Showing posts with label actions speak louder than words. Show all posts
Showing posts with label actions speak louder than words. Show all posts

Monday 17 October 2022

Robert De Niro's Waiting











Hopes dashed to the floor
Like shattered teenage dreams
Boys living next door
Are never what they seem
A walk in the park can become a bad dream
People are staring and following me
This is my only escape from it all
Watching a film or a face on the wall
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
(Talking Italian)
Robert De Niro's waiting
I don't need a boy
I've got a man of steel
Don't come any closer
I don't wanna feel
You're breathing, you're touching, but nothing's for free
I never want this to happen to me
Don't try to change me, you're wasting your time
Now I've got something much better in mind
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
(Talking Italian)
Robert De Niro's waiting
A walk in the park can become a bad dream
People are staring and following me
This is my only escape from it all
Watching a film or a face on the wall
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
Robert De Niro's waiting
Talking Italian
(Talking Italian)
Robert De Niro's waiting
Songwriters: Tony Swain, Keren Woodward, Siobhan Maire Deirdre Fahey, Steven Jolley, Sara Dallin. For non-commercial use only.

The left-hand pinky-finger ring I noticed in King Charles and Lord Mountbatten of Romsey.

Thursday 19 May 2022

Leon - Wednesday 18 May, 2022







Leon Benjamin passed away this morning, after a viciously short illness.

Leon and I were connected for many years on our socials, and even when he wrote to me about my mother's terminal brain cancer; by the time it was all over for Mum, I'd completely forgotten about Leon and his messages of support. He persisted in getting to know me despite my confiscated influence on social media due to deplatforming. 

Those are always the best people. The one's who couldn't care less about your status.

I had the privilege of getting to know Leon when I moved back to the UK. He loved my writing and wanted to get me involved in work. We'd never met in real life, so after writing an Amazon proposal for him, he was excited about some of the ideas I put forward and he wanted to meet in real life to talk about working together.

I was broke so I needed support from DWP for train tickets (Hi guys, I know you read my blog) to travel to London, and they agreed and then reneged on their promises without telling me on the three occasions I was given different criteria, to prove our meeting was professional.

Documenting it here and for over two years on my journal has been recursive. Nobody in the civil service has ever had the time to read the full extent of what I've encountered, but an ombudsman, a lawyer or a jury are obliged to read the evidence in full and will surely understand that repetition of obstruction is by normal evidentiary standards proofs of conspiracy - a very serious accusation in the civil service. 

Senior colleagues gave assurances, so I agreed, to drop all complaints and moving forwards, if I'm treated without prejudice, that's the end of the matter. 

However if further obstruction returns, the onus is your side to explain random re-upload requests of the documentation I provided thrice,  to prove it was a business opportunity meeting Leon in February this year.

Three months after that meeting, and a nameless agent apropos of nothing, and demonstrably provable irrelevancy, reposts my original five files with no feedback? I didn't raise this matter with your superiors recently, because it's trivial compared to the provable obstruction. That doesn't mean it isn't documented.



Leon always talked about meeting, but he was a very busy guy so to secure the deal, I had to be a bit pushy with him. I finally got an appointment and while I was waiting at The Granary bar (St Pancras, my old stamping ground), he messaged his train was delayed and I flippantly replied 'that's OK, I'm drinking champagne on your tab 😎. '

When he arrived, He asked where's the champagne, and when I explained I was only joking, he said let's have some champagne and I ordered a bottle of Veuve Cliquot, which he only touched one glass of, as he was technically an abstainer.

It was a lovely afternoon (just a perfect day) and Leon was glowing with health, humour and vitality. When we departed, Leon was convinced he'd find another project to work on together as the proposal I'd written had fallen through due to standard corporate changes of strategic direction. All that documentation is on my UC journal and as mentioned, was for no reason re-uploaded a few days ago.

Leon and I were more than just similar. We both knew why we're here and the price we must pay. He was mixed international and we shared Maltese genetics. Most of our conversations were metaphysical so that's why we needed to meet face to face in order to cement any possibility of working together.


Leon knew I was unemployable as a targeted individual, but he didn't flinch at that, and I pray this sudden illness and even quicker demise is not connected to me (it wouldn't be the first time).

There are only a handful of people in the corporate world who can execute consultant project management at a C-Suite level and still inform everyone they know and care about, what is really going on, when the entire corporate-narrative-world is lying about vaccine efficacy/mortality/toxicity, masks and lockdowns.

Leon was man. A real one. 

