Piers Morgan on Shanghai, apparently.

Hey,

I am a man who is interested in politics. This we know. People often ask me "why do you like politics? It's rubbish. Personally I prefer chicken". To me, though, politics is everything (chicken included).

Take for example, my job in a pub: the price of the Tennents that we sell is affected by Government laws; it costs money for the alcohol to be delivered, as lorry company's charge according to running costs such as petrol, staff wages etc; a VAT increase increases expenditure on near enough everything, and staff would be affected by National Insurance contributions and tax. What I earn has to be in correlation with the National Minimum Wage, which not all countries have. The World Cup is on the television, but it is on terrestrial (if you can still call it that) because in this country it is an A-listed event. This means that Sky can't buy the rights like they did with the Premiership, and other A-listed events are events such as Wimbledon and Formula 1. This means that people can watch these events without having to go to fine public houses such as the one I work in.

This, to me, is politics. I also find stuff such like Communism interesting, the (probable only) alternative to  capitalism and if it works. I studied the Soviet Union for a year and to see it's rise and fall was really interesting. Where the USSR collapsed under political reform, the regime in China was strengthened by changing the economic policy whilst keeping political freedoms limited.

So you can see that I was sort of looking forward to "Piers Morgan's Shanghai" which was on ITV last week.  Could Piers do some great investigative journalism about China? Whether the system which cracked two decades ago in the Soviet Union is showing similar signs of strain?

In a nutshell, no. What we did find out is the following;

* In Shanghai, there is a Tesco, where you can buy live eels.
* Some people drink wine with coke.
* They are rubbish at football.
* He couldn't get onto YouTube, which annoyed him.
* David Beckham is famous.

And that's about it, really. They had some shots of poor people, compared to some very, very, very rich people. But this could of been done in any city, not just Shanghai. I shouldn't really be too harsh though, this was ITV's filler whilst the BBC had a football match on. It wasn't intended to be a serious documentary, if you wanted that I recommend John Simpson's documentary about the fairly unknown city of Chongqing, which has a population of about 30 million yet ten years ago it was about half the size of three start hotel. You have to love state planning. I shouldn't be too surprised, really. After all, Piers Morgan's interview with the former Prime Minister Gordon Brown involved some Paxman-esque  questions such as whether he was part of the mile-high club (which was as awkward as the mental picture it created) and whether he got drunk at university. I don't need to know such details, not from him or anyone. Overall, it was interesting-ish in bits (the part about women having plastic surgery to look less oriental in particular) but I'm a cynical old git and it's easier to be grumpy.

DC
x

Remember when I used to review television shows?

Hey,

I'm in bed whilst writing this, at 12.12pm. I wish I wasn't, because the reason I'm here is due to illness. I'm not sure what it is yet? Flu? Cold? Hayfever? Whatever it is it's probably worse than pregnancy. Trust me, it's so bad I have cancelled half-marathon training for the day.

Anyways, the other day I was looking through the previous blog entries (there is over sixty now, startling) and came across my brief attempts at reviewing television. I didn't realise the irony of reviewing television whilst not actually owning a television until now. Anyway, I am back in Fort William, where I now own a TV, so it seems fitting to make a return to trying to be Brooker whilst inadvertently sounding more like the other Ross brother. Y'know, the one which doesn't have all that money?

Firstly, a long-term favourite of mine, Waterloo Road , a drama based around a secondary school "up north" in Rochdale. Where it is not as nice as private school, as we were led to believe. Essentially, the school is an example of Sod's Law, especially when there are things of a chemical nature, just lying about, as you do. So far there has been;

* A caravan exploding, Brainiac-esq

* A boy getting pure sodium (or something similar) in his eyes during a field trip to a farm

* A girl trying to remove a birth mark using bleach from the Chemistry classroom

* A depressed teacher accidentally setting the kitchen on fire

* Kids trying to make their own alcohol from ethanol.

To me, it is just a bit lazy, really. Which is a shame, because the storylines are generally, if not predictable, interesting nonetheless. How they managed to fit a lesbian-teacher crush before watershed most of involved some bargaining, hopefully out of the "chemistry-related-disaster" budget. Also, if you don't know who is in Waterloo Road, it is in essence a collaboration of Loose Women and Grange Hill from three or four years ago.

