This article declares that the writers of a script for a soap should pay more attention to the downsides of bad habits. There are many characters in UK’s soaps that smoke a lot, drink a lot and eat a lot of unhealthy food. Too many times, these characters appear in a perfect healthy state in the series. A top ten has even been released of the most unhealthiest soap characters. At the top is Dot Cotton from Eastenders. She is a heavy smoker and doesn’t show enough unhealthy sign according to private healthcare firm Bupa. Soaps can be of a very good use when it comes to getting the message across that an unhealthy lifestyle is really bad for you. Right now soaps miss out on this health message. Dr Peter Mace said: "We ask that soap opera scriptwriters portray the effects of an unhealthy lifestyle more realistically, such as in the way they've handled other medical issues such as cancer or Aids. He said that viewers would be influenced by the "everyday lives" they see acted out on the television.
At least not all soap opera characters are immune to unhealthy lifestyles. Jack Duckworth and Fred Elliot from the soap ‘Coronation Street’ for example, both suffered a heart attack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7802985.stm
Reaction:
My first impression was: Humbug! Sometimes authorities place too much value to what we see on the television. But when I gave it a second, responsible thought, I thought it being quite a good idea. After all, Soaps do try to simulate the everyday lives on television. When someone wants to make a realistic soap, he also has to portray the realistic affects of a unhealthy lifestyle. I even think it wouldn’t be bad to exaggerate the effect a little bit. Just to get the message across. Television is a good way of educating so why not use that ability a little in the previously non-educative programmes like soap operas. It is a very small effort to do this and I think it will not really harm the popularity of a soap opera.
maandag 29 december 2008
UK Lynx 'could be reintroduced'
The Big Cat, the Lynx, has until now been thought to have died in the UK about 4000 years ago. New research has shown that the lynx lived until Medieval times and was extinguished by humans, instead of dying out in a natural way. This new discovery is one of the supports of the proposal to reintroduce the Lynx. An professor from Oxford called David Macdonald made this proposal. In His State of Britain's Mammals report, Professor David Macdonald said the reinstatement of the previously native lynx was an important issue. "Lynx would most likely hunt roe, sika and juvenile red deer, supplementing their diet with hares and foxes." Said Macdonald. He also thinks the Lynx can help to control the expanding Deer population. He claims this would be good because the overpopulation of “Free-ranging” Deer is a cause of damaged protected woodland. There is enough forest in Scotland and northern England to support a population of around 450 lynx.
Reaction:
I think it will be good idea to have Lynx back in the UK. These are beautiful animals, great to have them in the wild. It is expected that they can survive, since they have the right kind of diet and the previous cause of their extinction was the persecution by the humans. This only should be enough reason to have them back in the UK. But now it is even likely that they can do something good for our environment as well. I wouldn’t know why they should hesitate to do it.
I think it will be good idea to have Lynx back in the UK. These are beautiful animals, great to have them in the wild. It is expected that they can survive, since they have the right kind of diet and the previous cause of their extinction was the persecution by the humans. This only should be enough reason to have them back in the UK. But now it is even likely that they can do something good for our environment as well. I wouldn’t know why they should hesitate to do it.
woensdag 10 december 2008
X Factor exclusive: Secrets of the winner's '£1million contract'
The truth behind the X factor contract revealed.
The contract X factor finalists have to sigh before Saturday night’s show is quite ridiculous. First of all, the promised record deal of £1 million is not true. The winner will get a £150k upfront for their first album to pay their expenses. This is revealed by the Mirror, who got to see the contract and looked in on all 80 pages. The presenter of the show said that the winner would get a million pounds so this is highly misleading. 1 million is not he prize, it is the record deal. This means that the recording is funded by this 1 million pounds. So all the costs of the best producers and the marketing costs using the best video directors will be paid for this 1 million. There probably won’t be much left.
The finalists are expected to read this complicated, 80 pages long contract in just 3 days. And they’re supposed to read it carefully. The contract contains hundreds of clauses and some of them are quite bizarre like clause 32.4 : artists must not make any statement which “may be considered unduly negative, critical or derogatory of the Company – including its personnel and, in particular, Simon Cowell”.