He told me to my face he couldn't give a fuck about upsetting anyone in the world as the only people he cared for were his family.

You are not gone for me Leon. Your uniqueness left an indelible change on my heart, as it did with many who met you.

In these days it's almost impossible to be a great family man, a truther and high level corporate consultant.

You showed the world how to juggle all three masterfully.

Update: The funeral is on the fifth anniversary of my mother... i have no words

Monday 7 February 2022

Netherlands - Vaccination Centre Bombing






The likely culprits for this bombing are the Dutch secret services. 

For those who don't know how the game works, I urge you to study the Operation Gladio documentary as this details things like the Bologna Railway Station bombing, done by the Italian deep state, which killed around 80 Italians to divide the people between 'moderate' right and 'radical' left boogeymen. Naturally the good guy vs bad guy dialectic can be reversed depending on your current government.

If you've never seen the film, Brazil by Mossad Hollywood asset Arnon Milchan starring Robert de Niro, I recommend you watch it again.

Random bombs going off, and diners unsure whether to flee or press on.

Wednesday 3 April 2013

How To Argue Online - Notes on Rhetoric


[n.b. Please use the comments box for suggested additions to these notes] In negotiating the so-called 'blogosphere' you will need to be aware of certain obligatory rhetorical tools with which to rebut opponents. The following are a few I have noted at random, and can be used in comments boxes or when critiquing a publication: 


A priori - your apriori supposition is that: ‘I operate by the clear light of reason, you according to preconceived notions’. You are using pure thought and evidence, your opponent is unthinkingly in thrall to canards, tired clichés, and various pieces of received wisdom. 

Always Psychologise - If your opponent criticises you more than once, he is evidently obsessed/ fixated by you, you are being stalked by him etc, his objections are to be reread as ‘symptoms’ of his disorder etc. 

Armchairs Pontificate from them; or rather, accuse others of so doing. The armchair is sundered from the Real World (qv) and no access to truth is possible therefrom. Use advisedly: an 'armchair politician' is a caustic insult, but an 'armchair TV critic' has rather less force. 

Barred If you have been barred from a blogger's comments thread it is always because you 'reminded them of some uncomfortable truths', you 'told it like it was' etc, never because you were an insufferable troll or (for example) a tedious prick whose diversionary ramblings and clumsy put-downs were an embarrassment to all but yourself.

Chorus It is axiomatic that your opponent always speaks as part of a ‘chorus’ or ‘company’, whereas you of course speak as an autonomous individual. Whereas your opponent merely chimes in with a consensus, you have the courage to speak out and tell it like it is - as is the case with all the others who support your position. (see also 'Brigade'- "Your opponents form a 'brigade', cf Peace Brigade, Bruschetta Brigade, Root Causes Brigade etc. " (Lenin)

Climbdowns Necessarily 'humiliating'. People are 'forced' into them

Conspiracy Theory = suggesting that Western governments (or businesses) are anything other than benign or incompetent. 

Critics Are invariably 'confounded'. 

Difference of Opinion It is axiomatic that your opponent does not, nor ever will, be objecting to the content of your opinion. He is necessarily stung by and unable to tolerate the sheer difference of opinion, and his arguments simply express this fact. (copyright J.Hari.) 'You are obviously unable to tolerate any point of view different from your own' etc 


Emotion –your opponent is necessarily and invariably ‘excitable” “agitated’ “animated”; you, by contrast, are immobile, impassive, devoid of emotion. 

Entertaining - You find your opponent entertaining. His arguments are 'amusing', 'diverting' and so on, a kind of sport, which you have enjoyed. At some point, however, this becomes 'embarassing' and you should advise your opponent to retire before he humiliates himself. At all costs avoid suggesting you are seriously engaged with what he is saying.

Evidence – demand it. Always refer to as ‘empirical’. If actually offered, criticise the methodology. 

Fascism - If all else fails either: 1. find some link between your opponent and fascism, and the Nazis in particular. 2. Wheel in some analogy about fighting/ collaborating with the Nazis. Refer any dispute to the Second World War as a point of comparison. (see also Godwin's Law, courtesy of Anon. at the Weblog). Identifying your opponent with fascism enbles you todramatise yourself as fighting fascism - universally agreed to be noble and good. 

The Guardian A newspaper bought exclusively by people who wish to complain about the mentality of its readership and the venality of its columnists. The Guardian (2) Whereas you might think The Mail and The Times are middle class papers reflecting middle-class preoccupations, for your purposes 'the middle-class' are exclusively Guardian readers and the Guardian is the quintessentially middle class paper. The expression 'middle-class Guardian reader' should be avoided as a tautology. 

