Top 5 “Classic” Christmas film Countdown!

There’s only 29 days until Christmas! Have you done your shopping yet? (If not, I have some brilliant hints for you here: http://hazny182.blogspot.com/2011/11/top-ten-tips-for-christmas-shopping.html)

Anyway, to get you into that Christmas spirit, I thought I’d run down my personal top 5 Christmas films, some classics some… well, you’ll see. I may, at a later date, do a list of my least favourite too (because there are some truly awful Christmas films out there… and some that should be awful but are in fact ruddy marvellous)

I would like to remind you now that all this is my own opinion and that I haven’t been sponsored or anything like that (for a start, I’m nowhere near famous enough to be influential…)

So, in the words of a very famous, fictional, Italian plumber – Here we go!

5.       The Santa Clause (1995) – the Christmas film that puts the laughter in manslaughter… fairly sure they didn’t put that on any of the promotional material, but it’s true. Scott Calvin (Tim Allen) accidently kills Santa and gets more than he bargains for when he dons the suite himself. I think what made the film for me is the brilliantly dry and sarcastic elf Bernard (David Krumholtz). The second film (The Santa Clause 2) is also good however “Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause” I found to be a bit of a let-down, possibly because of the severe lack of Bernard but mostly due to the annoyingly cheesy ending.

4.       Die Hard (1988) – It’s set at Christmas, so it counts. Fact. Bruce Willis (who still has hair at this point) plays New York cop John McClane who ends up stuck in a sky scraper that’s been over-run by terrorists and is the only one who can save the hostages from the building’s Christmas party – including his wife. It’s full of brilliant stunts, violence and explosions and McClane’s humour is the icing on the Christmas cake. The other 3 films in the series are also excellent, but sadly only the first and second films have any relevance to Christmas… but, hey, that’s two films for you guys to argue with your partners about watching!

3.       Home Alone (1990) – a brilliant, if terribly unrealistic, film full of comedy to suite the whole family. 8-year-old Kevin McCallister is left behind by his family when they go to Paris for the holidays and comes up with various ingenious ways to stop two dim-witted burglars from breaking into his house. The idea of a young child out-smarting two fully grown men is funny in itself, but McCallister’s witty lines and the copious amounts of slap-stick add to the hilarity and make it suitable for all ages.

2.       The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992) – It’s a Charles Dickens’ classic with the Muppets and Michael Caine in it… what else could you possibly want? Essentially a re-telling of the traditional story where Scrooge (Michael Caine) is visited by three ghosts that just so happen to be puppets… The whole thing is narrated by Gonzo the Great and Rizzo the Rat, whose relationship adds an extra layer of hilarity to an already funny film.

1.       Scrooged (1988) – Bill. Murray. That is all…

Frank Cross (Murray), a cynical and selfish TV executive, is visited by 3 ghosts on Christmas Eve whilst he tries to put on a live performance of Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol” which, as I’m sure you can imagine, has hilarious consequences. The modern twist this film put on the Dickens classic makes it both more relevant and funnier and Bill Murray is excellent, as usual.

You will never understand how hard it was to narrow it down to just 5 films… Some other brilliant films that didn’t quite make the cut (but possibly would have if I had made this list a few days ago or a few days from now) include:

·         Gremlins (1984)

·         Miracle on 34^th Street (1994)

·         Santa Claus: The Movie (1985)

And, arguably not a Christmas film, but there’s snow so I think it counts:

·         Edward Scissorhands (1990)

So, there you are. If that’s not enough to get your Christmas juices flowing, you should probably start practising saying “Bah-humbug!”

Until next time, merry 29 days ‘til Christmas!

Some Flood, Some Food and Science Fiction

Today I’m feeling opinionated which, as any proper journalist knows, isn’t good if you’re trying to write news stories. After all, it’s hard to be totally objective when you’re having one of those days when everything goes wrong; you wake up early, you fall asleep listening to the Today program yet again, your shower floods your bathroom 20 minutes before you’re meant to be in lectures, you can’t find your bottle opener – that kind of jazz. Seriously though, there was about an inch of water on the floor- anti-fun times! Today was not my day…

So, as I’m not allowed to have an opinion writing news, I thought I’d do something where my opinion is valid and do some reviewing! I’d like to do travel writing, but I’m a poor uni student so I don’t have the means… (Free holiday, anyone? Please?)

I’ll start with a restaurant review, I think, and then review the last 4 series of Red Dwarf (i.e. series 5-8). I’ve never written a restaurant review before, so constructive feedback would be greatly appreciated! Though quickly, before I do, just want to ask if it’s acceptable for a man to wear a t-shirt with the neck cut so low that his boobs were almost falling out and jeans so low his boxer-clad bum overhangs the top… it’s not is it? Though, what’s probably worse was that this guy was a waiter (at a totally different restaurant, I hasten to add) and every time he went to serve the customers outside he appeared to me smoking! I mean jeez, surely you can wait for your break before you light up…

Anyway, reviewing... I would like to point out that all opinions are indeed my own and that everything was paid for by myself and not someone trying to make me write nice things about their stuff (because even if I do get free things, I refuse to say nice things about them if I didn’t think they deserved it… please give me a free holiday please?)

