The Story and Controversy Surrounding The Opera House Bomb Site in Valletta.
"This is not about politics - this is an issue in relation to the preservation and development of the Arts, Theatre and Culture for the Maltese and the many who visit, adore and enjoy these Mediterranean islands." Ian Waugh, Website Creator
Today there is a storm in Malta over the future of this prominent bomb site. Thousands of Maltese are angry and alarmed that, after all these years, the Prime Minister seems hell-bent on turning this into a place for Parliament.
There is a highly charged debate going in the Mediterranean. In Malta to be precise. It's politicians against theatre and the performing arts.
After more than 65 years as a highly visible reminder of the horrors the Maltese endured during World War Two, the Prime Minister of these islands has announced that the Opera House bomb site will not be reinstated as a place of theatre but as .... parliament itself!
This has infuriated thousands of Maltese and foreigners who are up in arms about what must be one of the most ridiculous proposals in decades.
There is a highly active Facebook "Group" based on this debate here.
Me, as a mere foreigner, have brought this issue further into the worldwide web here.
This morning I had this from Alex Simpson from Guildford, who is up the wall over the Prime Minister's decision, referring to the whole matter as a cultural "scandal":
"Dear Ian,
Well done on this website. In my view this whole thing is a scandal.
I first started visiting Malta in the 1960’s with my late mother and father. As dreaded “tourists” we never partook in “fish ‘n’ chips” we did go to Theatre and my father always insisted in absorbing the culture in preference to the sun whilst taking time out to remember the many who died in the defence of Malta, the Mediterranean for the free world.
We used to wonder past the ruins of the Opera House and we always paused to gaze at this painful sight. I can still recall my father, year in year out, wondering when the theatre was going to be rebuilt.
The 1970’s came and went and by the 1980’s I was bringing my own children and family to Malta. Something’s never changed – we never partook in “fish ‘n’ chips”, we carried on going to Theatre and taking in the culture. Like my father I took my own children past the Opera House ruins which remained painfully and apparently ignored.
The 1990’s came and went. By now my parents were gone, my children grown up. The Opera House still not rebuilt as theatre. I was beginning to wonder why. I couldn’t understand why “they” (the elected power house) just still left it in ruins disrespecting theatre. Perhaps “they” simply had no respect for the creative arts.
Here we are. I am now retired. My children are married and I am a grandfather. In October my wife and I, my son and my grandchildren returned to Malta. We ate good Maltese food as usual, we ignored “fish ‘n’ chips”, took in the culture, stood exactly where my father stood more than 45 years ago to pause and remember. We strolled again past the ruins of the Opera House. We stood and stared as I tried to explain to my inquisitive grandchildren what this wreck was. My grandson asked me why it was in ruins and not a theatre. I told him (because I honestly don’t know the answer) that “they” are still thinking about it.
Through all these years we have always thought that one day a theatre or performing arts centre would replace the Opera House in Valletta. My grandchildren’s great-grandfather believed it, as have I and my now grown-up children.
I am sorry. I am so really sorry that after all these years of waiting, of questioning that a politician has ignored the wishes of his people. This bomb site is a long lasting reminder of the fight for democracy for which thousands died to preserve freedom. One man has decreed that the wishes of his people are ignored. The site of theatre is to wiped out completely to be replaced by a building for his fellow politicians.
I am appalled, my father and mother would have been disgusted, my children are bemused. After all this, after standing as a ruined theatre, a bomb site. Malta suffered long dark days in the war – it will be a another dark day when the doors open again on this site, not as a theatre but as parliament.
After more than 65 years as a World War Two bomb site the Malta government plan to place a Parliamentary building at the entrance to Malta's historic capital city, Valletta.
Thousands of Maltese and a great many non-Maltese oppose this action in favour of having a place of Maltese theatre, arts and culture. maltaoperahouse.com is adding pressure to an already energetic campaign to persuade Malta's Prime Minister, Dr. Lawrence Gonzi to reconsider his plans and give his citizens and the thousands of visitors to these Mediterranean islands what they want.
On Facebook:
No to House of Parliament instead of Opera House (Malta) - Link
"Dr Lawrence Gonzi has again announced that his government intends to develop the site of the Old Opera House into a new Houses of Parliament. This is a group for people who oppose this initiative and who believe that the Old Opera House site should be developed for the Arts, Theatre and Culture".
Democratic Senator Barack Obama says "change has come to America", after being elected the first black president of the United States.
BBC News: "It's been a long time coming, but tonight... change has come to America," the president-elect told a jubilant crowd at a park in Chicago.
His rival John McCain accepted defeat, saying "I deeply admire and commend" Mr Obama. He called on his supporters to lend the next president their goodwill.
The BBC's Justin Webb said the result would have a profound impact on the US.
"On every level America will be changed by this result... [it] will never be the same," he said.
