Laws quits over expenses scandal
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2992831/Laws-quits-over-expenses-scandal.html
Treasury chief David Laws has quit because it emerged he channelled thousands in Commons expenses to his secret gay lover. The resignation is the first blow to the Tory-Lib Dem coalition. In a statement, Mr Laws said: “I do not see how I can carry out my crucial work on the budget and spending review while I have to deal with the private and public implications of recent revelations.” David Laws got a lot of support and positive words, despite the way he darkened the money. Prime Minister David Cameron described him as an honourable man, while deputy PM Nick Clegg said he deeply respected his colleague’s “dignity and integrity”. The resignation came after it was revealed that David Laws had paid 40000 pounds of taxpayers’ money to a man he has been having a relation with since 2001. Many people think he made the right decision with his resignation as a though job and personal problems (fuelled by media) are hard to combine.
This is the first of my blog posts that is about an article from The Sun and probably the last one as well. I am stunned that a paper can consist of so much rubbish. Almost all of the articles on the front page are about scandals, split-ups or people brutally murdered. What’s more, most of the pages are decorated with girls in lingerie, probably to divert the readers attention and to stop making him realise that he is reading an incredibly bad newspaper. Articles consist for fifty percent of quotes of other people, inconsequently linked together. The rest of the article, which I suppose is written by an editor of The Sun, could have been written by a ten year old just as well. This was one of the more serious articles on the site, and even here they manage to focus on the secret gay lover instead of the fact that someone steals 40000 pounds of taxpayers’ money. People quoted are just saying how honourable and decent Mr. Laws is, while in fact he channelled thousands of pounds away for his own interests. Not even one speaker in the article has something negative to say about David Laws. Cheap, panting and with no respect for privacy is how The Sun might be described. The worst thing however, is that there are people who actually like it…
Sunday, 30 May 2010
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Football Frenzy
Robin van Persie pleased with two-goal return from injury for Holland
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/27/robin-van-persie-holland-world-cup
In the friendly match between Holland and Mexico, Robin van Persie proved his worth as an attacker by scoring both goals for the Dutch team. He suffered from several injuries in the past several years, and though they have not completely cured, he seems to be fit enough to compete in the World Cup 2010, starting in June. In the first half, Holland was by far the better team, constantly keeping high pressure on Mexico’s defence. This paid of with two goals, one in the 17th minute and one just before the half time break. Two excellent crosses from midfielders Ibrahim Afellay and Rafael van der Vaart provided Holland with goal scoring opportunities. After the break the Dutch players were unable to keep up their good form. Mexico was the better team during the second half but only scored once and so the match ended in a 2-1 victory for Holland. According to Hollands’s manager Bert van Marwijk the frugal second half was because of the heavy training sessions of his team this week. And after all, it was just an exhibition game. The real matches won’t start until June 11.
It is always fascinating to see what happens in the weeks before a World Cup, not to mention the tournament itself. Teams are composed, strategies invented and opponents are closely monitored. The ‘Oranje gekte’ and similar foreign phenomena flare up and cause football to be the conversation of the day in nearly every country that participates. I like the fact that English newspapers like the guardian report about what the Dutch national football team does and what their views on it are. My own vision is always slightly blurred because of patriotic so it’s a good thing to here some opinions from other countries. Apart from keeping an eye on the competition, a reason for the attention might be that a lot of Dutch footballers and coaches are active in other countries such as England like Van Persie playing for Arsenal. I’m looking forward to see what both England and Holland will achieve this tournament.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/27/robin-van-persie-holland-world-cup
In the friendly match between Holland and Mexico, Robin van Persie proved his worth as an attacker by scoring both goals for the Dutch team. He suffered from several injuries in the past several years, and though they have not completely cured, he seems to be fit enough to compete in the World Cup 2010, starting in June. In the first half, Holland was by far the better team, constantly keeping high pressure on Mexico’s defence. This paid of with two goals, one in the 17th minute and one just before the half time break. Two excellent crosses from midfielders Ibrahim Afellay and Rafael van der Vaart provided Holland with goal scoring opportunities. After the break the Dutch players were unable to keep up their good form. Mexico was the better team during the second half but only scored once and so the match ended in a 2-1 victory for Holland. According to Hollands’s manager Bert van Marwijk the frugal second half was because of the heavy training sessions of his team this week. And after all, it was just an exhibition game. The real matches won’t start until June 11.