Today I ate at the Slug and Lettuce in Winchester for the first time. The front of the restaurant made it look quiet and unassuming and the décor, upon entry, was nothing of particular significance. The wooden floor gave it a slight rustic feel and reminded me of my friends & my favourite pub from back home. We were seated in the restaurant very quickly by our incredibly friendly and helpful waitress. Our order was taken and filled quickly too, which was nice. The food itself was good; the tuna melt was well toasted without becoming too crispy and the ratio of tuna to cheese was about right, however I personally found that the sautéed red onions inside were a little over done and felt they should have been cut smaller too. My friend Emma (whose blog can be found here: http://emmahblog.blogspot.com) enjoyed her food too, having opted for sausage and mash but changing the mash to chips, which they were very accommodating of. In fact, we ate there at her recommendation as she said: “I’m never disappointed when I go there.” The food seemed relatively reasonable in terms of pricing too, though it’s not somewhere I could afford to eat out at too regularly as a student.

Over all, I’d give it four out of 5 stars (see, right here: * * * * … ta-dah) which, technically means nothing because I have no background in food, apart from living off of it for the last 19 years of my life like the rest of humanity. That and the fact that I have nothing to go by star-wise and you have nothing else starred by myself to compare it to.

Moving on to Red Dwarf! (I’ve lost my professional/hoity-toity voice for now, I’m sure you’ll be glad to know). Warning: SPOILERS!

Having thoroughly enjoyed every episode of series 1-4, despite the continuation errors, I found myself feeling a little disappointed towards the end of watching series 5-8. Series 5 followed on relatively well from series 4 and ended with one of my favourite episodes (though I could say that about a lot of the series). However, Series 6 begins with the crew in pursuit of Red Dwarf in one of the smaller ships but it is never explained how they lost it. At the end of series 7 we discover that Kryten’s nanobots (which live inside him to repair him) have somehow shrunk the ship and are flying around Lister’s laundry basket but it’s never established when they managed to do this or where the crew and Starbug were when this took place. Perhaps I’ve missed something somewhere whilst I’ve been too busy laughing.

Anyway, I begin to lose some of my love for the series after losing Rimmer mid-series 7. Although the scripting is still good and the plots interesting and funny, I feel the novelty of him being gone and replaced my Lister’s love interest, Kristine Kochanski, rather wears off after the first two or three episodes. He returns in series 8 after the nanobots recreate both Red Dwarf and its entire crew but the show doesn’t feel the same; the set is completely different and although the additional characters may make for a greater number of possibilities in terms of plots and scripts, they change the shows entire dynamic. And don’t even get me started on the ending of series 8! Leaving Rimmer trapped on Red Dwarf as it completely corrodes and the ending with the words “The End” changing into “The smeg it is” is both thoroughly unimaginative and incredibly annoying. After all, what happens after that? And how does that link to the latest special episodes in “Back to Earth”? I think when I watch Red Dwarf next I’ll just make sure I don’t bother with Series 8, at least not the second half of it anyway.

So, there you have it; my reviews of various things.

Until next time, thanks and keep reading!

Asdfhgqeirkfndjk!!!!!

OhmyGodI'msohappyIthinkImighthaveforgottenhowtousethespacebar!!!!

Oh, I remember now... Sorry, but I am rather excited right now; words can not describe... however, as I'm in the business of words, I'm going to have to try and use them...

So, my aim in life for this month was to double the number of views for November compared to October and I've only gone and actually succeeded! For, like, the first time in my life ever! I'm exaggerating a lot, but as I have mentioned on about 105 separate occasion (still exaggerating... sorry), I'm a stats-addict - curse you, Alexa! The ranking system... not a person...

Anyway, to prove my super-special-awesome achievement is a fact and not something I've made up, here is the evidence:

It's amazing, isn't it?! And here, just because I've broken the 2000000 mark, is my Alexa ranking:

I'm so happy for me! Though that may be the M&Ms talking...

So, yeah... Thank you all so much for all your support and reading and repeatedly clicking on links to keep me happy/sane; I'd be nothing without you! I really appreciate knowing people are reading this and I love getting comments over facebook, on twitter, at the bottom of my blogs and when people come up and tell me in person (especially that last one if it involves also getting a hug off a friend - I love hugs).

However, this means I'm now rather lacking in a short-term goal... ideas anyone?

Anyway, until next time!

Guess Who's Back

Back again!

Hazny’s back!

I’ll stop there… Though you should tell a friend; just saying.

Anyway, sorry I haven’t blogged much over the past several days, though this does in fact make my 3^rd this week, so I’ve kept my promise – yay, reliability! This short hiatus is due to the work that seems to have piled up suddenly. That and I keep going home. Two weekends in a row now; was only meant to be going shopping in London Saturday, and that was only to stop my mum and sister getting lost. Never mind; I got enough peanut m&ms to last a life time out of it, so it was certainly worth the train journey. That, and it was a really funny day out.