Mr Obama appeared with his family, and his running mate Joe Biden, before a crowd of tens of thousands in Grant Park, Chicago.
"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer," he said.
There are a great many social websites available these days. A chance to link to old mates. Mates who have other mates or mates you kind of know but only within the safe distance of your desktop.
With these sites you can show the world how many dozens of ‘friends’ you have.
If you only have a few ‘friends’ then there’s this unspoken feeling by others that actually you are ‘Johnny No Friends’. You are lonely and lead a sad pathetic life where nobody wants to know you. Because in cyber space size really is everything.
So if you revel in having many dozens of these ‘friends’ you can show the world what a dynamic and truly active person you are despite the reality that in fact with these websites having many ‘friends’ is not unlike the geezer who owns a flashy red sports car! You get my meaning ? Surely I don’t have to spell it out!
As someone who lives in the real world where there are real people who live and breathe I take these websites with a pinch of salt.
For me the internet is a way of conveniently expressing myself and linking cautiously with a world beyond my doorstep. I never express personal details of my private life, my relationship or any matters beyond my interests or profession.
If I feel sad, let down or depressed I reserve my feelings as far from this superficial cyber space as possible. Some revel in all this and use the internet as crotch to hang what increasingly seems a very shallow, over inflated and lonely existence.
I have played round with, joined, deleted and forgotten quite a few of these social sites. I enjoyed building my sad little profile and playing around with the HTML and see what sort of a mess I can make before getting thoroughly bored and deleting it!
Facebook and I have a dangerous moderate / hate relationship.
Earlier this year I thought I’d top up the numbers of a few friends I have on this platform. So I sent a few ‘friends’ invites to people I have known and worked with and who actually have a Facebook account.
One of these alleged ‘friends’ was a news journalist at a radio station where I worked in the 1980’s. He wasn’t just a colleague he was a real-life friend so I thought. So much so that he was also a lodger of mine while when I lived in Exeter, South West England.
So naturally I sent him a request to join me at Facebook. And therein started a nightmare the shock of which I will never forget.
The ferocity and slanderous reply this South West radio and television broadcast personality and journalist sent me shocked me so much that I was forced to report the disgusting email and Facebook message (the edited detail you can see from a screen shot of his Facebook reply which was copied to my email account).
As a 54 year old disabled stroke victim with severe mobility issues I found the comments by this alleged intelligent person, a person who prides himself through the internet as 'professional' nothing less than seriously threatening. If he was capable of writing this to me ... what else was he capable of? Here was someone I hadn't had any real contact with for some years. My intention to add him as a 'friend' was totally innocent. How wrong and damaged I was.
Facebook is in many ways a ‘faceless’ large website who’s intentions are fairly obvious but at the end of the day it is a commercial machine where ‘bums on seats’ (or user numbers) is premium.
My experience with these websites is one of extreme caution.
I use it and it uses me. That’s where the relationship begins and ends.
This weekend the technology of Facebook got the better of me as I inadvertently wiped my Facebook account and in so doing instantly lost contact with my ‘friends’ or the 50 or so I have built up.
I then had to go crawling back to the ‘friends’ I could remember and ask them to re-link. This was an interesting exercise in a way because it demonstrated to me exactly how strong these ‘friendships’ really are by the numbers who could be bothered or cared to befriend me again by pressing a button.
The result is depressing if you care about this superficial world they call cyberspace. A world where the difference between being a ‘friend’ is merely a button away … the difference between ‘accept’ and ‘decline’. Which is why I maintain thank goodness there is nothing like the real world with real friends and loved ones.
As Auntie Beeb licks her wounds and re-adjusts her tatty bloomers many in the UK are really angry at a broadcast corporation financed by the licence payer that has extreme basic management and editorial flaws.
This after a week which has exposed this 'Voice of Britain' as an organisation so seriously multi layered in management levels that it seems incapable of conducting itself in a manner befitting an international and national broadcaster.
The events this week exposed the incompetence of a broadcaster who transmitted pre-recorded material which harassed a 78 year old public figure, which made sexual references to his grand-daughter and was allowed all this to be transmitted in the name of "comedy" caused more than 37,000 complaints.
After the contractual resignation of Brand (one of the idiot "presenters"), the alleged "resignation" of the Controller of Radio 2, Lesley Douglas and the suspension without pay of Ross (the other idiot "presenter") suddenly the BBC has declared from it's ivory towers they have drawn "a line under radio row' (their words).
"Ross, whose £18m, three-year contract had become a lightning rod for critics of the BBC, was said to have accepted the sanction without complaint" (The Guardian).
Regarding the departure of Radio 2's Controller, Don Foster, the Liberal Democrats' media spokesman, last night told The Guardian, "This resignation seems to have more to do with satisfying the media feeding frenzy than in working out what went wrong and ensuring it doesn't happen again."