Glee - Always 'scarcely concealed'. 

Goaded (qv raw nerve). If an opponent responds to your comment, he has necessarily been 'goaded' into responding and is thus exposed as a fool. Your superficially inept remarks are retrospectively revealed to have been a trick designed to 'provoke a response', and your opponent has 'fallen for it'. 

Human Rights When reading about the human rights of some particular person or group, you are required to ask indignantly about the rights ofsome other person or group. Imply that the rights of the latter cancel out those of the former. 

Humour Your opponent is always 'earnest', his pronouncements are 'solemn', he takes himself 'too seriously' etc It is important that the monopoly of humour, irony etc remains with you, and that your adversary is always the object of laughter, never its source; your relation to him is only ever that of being 'entertained' - not challenged or stimulated (such an admission would be fatal). If you lack genuine wit, simply pepper your prose with 'lol' and gleeful exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!

“intoning” – when quoting your opponent's argument always interpolate ‘he intones/ intoned’. (Especially 'he intoned solemnly' or 'he intoned darkly'). This works with almost any statement. Even if your opponent is not ‘intoning’ your remark will have a delectable sarcasm, as in '“fuck you” he intoned, solemnly'. 

Irony To give your comments a protective coat, it is always worthwhile intimating, hinting, allusively indicating that you are 'being ironic'. Retroactive irony can also be used - declare after receiving criticism that your opponent has perhaps 'missed some of the irony' of the post. No one will inquire too deeply into 'missed irony' for fear of redoubling their original oversight. Note, you do not have to actually be ironic, simply append 'guess the tone' or 'tongue firmly in cheek' and your opponent will be reluctant to entangle himself in the invisible gauze spun around your words. That your tongue, along with the rest of you, is de facto firmly between your cheeks will pass without notice.

Criticism of Israel Concede that of course, in principle, criticisms of Israel are not necessarily anti-Semitic. Give the impression that this is so obvious as hardly to be worth mentioning. Having got this out of the way, every particular criticism of Israel can be exposed as implicitly anti-Semitic. 

‘…is itself an example’ - E.g: : ‘”stale cliché” is itself a stale cliché’ ‘”I’m using no rhetorical ploys” is itself a rhetorical ploy’; 'your remarks on logical incoherence were themselves..". You get the idea. Endlessly adaptable. Creates the impression that your opponent has refuted himself, thus sparing you the trouble of doing so. c.f. 'unwitting'; 'precisely my point'.

Just a Bit of Fun Anything which is 'just a bit of fun' is not susceptible to analysis or understanding. Any attempt at analysis or understanding should be met with the response 'come on, it's just a bit of fun'. (Films and TV programmes are always 'just a bit of fun'). 

The Last Word - Invite your opponent to 'have the last word', thereby ensuring that he cannot (and that you just have). 

The Left (i) Rather than attacking the ‘Left’ as such, it is better to undermine the word and cause to be it ineffectual, either by constantly diluting it in ‘liberal-left’ or simply by using phrases that render it meaningless, as in ‘my fellow leftist Stephen Pollard’

The Left (ii) An umbrella organization consisting exclusively of students on the one hand, and, on the other, middle-class people who like hosting dinner parties. Contrary to a lingering misconception, The Left has nothing to do with the working class, who are actually quite content with how things are. (However, 'while The Left are undoubtedly a laughably impotent bunch of middle-class Students Waving Placards, they are alsoand simultaneously a Sinister Worldwide Plot, all powerful, with tentacles reaching into every orifice of the civic body, working in cahoots with global Islamofascism etc etc etc '. [courtesy of bat])

Liberal Tolerance is simultaneously: A) The cardinal virtue of our democracy and what differentiates us from extremists, totalitarians, theocrats etc B) Politically correct madness which opens the door to theocrats, totalitarians, extremists etc 


Neither a lender nor an adder Rather than making an argument, with his own words or voice, your opponent is lending or adding his voice to a certain pre-existing argument or 'chorus' (qv). (He may be doing sounwittingly (qv). In any case, his argument is not quite his and he is those exposed as a clueless dolt.) 