What else was I going to say… I can’t remember; it’s late and I’m tired. I’m also cold, though I don’t think temperature affects memory. That sounds like a potential experiment, right there…

Seriously, physics has, quite clearly, ruined my brain.

Well, anyway, there was definitely something else I wanted to write, but it’s gone now; hopefully it wasn’t important. If it was, I might remember in the morning and tell you then… with a bit of luck, at least…

Anyway, until next time!

Alterations in my Understanding (AKA Seminar aftermath (AKA Physics ruined my brain))

Before I start talking about any of the important/useful/factual stuff, I’d just like to say that that could have gone infinitely better – curse my inability to speak publically and crippling fear of being wrong. I think the fact that I haven’t slept in about 30 hours probably also didn’t help, nor did the ridiculous amount of coffees and sugar-based snack items I have consumed/been living off of in this time.

Things I should add:

·         Descartes refutes the ideas that other people might not exist as 1) God is good so would not allow us to be tricked by ‘the evil demon’ that others exist when they do not and 2) he had a strong intuition that they also existed.

·         Everything discussed is of a Continental Rationalism; the opposite of this is Anglo-Saxon Empiricism which we look at later.

·         Wax – observed by sense before and after it is burnt; perception of the wax changes so ideas from the senses cannot be relied upon, can only know that the wax takes up space (not available to the senses).

·         Things to think about: Can objects exist without observation/perception? And how can you possibly know?

·         Films that steal ideas from philosophy about the universe and existence: The Matrix, Inception, Men In Black (a little bit right at the end), The Grinch (again, a little bit, not really though)

·         Space is a concept of the mind; it does not exist

·         The universe is infinite and therefore has no direction – direction is added by you to help you try to understand/comprehend it

·         Time is not observable, only events

·         God exists in rational theory to, essentially, fill the gaps

·         Solipsism – where you believe only you exist as you can only know that you can think and that everyone and everything else is an illusion of some sort.

And:

·         Paradise is where you never stub your toe (or fall in a pot hole)

The issue I’m having with a lot of this, like objects not existing when unobserved or that space does not exist and the like, is that it goes against a lot of things I learnt in physics which is proving to be yet another reason that none of this makes sense. Okay, that’s not quite true; I get a lot (or at least a fair few bits) of it, and the idea that the universe is infinite is fairly easy for me to understand thanks to physics, but, still. I think I’m starting to sort of understand things a little bit more though. I hope.

Anyway, until next time!

Seminar Paper – Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz

René Descartes (1596-1650)

Descartes is often considered the founder of modern philosophy; he was the first philosopher whose work was affected by the new scientific breakthroughs, in physics and astronomy, of the time.

Having travelled across Europe, enlisting in various armies to try and gain insight into life through action, he settled in Holland in 1629 where the right to freedom of speculation allowed him, as well as Hobbes, Locke and Spinoza, to think, write and publish work freely and without persecution.

In 1637, he published “Essais Philosophiques” which looked at geometry and optics and in 1644 he published a book setting forth most of his scientific theories: “Principia Philosophiae”. He also wrote “De la formation du foetus” in which it is regarded that the bodies of men and animals are machines. Whilst animals are “automata” and governed by physics, devoid of feelings, men have souls (residing in the pineal gland in the brain). According to Descartes, this soul comes into contact with ‘the vital spirits’ and, through this, there is interaction between soul and body. This theory was abandoned by his schools as the conservation of momentum disproved this – as the total momentum in all direction must remain equal, it is not possible for the mind or soul to physically interact with the body without altering this, therefore mind and body must be separate.

His books “Discourse on Method” (1637) and “Meditations” (1642) are purely philosophical yet largely overlap, according to Bertrand Russell’s “History of Western Philosophy”. From these, we get ‘Cartesian doubt’ – “I think, therefore I am” or “Cogito ergo sum.” According to this, everything can be doubted to exist except some form of yourself; as you can doubt your own existence or the existence of other things, you must exist so that you can doubt it - even if you only exist in the mind of someone/something else, you still exist in some form. Therefore knowledge can only come from the mind, not the senses as what is observed can be doubted as it could be imaginary. So, when something is not being observed, does it exist? In my mind, physics states it must as everything is made of fundamental particles which cannot be called in and out of existence at will. However, as particles are only known as they observed, they cannot be considered to be known, so theoretically may not exist, though Descartes states that geometry and physics can be known, which, to me, creates a paradox.

Also, if there are two different ideas of something, “the one which comes directly from experience must be the less like it of the two” and in the example there is the example of the Sun “as it appears to the senses and the sun in which astronomers believe” but, as the ‘knowledge’ that astronomers believe about the sun has come from observation (a sensory experience) it too can be doubted, which makes me wonder if there is any difference in the two ideas’ closeness to the truth.

Baruch Spinoza (1632-77)

Spinoza’s family moved from either Spain or Portugal to avoid the inquisition. He was excommunicated by the Jews and abhorred equally by the Christians. He was offered 1000 florins to conceal his doubts but refused (much like Socrates, who refused to stop teaching philosophy so, instead, took the death penalty). After he refused to conceal his doubts, there was an attempt to assassinate Spinoza and, when this failed, he was cursed to be attacked and killed by a she-bear, which never came true.