So that's it then. End of story. The BBC licks a few wounds, pours a gin and tonic, has a sigh of relief and it's business as usual. Today's Friday, the weekend is here ... it's been a crap week and all will be well on Monday morning.
Meanwhile in the real world the licence payers who fund this bloated corporation (£139.50 GBP or 178.364 EUR per year) are asking themselves why Ross is paid many, many millions of pounds a year to broadcast on the BBC and how all this horror happened in the first place.
To compound all this fall-out I can honestly say that the reputation of not just the BBC but of British broadcasting is now truly in tatters. I can say that because this week I have spoken to three separate broadcast executives and two business people and potential business investors outside the UK all of whom have hinted their doubts about the alleged professional reputation of British broadcasting.
May I thank the BBC very much indeed not only from myself but from those of us related to broadcasting who have developing business connections outside the UK for not only buggering your own reputation but also for applying mud to innocents with no connections to your fat Empire.
I have travelled and worked extensively outside the UK. On each and every contract I carried with me the unspoken excellent reputation of British broadcasting. I met many who prided themselves in their career and broadcast connections with the BBC. Many told me how they deeply respected the Corporation as "solid", "trustworthy" and "impartial".
That was then.
Today (and over the past few years) I have found fewer admirers and more and more critics of British broadcasting internationally. Indeed as the rows within the corporation have become more and more public. As the Auntie has been washing more of her bloomers in public so the name of British broadcasting generally has been severely dented.
The knock-on effect for smaller people like myself, for those trying to do business beyond the UK is disastrous.
The BBC this time and previously in these matters simply has never ever learnt anything (the tragic David Kelly affair, The Hutton Report, the Queen documentary even as far back as the Alasdair Milne resignation in 1987). As the years pass the scandals become more lewd more revolting.
The BBC declare a line drawn - the rest of are left picking up the professional debris.
It's day four in the big broadcasting house and the housemates are running around impersonating chickens with their heads off. While licence payers look on in bewilderment, nobody is laughing but everybody is asking who is going to pay the massive regulator fines for a dreadful BBC editorial breach?
For the last few days this bloggy bloke has been scribbling a few words about the naughty, silly BBC "presenters" known now to the general public of this green and pleasant land as those with "mouths like a sewer".
In case you have been concerning yourself with other matters in the news like the economy, the impending Barack Obama US election win or even the 2.30 at Haydock let me just fill you in.
Warning: this blog entry contains strong language
Two idiots "present" a BBC Radio 2 (UK national network) radio programme. This is a pre-recorded show. They harass a 78 year British actor on his answer phone by leaving lewd messages. They discuss sexual relations with the elderly man's grand-daughter. The pre-recorded programme is editorially cleared by a BBC idiot and transmitted across the UK. 27,000 people complain to the BBC. At least two complaints are received by the police. The BBC management delay and counter delay serious executive action. National broadcast crisis ensues. The reputation of the BBC and British broadcasting in general in the UK and overseas is left in tatters.
Yesterday one of the idiot "presenters" (Brand) resigned his broadcasting contract with the BBC and again used that worthless word "sorry". To me Brand did not in the slightest bit appear "sorry" for not recognising the most basic fact of being a professional presenter - that you are entering peoples homes and broadcasting across a wide ranging audience. By doing so you should respect the person you are directing your "talent". No! I suggest Mr. Brand should learn the meaning of the word "sorry" and how it can be applied in an honest manner to Andrew Sachs, his granddaughter and the 1,000's of people Brand offended.
And what of the other idiot "presenter", Ross? He remains suspended. He remains (reportedly) the BBC's highest paid "presenter".
What of the idiot BBC "producer" of all this filth? Therein lies a mystery.
And what of the person who is editorially in control of what the BBC inflicts on the nation?
No doubt this horror show will continue to roll-out despite the appalling damage to reputations in the UK and beyond.
The BBC should have acted instantly and decisively. Firstly by not broadcasting this disgusting material. Even after transmission the Corporation which prides itself in "broadcast management" (another huge big fat joke) should have acted immediately by firing those involved.
This is nothing less than a major professional disgrace by a management team who could not arrange a booze-up in a gin factory.
Today the BBC's director general is to meet representatives of licence fee payers to discuss lewd phone calls made on a Radio 2 show. Meanwhile as audiences to BBC output and product remain angry this particular show rolls ever onwards.
Today's installment on the BBC News website:
Mark Thompson will brief the BBC Trust on a preliminary inquiry into how the calls to Fawlty Towers actor Andrew Sachs came to be broadcast.
Russell Brand has resigned from Radio 2 and Jonathan Ross has been suspended.
The pair made obscene comments about Sach's 23-year-old granddaughter Georgina Baillie during phone calls.
During the meeting on Thursday, the BBC's director of audio and music, Tim Davie, is due to present a preliminary report on the calls to the Trust.