More of these things make this contract quite doubtful.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/12/10/x-factor-exclusive-secrets-of-the-winner-s-1million-contract-115875-20959077/
Reaction
This article confirms a lot of bad rumors going on about the show business I think. It is always said that the show bizz is as corrupt as can be and this is even a official article, not just a rumor. It’s a shame that it has to be like that. The only good thing these silly programs have, is also taken away. The winner of this X factor thing could actually be given a fabulous life of which he or she probably dreams about and such a stupid contract gives that dream a quite nasty twist. It’s a shame that even in such a rich country people can’t even do what they are promised. It’s highly misleading. But on the other hand. I can’t really bother. It’s a problem that doesn’t really exist because you chose for it yourself. The people attending X factor should have thought of it earlier. It’s a silly program anyway.
The contract X factor finalists have to sigh before Saturday night’s show is quite ridiculous. First of all, the promised record deal of £1 million is not true. The winner will get a £150k upfront for their first album to pay their expenses. This is revealed by the Mirror, who got to see the contract and looked in on all 80 pages. The presenter of the show said that the winner would get a million pounds so this is highly misleading. 1 million is not he prize, it is the record deal. This means that the recording is funded by this 1 million pounds. So all the costs of the best producers and the marketing costs using the best video directors will be paid for this 1 million. There probably won’t be much left.
The finalists are expected to read this complicated, 80 pages long contract in just 3 days. And they’re supposed to read it carefully. The contract contains hundreds of clauses and some of them are quite bizarre like clause 32.4 : artists must not make any statement which “may be considered unduly negative, critical or derogatory of the Company – including its personnel and, in particular, Simon Cowell”.
More of these things make this contract quite doubtful.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/12/10/x-factor-exclusive-secrets-of-the-winner-s-1million-contract-115875-20959077/
Reaction
This article confirms a lot of bad rumors going on about the show business I think. It is always said that the show bizz is as corrupt as can be and this is even a official article, not just a rumor. It’s a shame that it has to be like that. The only good thing these silly programs have, is also taken away. The winner of this X factor thing could actually be given a fabulous life of which he or she probably dreams about and such a stupid contract gives that dream a quite nasty twist. It’s a shame that even in such a rich country people can’t even do what they are promised. It’s highly misleading. But on the other hand. I can’t really bother. It’s a problem that doesn’t really exist because you chose for it yourself. The people attending X factor should have thought of it earlier. It’s a silly program anyway.
Firms urged to cut energy bills.
You would think that lately prices of oil, gas and electricity could only rise. But this is not true. For some reason the price of oil, and therefore the price of gas, has gone down the last few months. As you can see in the diagram, the price per therm of wholesale gas has risen until September 2008. In the first half of this year, the price jumped from 60 pence to a 100 pence per therm. But in de second half, prices had been cut to 60 pence again. The price of oil has slumped recently and the price of gas is connected to the price of oil.
The problem is that energy bills are still not decreasing in the UK. Energy companies are under pressure of the Government. They are told to drop their prices. But the energy companies don’t want to drop their prices yet because they pay for the gas in advance. Mutations, therefore, can’t be passed on immediately. Ian Parrett, of Inenco, said that when the changes come there could be a 15% reduction in electricity prices and a fall in gas prices of between 20% and 25%. The mutation of the prices are expected in March 2009 but it would be more convenient if the wholesale gas price would diminish now because in this time of the year, energy is needed the most.
The problem is that energy bills are still not decreasing in the UK. Energy companies are under pressure of the Government. They are told to drop their prices. But the energy companies don’t want to drop their prices yet because they pay for the gas in advance. Mutations, therefore, can’t be passed on immediately. Ian Parrett, of Inenco, said that when the changes come there could be a 15% reduction in electricity prices and a fall in gas prices of between 20% and 25%. The mutation of the prices are expected in March 2009 but it would be more convenient if the wholesale gas price would diminish now because in this time of the year, energy is needed the most.
Reaction
I think that the government shouldn’t press so hard on the energy companies. Of course it is better for every household if the gas is cheaper but energy is something we have to be careful with and it is worth to pay a little more for it. Fossil fuels are obviously running out. I don’t know how these prices suddenly can drop but eventually they will keep on rising because oil and gas is only going to become more rare. I think it is not wrong if the energy companies do not cut down the prices even when energy is cheaper for a while. I suggest they put the extra money earned in search for green energy.