Historical Record. Your opponent is invariably unfamiliar with it, while you master it with matchless facility. Allude to it wherever possible, encourage your opponent to acquaint himself with it. So much the better if you have a cache of slightly obscure references that you can dispense, especially if these bear only tangential relationship to what you are discussing. In particular, when called upon to explain the relevance of the reference, explain that you are not about to spoon-feed your opponent and advise him to get off his flaccid fundament and do some independent reading. It will, you can assure him, be its own reward.' [courtesy of Lenin] n.b. The ‘historical record’ is the events of history as they appear in their correct order and final significance. It is the objective status of events, uncluttered by mere partisan interest and subjective interference. If it is difficult gaining access to the HR, imagine how much more difficult being its trusty custodian. Fortunately, in our times, the custodian -and occasional author - of the historical record is a humble English Blogger called Oliver Kamm.

In Reserve Rather than jumping in with full-blown polemical fireworks, an alternate strategy is to give the impression you have great and devastating arguments in reserve, and are holding back. And you are holding back partly through sheer magnanimity, partly to spare your subject utter humiliation. Start by implying that your very intervention is an act of graciousness on your part, as in ‘Normally, I don’t involve myself in these kind of spats, however..’ or ‘I have resisted the temptation to comment on this issue so far, however.. .’; and you go on with ‘let’s just say I find this position less than convincing, putting it mildly....’ ‘let’s just say there are elementary logical procedures that haven’t quite been grasped here’. 

Nomenclature/ Semantics etc Since arguments (at least in the blogosphere) tend to take place in language, it is always possible to claim your opponent is merely quibbling over words. Eg: "Zizek's theory of revolution as expressed in this article is nonsense" "But it's not a theory of revolution at all" "Call it want you want, I don't want to get hung up on questions of nomenclature" 

Unoriginal If you can find no substantive points of disagreement, try lamenting that your opponent's argument is 'hardly original' or 'laughably unoriginal' perhaps. This will almost certainly be true at some level, and your opponent is unlikely to be so immodest as to protest the contrary. 

Over-analysing/ Over-interpreting In general things have a perfectly familiar and obvious significance which they wear on their surface. Some people, however, insist on discovering other and more 'interesting' meanings beneath this innocuous surface. They may even claim that this process is called Thinking. These people are generally intellectuals, however, and you should have little difficulty rousing your audience against them. Analysing or interpreting certain things, eg a good film, rather than simply enjoying them, is often symptomatic of a mental illness known as intellectualism - symptomatized in a small pudgy body and oversized cranium. 

Profanity and the demotic. Used sparingly (so as not to be mistaken for some incensed half-wit), your use of the profane/ demotic is a right laugh and a sure sign that you represent robust common sense and can sniff out and debunk pretentious academics and pseudo-intilectukals. Try mixing it with more refined prose for full effect, as in “after careful and sustained reflection, I have now arrived at the inexorable conclusion that X is a clueless twat who talks counter-revolutionary shite.” Be careful, use of demotic language may provoke truimphant claims to have 'touched a raw nerve' (qv) from your opponent. 

Parody - Although you may want to attempt parody yourself, it is better to ironically opine that your opponent has been the victim of a parodist. This can take a couple of forms: 1. ‘Please direct me to the original weblog of which this is evidently a parody.’ 2. ‘A malicious third party is posting under your [the opponent’s] name/ has gained access to your blogging account, and is writing absurd risible nonsense in order to discredit you.’ 

Political Correctness.. always already 'gone mad'. 

People You've Met If you wish to establish the veracity of some chosen stereotype, all you have to say are the magic words, “Look, I’ve actually met people like this..”. Your vapid generalisation will instantly assume concreteness, and your opponent buckle before an unassailable empirical factoid. In the 1980’s it was lesbian CND supporting Guardian readers who people had invariably ‘actually met’; in 1930’s Germany it was doubtless avaricious Jews. (compare with ‘someone who has actually been there’). 

Postmodern - use to refer to any jargon unfamiliar to you. Apparently the term has a more precise meaning, but this is only according to people who write in unfamiliar jargon and can therefore be safely ignored.

Posturing - always 'empty'; no one has yet pulled off a posture that's even half-full. 

Precisely my point- the opponent’s argument is really yours, as in ‘I could hardly wish for a better confirmation of my point.’ (see ‘unwitting’) 

Pseudo - A prefix which attaches to intellectuals. So tenacious is this attachment (which can be dowloaded from doxa.com) that intellectuals can never be mentioned without it. Indeed, many argue that only pseudo- intellectuals exists. The real thing is a mere mirage or retroactive illusion created by the prefix pseudo-. 