The political theory in his books “Tractatus Theologico-Politicus” and “Tractatus Politicus” is, in some respects, derived from or in agreement with Hobbes in that both agree:

1)      The state of nature contains no right or wrong as there is no law to disobey

2)      That the State is to stop beliefs being forced upon citizens (i.e. religion is subordinate to state)

Spinoza argues, in his book “Ethics” that there is just one substance – God or Nature (unlike Descartes’ idea that there are three – God, mind and matter) as thought and extension are attributes of God, who has an infinite number of attributes. This is known as Spinoza’s monism, which is to say that the one fundamental substance is neither mind nor matter but is capable of becoming either. He says that substance is that which:

1)      Is a cause of itself

2)      Can be conceived of by itself (i.e. “I think, therefore I am”)

3)      That which need only itself on order to exist

These principles mean that substance must be intelligible without relations to other things and so must exist in order to be independent and therefore must exist alongside everything else which exists and be part of one thing, i.e. God/nature.

Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716)

Leibniz was born two years before the end of the Thirty Years’ War and his father was a professor of Moral philosophy. In 1666, Leibnitz gained a Doctor’s degree in Law.

His theory of ‘monads’ can be found in “Monadology” and “Principles of Nature and Grace”. Monads “are to the physical world what atoms are to the physical/phenomenal” – they are the ultimate elements of the Universe. They are “substantial forms of being” that are:

1)      Eternal

2)      Indecomposable

3)      Individual

4)      Subject to their own laws

5)      Un-interacting

6)      Reflecting the universe in “pre-established harmony”

These ideas had been developed from Descartes. They suggested that it was a centre of force or that “substance is a force whilst space, matter and motion are phenomenal”. This means that monads have no special or physical characteristics, unlike atoms, therefore they do not have to be small. Also unlike atoms, monads follow “instructions” so only appear to interact; God wills the pre-established harmony which these monads follow. This creates a problem with free will. However, Leibniz’s “principle of sufficient reason” states that, as nothing happens without a reason, the reason for a “free agent’s” actions are “without necessitating” which means that whilst these actions have motive and reason, they do not need to have a logical necessity.

From this, there can be 4 arguments in which metaphysics can ‘prove’ God:

1)      Ontological – whilst “essence” (personal qualities) do not imply the existence of humans, it does imply the existence of God, as the most perfect Being as, if he does not exist, he cannot be the best possible Being.

2)      Cosmological (first cause) – everything finite has a cause, which itself has a cause, which itself had a cause, and so on. This chain cannot be infinite, so the first thing must not have a cause and therefore, must be God.

The world/universe is ‘contingent’ and logically possible not to exist and, even if it always existed, there is nothing to show why. As everything must have sufficient reason, it must be outside the universe and therefore it must be God.

3)      Eternal truths – some statements are always true (e.g. 2 +2 = 4) As all truths are part of a mind, an eternal truth must be a part of an eternal mind, i.e. God

As there must be a reason for the contingent world, and this reason cannot be contingent but sought from eternal truths, a reason for what exists must exist, therefore external truths must, in some way, exist and can only exist as thoughts on the mind of God.

4)      Pre-established harmony/design – everything in the world cannot have been created by chance and therefore was designed for a purpose by God

Easily amused, easily distracted, easily bored

I don’t know if it’s a genetic or environmental, age or gender, hormone or nervous sort of a thing, but I am incredibly easily amused, distracted and driven to boredom. It’s not just me, I don’t think; I know plenty of other people who also appear to fit this description. However, it’s becoming more and more of an issue of late.

For example, I finished lectures and was home by about midday today, sat down to use this extra time to get some work done and, instead have sat here painting my nails whilst listening to music… for four hours… Don’t think it’s pure laziness (although it is a little - doing work is effort, especially as I barely slept last night); on several occasions I have attempted to start and then either gotten distracted by something – things that need tidying or cleaning or deciding I’m thirsty even though I’m not – or been completely unable to concentrate. I’ve decided it’d be more constructive to hit my head on the desk a couple of times…

It’s not just this slight inability to focus that hinders me; I get bored stupidly easily. I can be talking to someone online, writing a blog or notes on something and watching a film and still get bored. I’m beginning to wonder if this is one of the side effects being part of generation Xbox. People my age (which makes me sound old… I’m 19, I shouldn’t be able to say things like that) are so used to technology and the instant gratifications that come with it that we seem to be less capable of concentrating on things, particularly if the rewards for doing them are ones that will be seen in the long-term rather than instantaneously.

Saying all this, I’m also really easily amused. Simple objects like keys or paperclips or those little metal puzzles you sometimes get in Christmas crackers can entertain me for fairly long periods of time… it’s not healthy, is it? Makes me sound about 5 years old…

Bringing this back to some kind of journalism related theme (because I should really try to more often), the thing that has been getting me rather over-excited recently is my blog stats. Yeah, I’m still a little addicted… I am currently on 931 views, which I’m quite proud of. However, what’s amused me most is seeing that people have found my blog by googling things! It’s so amazing, I might explode! I mean, I’m on page 2 of google! Look:

So amazing!