If the bills would drop, households will start to spoil energy I think. It will be an impulse for people to be less careful with energy.
I think that the government shouldn’t press so hard on the energy companies. Of course it is better for every household if the gas is cheaper but energy is something we have to be careful with and it is worth to pay a little more for it. Fossil fuels are obviously running out. I don’t know how these prices suddenly can drop but eventually they will keep on rising because oil and gas is only going to become more rare. I think it is not wrong if the energy companies do not cut down the prices even when energy is cheaper for a while. I suggest they put the extra money earned in search for green energy.
If the bills would drop, households will start to spoil energy I think. It will be an impulse for people to be less careful with energy.
zondag 7 december 2008
Irish republic recalls all pork
Previous Monday, suspicions were first raised over Irish pork meat when routine test were being taken. On a number of pig farms in Ireland, a very high level of dioxins were found in the pork meat. It is said that this was caused by a high level of dioxins in the park’s feed. dioxins are formed during combusting processes but it is still unknown how this high level of dioxins got in the pork’s feed. Long term exposure to dioxins can lead to serious health-problems, including cancer. The food safety authority demanded that every pork meat produced in the Irish republic after the first of September should be destroyed. This includes Bacon, ham, sausages, white pudding and pizzas with ham toppings. These precautions were taken out of safety. The UK's Food Standards Agency said it did not believe that UK consumers faced any "significant risk". Although, they are still waiting to hear if any of the contaminated food had been exported to the UK.
The same optimism holds true for the Irish republic. It is said that we should not panic and that anyone who has eaten pork meat did not need to seek medical help.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7769391.stm
Reaction
Threats like these are very dangerous I think. Meat is being produced on such a great scale these days that a contamination can spread very easily. Before you know it half of the country could have been eating the contaminated food. Therefore I think that the Food Safety Authority of Ireland did a good job on recalling all the meat. Precautions like these are important. Maybe they exaggerate a little bit but that would be a lot better than to keep it quiet and to eventually discover that a lot of people faced serious health problems because of the contaminated meat. It seems that the threat for the UK is very small but it’s still important that preliminary actions are being taken.
It is odd though that it is still unclear how the pork’s feed got contaminated. Isn’t the feed properly checked before given to the pork? If it is not, it should be…
The same optimism holds true for the Irish republic. It is said that we should not panic and that anyone who has eaten pork meat did not need to seek medical help.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7769391.stm
Reaction
Threats like these are very dangerous I think. Meat is being produced on such a great scale these days that a contamination can spread very easily. Before you know it half of the country could have been eating the contaminated food. Therefore I think that the Food Safety Authority of Ireland did a good job on recalling all the meat. Precautions like these are important. Maybe they exaggerate a little bit but that would be a lot better than to keep it quiet and to eventually discover that a lot of people faced serious health problems because of the contaminated meat. It seems that the threat for the UK is very small but it’s still important that preliminary actions are being taken.
It is odd though that it is still unclear how the pork’s feed got contaminated. Isn’t the feed properly checked before given to the pork? If it is not, it should be…
vrijdag 5 december 2008
Man wins cliff home erosion case
The coast of Southwold, Suffolk has always been thread by the sea. The land erodes and therefore the village of Suffolk is getting to lie closer to the sea. If this eroding continues, eventually houses will just fall into the sea. A retired engineer called Peter Boggis lives close to these cliffs and he took his chances and started two years ago with building his own sea defences. He already spent ten of thousands of pounds doing so. He dumped 250.000 tonnes of clay soil in order to build his own dike and protect his own home and the homes of other inhabitants of Suffolk. The problem is that this area has been selected as a SSSI(Site of Special Scientific interest) by the organisation Natural England. This means that they have decided that the shoreline is not to be disturbed and that the eroding should continue on behalf of scientific studies. Peter Boggis didn’t have the right to do this without any jurisdiction and therefore Peter Boggis and Natural England got into higher court. Peter Boggis won the latest stage of his fight. He said Natural England had no legal right to stop him saving his home.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/7766782.stm
Reaction
I think Peter Boggis is right. The sea is threatening the village and his home and therefore only he is already allowed to take the right measures. However, the article also said that Natural England declared that Peter Boggis had not obtained planning permission from his local authority or a waste licence from the Environment Agency. This is quite harmful I think because nobody should be taking great measures like this whenever he feels like it. If we’d all do that we would affect the environment immensely. But still, it is very good of Peter Boggis that he try’s to hold back the sea. Especially when you hold in mind the global warming and the rising of the sea level. Measures should be taken to hold back the sea.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/7766782.stm
Reaction
I think Peter Boggis is right. The sea is threatening the village and his home and therefore only he is already allowed to take the right measures. However, the article also said that Natural England declared that Peter Boggis had not obtained planning permission from his local authority or a waste licence from the Environment Agency. This is quite harmful I think because nobody should be taking great measures like this whenever he feels like it. If we’d all do that we would affect the environment immensely. But still, it is very good of Peter Boggis that he try’s to hold back the sea. Especially when you hold in mind the global warming and the rising of the sea level. Measures should be taken to hold back the sea.
