Tuesday, 4 August 2009
Magna Carta 1215: New Labour in Breach! Outrageous Silence
Clause 38 ‘In future no official shall bring anyone to trial on his own unsupported statement without producing trustworthy witnesses to the alleged offence.
Clause 39 'No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions ... except by the lawful judgment of his peers and according to the law of the land.'
Clause 40 'To no one will we sell, refuse or delay the operation of right or justice.'
Why is it that the myth of Magna Carta is promoted as a great document but the sad truth is that it is ignored. New Labour is not alone in ignoring the simplicity of Magna Carta, claiming to prefer the more complicated provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. But this still allows our civil liberties to be cast aside on grounds of expediency, knowing full well that private citizens for the most part do not have the resources to challenge an abuse of power. Anyone who knows anything about our system of government will soon realise that the people get their rights by a trickle down from above and the trickle is governed by the tap the Government chooses to turn on and off at its whim.
Judging by the terms of Clause 40 the law is open to all. It is: like the Ritz Hotel, to quote the old joke. Just try to challenge a delay or denial of justice in the courts and you will soon find out that it is not free. Indeed access will be barred due to costs alone let alone trying to find a lawyer to act or a provision the legal aid scheme which will allow you to be funded. In any case, if you are moderately well off, you are on your own mate!
The present Government, like its predecessors have been squeezing the legal budget for years and now its looks as though the solicitors who are in the front line are going to be like the farmers. They must do the job for less than cost. They will cut corners of course but if they go too far they will lose their franchise. The result? More lawyers will withdraw from the scheme, more firms will not train lawyers and the big cats will move in to asset strip the lucrative assets of old firms, close down unprofitable sections and put their fees up.
Against all of this the Government assures us that it wants to make the professions less elitist. I don’t know how they are going to achieve this with students leaving university with huge debts and facing huge bills for professional examination courses, and with little prospect for the majority of finding a training position. Coming from a generation of politicians who had a lot of help to get where they are; grammar schools, public schools and university grants etc, Jack New Labour must be running out of ladders to pull up. Some hope for Magna Carta. .
Dacier.
See Spaghetti Gazetti by The Editor on 02/08/09
Clause 39 'No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions ... except by the lawful judgment of his peers and according to the law of the land.'
Clause 40 'To no one will we sell, refuse or delay the operation of right or justice.'
Why is it that the myth of Magna Carta is promoted as a great document but the sad truth is that it is ignored. New Labour is not alone in ignoring the simplicity of Magna Carta, claiming to prefer the more complicated provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. But this still allows our civil liberties to be cast aside on grounds of expediency, knowing full well that private citizens for the most part do not have the resources to challenge an abuse of power. Anyone who knows anything about our system of government will soon realise that the people get their rights by a trickle down from above and the trickle is governed by the tap the Government chooses to turn on and off at its whim.
Judging by the terms of Clause 40 the law is open to all. It is: like the Ritz Hotel, to quote the old joke. Just try to challenge a delay or denial of justice in the courts and you will soon find out that it is not free. Indeed access will be barred due to costs alone let alone trying to find a lawyer to act or a provision the legal aid scheme which will allow you to be funded. In any case, if you are moderately well off, you are on your own mate!
The present Government, like its predecessors have been squeezing the legal budget for years and now its looks as though the solicitors who are in the front line are going to be like the farmers. They must do the job for less than cost. They will cut corners of course but if they go too far they will lose their franchise. The result? More lawyers will withdraw from the scheme, more firms will not train lawyers and the big cats will move in to asset strip the lucrative assets of old firms, close down unprofitable sections and put their fees up.
Against all of this the Government assures us that it wants to make the professions less elitist. I don’t know how they are going to achieve this with students leaving university with huge debts and facing huge bills for professional examination courses, and with little prospect for the majority of finding a training position. Coming from a generation of politicians who had a lot of help to get where they are; grammar schools, public schools and university grants etc, Jack New Labour must be running out of ladders to pull up. Some hope for Magna Carta. .
Dacier.
See Spaghetti Gazetti by The Editor on 02/08/09
Sunday, 2 August 2009
Where paths of History Cross (pt 2).
One summer weekend about ten years ago my wife’s cousin visited. Our family reunion was interrupted by a telephone call from our neighbour who wondered what he should about a piece of ordinance he had found hidden up on the top of a wall plate in an out house. It was about 6 inches long and about ¾ of an inch thick, with a pointed end. My wife’s cousin happened to be an Artillery man so we all trotted down the lane to inspect the object. Observed from a distance the expert opinion was soon being voiced that it was clearly live, lethal and could by now, be unstable. With such things it is always better to fear the worst and do the best, in this case calling bomb disposal. Things moved quickly, even on a sleepy hot afternoon. A truck arrived and the dangerous object removed.
By contrast, Christmas Day 1944 was foggy and most families were sitting round the wireless listening to the Kings Christmas message. In one farm house two girls were playing upstairs and granny was downstairs in the kitchen. A loud thump suddenly broke the quiet of the farm, and one or two other farms in the area. ‘Will you two girls behave yourselves, and stop jumping off that bed. You’ll have the plaster down!’