Anyway, as I’m going home for the weekend, this is probably the last time I will have successfully completed the blog-a-day promise I made 7 posts ago, although I will try and write something over the weekend.

So, yeah… I will leave it there – until next time!

Top Ten Tips for Christmas Shopping

There are just over 45 days left until CHRISTMAS!

I’m not over excited at all… what are you talking about?

If gender stereotypes are to be taken as accurate portrayals of reality then most of us women have already done some of our present-shopping, or at least written a list of what we’re going to buy for who, whilst the men are too preoccupied with sport/cars/half naked photos of women to have even realised that Christmas is next month. If you’re one of those people who has yet to give Christmas a thought (male or otherwise), here are my tips for how to successfully pretend you spent a lot of time, effort and money when buying your gifts. Enjoy!

(Please note, whilst a lot of this may well be quite practical and/or logical, this is really meant to be more of a bit of fun than a way to live your life – I am in no way responsible for any negative effects of following my ‘advice’… though I am credible for all positive out-comes… true fact… as far as I'm concerned anyway...)

1.       Start your prep work early – because thinking about who to buy for and what to buy for them takes time, as does buying the gifts, getting nice wrapping paper, find nice cards that aren’t too mushy-sounding and actually doing the wrapping.

2.       Make a list of who to buy for – even if you don’t write down what you’re going to buy them, make sure you have a list of everyone you need to buy a gift for and cross off people once you’ve bought their gift. There’s nothing worse than having all your nearest and dearest in one room, sitting round the fire as you pull out gifts from the big sack of presents you’ve bought, handing them out one at a time and realising the bag is empty without you having given your dearest mother/partner/10-year-old sibling their present.

3.       There’s no harm in asking – as long as there’s still more than 3 weeks before Christmas. If you ask someone what they want for Christmas much after this time, and they’ll either lecture you on why you should do your shopping earlier or get offended that you’ve only just bothered to ask and that “you should just know anyway; don’t you listen to anything I say? Don’t you know anything about me?”

4.       Pay attention! – It’s fairly easy to work out a great idea for a gift for someone even if they don’t tell you what they want (“Oh, you don’t need to get me anything, silly!” isn’t very helpful, I know). Either buy something they’ve been talking about  -  if they’ve been talking about a pair of shoes, a coat, a mug or something they like a lot then that’s normally a good hint that you should buy it for them – or something that has meaning; romantic, comic or otherwise. For example, getting a nice photo of you and your partner made into a print or canvas, or even just printed off and put in a nice frame, is always a good plan or, alternatively, if your friend spent a day talking about jams and pickles, a little hamper of mini jars of them would make a funny yet thoughtful gift. Failing that, women like chocolate and/or teddy bears and men like sport and/or technology – take it and run…

5.       The internet is your friend – despite what’s suggested in the Avenue Q song, the internet is not just for porn. Hopefully you should realise this, seeing as you’re reading my blog about Christmas shopping right now… It’s great for finding presents cheaply; sites such as “Amazon” and “The Hut” have loads of different items that could make great presents often for a much lower price than on the high street. Not always, but sometimes. Plus, there are sites like “I Want One Of Those” which have a large variety of unusual and quirky gift ideas, in case you’re still stuck.

6.       Think outside the box, then put it in one! – Buying something interesting and unusual is always a positive, as long as you’re sure the recipient will like it; there’s no point buying a mini hadron collider just to be unusual if your friend/relative/partner hates physics… unless they like smashing science-related things, particularly anything to do with particle physics… Anyway, if it’s an unusual shape, don’t worry about the awkward wrapping, but it inside a box! If you can’t afford or find a gift box, an appropriately sized cereal or tea box will work just as well, and if you don’t turn it inside out, you get the added bonus of seeing their face unwrap a box of Frosties*unexpectedly.
* Other brands of sugar coated flakes of corn are available, lol

7.       It’s all in the presentation – using nice wrapping paper, cellophane, gift bags, bows, bits of stringy-paper-shredded-fluff and the like not only makes it look more posh but also suggests you’ve taken greater thought when wrapping. Even just using a nice wrapping paper and putting a little ribbon and/or a nice tag on a gift instantly makes it look nicer and more cared for. Definitely don’t scrunch loads of newspaper round it and then wind it up in sticky tape; not even Ryan Reynolds would be forgiven for that.

8.       Take a break and a friend – if you intend on physically going shopping to get your gifts, you’re going to want to make several trips and bring someone along with you. For a start, you don’t want to feel pressured as you shop and knowing you have a friend there to help and the ability to continue shopping another day will certainly ease this and make it feel more like a social outing than a military exercise. Plus, it’s always handy having another set of hands if you’ve got a lot of people to buy for.