The BBC's apparent urge to promote young talent on Wednesdays continue with The Junior Apprentice. It is the same format as The Apprentice, only with "young entrepreneurs" being shouted over by the narrator and how "Lord Sugar" has backed them since the beginning of time/capitalism.

It is actually a good show, and it avoids the problematic issue of making the show entertaining without being patronising towards the contestants. Watching it is only disheartening when you realise that these kids will more than certainly do better in life than I ever will, the cynical guy who hides behind a laptop slagging off television programs. It is like the day you go to a football and the boy upfront is younger than you. Celtic are never going to sign me, are they?

Just because they are young doesn't mean that some of them aren't tools of the highest order, though. Names allude me at this moment, but the girl "whose parents are both artists, her brother is an artist and has been going to art exhibitions" has the capability to change an art exhibition turn from a exhibit of an artist into an exhibit of herself. It is quite a talent, as is the ability to think the exact opposite of what her facial reactions suggest. I hope she goes on tonight's show. As for contestants I like, there is the "wee Scottish girl" for nationalistic reasons, and Arjen, the human calculator. The most interesting aspect of the show is how different people can look, even though they are all roughly the same age. Tim looks like he could be some of the other kids' father. Sadly, if they are to succeed in business, they will probably all have to gain a thick skin and a twat exterior. And seeing that occur on television to young people is kind of disheartening.

And finally, Blue Mountain State. It's hard to explain, but it's about the antics of a college football team. It is the intellectual equivalent of chinning a can of beer and then ramming it against your forehead. It's online, so you can find it somewhere, if you want to know what that feels like.

DC

x

In John Lewis, Clothes Buy You!

Hey,

As you may or may not know, I do Central and Eastern European Studies (CEES) at University. What this means is that for the last year I've been learning about the Communist period in the Soviet Union (Lenin, Stalin, Breshnev, Gorbachev etc). The propaganda they used was farcical, ranging from calling each other "Comrade" to depicting life in the West as very similar to the musical "Oliver". In the 1970s. Seriously.

I bet for a second you thought I wasn't going to talk about TV for once (because this is what this blog has become effectively) but no. I'm going to stick to form. I write about the Soviet Union this morning due to the show on BBC the now "Inside John Lewis". Not a bizarre interactive biology experiment, "Inside John Lewis" follows the business which is trying to see out the recession successfully. It would be an interesting program as it is, but to make it a bit different is that John Lewis is not a business but a "partnership" which all the staff "own".

At John Lewis, you are not staff. You are a "partner". The pay structure restricts the men at the top getting extortionate wages (the chief executive can only get 75 times that of the lowest paid staff/partner, a lot of money nonetheless but significantly less to other companies).

The question I pose is this: is John Lewis the socialist ideal? The partners are effectively shareholders in John Lewis, meaning they are involved in a generous "profit share" system. John Lewis Partnership also own resorts for their partners to go on holiday to. The people who work there appear to love the place. They adhere to this "one for all, all for one" ideology.

John Lewis, like all businesses currently, are struggling in the current recession. "Slim-lining" the company has meant the "R" word: redundancies. It doesn't matter whether you are staff, comrade or partner. You are disposable, a weight that must be relieved to keep the business' head above water.

I don't know if John Lewis will suffer a similar fate to that of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s/early 1990s. I don't really "do" economics or business or anything like that. But by using my wee bit of political knowledge if I was to hear it were to fall I wouldn't be overtly surprised. The similarities are a bit odd, considering one was an empire (or as good as) and the other is a shop. Just a shop. John Lewis' unique "partnership" system is retail socialism. If John Lewis becomes an institution to be lost in this economic climate (ie like Woolworths) it will be because they tried to cover to many different objects on too vast a scale. With the internet and competitive high streets, to expect a shop to cover everything and more is just a bit too unrealistic. You can't expect the same shop to cover televisions as well as perfume? It's a bit like the Soviet Union trying to hold on to the Baltic States and the republics of central Asia. Fifty years ago both could be done, now not so much.