It is always fascinating to see what happens in the weeks before a World Cup, not to mention the tournament itself. Teams are composed, strategies invented and opponents are closely monitored. The ‘Oranje gekte’ and similar foreign phenomena flare up and cause football to be the conversation of the day in nearly every country that participates. I like the fact that English newspapers like the guardian report about what the Dutch national football team does and what their views on it are. My own vision is always slightly blurred because of patriotic so it’s a good thing to here some opinions from other countries. Apart from keeping an eye on the competition, a reason for the attention might be that a lot of Dutch footballers and coaches are active in other countries such as England like Van Persie playing for Arsenal. I’m looking forward to see what both England and Holland will achieve this tournament.
Academy Aspiration
Education secretary Michael Gove urges all schools to become academies
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article7136801.ece
Every school in England should become an academy, according to the Educational Secretary Michael Gove. He has written to all 20000 state head teachers, offering them the chance to break free from local authority control, said creating more academies would improve standards, cut bureaucracy and raise aspirations. For a school to become an academy means that they have a bigger budget and freedom over what they teach. But there are also people disappointed by the announcement. Chris Keates, general secretary of the teaching union says that what parents and the public want are good local schools run by local councils, also improving the community feelings. As schools need to be judged before becoming an academy, a critics say that schools judged not good enough will be left behind. They also fear that extremists will start schools and use it for their own purposes. Michael Gove defended his plan by assuring the public that it will not be possible for extremists to run an academy and that stronger schools will help weaker schools to improve.
As I am not really familiar with the British education system, despite Roger Marples’ speech, I had to look up what exactly the difference between a ‘normal’ school and an academy is. The Times Q&A page tells us that an academy school a “state-maintained but independently run school which has the help of outside sponsors including big business and entrepreneurs.” All academies have a specialism in one or more subjects, for example sport, science or technology. They are state-funded and thus free.
I don’t think that this is a good plan at all. For the reasons already mentioned above I doubt it will be effective. There apparently is no national curriculum the students follow. Freedom is good, but in some cases there have to be guidelines or rules. If a student moves to another part of the land he might have to adapt to a completely different school. The outside sponsors are a sign of commercialising taken to far. Education, especially primary and secondary schools, is something that should be financed by the state and not some business that has different ideas about a school and just wants to make profit.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article7136801.ece
Every school in England should become an academy, according to the Educational Secretary Michael Gove. He has written to all 20000 state head teachers, offering them the chance to break free from local authority control, said creating more academies would improve standards, cut bureaucracy and raise aspirations. For a school to become an academy means that they have a bigger budget and freedom over what they teach. But there are also people disappointed by the announcement. Chris Keates, general secretary of the teaching union says that what parents and the public want are good local schools run by local councils, also improving the community feelings. As schools need to be judged before becoming an academy, a critics say that schools judged not good enough will be left behind. They also fear that extremists will start schools and use it for their own purposes. Michael Gove defended his plan by assuring the public that it will not be possible for extremists to run an academy and that stronger schools will help weaker schools to improve.
As I am not really familiar with the British education system, despite Roger Marples’ speech, I had to look up what exactly the difference between a ‘normal’ school and an academy is. The Times Q&A page tells us that an academy school a “state-maintained but independently run school which has the help of outside sponsors including big business and entrepreneurs.” All academies have a specialism in one or more subjects, for example sport, science or technology. They are state-funded and thus free.
I don’t think that this is a good plan at all. For the reasons already mentioned above I doubt it will be effective. There apparently is no national curriculum the students follow. Freedom is good, but in some cases there have to be guidelines or rules. If a student moves to another part of the land he might have to adapt to a completely different school. The outside sponsors are a sign of commercialising taken to far. Education, especially primary and secondary schools, is something that should be financed by the state and not some business that has different ideas about a school and just wants to make profit.
Thursday, 13 May 2010
Content Covered by Cover?
Design: Don't judge a book by its cover.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/may/09/judge-book-by-cover
While “albums are sold across the world inside a universal sleeve and blockbuster films branded in a singular style", novels are given a different cover in almost every country. The reason for this is unknown though some people suggest it might be a cultural thing. Also, marketing might play an important role. In the US and the UK covers are desperately trying to get the attention from people passing by, while in countries like Germany the cover is kept really simple. Others are sceptical about book buyers being so different in each country that they require different covers. There might also be an element of pride in designing a cover for a book. It has certainly become the norm to start covers from scratch, with variable results.