9.       Don’t leave it to the last minute – seriously. Just don’t. You’ll never get away with it.

And, finally:

10.   If you DO leave it to the last minute – there are better places than a petrol station to get presents! Forecourt flowers and a pine air freshener is not the only option available to you. Most supermarkets and even a lot of shopping centres will still be open on Christmas Eve. Some of them might even be open until late, you never know. Even if they’re not, take a drive down a motorway and stop at a Service station – at least they have proper shops with CDs, DVDs and books most of the time. And, if push comes to shove, you can always pretend you bought something online and “it hasn’t arrived yet; damn those postmen!” and try to make it up by offering your beloved some lovely cake you baked at half midnight by way of an apology.

Alternatively, you can ignore my advice and do what Joey and Chandler did on Friends: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mi0EnuF4B0

Either way, until next time – Merry 45-days-until-Christmas!

***Bonus News Stuff***

Asteroid Yu55 didn’t crash into Earth (as you may have noticed). I have yet to find out what scientists have found out about the asteroid, however I do know that they were looking for signs of water as well as trying to work out the chemical composition of the material that it’s made from, though it is believed to be a common carbon-rich asteroid. Experts have run models to predict the asteroids path over the next 100 years and do not see it as being a threat to Earth within that time span (or after this time, despite not having run it through any models.)

Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2011/1109/Asteroid-2005-YU55-looks-like-a-giant-rock-floating-through-space-reports-astronomer

Let’s Get Out There And Review It!

I don’t care how much of a total nerd this makes me sound: Red Dwarf has totally taken over my life!

My most excellent parents bought me the box set for my birthday, and I’ve been putting off watching it ever since because I knew exactly this would happen, but a few days ago I gave into temptation to make myself feel less ill and generally happier. It worked; I felt much better by the end of the first two series though I had just spent over 5 hours of my life doing nothing but watching that, huddled in my blanket, eating noodle soup, so…

Anyway, as I’m thoroughly out of ideas at this precise moment in time (writing a blog a day is killing me a little bit), I thought I might as well make use of the 674 minutes I have spent of my life watching Red Dwarf over the past couple of days and write a bit of a review of series 1 – 4.

For those of you who have never seen Red Dwarf – Get off my blog! Joke, joke! Essentially, in deep space, a human (Dave Lister) was put in suspended animation before the rest of the crew was killed due to a radiation leak. He is now 3 million light years from Earth and is alone aside from Cat (a creature evolved from the ship’s cat), the hologram of his friend Arnold Rimmer who died, an android called Kryten and the ship’s computer (Holly). The show follows their (mis)adventures in space as they try to return to Earth.

Despite the fact that some of my favourite episodes are in Series 3 and 4, I have found watching Series 1 and 2 more enjoyable. I have a couple of theories on this, the major one being that the first series flows into the second one well – all the plots and characters make sense and have not changed at all between the two. I think if I wasn’t watching all the episodes in order, almost back-to-back, I might not care as much, however, I am and it annoys me that between Series 2 and 3:

1.       Kryten re-appears without warning or any sort of explanation and has once again is unable to rebel (plus he looks different, but, still – it’s an improvement, not a bad thing)

2.       Holly has changed face and gender

3.       Rimmer has suddenly had more/different girlfriends and sexual partners compared to before, or seemingly so

4.       The set has changed

5.       Lister is suddenly no longer pregnant (long story) and there’s no trace of him ever having been (i.e., no kids) and no explanation of what happened

6.       Rimmer’s uniform has changed

My other sort-of substantial theory is that I hadn’t seen much of series 1 and 2 but had already watched most of the episodes in 3 and 4. Not that this usually makes a difference; I can watch repeats of most shows and find them equally and entertaining and enjoyable.

Anyway, I can’t think of much else to say other than that I am loving watching Red Dwarf (and it's all in order for once)!

Until tomorrow...

Privilege, Principles and Privacy

Just going to quickly summarise a few of the law bits we’ve learnt so far on the basis that I have 2 hours to write this blog in before I break my 1-a-day promise and I can’t think of anything else to write about (apart from Red Dwarf, and I’m not sure how I can make that relevant to journalism, unless I review it… might do that for tomorrow’s blog…)

Privilege:

Common law privilege – If a story is in the public interest, it can be printed. However, it must include any denial form the parties depicted within it

Statutory Qualified Privilege – anything said within a court, parliament or other special places along those lines is reportable as long as the story is written fast, accurately and fairly

Principles:

1)      Presumption of innocence

2)      Justice must be seen to be done

3)      Justice must be based on evidence

Privacy:

·         Under section 8 of the Human Rights Act, privacy is protected as it states that everyone has the right to a normal family life.

·         State secrets (official secrets act) and Commercial secrets (common law confidentiality) are also protected.

·         A person is in breach of confidence if they pass on information that is ALL of the following:

1)      Has the necessary quality of privilege

2)      Was provided in circumstances imposing an obligation

3)      Was not permitted to be passed on

4)      Is likely to cause detriment

·         Gagging clauses, such as injunctions, can be taken out to protect privacy – contractual stop you from saying certain things, regardless as to whether or not they are true

·         Royalty and celebrities can be photographed without permission if they are on “a clear public duty”, otherwise, permission is needed to take photographs (implicitly – acknowledging the presence of the camera and allowing photos to be taken, explicitly – arranging for photographers to be at certain events)

Right, that’s all I’ve got for tonight. I hope that makes sense, seeing as I’m tired and it’s late and all… Might have to give up on this blog-a-day lark… we’ll see.