"Wrest control"
Mr Thompson will then brief trust members on latest developments, followed by a discussion on what action can be taken
The BBC's media correspondent, Torin Douglas, said the BBC was perceived as having "lost control" of events following the broadcast and the subsequent row, which has now attracted 27,000 complaints.
The broadcast watchdog Ofcom has launched its own investigation.
"The BBC is now trying to wrest control back," said our correspondent. "People are saying the BBC should have acted a lot quicker."
Actor Sachs, 78, was upset after Brand and Ross left a series of lewd messages on his voicemail as part of a pre-recorded show, taped on 16 October.
During the calls, Ross swore and said Brand had slept with Sachs' granddaughter.
Sachs later said he had "respect" for Brand's decision to step down.
Brand, who is believed to have been paid more than £200,000 a year for his Saturday-night show, said in a statement that he took "complete responsibility" for the incident.
"As I only do the radio show to make people laugh I've decided that, given the subsequent coverage, I will stop doing the show," he said.
"I got a bit caught up in the moment and forgot that, at the core of the rude comments and silly songs, were the real feelings of a beloved and brilliant comic actor and a very sweet and big-hearted young woman."
'Stupid error'
Meanwhile, Ross said in a statement: "I am deeply sorry and greatly regret the upset and distress that my juvenile and thoughtless remarks on the Russell Brand show have caused."
He said he had not issued a statement before because he had intended to apologise "to all those offended" on his Friday night chat show.
"However, it was a stupid error of judgement on my part and I offer a full apology," it added.
BBC One show Friday Night with Jonathan Ross, which was due to have been filmed at BBC Television Centre, west London, on Wednesday, has been cancelled.
A decision has yet to be taken on what should be shown in its place on Friday night.
Ross's Saturday morning radio show has also been pulled from Radio 2's schedules.
More than 27,000 people have complained to the BBC while watchdog Ofcom has launched its own investigation.
This is what was transmitted (from the BBC News website):
The show is broadcast between 2100 and 2300 BST. It opens with this warning: "The next programme contains some strong language which some listeners may find offensive."
Early in the show, Ross jokes about an interview planned with Sachs telling Brand that "I had a go on his daughter" would be "the sort of thing you'd say".
Brand replies that he knows Sachs' granddaughter - 23-year-old Georgina Baillie - and says she has visited his home and that she is a member of "a baroque dance group called the satanicsluts.com".
He continues: "She always said to me, 'don't mention that to my granddad Manuel', and now here we are.
"So when we talk to Manuel, don't mention that his granddaughter's a satanic slut."
After it emerges that Sachs will not now be in the show due to unforeseen circumstances, listeners hear Brand and Ross leave four messages on the actor's voicemail.
Here are extracts from those messages:
Message one: As Brand begins to leave a message, Ross blurts out: "He fucked your granddaughter... I'm sorry I apologise. Andrew, I apologise, I got excited, what can I say - it just came out.
Brand replies: "Andrew Sachs, I did not do nothing with Georgina - oh no, I've revealed I know her name. Oh no, it's a disaster."
Ross goes on to say: "If he's like most people of a certain age, he's probably got a picture of his grandchildren when they're young right by the phone. So while he's listening to the messages, he's looking at a picture of her about nine on a swing..."
Message two: "Andrew, this is Russell Brand. I'm so sorry about the last message, it was part of the radio show - it was a mistake."
Ross adds: "It might be true but we didn't want to break it to you in such a harsh way."
Brand goes on to say: "No, I'm sorry, I'll do anything. I wore a condom. Put the phone down. Oh, what's going to happen?"
Message three: The message opens with Ross saying: "She was bent over the couch..."
Brand then improvises a song which includes the lines: "I said some things I didn't of oughta, like I had sex with your granddaughter..."
Message four: Brand opens the message with: "Alright Andrew Sachs' answerphone? I'm ever so so sorry for what I said about Andrew Sachs."
"Just say sorry," adds Ross, "I'll kill you," says Brand laughing. "Don't say you'll wear him as a hat - just say sorry," continues Ross. "Sorry, right," adds Brand.
Yesterday when I was scribbling my bloggy thingy I was banging on about how two exceedingly highly paid BBC "presenters" had abused their position by publicly harassing British actor Andrew Sachs (78) on air and then suggesting having sex with his grand-daughter, Georgina Baille. On top of all this horror was the fact that these revolting broadcasts were not live but pre-recorded and therefore cleared by some idiot for transmission across the national radio service, Radio 2. Presumably this filth was assumed amusing by certain Corporation employees as it was deemed fit for transmission.
Yesterday the flood of complaints to the BBC had more than doubled to 10,000 with many in the UK calling for simple, basic action by the BBC - to fire the "presenters" and the those in grey suits who sanctioned the transmission of these truly appalling broadcasts.
By yesterday evening this story was leading news bulletins ahead of the economy and the US elections.