This is top-level procrastination, by the way. I have an essay due for Wednesday in CEES (of all subjects). To find a comparison between a shop and post-war Stalinism I think is quite impressive. It's not, but I'll keep telling myself this. It makes it better for me.

DC x

Glee. Again.

Hey,

That previous blog turned out to be quite serious, didn't it? Sorry about that. No, seriously I am. Can I make it up to you? Slag off Glee you say? Oh, just for you then..

To be fair, I haven't slagged off "Glee" in a good while. It just slipped off my iPlayer schedule of programs I watch on a regular basis. It's been so long since I had watched Glee that on the Channel 4 website it was nearly not available anymore.

I didn't expect anything different. It has not changed one bit, it's still a massive sing-a-long with awkward relationships forming everywhere you look amongst the cast. The neat freak one with the Glee teacher guy? Her fiancée with the Glee teacher guy? Sue? I should really pay more attention to the names, but they don't matter really. They aren't real people, they are characters. So their feelings won't get hurt. Easy.

Yet - and here is a shock - I actually found myself laughing at parts in Glee, albeit slightly. There's a scene in which the jock guy (names again) is trying it on with annoying girl (Rachel? Is her name Rachel? She looks like a Rachel) and says something along the lines of "I'm a Jew, you're a Jew" to work his ways on her. Classy. Will I get to the end of Glee? Or will Glee get to the end of me? I really don't know.

In other news, has anyone seen my first year at University? I don't know where it has gone.

DC x

It's just not fucking funny.

Hey,

Much has been said about BBC Three. It's apparent immunity from the major cuts happening at the moment, seemingly at the expense of others such as BBC 6Music has made it as an easy victim to throw abuse at. "Snog, Marry, Avoid?"? Oh, we the intellects are far superior to that nonsense. "Hotter than my Daughter"? I'd rather watch a Glee mash-up.

Us "BBC Four" types find it too easy to criticise the decisions of the powers that be to continue the funding of this TV station, and it's - at times - mind-numbing content. Put on "Newswipe" or a program featuring Marcus Brigstocke and we are can feel better. We can experience intellectual snobbery.

I was actually going to spend today defending the BBC's backing of BBC Three which, truth be told, would not of been as difficult as you would think. BBC Three, for it's many faults, has produced some excellent comedy amongst the awful. For every "HTMD" there is backing of "The Mighty Boosh" from radio to television so successfully. Same could be said of "Little Britain". Some of my favourite comedies from the USA are shown on BBC Three, also.

Yet yesterday changed my mind. Whilst browsing the delights of iPlayer (in my opinion, the BBC's best asset) I came across the program titled "Tourettes: I Swear Can't Help It". It's a show which follows two sufferers of the illness, documenting their daily struggle.

Although the program is done on the most part quite tastefully, it does contain scenes that some would snigger at, but this program was commissioned for BBC Three, the channel's station for comedy and light-hearted program. My concern is that the show was commissioned not to raise awareness of the disease (which has 300,000 sufferers in the UK) but for a cheap laugh at someone else's expense. And that is just not right. The young boy who has a form of tourettes which means he constantly screams is just not funny at all. Nor should it be.

DC x

Threads

Hey,

I just watched "Threads", the film from 1984. It's on Google Video. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023790698427111488#)

That's all I'm saying. I can't really say much about it. Watch it yourself.

DC x

Eastenders.

Hey,

Apparently there was something important happening in "Eastenders" tonight. I wouldn't know because I don't watch the soap that often, it's the television equivalent of looking in one of those "House of Mirrors" and seeing a glimpse of yourself which is far from positive.

I am not alone in this disposition towards "Eastenders". Yet ratings for tonight's show will be as high as they have been in recent years. Why is this so? Is it because it's the 25th anniversary? Is it because as a nation we have been gripped by this classic "who done it" storyline?

No. Everyone watched it tonight because it was live. And when there is live TV there is, inevitably, mistakes. These are soap actors, after all, they can't just act like turning on a tap! You cannot just "become" a ginger guy with a murderous streak (or not, as I have been told). No, no, no. Live TV can be cringe worthy, with accidents and fumbling of lines aplenty. Which means that if something did go wrong, we could all watch it. And it would be bloody hilarious, too. Imagine if Pat Butcher just blurted out "COCK!" by accident. Like, "Ricky (is he still in that show?), pass the cock book! Err I mean cook book!". Television would never be the same again.