Until tomorrow!

Actual News!

Yes, I’m going to talk about actual news from today – shocking, I know! All these stories were found on twitter and have been re-tweeted on my news account http://twitter.com/HazGotNews4You (thus ends the shameless plug).

I want to quickly just say, before I get into this, that my thoughts are with all those affected by the M5 crash – it’s a real tragedy.

Anyway, news stories from today:

The Welsh government plans to bring in a new law for presumed consent of organ donation by 2015. Implementation of this law would mean that people would need to opt out of donating organs rather than signing the donor register to opt in, which could potentially save many more lives each year. They told the BBC Wales Politics Show that they were planning a “soft” consent, meaning that a person’s family members would still be consulted after their death.

"Introducing a soft opt-out system will mean people are more likely to make decisions about donation during their lifetime and to have discussed their wishes with their family," said one spokesperson.

Conservative MP for Montgomeryshire, Glyn Davies, is seeking time in Westminster to debate the issue.

“It does not deliver but a fraction more organs,” he said, also expressing that he felt that presumed consent “undermines trust.”

However, Roy Thomas, chairman of the Kidney Wales Foundation, claims that these measures could increase the number of available organs for donation by up to 30%, stating that: "We are losing one person each week here in Wales and that's a huge amount of people who are dying and we need to give them hope.

"I believe the Welsh government has got this absolutely right and are progressive. Indeed I think the rest of the UK will follow."

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-15611308

In other news, Asteroid Yu55 will be coming into close proximity to Earth on Tuesday night.

Scientists hope to be able to study the elements and chemical composition that make up the 400 metre wide asteroid as its path brings it within 198,000 miles from Earth, closer to us than the moon.

Even if skies are clear, the asteroid will not be visible to the naked eye, but both professional and amateur astronomers are expected to try to catch a glimpse through their telescopes as it passes Earth at 23:28 GMT.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/nov/06/asteroid-yu55-course-close-earth?CMP=twt_fd

Finally, I just want to mention a couple of news stories that caught my eye. The first is from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/05/kina-grannis-in-your-arms-jelly-beans_n_1077702.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003 which discusses how one clever YouTuber has made a video using thousands of jelly beans. I think the video is pretty amazing, I’m not going to lie, but I can’t help but think it’s a little bit of a waste of jelly beans. It also made me desperately crave them, which I think is weird considering I don’t really like them. It’s a textural thing…

Anyway the other story I only looked at because the headline was so impressively cheesy: “Scrabble king celebrates with night on tiles.” The story is from http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/nov/06/scrabble-champion-2011-wayne-kelly?CMP=twt_fd and, I think, just goes to show the importance of a good headline in print and digital media news articles. The story itself just discusses Wayne Kelly’s (a 37 year old “local government finance adviser who lives with his parents in Warrington”) victory at the British national Scrabble championship and briefly mentions at the end how he intends to “go wild” in the next three days before he returns to his studies for his next public finance accountancy exams.

I’m saying nothing.

Anyway, that’s it for today. I would be incredibly interested in hearing your opinions on any of the above news items, so please do feel free to leave a comment below.

Until next time.

Stats and Facts

Fact: I have been putting off writing this blog by cleaning my room even though I cleaned everything yesterday and the day before.

Opinion: I think my room appears cleaner than it did when I moved in and now smells very strongly of “multi-surface polish”.

Fact: The above statements have nothing to do with the rest of this blog.

So, after today’s blog-review-lecture-seminar (technical term), that I thought I was going to be late for after falling asleep again whilst listening to the Today programme, I have removed the “There’s just no reasoning with some people!” philosophy-rant. Sad times, I know, but there was much too much swearing and it made me look bad. Before it was tragically deleted, the blogger stats page said that it had received 43 views. Forty three! Silly as this sounds, I got very excited about this to the point I turned my music right up and started dancing round the room like the COMPLETELY NORMAL person that I am… Ahem.

Anyway, this shot of internet-induced endorphins turned into a bit of an addiction quite quickly. I looked through all the various breakdowns and haven’t actually closed the tab with this information in it since. What shocked me most, and provoked the response: “Russia!?” was the breakdown of my audience. Apparently, my blog has been viewed 6 times in Russia, 4 in Germany, 3 in Norway and even once in Egypt as well as a few other countries I wasn’t expecting. Look, see?

Mental! Fairly sure they must have accidentally stumbled upon my blog thinking it was someone else’s and then left again very quickly. If not, and you’re my new Russian/German/Norwegian/etc. friend, please leave a comment or follow me or something so I can say hi.

I’ve lost track of what I was trying to say again… Oh, yes! Statistic addiction! As you can see, I also downloaded and Alexa toolbar – yay, more stats!