By 10.00pm last night it was being reported that at least two people in the UK had actually reported the incidents to the police.
What I find incredible is how such pre-recorded material had been passed fit for broadcast despite internal BBC regulations and regulator (OFCOM) guidelines to contrary. It is now obvious those who are employed by the BBC feel they are above such rules.
Apart from all this dreadful business, I wonder in the pits of my heart what sort of creepy nasty characters Ross and Brand really are to leave such nastiness on the answer machine of a man well in his 70's, to suggest sexual relations with his grand-daughter and then broadcast it to a national audience for goodness sake!
Apart from implications for the Corporation locally in the UK there is also the dreadful fall-out for the BBC internationally as a presumably former respected broadcaster with World Services and several international broadcast strands.
Their, slow, slow lack of direct action and management is indeed painful for the entire BBC. Ross and Brand are disposable, overpaid insignificants compared with the rest of the entire Corporation, it's product and the employees who work for the BBC. The Corporation has enjoyed so much credibility internationally, now as this story is international news in itself, one wonders where the damage will end.
For those of us British broadcasters with professional connections outside the UK this mud could well stick. I very seriously hope not.
Who cares about Ross and Brand when there are far more important issues at stake like the credibility of British broadcasting?
Are British broadcasters going to become a professional joke beyond these shores I wonder?
Or has the horse bolted?
This morning the current status (reported by the BBC) ... :
The BBC is coming under increased pressure to sack Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross following their prank calls made to actor Andrew Sachs.
His granddaughter Georgina Baillie told the Sun the pair "should at least pay for what they've done with their jobs".
Tory MP Nigel Evans said he would choose to end the pair's contracts.
"The least that should happen is that they should be suspended, pending the outcome of the inquiry by Ofcom and the BBC Trust," he said.
Brand and Ross made a series of prank calls made to Sachs, 78, famous for his part in Fawlty Towers. The calls were broadcast on Radio 2 as part of a pre-recorded show on 18 October. During the calls, Ross revealed that Brand had slept with Sachs' granddaughter.
Someone high up at the BBC must have decided it was funny and suitable for national radio.
But Ms Baillie, 23, said she felt "betrayed" and "embarrassed" that the relationship had been publicly revealed to her grandfather. She said that he was "really upset, and says he wants the whole situation to end".
She added of Brand and Ross: "They are beyond contempt. They are warped for what they have put me and my grandfather through.
"It was bad enough that they recorded these things on my grandfather's answer machine but astonishing the BBC saw fit to broadcast it when they could have stopped it.
"Someone high up at the BBC must have decided it was funny and suitable for national radio. They've shown an appalling lack of judgement."
Political criticism
PM Gordon Brown has criticised Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross for their "inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour" on Brand's radio show.
The BBC and watchdog Ofcom have both launched investigations and the BBC has now received more than 10,000 complaints about the broadcast.
Conservative MP Nigel Evans accused the BBC of being "incredibly supine" in the way it has treated the affair, and has tabled a parliamentary motion saying the behaviour of Brand and Ross was "base and vulgar".
He also said the BBC's director general should step in.
"Mark Thompson, himself, wants to find out why it is that procedures should have been in place to have stopped this sort of thing.
"That... at least the producer should have heard it and said: 'No, this can't go out'.
"Or, indeed, when the initial request went in from Andrew Sachs, that it shouldn't be broadcast - why is it that somebody then listened to the programme and decided that this was acceptable?"
'Risky line'
The comedian Helen Zaltzman, who ran a comedy club where Brand performed before he became famous, told BBC Radio Five Live that it was well-known that Brand and Ross "toe a particularly risky line" and said that was why millions of people listened to their Radio 2 shows.
"I'm sure they regret this trouble. But, I think the reason why Russell Brand is popular is because... he is a liability.
"He was sacked from MTV, he was sacked from XFM.
"This is why people are interested in him as a broadcaster - and why, presumably, he got employed and has a very popular show - about which the majority of people didn't complain." Meanwhile, Jeremy Hunt, the shadow culture secretary, is to call on broadcasters to take more responsibility for their impact on society, in the wake of the row.
He is to give a speech at the London School of Economics and will say the BBC was "quite wrong" to broadcast the offensive phone calls.
He will also say that it is wrong for broadcasters to make programmes that legitimise negative social behaviour.
Oh dear, oh deary me! It seems dear old Auntie (aka The British Broadcasting Corporation, that bastion of high standards, morals and decency financed by the UK licence payer) has got her bloomers in another twist.
This time the UK national broadcaster is facing calls to sack two of its overpaid and overinflated egos - Russell Brand and Jonathon Ross over live highly offensive comments directed at the much adored actor Andrew Sachs and his grand-daughter.
The situation is so bad with Aunties knickers twisted to almost throttling point that even the UK Broadcast regulator, OFCOM, are ordering an "enquiry" into the repulsive comments broadcast on Radio Two across the UK.