woensdag 19 november 2008
Clampdown on excessive speeders
Article
Excessive speeders are drivers who frequently drive way to hard. The proposal is that there will be a bigger contrast between major and minor speeding offences. Excessive speeders will be punished a lot harder in comparison to the non-frequent speeding offender. They hope to separate the anti-social driver from the drivers who are behaving. Furthermore is there spoken about drugs-policy. Again, the frequent drug drivers should be kept an eye on and punished a lot harder. The problem with drugs is that it is very hard for the Police on the road to conclude what kind of drugs the driver has used.
Excessive speeders are drivers who frequently drive way to hard. The proposal is that there will be a bigger contrast between major and minor speeding offences. Excessive speeders will be punished a lot harder in comparison to the non-frequent speeding offender. They hope to separate the anti-social driver from the drivers who are behaving. Furthermore is there spoken about drugs-policy. Again, the frequent drug drivers should be kept an eye on and punished a lot harder. The problem with drugs is that it is very hard for the Police on the road to conclude what kind of drugs the driver has used.
Reaction
It sounds like a fair idea to me. I think there is a big difference between excessive speeders and coincidental speeding offenders. When offending a speed limit you can’t immediately label that driver as a anti-social driver. I think it is still possible to be a good driver if you cross the speed limit with only a few miles. The excessive speeders however truly show that they lag responsibility and have no care for the other drivers on the road at all. I know it’s hard to decide where to place the border between excessive speeders and less social drivers. That is a true downside of this proposal. But if you find a good solution for that: it sounds good to me.
Free meal plan for Scots pupils
The Scottish government set up a plan to provide free meals for pupils(5 to 7 year olds) in primary school. Every child between the 5 and 7 years old should be able to get a free meal in school by 2010. This project is already being piloted and it seems to work well. The amount of meals taken in school increased from 53% to 75%! The project’s aim is to fight obesities. This growing health-problem can be fought by providing the right diets for children. Children will learn to try new food and will get used to eating healthy food. However, not everyone is convinced. Who is going to pay for these free meals? President of Cosla, Pat Watters, says there is no need to worry because the government has a budget of £40m to provide these meals.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7646898.stm
Reaction:
Sounds like a very good idea. I’m certain that children can be thought to eat heathy food even though they probably wont like some of the food the first time. They will find healthy food which they like and learn to eat what they like less. It is very motivating that the meals are for free. In the beginning it can help to support the project and make it popular. In the end it won’t be necessary to provide the meals for free I think. You can just split the costs in two. One half for the parents and one half for the government. I think most parents will still be enthusiastic when they have to pay so less for their kid’s meal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7646898.stm
Reaction:
Sounds like a very good idea. I’m certain that children can be thought to eat heathy food even though they probably wont like some of the food the first time. They will find healthy food which they like and learn to eat what they like less. It is very motivating that the meals are for free. In the beginning it can help to support the project and make it popular. In the end it won’t be necessary to provide the meals for free I think. You can just split the costs in two. One half for the parents and one half for the government. I think most parents will still be enthusiastic when they have to pay so less for their kid’s meal.