Anyway, you’re probably bored now, so I’ll leave you with this: I have a couple of ideas for features, one based on my philosophy fight and another based on shorthand so stay tuned for those!

(Also, if anyone knows a philosophy discussion website or similar vaguely serious forums where I can pick a philosophy-related fight with someone, could you comment with a link below? Cheers!)

A blog a Day...

… keeps my lecturers from commenting on older blog posts asking why I haven’t blogged in over two weeks. Or something like that, anyway. So, yes, this is my aim from now on, much like the whole apple thing to keep you healthy. Although, saying this, I have a very good immune system, so I could probably get away with having an apple every other day and still be fine. Maybe I should blog every other day. Mind you, I eat about 3 apples a day at least (slight addiction, not going to lie) so perhaps I should write that many blogs. I’ll try and stick to one a day… certainly 3 a week anyway. I really am sorry I’m not blogging as much as I should or want to; I’m finding it very hard to keep up with all the work, let alone understand it all. That and I’m very good at getting distracted.

Must try harder.

Anyway, moving away from the apologising and grovelling and self-pity, I need to review WINOL because I haven’t yet. I’m just going to say now that everything I write may be my personal opinion and as much as I might be critical (and I will be, mwahahaha!) I am not suggesting I can do it any better in any way, shape or form. However, when we did something similar a few years ago at ‘video club’, we did pretty damn well. Just saying.

I’m going to start by being annoyingly picky – I rather think the term “rebel” was over used in the first story. Sorry. I know you’re probably trying to emphasise the point that local MP Steve Brine went against the government’s stance on Europe but there have to be other phrases that give an equally powerful description of his actions; especially as Brine refutes this idea in the interview. Also, it was pointed out in the News Clinic today that, theoretically, Ed Miliband has an actionable case for libel where Steve Brine says that: “Ed Miliband had his own humiliations on a daily basis in this place.” Tut tut, WINOL team; tut tut. Though, I kind of just did the same thing… I’ll slap myself on the wrist once I’ve finished writing this. However, as he is a politician and is being attacked in terms of his profession, you can almost certainly get away with it.

I am going to continue to be infuriatingly fussy and mention the fact that there’s quite a lot of background noise in the interviews that were conducted outside. Now, I know this probably isn’t really your fault and I’m sure a lot of it is to do with the equipment you’re using, or things of that nature, but it is a little distracting at times. For me, anyway (I’m easily distra… oh, shiny!)

I also noticed a few issues with cues, but I’m sure they’ll get smoother with time a practice. I think I’ll leave it there; I could continue but I feel that, to be honest, it was generally good. Certainly better than last weeks. No offence.


Watch WINOL and see what you think at http://www.winol.co.uk/ (It'll be better next year when my class starts getting involved)

Courting

Considering I went to the Courts here over two weeks ago now, I should really put up my blog on the experience and talk about some of the Court-related law stuff I’ve learnt so far…

Now, as I’ve not written about the court in the first available publication I don’t have qualified privilege*, so I intend on skirting around the details of the case my excellent friend Amy Moore and I sat in on. Though, if I’m honest, probably wouldn’t have said a lot about it anyway in case I got it wrong. I don’t want to get in trouble.

Re-reading my shorthand from the day now, I am reminded how incredibly nerve-wracking the entire experience was. Just walking into the court and up to the desk to go in was thoroughly scary. I made Amy talk the first time but they were about to go to lunch so we had to go back – typical! We took this opportunity to take some photos, hopefully they should appear here:

Anyway, we returned and, as promised, I spoke to the man this time, which is a bigger deal for me than it sounds. After a little explanation, we walked through the metal detector (which we both set off) and approached the desk, overwhelmed by the size of the place before we had even really got inside. The extremely busy woman at reception eventually managed to find a gap between phone calls to direct us to the only court where the jury was not deliberating. This case just so happened to be a rape case – what joy.

We took a fair amount of time to work up the courage to go in, alarmed by the fact that the girl being interviewed on the television screen seemed so young. We waited outside for a good 15 minutes before we entered the public gallery, only going in because someone had just come out - we’d become a little paranoid about the possibility that we might not have actually been allowed to be there. This is silly because the whole point of there being a public gallery is to let the public watch – after all, “justice has to be seen to be done.”

I managed to make a few notes from what was said in the recorded witness interview in shorthand (I’m quite proud of myself for this) and I think I can just about read them back but I’m not going to write it on here because:

1)      It’s sad

2)      I am taking no risks in potentially getting into trouble.

We left after about half an hour, as the jury had left and the barristers and judges and what-not were confusing the hell out of us with their pretentious-sounding lawyer-jargon, and were, frankly, thoroughly depressed by the whole affair. I think if we’d had a less intensive case, we might have felt a little more positive or if we had had the ability to hear the verdict. Alas, the case continued the next day and we had lectures. Not that either of us really wanted to go back after all that.

Oh well; if nothing else the experience taught me I probably can’t be a court reporter without needing serious amounts of therapy.

* Qualified privilege – the ability to report anything said in court, and some other places, if reported quickly, accurately and fairly; more detail in a future blog; promise.