So, dear reader ... place your bets. Will dear old Auntie untwist her massive knickers and fire with no notice BOTH these two sad alleged broadcasters? Or will Auntie give them a smack on the bum and send them to bed with no supper?
"Ofcom says it is going to launch an investigation into Russell Brand's telephone prank to actor Andrew Sachs during his Radio 2 show.
The Fawlty Towers star was called four times by Brand and guest Jonathan Ross on a pre-recorded show on 18 October.
Ofcom said all BBC broadcasters must adhere to its broadcasting code, which sets standards for the content of TV and radio programmes.
The BBC apologised to Mr Sachs on Monday for the "unacceptable" calls.
The actor's agent said Sachs was "very upset" after Brand and Ross left lewd messages about the actor's granddaughter on his voicemail.
Brand himself apologised for the offence on his latest show.
A Radio 2 spokeswoman said on Monday the BBC was "reviewing how this came about" and apologised to listeners for any offence caused."
"The BBC has apologised to actor Andrew Sachs for the "unacceptable and offensive" content of calls made to him by Russell Brand during a radio show.
The Fawlty Towers star was called four times during a prank on Brand's BBC Radio 2 show on 18 October.
The actor's agent said Sachs was "very upset" after Brand and guest Jonathan Ross left lewd messages about the actor's granddaughter on his voicemail.
Brand himself apologised for the offence on his latest show.
He said "you musn't swear on someone's answer phone", but added it was "funny".
A BBC Radio 2 spokeswoman said: "We have received a letter of a complaint from Mr Sachs' agent and would like to sincerely apologise to Mr Sachs for the offence caused.
"We recognise that some of the content broadcast was unacceptable and offensive.
She added: "We are reviewing how this came about and are responding to Mr Sachs personally.
We also apologise to listeners for any offence caused."
Sachs, who played Manuel in Fawlty Towers, was expected to be a guest on the programme, but was unable to appear due to unforeseen circumstances.
Obscene comments
Brand and Ross went on to leave a series of messages on the 78-year-old's voicemail during the two-hour radio show, which included obscene comments about Sachs' 23-year-old granddaughter.
In the first message, Ross suddenly swore and said Brand had slept with her.
He then apologised and said he "got excited".
Later in the programme, Brand said the only way to rectify the incident was to make another call - but caused further offence after he suggested Sachs might kill himself because of the previous message's revelations.
A third call saw Brand and Ross singing an apology to the actor.
Brand sang: "I'd like to apologise for the terrible attacks, Andrew Sachs. I said some things I didn't have oughta [sic], like I had sex with your granddaughter."
During the fourth call, Brand said: "Now when I watch Fawlty Towers I think I'm going to think I've hurt his feelings."
A BBC spokeswoman said the programme had received two complaints related to Ross's swearing - rather than the content of the phone calls - before details of the incident were publicised in a Sunday newspaper.
A further 1585 further complaints have arrived since.
Sachs' agent, Meg Pool, has written a letter to Radio 2 controller Lesley Douglas asking for an unreserved apology.
Ms Pool told BBC News that the actor had passed on his mobile phone number to Brand's production team "in good faith", which the presenter used to contact him during the show. She added that the actor did not hear the programme, but listened to a recording and was "offended very much indeed" by its content.
Talk show host and Radio 2 presenter Jonathan Ross has now sent a personal apology to the actor and it is understood Brand is planning to do the same.
Earlier this year, Brand apologised for making a hoax call to the police during a stage show in Northampton.
He rang a police line in front of an audience and said he may have spotted a man who was responsible for a series of assaults.
Brand later said he was "devastated by the possibility" that he "may have offended vulnerable people".
The 33-year-old star, who hosted the MTV Music Awards in Los Angeles last month, has been a regular presenter on Radio 2 for almost two years."
I read Charles Flores’ Opinion piece “Joseph, Lazarus and Parliament” (TMIS, 28 September) with the usual enthusiasm, delight and cheeky smirk befitting a man of his writings.
I wholeheartedly agree that Joseph Muscat will bring energy and vigour to proceedings at Parliamentary level. It is just the injection Maltese politics requires. I think this is a clean sweep on many levels and one the current administration should not ignore nor snigger at.
There is nothing worse in politics than complacency. In the dark, dark days of Thatcher the stench of self-satisfaction, smugness and conceit stifled British politics. It wasn’t until 1997 when Labour swept to power that these complacent right-wingers were brushed away with a landmark Labour victory; only then did we have the opportunity to breathe fresh air.
Charles Flores refers to the “ripple effect” that the House of Representatives so urgently deserves. No truer words have been written. Many of my Maltese friends on both sides of the political divide were desperate for change at the last election. Some of these people even surprised me with the strength of their desire. Sadly it wasn’t to be.