Pretentious - Anything which cannot be paraphrased into journalese, (almost) anything French, anything not yielding some sort of immediate and calculable return, anything which one cannot imagine being spoken by a 'bloke down the pub', (almost) anything you can imagine being spoken by an intilletukal. 

Psychology Always 'pop' - or 'psychobabble'. Note, there is no law of contradiciton in rhetoric, so don't let the psychology rule stop you from 'always psychologizing' (qv). 

Pub The Pub is always a sign of blokeish familiarity and common sense. Do end a discussion with “right, I’m off down the pub”, so indicating a sensibly English awareness of the limits of mere intellectual debate andtouching base with the Real World. (The mere mention of this last is sufficient to debunk certain kinds of high-flown jargon.) Of course, his gesture (of touching base with The Real World) can be performed without having to visit the pub or even leave your armchair – you can also break off a debate by reference to some favoured TV program that requires attention, preferably ‘the football’ or something Popular (never, God forbid, ‘an Ingmar Bergman film’ or ‘a documentary about Heidegger’). Always remember: You are at one with the Common People (who go down the pub and watch telly) and not at all part of the despicable Middle Class/ Intelligentsia.

Quotations Always 'out of context'; if however someone accuses you of 'quoting out of context' say that all quotes are out of context by definition 

Raw Nerve - If your opponent responds to you with anything like gusto/ feeling you have necessarily ‘touched a raw nerve’. This can be used against all but the most blandly neutral reply. Try saying it in various contexts, just to unsettle and bemuse e.g: “Mark, "I'd really like that reference for Hegel’s comments on Zoroastrian religion?” “Ah, it touched a raw nerve did it?” 

Real World - Invariably, a place where things are different. Inhabited by ‘ordinary people’. Often located in Glasgow’s East End or even outside the First World altogether, as in ‘this might sound plausible in Christ Church common room, but it rings pretty hollow in the Guatemalan jungle’. Needless to say, your interlocutor is unfamiliar with it.

Reminders – are always ‘salutary’. Your opponent has a poor memory and needs many such reminders. 

Refreshingly un-P.C. If you're afraid to salute bigotry, don't worry, here's your get out clause. 

Sarcasm – always refer to as ‘clumsy’, unless a favoured columnist uses it, in which case it is 'delectable'. 

Screed - if referring to your opponent's book at all costs describe it in some other terms: Screed, tract, glorified pamphlet, loose collection of essays, collation of occasional journalism, assortment of republished ephemera etc 

Self-Appointed- If you prose is criticised for its sloppiness it is by a 'self-appointed literary critic'; if your opinions are deemed offensive it is a self-appointed commissar of political correctness; if your taste in literature or art is ridiculed as vulgar it is by a self-appointed arbiter of taste etc. The rule is roughly this: any judgement made about you, any criticism of your arguments or your style, has been made by someone who has appointed him /her self rather than, presumably, being divinely or officially appointed.You may run into problems if criticised by someone who is genuinely divinely or officially appointed (The Pope, High Court judge), but simply dismiss them as arguing from authority. . 

Silences Yours are dignified, your opponent's revealing. 

Snide - a witty remark that happens to be aimed at you becomes 'snide'. 

Someone who has actually been there - someone who has ‘actually been’ to a place (eg Nicaragua/ anywhere in the Real World) obviously knows what they are talking about and is automatically deserving of respect. Their small sack of anecdotes is unassailable by logic, statistics or other documentation. Best admit defeat.

Tenuous - Your opponents grasp of logic, the facts, the English language. 

To argue is to lose The very fact that your opponents argue against you is the best evidence against them. It means that your post has 'upset quite a few people', 'got a few people quite agitated' 'got under their skin' etc They have not made an argument but had a tantrum, they are not making reasoned points but ‘throwing their toys out of the pram’. 

Too Generous - e.g: "It would be tempting to attribute the use Chomsky makes of this material to intellectual idleness and incompetence, but I fear this is too generous a judgement." Here, one gets to have one's cake and eat it. Any one of a number of variants are possible: e.g. “It would be tempting to attribute the writer’s lexical ostentation to a too patent need to assert his cultural credentials/ an autodidactic zeal to display the fruits of his lexicological and bibliophilic labours/ social insecurity, and a frustrated desire to be admitted to the universe of Belles Lettres, but that would be too generous”. 

Turkey - If your opponent is criticising the policies of some state you favour demand that he talks about Turkey instead. This may sound a feeble ploy, equivalent to saying ‘please talk about something else’ but can be effective if you use language like ‘if you’re being consistent’ ‘disproportionate and selective attention’. (You may if you wish substitute some other country for Turkey – obviously so if, by chance, your opponent is talking about Turkey.) 