UK Hostages on Saudi tanker named
Article:
Previous Saturday a Saudi oil tanker has been seized by Somali pirates. It is the Sirius Star. It can be loaded with 2million barrels of oil which is worth more than £67 million. The tanker was attacked near the Kenyan coast. On this tanker are 25 crew members of which two of them from the UK. Their names have been tracked and they are Peter French and Peter Grady. Their families hope that Peter and James will return soon. Negotiations have begun and Frank Gardner from the BBC said that the pirates want to get rid of the load as soon as possible. The last thing they want is a bloodbath so probably the crew gets away unharmed. The amount of attacks by pirates on vessels is rising. This year more that 90 took place.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7737969.stm
Reaction:
It's possible that 'pirates' become a new threat for trading ships. Apparently it allready is but you don't hear a lot about it in the news yet. Many people are suprised to hear about pirates. I also thought that pirates were long gone history. But when you think about it, it's not a strange idea because especially the oil-vessels are worth a lot, lot of money. These vessels are not very well protected yet so it's probably not very hard to hijack them. The problem could be easily solved though by trainging and arming the crew of the ships and/or guard the vessels by the navy.
Previous Saturday a Saudi oil tanker has been seized by Somali pirates. It is the Sirius Star. It can be loaded with 2million barrels of oil which is worth more than £67 million. The tanker was attacked near the Kenyan coast. On this tanker are 25 crew members of which two of them from the UK. Their names have been tracked and they are Peter French and Peter Grady. Their families hope that Peter and James will return soon. Negotiations have begun and Frank Gardner from the BBC said that the pirates want to get rid of the load as soon as possible. The last thing they want is a bloodbath so probably the crew gets away unharmed. The amount of attacks by pirates on vessels is rising. This year more that 90 took place.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7737969.stm
Reaction:
It's possible that 'pirates' become a new threat for trading ships. Apparently it allready is but you don't hear a lot about it in the news yet. Many people are suprised to hear about pirates. I also thought that pirates were long gone history. But when you think about it, it's not a strange idea because especially the oil-vessels are worth a lot, lot of money. These vessels are not very well protected yet so it's probably not very hard to hijack them. The problem could be easily solved though by trainging and arming the crew of the ships and/or guard the vessels by the navy.
dinsdag 18 november 2008
When should a child go into care?
Article:
There is a lot going on because of the death of Baby P. One thing became clear: child-care needs to be improved in the UK. The NSPCC estimates that every ten days, a child is killed by it's parent. The death of baby P made us think about when a child is taken into care. How do they decide a child should be taken into care? Maybe we should place less value on the belief that children are always better off with their parents. This has been the belief of social services. Prof. Nick foster declares: ‘being shifted from one foster home to another can lead to children losing faith in society and falling into crime.’ However, social workers might hold back to long with concluding a child is abused or neglected because of the fear of being wrong.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7735464.stm
opinion:
I can imagine that it’s very hard to decide if a child is being abused or not. And second, how should the child be helped. I think it is still very good that social workers are trying to keep the child with it’s parents. A good foundation of a mans youth is important. But let’s be realistic. When a parent beats up him/her child as much as baby P, I think a social worker should not hesitate to take the baby away from it’s parents. A social worker should be more confident when making such decisions. Therefore, a social worker should be help less responsible for the child I think. This way pressure can make way for action.
There is a lot going on because of the death of Baby P. One thing became clear: child-care needs to be improved in the UK. The NSPCC estimates that every ten days, a child is killed by it's parent. The death of baby P made us think about when a child is taken into care. How do they decide a child should be taken into care? Maybe we should place less value on the belief that children are always better off with their parents. This has been the belief of social services. Prof. Nick foster declares: ‘being shifted from one foster home to another can lead to children losing faith in society and falling into crime.’ However, social workers might hold back to long with concluding a child is abused or neglected because of the fear of being wrong.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7735464.stm
opinion:
I can imagine that it’s very hard to decide if a child is being abused or not. And second, how should the child be helped. I think it is still very good that social workers are trying to keep the child with it’s parents. A good foundation of a mans youth is important. But let’s be realistic. When a parent beats up him/her child as much as baby P, I think a social worker should not hesitate to take the baby away from it’s parents. A social worker should be more confident when making such decisions. Therefore, a social worker should be help less responsible for the child I think. This way pressure can make way for action.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)