Now there is genuine prospect and a light in a stuffy tunnel that needs opening at the earliest opportunity. This new younger brush will undoubtedly sweep through Parliament, and I am sure a new era of lively and exciting debate will ensue.
Maybe a vacant seat in the Strangers’ Gallery will once more become as treasured as the debates themselves. Charles Flores mentions that Lawrence Gonzi “let it go to the dogs”. “The arrogance and complete disregard of parliamentary fairness during the past four years did not go unnoticed with voters at the last election”
I am not a man to give away olive branches at a whim. But if I were a man given just a few seconds then my words would be “Watch your back Lawrence because this is not going to be the easy ride you are accustomed to!”
Meet Joseph Muscat - a man on a mission. At 34 years old he is the new leader of the Labour Party and the hope for Socialists on the Mediterranean islands of Malta.
Joseph Muscat is a household name for many Maltese and Gozitans.
No stranger to the media, he has hosted and produced a number of television and radio shows and has established himself as a regular political analyst on both Maltese and English language newspapers.
"He is one of the few people in the media who has a sound knowledge of economics, being primarily an economist and a manager. Joseph Muscat also holds a Masters Degree in European Studies and is completing his Ph.D in economics.
"He studied at St Aloysius’ College and was part of a core team that set up the Institute for the Promotion of Small Enterprises, which was established in agreement with the European Union and was granted EU funds for the restructuring of industry. In fact, Joseph was part of the team that secured these EU funds.
"At the age of 29, Joseph was also the youngest person to hold the post of chairman of Labour’s general conference during the sessions which forged the party’s new EU policy. He was also a member of the working group that forged this policy. During the past years he helped secure EU funds for a number of Maltese and Gozitan organisations."
Muscat sworn in as MP and Opposition leader by Michael Carabott
In a very warm ceremony filled with goodwill from both sides of the house and the President of Malta, former MEP Joseph Muscat yesterday assumed the mantle of Opposition leader after taking his oath of allegiance to the President and the House of Representatives.Dr Muscat, looking slightly taken aback by events, officially replaced Joseph Cuschieri in parliament as a fully fledged co-opted MP.
The motion to co-opt Dr Muscat was put forward by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi and was seconded by Malta Labour Party deputy leader for parliamentary affairs Anglu Farrugia. Addressing the House, Dr Gonzi said: “It is my pleasure and a privilege to put this motion forward. This is not the first co-option this house has seen, but it indeed unique to co-opt Dr Muscat as leader of the Malta Labour Party and (now) Opposition leader.
I wish Joe well. I would also like to thank outgoing opposition leader Charles Mangion who has filled this post since the resignation of his predecessor. He took it in his stride and is an example to us all.”Dr Gonzi urged the House to approve the motion unanimously. Dr Farrugia also spoke briefly and thanked the Prime Minister for his words. He thanked Dr Mangion and of course Joe Cuschieri. “It is true that Joseph Muscat has been co-opted but he has already passed two electoral tests in the European Parliament and of course the MLP leadership election,” he said.
The motion was unanimously passed after which Dr Mangion and Dr Gonzi walked down the aisle separating the two sides to usher Dr Muscat in. In a relaxed manner, Dr Muscat took his oath of allegiance to the parliament and proceeded to shake the hand of every MP in the house. Dr Muscat spoke briefly and his first words were of thanks to Joseph Cuschieri for his sense of loyalty to the MLP and the country as a whole. “I also want to thank Charles Mangion for his sterling work.
I want to thank Dr Alfred Sant for the years of service he gave to this country. We should admire his incorruptibility and I hope I can live up to that reputation,” said Dr Muscat.He also thanked MP George Vella for his words of guidance and advice as well his wife and family for their support. “Without the support of our families, we are nothing,” he said.Dr Muscat said the past and future differences between the two parties never have or will involve malice. “The common denominator is that whether on one side or another, we all have Malta's best interests at heart,” he said.
Dr Gonzi welcomed Dr Muscat officially and said he hoped that his party and the opposition could continue to work for a better Malta. “Each and every MP has good intentions and wants to offer a service. Please God, when we have to leave this arena, we can all look back and see that we have done some good,” he said.Dr Gonzi continued: “We have an opportunity to open a new chapter in Malta's history. When we argue and debate in parliament, people must understand that it is passion, it is passion to see the best possible outcome for our country.” Speaker of the House Louis Galea also congratulated Dr Muscat on his becoming and MP. Dr Muscat was then whisked off to the office of the President. He took the oath of allegiance to uphold the Constitution of Malta without fear or favour. His wife Michelle beamed with pride as a very relaxed ceremony was presided over by President Eddie Fenech Adami.Dr Fenech Adami said that this was a rare occasion. “Opposition leaders come and go. But your political career has been meteoric. You were an MEP in Brussels and you became leader of the MLP before becoming and MP. I praise you for your courage in assuming tis role at such a young age,” he said.Dr Fenech Adami concluded: “I do not know your wife much but she has supported you. Believe me, you will need her support.” Dr Muscat thanked the President for his “kind comments” and proceeded to have a private meeting with him.