University, your opponent is at. Bear with me. In the realm of doxa, the university is entirely seperated from the Real World (qv) and populated by Student Revolutionaries. This image of the university is unassailable, and safely entrenched beyond refutation, so don't worry. It is thus rather useful if you can insinuate a connection between your opponent and the University (the University of doxa, that is, not any particular institution). Moreover, there is, belonging to this University of Doxa, an equally mythic 'undergraduate' who reappears endlessly in statements such as: 'this is an elementary undergraduate error'; 'As every undergraduate would know..' , 'one can find this kind of thing in any standard undergraduate essay.' 'if this were an undergraduate essay.. etc' and so on and do forth. This poor mythic undergraduate has been kept at university for countless years by the requirements of rhetoricians and polemicists. 

“Unwitting” – almost everything your opponent does is ‘unwitting’, eg revealing his real sympathies, confirming your argument, showing his true colours etc. 

Unworthy of serious consideration That your opponent’s argument ‘doesn’t merit a response’, is ‘unworthy of serious consideration’, that commentary or mockery ‘is superfluous’ shouldn’t of course prevent you from saying so at great length. 

“What I actually said” - your opponent has invariably failed to grasp this. Thus, you should suggest that he ‘tries addressing what you actually said’ or even ‘please address you remarks to the person who actually made the argument you refer to.”

"Who are you to say that?" Your opponent makes a coherent, plausible argument. You might think you've had it, but no - this meaningless question removes the ground from under his feet, shifting attention from what he's said to the position from which he speaks. E.g., "2 + 2 =4" Who are you to remind us of elementary mathematical truths?" qv 'self-appointed'.

Friday 7 October 2011

Nobel Peace winner Tawakul Karman talks to Al Jazeera



It's easy to dismiss the Nobel peace prize awarded to Tawakul Karman (and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee) as unconnected to the X Factor and TV dinner lives of the West but this year is a great example of an activist in a part of the world, that along with Bahrain and Syria is buried under a daily dishing of brutality that exists in large part to pipe the oil into the West's vehicles. 

Everything is connected. Listen to her. There's no daylight between her and say the words of John Lennon or any of the other greats that invariably the system seems to find a way to place a bullet in.

Tuesday 26 July 2011

Israel Threatens To Cancel Oslo Agreement


Building settlements illegally while claiming to seek peace is unconscionable and the ubiquitous silence on the part of my talented Jewish friends who I love and admire hugely is becoming louder and louder. The difference between why Israel was established after the second world war and that which is done saluting its name is increasingly indistinguishable with each passing day. That's an appalling observation to be forced to make and one which should not be ignored by those who recognise the value of ALL human life.

Tuesday 2 November 2010

Straight To Video



Some things I take a bit too seriously. And some things I don't. I made the clip above a short while back so that I could test the Twitvid function on Tweetdeck. I bought the sheeps mask and tried it out. It's only worth embedding because I'm not taking myself seriously and it's consistent with the next clip.




Same shit right? Nope.


The trouble is, I have no recollection of doing the one above. I realised the next day something wasn't right as I couldn't recall getting home. Most unusual for me, so I retraced my steps. The main event was buying a couple of pairs of sunglasses from the night market. I did stop off beforehand to have a couple of local spirits called Lao Cow.

It's served in a small shot glass and often coupled with seasonal sour fruits like unripe tamarind pieces or wild berries and then dipped in chilli sugar. It's very blue collar, an acquired taste and most valuable for getting an unvarnished view of the world. I mean talking to people it's hard to normally break the ice with. I don't mean with beer Goggles on.


So as I lost my memory, I thought maybe I'd been spiked or something. But then I remembered a girl joining me who always turns up when I'm around. I roped her into a mini flurry of Lao Cow shots. Nothing that excessive, but definitely more than I've ever had before. I think six shots.

Then all mayhem apparently let loose.


I"m guessing I came home, tweeted about my glasses and then made the Twitvid above. There could easily be lots more carnage judging by the random replies to me on Twitter the next morning. I've still not checked my timeline to piece together the full story but just in case anything abrasive was said or done, I do apologise.


This post is sponsored by @pristyles who sheltered me (most graciously) from harm.

Tuesday 8 July 2008

Word Up


This will no doubt be a boring post for many, but I'm in the States and catching up on a lot of blocked sites that were just too difficult to interact with through The Great Firewall of China. So here's my Blog Wordle thus far.