Even these two fit country girls could not have made such a crash, for crash it was. A bombing mission over Germany had ended on our common a few yards from another occupied farmhouse. The farmer had been called in from tending his cows to hear the Kings Message and the cows he would have been tending were killed when an American Liberator Bomber came to earth. The crew had bailed out in two stages. The flight deck first as the plane was on fire. They landed in Germany, but due to a break in communications, the fire now out, the rest of the crew remained on board. A brief inspection had shown the flight deck empty, the plane on automatic but all the dials on danger. They jumped over France. Bold Venture lived up to its name and flew on, ran out of fuel and its unsupervised glide path passed over RAF Madley to its crash site. The policeman who had arrived first asked the village boys to take a quick look to see whether there were any crew on board, as they were more agile and smaller. As a result various souvenirs were brought home before a round the clock guard was mounted and the wreckage cleared. You guessed it; some shells went home with the boys. Their reward was a good walloping by their concerned dad. It would seem that someone had hidden one shell before the rest were returned to the wreckage.
And the other path of history that crossed that glide path? It was into the same airspace from RAF Madley that Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess took off in October 1946, to face trial in Nuremberg before serving a Spandau Prison. He died on 17th August 1987 only to leave this world with yet another puzzle at the end of a puzzling life. Did he hang himself or was he strangled?
Dacier
(With acknowledgements to The Hereford Times 22/12/2004 where a full account of the crash can be found)
By contrast, Christmas Day 1944 was foggy and most families were sitting round the wireless listening to the Kings Christmas message. In one farm house two girls were playing upstairs and granny was downstairs in the kitchen. A loud thump suddenly broke the quiet of the farm, and one or two other farms in the area. ‘Will you two girls behave yourselves, and stop jumping off that bed. You’ll have the plaster down!’
Even these two fit country girls could not have made such a crash, for crash it was. A bombing mission over Germany had ended on our common a few yards from another occupied farmhouse. The farmer had been called in from tending his cows to hear the Kings Message and the cows he would have been tending were killed when an American Liberator Bomber came to earth. The crew had bailed out in two stages. The flight deck first as the plane was on fire. They landed in Germany, but due to a break in communications, the fire now out, the rest of the crew remained on board. A brief inspection had shown the flight deck empty, the plane on automatic but all the dials on danger. They jumped over France. Bold Venture lived up to its name and flew on, ran out of fuel and its unsupervised glide path passed over RAF Madley to its crash site. The policeman who had arrived first asked the village boys to take a quick look to see whether there were any crew on board, as they were more agile and smaller. As a result various souvenirs were brought home before a round the clock guard was mounted and the wreckage cleared. You guessed it; some shells went home with the boys. Their reward was a good walloping by their concerned dad. It would seem that someone had hidden one shell before the rest were returned to the wreckage.
And the other path of history that crossed that glide path? It was into the same airspace from RAF Madley that Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess took off in October 1946, to face trial in Nuremberg before serving a Spandau Prison. He died on 17th August 1987 only to leave this world with yet another puzzle at the end of a puzzling life. Did he hang himself or was he strangled?
Dacier
(With acknowledgements to The Hereford Times 22/12/2004 where a full account of the crash can be found)
Journalists have a go at Twitter! How’s that for a headline?
Journalists see themselves as cutting out the wittering. Where does that leave the rest of us? I cant remember when I last saw a journalist writing poetry. Their haikus seem, even in war-time, .to consist of “Gotcha!”
Anything popular is often seen as unworthy. Do I smell a rat, or is it the smell of fear that someone else other than the ‘highly trained’ wordsmiths might actually produce something worth reading. Having a go at the ‘proles’ who use Twitter seems to me rather like criticising the electorate for choosing the ‘wrong party’, fearful that there is a chance of democracy actually working. A 90% turnout would not be much of a story.
Graffiti artists were once seen as grubby nuisances but Banksy seems to have elevated it to ‘worthy art’. The same goes for expressing yourself in words. Everyone has to start somewhere. Those who call Twitter wittering must be reading the wrong tweets. Don’t these journalists see they have to apply some judgement?
Everyone is entitled to report on their own lives or voice their opinions. Look out journalists, Here Comes Everybody ! Get a life, have the wit to twit!.
Sian
For a Book Review of Here Comes Everybody ! see earlier Blog.
Anything popular is often seen as unworthy. Do I smell a rat, or is it the smell of fear that someone else other than the ‘highly trained’ wordsmiths might actually produce something worth reading. Having a go at the ‘proles’ who use Twitter seems to me rather like criticising the electorate for choosing the ‘wrong party’, fearful that there is a chance of democracy actually working. A 90% turnout would not be much of a story.
Graffiti artists were once seen as grubby nuisances but Banksy seems to have elevated it to ‘worthy art’. The same goes for expressing yourself in words. Everyone has to start somewhere. Those who call Twitter wittering must be reading the wrong tweets. Don’t these journalists see they have to apply some judgement?
Everyone is entitled to report on their own lives or voice their opinions. Look out journalists, Here Comes Everybody ! Get a life, have the wit to twit!.
Sian
For a Book Review of Here Comes Everybody ! see earlier Blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)