It's this morbid interest in accidents and disasters that keeps viewers interested and, to be honest, I'm surprised the major soaps haven't done it more. Disasters on live TV is a huge winner, unless you are an Arsenal fan in which case, it's worked against you this week. But the potential, if not the recipe, for disaster keeps eyes on the screen. I am pretty convinced "Dancing on Ice" will only stay on our screens if someone has a nasty accident. Soon. I mean, five series or so of Torvil and Dean needs an extreme edge, otherwise we would be knocked out cold by Philip Scholefield's banter.

Which leads me quickly onto the Winter Olympics. As keen a follower I am of sports, this entire spectacle, as in most years, has just flown past me. I don't have a TV, plus it is on at awkward times (damn Canadians). All I know is that Britain haven't won anything yet. Which means the Curling hasn't started yet, in other words.

DC x

If I had the money to go to the record store I would. Yeah, I would.

Hey,

The return of my laptop, as I said a few days ago, has meant many things have returned to my life. Most notably, Facebook. But another welcome reunion has been the one between myself and BBC iPlayer.

As a student, and consequently television-less, iPlayer has been a bit of a lifesaver. I do not miss out on my favourite shows, and I also watch them when I want to watch them, roughly on the same terms as Sky+. Looking back, scheduled TV listings just seem a bit, well, weird really. They have become a diet which you do not have to stick to, and if you don't you will lose the same amount of weight regardless of whether you done the exercise or not.

Another advantage of iPlayer - in conjunction with the free time a first year student has - has been the possibility to watch programs you would normally flick over whilst browsing the many channels on digital. One such program which I came upon last night was Hustle, Midsomer Murders, but half the length and twice as enjoyable. Oh, and without murder. In fact, the murder thing is quite essential to Midsomer Murders, not so much Hustler. Ultimately, it is my kind of show.

Another show which had it's UK debut last night was The Cleveland Show, a spin-off from Family Guy. If you love Family Guy, you will love this too. I know I did.

Right, before I end up becoming a TV critic, I better get off this thing. After all, this essay "What impact did unemployment have on society in the inter-war period?" is not going to write itself. If only I could con someone into doing it for me. Hopefully, it's a spoiler for next week's Hustle...

DC x

I really do not like Glee.

Hey,

Sorry about missing a day of blogging yesterday, time didn't permit it as I was very busy, playing hockey, and subsequently going out afterwards. For that I am truly sorry, I won't do it again. Promise.

In the absence of my blog yesterday I am sure many of you people watched the current (s)hit show from the US which is currently being broadcast on Channel 4; "Glee".

"Glee" is, essentially a show which is cashing-in on the same audience of twelve year olds who were hooked by High School Musical. Now 14, this "target audience" has grown up slightly and need a school-related all-singing all-cringe show to fill their hearts with covers of songs that I used to (ie before Glee) like. For example, the rendition of "Don't Stop Believing" and a severly edited "Gold Digga" (which, by the way, had no mention of having an "ass like Serena's"). Essentially it is a show which has a few innuendos - particularly the "Celibacy Club" which has more grinding than my teeth during American Idol auditions, but is still gentle enough to fit in before the watershed. I wonder what show is next? "Smack!", the story of a young drug dealer in High School who, when she comes clean, loves MacBeth? To be honest, that sounds interesting...

Even the cast makes me perform DIY dentistry. The young black girl who over-cooks every song she sings with Whitney Houston chin grizzling, the over-zealous camp guy and the lead girl who, although clearly talented, has a the face of an ex-girlfriend you just. want. to. hit.

I've made my feelings fairly well known, but I am a hypocrite. A big hypocrite, because I've watched every episode of the series so far. I probably will watch it all. Until it gets to the "Smack!" stage....

DC

ps, DO I sound a bit more grumpier than usual? Thought so. My laptop decided to die on me today, hence this blog entry coming straight from Glasgow University library. Rage.