If anybody is in Los Angeles and wants to hook up for a coffee, drop me an email which is in the 'Soundbite' section to the right of this post hopefully.

I'm also going to the PSFK conference in San Francisco later next week for a few days so if any of you Stateside progressives need your inspiration and thinking tackle topped up, you need to book your tickets soon over here because those PSFK boys and girls keep it fresh every time.



Saturday 5 April 2008

Electric Dreams Part III

Sadly that last electric bike didn't stay with me too long. Even shorter than the iPhone I lost at the APG awards in London last year which had the decency to stick around for 48 hours before bailing out. So after a splendid lunch with one of China's leading digital thinkers Kaiser Kuo I returned to an empty spot where the bike had been locked. Undeterred (because I'm well 'ard like that) I've gone out and bought a brand new one for about 150 Euros (10 RMB = 1 Euro). Only 20 Euros more expensive than the first one which was second hand. Here she is.


I've figured out why there are more electric bikes in Beijing than motorbikes. Beijing is unusually flat and thus quite suited for this type of low power mobility and also of course for bicycles too. Lately I've started to see roller blades and skateboards joining us on the bicycle lanes (perfect tourist transport for the Olympics I might add), as Beijing has the most bike friendly lanes I've encountered outside of say Amsterdam and specifically Groningen where although they are just as ubiquitous, they are not nearly so wide as here.


Just a quick photo snap above of the spelling or Engrish as its called because I want to make the point that the the English used here isn't for English readers. It's for the Chinese. English conveys an international sensibility (design, quality and innovation) and although it isn't spoken about much in the 'China will be the dominant language of the internet' discussion, Mandarin may have more users as a global language but its influence is mainly limited to its own country.

I'm reminded of the French spoken in Russian Nobility circles from my Tolstoy and Dostoevsky reading years. I guess it's less the quantity than the quality, and more about the influence. I should add that I had absolutely nothing to do with the creation or adoption of the English language globally, as is evident from my frequent spelling mistakes and poor grammar. It most definitely wasn't me!


Lastly the shop that sold me my new pimpin' wheels also sell these terrific bicycles that have that flat handlebar action going on (like the old Hovis ads) with a frame and brakes system that is straight out of the 1930's. I simply must have one these too as its exactly the type of bike I've been hunting down for years and years now. I expected to come across a second hand model but here they are in the 21st century still being pumped out new. I have no idea why anybody would want to sit in a car stuck in traffic (except of course a Hyundai or its contextual equivalent) when there are much smarter and cooler options as these for transport.

Sunday 30 March 2008

Uniqlo Beijing


I blogged about the Uniqlock digital idea back in June last year (click the speaker icon in the bottom right corner for full effect - it still rocks as it's regularly updated) and frankly I'm a big fan of the marketing communications of Uniqlo. They are hip, refreshing and quirky.


I only occasionally shop there as most of the stuff is too straight forward for my liking but if I was into that plain and simple, done-well thing that Gap had going a few years back I'd much prefer Uniqlo over Gap because of the way they communicate. In short I love their personality.


I anticipate that Uniqlo are going to be massive in China after seeing their latest shop open in Beijing at Joy Shopping Centre. I was ascending the subway escalators a few days back and caught site of Chloë Sevigny on some Uniqlo wall posters announcing a store opening. I was immediately hooked. Now I know this will look kind of dull to people in other parts of the world but locally this is about as standout as it gets in China/Beijing so I do feel the need to blog about it. These executions are cutting edge for this neck of the woods, and would normally be stamped all over with the "well in China we do things differently" creative meddling that results in most communications as lamentable marketing mediocrity if not downright spammy once it is fiddled with.


I heard Neil Christie of W&K in 'this podcast' refer to some parts of the world looking for the differences instead of commonalities of an idea, and I couldn't agree more. Once the dull marketing folk who should really be in product development get their mitts on a bit of communication that is handed to them by an agency without the balls to stand for anything other than spreadsheet profit and loss, it becomes evident that the cardinal rule of advertising gets lost in the communication theory quagmire of venn diagrams, brand visions, engagement planning and link testing.


The first rule of advertising is to be NOTICED and that by its very nature means putting a few noses out of joint - It means having the courage to stand for something. Time and again I see an approach to Chinese advertising that is so timid it begs the question why aren't the suits in charge working in banks or actuarial cubicles instead of the (cough) creative industries?


