MediaGuardian.co.uk | Broadcast | BBC to launch Pet TV

The BBC are to launch an interactive TV station for pets. The service will consist of various images and clips from television programs all looped round. So you can stick your dog, cat (yeah, really likely), fish tank etc. in front of your TV and see what happens.

It may also have cult appeal. When I lived in Maastricht in The Netherlands, one of the local TV stations had free air time before it broadcast. It used that airtime to broadcast various movies of a car travelling around Maastricht. You got the driver’s view, and yes, it did pass my flat! But, it got more weird: One movie was taken from a camera mounted on a trolley at the Maastricht University Hospital, so you could see all the doctors and patients doing there stuff whilst the trolley tootled round the wards. Amazing.

As the owner of a small business I am often telephoned by companies who want to sell me their services, products, or to put me on their mailing list. I have no problem with that. However, I am inundated with phone calls from companies representing charities who want the company to advertise on their wall chart, year planner, diary or other ephemeral publication. The style of these phone calls varies and most (over 90% in my experience) are scams. I highlight below the various types of phone call:

1. The "Hello, I’m Fred from CharityX / PublisherY.." phone call. This is usually a genuine phone call. The caller will explain that they are producing a publication in your area and are selling advertising space. The next phone call will be a form of Call 4.
2. The "Hello, can I ask you a few questions.." phone call. This is a scam phone call. The caller asks questions about the business and would you like to ‘put your name down’ for advertising in a publication. If you do, then you are likely to then get your next phone call from the same company in the form of Call 4.
3. The "Hello, can I speak to the person that deals with your advertising.." phone call. This is usually a scam phone call. It’s a variant of Call 2. I usually state that we don’t advertise. That easily ends the call.
4. The "Hello , thank you for contributing to Charity X.." phone call. This is a scam phone call. Most of the calls you will get will be all friendly, with the exception of those callers who are poorly trained in the technique. The idea behind this one is to make you believe that you previously agreed to advertise or contribute, that’s why they know you, ask you how your weekend was etc. When questioned, callers will say that they phoned a few months ago – long enough for most people to forget whether they did or did not advertise. If you are not careful, by the end of the phone call you will have agreed to advertise. Some callers of Call 4 always assume their information is correct. The best way to deal with this is to deny it. Repeatedly.
5. The "Hello , thank you for contributing to CharityX. I’m not asking for any more money.." phone call. This is a scam phone call. It’s a variant of Call 4.

The purpose of all of these phone calls is for you to agree to advertise or contribute. Most of the calls come from publishers rather than charities, and in my experience checking with charities is a waste of time. None of my checks have ever led to a response from the given charity, including some well known charities. If you agree to advertise, the caller will ask you not to renege on the agreement because it increases their overheads. Furthermore, to get the "ahh" factor, all the charities involved are related in one way or another to work with children. I’ve never had someone phone up regarding a bowel cancer wallchart.

The result of all of this is that I now keep my own "scam log" for such phone calls. I’ve found I get between 2 and 4 a month, and the caller can flounder when you let them know that you log all charity calls.

So, how does this affect me and my view of charities? The bottom line is whilst I once contributed occasionally to charities, I will no longer have anything to do with any of them. Genuine or not. Whether in this form or through traditional campaigning. It’s not easy to tell which telephone approaches are genuine and if the charities themselves don’t respond then they’re not exactly helping matters.

According to a recent mailshot I received from an organisation touting itself as a networked support mechanism for the commercialisation of research:

Oh, please. Since when has broadband and IP telephony offered a solution to outsourcing to other countries? These are technologies, not solutions. We have broadband at our office. We also do a lot of work from our own homes, whenever we feel like it. Is it cheaper to come to us than to go to India? No. Why? Because these other countries have a lower labour cost. As for IP telephony: well yes it could help, if you had masses of staff all hooked up to terabit broadband. Never heard of it myself.

Things that really help reverse outsourcing are traditional things about good business. Give customers a better level of service; promote the fact that all added value operations are handled in-house; nuture your customers; make them feel wanted and valued; invest in career development for existing staff; improve the way in which work is managed and tracked…

So what about the age old issue of outsourcing call centres. Well, recent indications are that it can be less effective than having call centres in your country of origin. See Dell’s experience. They should know.

Job done.

There’s much talk in the UK media at present about the proposed introduction of identity cards. They’re touted as being useful for preventing illegal immigration and terrorism. Civil liberties groups claim that they will be not be useful and that they impinge on the rights and freedom of individuals. I’m not going to comment on their concerns, there is clearly much still to be discussed. However, I am increasingly amazed by vox pop and media concerns about who is to pay for the introduction of these cards, which by 2013 will be in the hands of 80% of the economically active population.

Some demand that the government should pay for them, others think that individuals should pay. So why do I get all uppity about this? Because we always pay. If the government pays for any policy, it either has to borrow more (which we have to pay back later), or it has to increase taxes (which we pay for sooner), or it has to allocate the money from existing expenditure (which we pay for ultimately either in reduced services, or in the fact that reducing expenditure in some governments doesn’t ultimately lead to reduced taxes).

Payment is a non-issue. Are people so ignorant that they do not realise this?

Due to the increase in the numbers of students wanting to go to university it seems that some universities are putting into place various ways of weeding out numbers from over-subscribed courses. One university is actually picking students by random from those who meet the grade requirements. There’s also talk of introducing an A+ grade to live alongside the traditional gradings of ‘A’ levels in England and Wales.

It has been a long standing objective of the current government to increase the range of students that attend university, with more coming from poorer backgrounds. The trouble with the introduction of an A+ grade is that it is estimated that there will be six times as many students from independent schools who achieve this qualification, compared to those from comprehensive schools. This is all of course down to a lack of funding for further education. Increased funding would allow for larger yearly intakes, thus the current entrance requirements could be sustained.

But it looks like additional funding is not going to be forthcoming. The introduction of (post-graduation) tuition fees only makes tiny inroads into the total funding required to fulfill the government’s targets. So there seems to be a lack of joined-up thinking on tertiary education. On one hand the government wants more people to attend university; on the other hand there isn’t the funding to permit this. Sandwiched in between are the universities who have to find their own ways of getting additional funds or they have to be more choosy on who to accept on courses. The latter of course flies in the face of the government’s objectives for getting more people to university.

Elena is a Ukrainian who has a love of motorcycles. She has a web page about her Kawasaki ZZR-1100 and what’s been customised on it. It currently kicks out 147bhp. So, why is this on my blog? Well, she rides her bike through a deserted town that she calls Ghost Town. It has no traffic lights, no people, no police, just vegetation. She can go as fast as she wants and providing she doesn’t hit the occasional chicken she’s okay. When she goes on these trips she always carries a geiger counter with her.

Read this awesome photo journal to find out why.