“What you are trying to get across on a cover is the essence of a book” according to Nathan Burton. I agree with him on this point. Covers are important, as many people, including myself, often judge a book by its jacket. It has always puzzled me why for example the Dutch wrappings of Harry Potter are very different from the English ones. I was in a library in Sweden once where they had both the English and Swedish version of several fantasy books I knew. It was very interesting to see these, as I only recognized them by the authors name on the cover. Whatever the reason for the ‘cover confusion’, it’s interesting to see how every designer has a different interpretation of the book and thus creates a different cover.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/may/09/judge-book-by-cover
While “albums are sold across the world inside a universal sleeve and blockbuster films branded in a singular style", novels are given a different cover in almost every country. The reason for this is unknown though some people suggest it might be a cultural thing. Also, marketing might play an important role. In the US and the UK covers are desperately trying to get the attention from people passing by, while in countries like Germany the cover is kept really simple. Others are sceptical about book buyers being so different in each country that they require different covers. There might also be an element of pride in designing a cover for a book. It has certainly become the norm to start covers from scratch, with variable results.
“What you are trying to get across on a cover is the essence of a book” according to Nathan Burton. I agree with him on this point. Covers are important, as many people, including myself, often judge a book by its jacket. It has always puzzled me why for example the Dutch wrappings of Harry Potter are very different from the English ones. I was in a library in Sweden once where they had both the English and Swedish version of several fantasy books I knew. It was very interesting to see these, as I only recognized them by the authors name on the cover. Whatever the reason for the ‘cover confusion’, it’s interesting to see how every designer has a different interpretation of the book and thus creates a different cover.
Robin Hood once more
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/may/11/robin-hood-cannes-film-review
The Cannes Film Festival opener of this year is the film ‘Robin Hood’. The story has been told many times before, which is the reason that director Ridley Scott and screenwriter Brian Helgeland have chosen a different approach to the story. Instead of the usual Sherwood-forest-tale, the story takes place years before that, and ends when the normal story begins. The events that happened before are cleverly linked. Robin Longstride is a peasant archer in the army of King Richard Lionheart, who returns from the crusade, but dies in France. Robin takes the place of a noblemen called Robin of Loxley. In this combined role of noblemen and peasant he can be a member of both classes at the same time. Robin has to fight King John, his vicious captain, conspirators, and the French. Meanwhile he also gives a speech promoting something like the Magna Carta and obviously, he has to save Marian. Both Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett are excellent in their roles of Robin Hood and Maid Marian. This is without a doubt a good film.
I have seen both the film Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves , the parody Robin Hood: Men in Tights and the recent BBC series and are therefore familiar with the story. At first (after seeing the commercial) I decided this film was not worth seeing because it looked too large-scaled, more of a media hype than a good movie. After reading the article, however, I have to change my opinion. I always wondered about the events that happened before Sherwood, and according to the reviewer, they are clearly linked. Every actor and actress give a different interpretation of the characters of Robin and Marian, and I am eager to see what Crowe and Blanchett made of them, more so because they both have an good reputation (on film domain). Robin Hood is a typical British symbol, known worldwide for his inspiring ideals. The film will be two hours of not worrying about the ‘real world’ and I will definitely go and see it.
The Cannes Film Festival opener of this year is the film ‘Robin Hood’. The story has been told many times before, which is the reason that director Ridley Scott and screenwriter Brian Helgeland have chosen a different approach to the story. Instead of the usual Sherwood-forest-tale, the story takes place years before that, and ends when the normal story begins. The events that happened before are cleverly linked. Robin Longstride is a peasant archer in the army of King Richard Lionheart, who returns from the crusade, but dies in France. Robin takes the place of a noblemen called Robin of Loxley. In this combined role of noblemen and peasant he can be a member of both classes at the same time. Robin has to fight King John, his vicious captain, conspirators, and the French. Meanwhile he also gives a speech promoting something like the Magna Carta and obviously, he has to save Marian. Both Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett are excellent in their roles of Robin Hood and Maid Marian. This is without a doubt a good film.
I have seen both the film Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves , the parody Robin Hood: Men in Tights and the recent BBC series and are therefore familiar with the story. At first (after seeing the commercial) I decided this film was not worth seeing because it looked too large-scaled, more of a media hype than a good movie. After reading the article, however, I have to change my opinion. I always wondered about the events that happened before Sherwood, and according to the reviewer, they are clearly linked. Every actor and actress give a different interpretation of the characters of Robin and Marian, and I am eager to see what Crowe and Blanchett made of them, more so because they both have an good reputation (on film domain). Robin Hood is a typical British symbol, known worldwide for his inspiring ideals. The film will be two hours of not worrying about the ‘real world’ and I will definitely go and see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