Anyway in short the Uniqlo stuff is a breath of fresh air and hasn't been watered down. It's not Chinese, it's not Japanese, it's not American but it will be successful. The point of focus groups was never to let the 'consumer' (ugh) tell us what the creative direction should be it was about creative development and disaster checking. Those who hang on the focus groups' every word are destined to be followers not leaders. It takes leadership to be a brand, not the correctional marketing, and insipid rear view mirror copycat mimicry that is endemic in what should be the most exciting and new emerging market on the planet. There's a reason why China doesn't have a real global brand yet and I've talked about it more extensively in the comments over here. There's deeper socio-historical reasons too but I will go into that more fully when I write the post that suggests if you're over 25 and in advertising in China - You are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

Uniqlo - We salute you for being the nail that sticks out, for having a personality and being interesting. Rant over.

Monday 6 August 2007

Long Play


Late in the afternoon last week for no apparent reason the phone started ringing off the hook with work things. So I dragged my sorry rear into the West End mainly to get off my well honed reclining-position as earlier I'd been sucked into responding to Robs post to cover my partially exposed butt on brand values. Frankly I was close to bailing out Stateside for an overdue meetup, but a combination of a delayed reply that I've been waiting on, filed in 'the dog ate my emails' folder, and a sudden offer to get stuck into some charity rebranding tipped me over to taking on a gig on that meant a 4am start the next day up in Glasgow doing groups. These included in the afternoon, some young men who don't necessarily think too much about being electronically tagged while keeping a curfew - yeah Punk Planning my friends.

So far its been an exhausting but eyeopening experience and since the kickoff I've also covered Cardiff, a small mining village in the county borough of Caerphilly as well as Sutton Coldfield near Birmingham and Gloucester today. I should wrap up in a few days time but until then I've started to ask myself if the idea of an open source C.I development methodology might be an effective way to meet the objectives of keeping a very disparate bunch of people that range from local government, charity workers and young folk in need of a helping hand onboard and 'buying into' a process which one guy memorably articulated as 'reeking of insincerity' when referring to the the way 'brand' talks.

Here's the deal; most of the people that I've spoken to are really sceptical of anything that relates to marketing and the reason for that is they actually do stuff rather than waffle on about it like a lot of us ad tossers do. Its also increasingly evident that as with any change management a shiny new badge can be a reasonably useful point to coalesce around for a new direction. The reality is that unlike that rare and mythical beast called a proper brand (people getting mugged for Levis in 80's Moscow and ditto for iPods in the 3rd millennium) they probably will never be more famous than say top of mind prompted-recall within a specific charity segment, even if as I have discovered time and again since last Thursday they are off-the-richter-scale for complexity in stakeholders and financial solutions. Not to mention diversity of projects and doing a lot of hands on work.

I'm probing some architecture, platform and proposition dimensions that are not far removed from interrogation of (deep breath) third party projection of the meaning-of-meaning for say deprived young'uns with low attention spans - you get my drift? OK I'm exaggerating a tad, but that whole brand personality malarkey isn't moving mountains for me if people have to think about it. I mean personality is surely something people can spontaneously remark on and unwittingly have, acquire and possibly nurture. Surely its not something that can be scored from the nearest council estate corner gathering, and falls neatly between say a "chav" brand and one that "tells you what to do" as one group earlier today outlined when discussing those "Just do it" people. I guess I'm taking shots at some of the FMCG navel-gazing research gigs I've had to oversea in my time. But there is some overlap with whats going on here.

So in the interests of suggesting a kick-ass methodology for a participatory media process that embraces uncertainty and welcomes the digitalocracy of the web I thought I'd run the idea past you folk in case anyone else has thought about the idea of opening up the development of identity architecture real-time on the web. The immediate pluses for this method are that everyone gets a say and feels that they have been part of the consultation process, one or two egos/agendas don't hijack the process as invariably happens when settling on a least contentious communication platforms. Any thoughts? Is this taking 2.0 a bit far? Could it all go peaches up or as I really suspect, the P.R from the process could be worth considerably more than a years communication budget, given that nobody has ever done it before and that somebody will surely be extremely upset about the loss of control - which is a good thing in my book.

Other than that there are a quite a few other things kicking off and I'll leave you with the best post for ages. If any of you wannabes want to know what planning is about then check out this slice of action that absorbs people of our stargazing ilk who can't ever help stop thinking - albeit in my case pretty uselessly. It also gives me a chance to use that picture of ChinaD0II that has been lurking on my desktop before I dig out some of the great podcasts I'm still gagging to tip y'all off about.