The knives are being sharpened ... the spin is in full throttle ... words like "support" do nothing to allay speculation that Gordon Brown's days as Labour Leader and Prime Minister could be numbered.
A Cabinet reshuffle could be on the cards but no former Prime Minister has ever recovered from such damaging opinion polls and agitation from the back benches.
The question is ... what can we in the party do to save this Labour government this time? Or is the prospect of Labour in opposition now definitely on the cards? A repeat scenario of Thatcher and Major?
Another dark nightmarish period of right wing silliness, sleaze and scandal is too scary at this stage to contemplate.
Be afraid - be really afraid!
BBC News:
Ministers rally to support Brown
Three cabinet ministers have rallied to the prime minister's defence, insisting he is the right man for the job.
Alistair Darling, Harriet Harman and John Denham have declared their support for the beleaguered Gordon Brown.
Skills secretary Mr Denham told BBC One Mr Brown had a "profound understanding of what this country needs".
Meanwhile, former transport minister Stephen Byers echoed an earlier call from Foreign Secretary David Miliband for Labour to start afresh.
The Guardian:
Blair slams 'vacuous' Brown in leaked note
Tony Blair. Photograph: Martin Argles
Tony Blair accused Gordon Brown of generating 'hubris and vacuity' in a devastating private memo analysing his mistakes, which last night threatened to blow a hole in the heart of government.
The former prime minister believed his successor had presided over a 'lamentable confusion of tactics and strategy', attacking Blair's record instead of building on it and failing to spell out an agenda for the future, according to the scathing note penned after last September's chaotic Labour party conference. Such tactics would not win the next election, he concluded.
The note leaked to the Mail on Sunday newspaper now threatens to trigger open warfare within New Labour, with its emergence so soon after David Miliband's broadside against the Prime Minister which was seen as part of an orchestrated plot to destabilise Brown by those loyal to his predecessor.
The bad news is that this man can resume causing more chaos on our roads in London whilst thinking up new ways of senselessly patronising the Prime Minister.
Heaven help Great Britain if these losers ever get back into power! You think its bad now - cast your mind to the last time the Tory twits ran the UK!
The sick sad joke that was the Zimbabwe's Presidential Election has taken place with citizens of that beautiful country being forced to vote.
In case you don't know - the choice in this democratic farce is:
Mugabe, Mugabe or Mugabe.
And, because Mugabe believes all of us in the real world are complete idiots, it's widely predicted that (surprise, surprise) Mugabe is the clear winner.
Wow! When I heard the result I was completely shocked - my goodness what a surprise! Still, that's democracy for you! I had my money on the other candidate - but silly me, there wasn't another candidate!
Incidentally - If you are thinking of going to Zimbabwe make sure you take an extra suitcase for the volume of cash you will need. At the precise time of writing this blog entry the current exchange rate is:
Saturday, June 28, 2008 - Exchange Rate 1 Euro = 16,901,252 Zimbabwe Dollar 1 Zimbabwe Dollar (ZWD) = 0.00000006 Euro (EUR)
Mugabe - you have ruined your once prosperous nation and you have brought your own good people (the very same people who dreamed a dream 25 years ago) to their feet. How does it feel to have the entire world hate you ? Which way now ? You are isolating your people - what's the next move Mugabe ? Where do you want to go now ?
More pain ? More threats ? More torture ? More killing ? More destruction ? More intimidation ? More media manipulation ?
"We live in a surveillance society. It is pointless to talk about surveillance society in the future tense. In all the rich countries of the world everyday life is suffused with surveillance encounters, not merely from dawn to dusk but 24/7. Some encounters obtrude into the routine, like when we get a ticket for running a red light when no one was around but the camera. But the majority are now just part of the fabric of daily life. Unremarkable". (November 2006: Surveillance society - full report)
With violence, knife crime, gun crime and the overall fear of people on the streets in the UK seemingly on the increase (or at least given greater media prominence) there is suddenly a call for local councils to review their policies towards surveillance.
But the the question is - are we feeling safer with the vast numbers of CCTV cameras on our streets? If, like me, you have nothing to hide and don't care if a man in a remote security office can see me walking down my street or into a shop - then fair enough.
To be absolutely honest, I am all for this use of technology. If crime can detected electronically and used as evidence in court, then fantastic. If terrorists who seem hell bent on blowing us up on the train, in the tube or on the bus then I feel that detection at this level is absolutely vital at so many levels.
Today BBC News is reporting:
"The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act, part of the government's anti-terror drive, gave councils the power to use the surveillance and to access phone and e-mail records. But concerns have been raised about the way some councils have used the powers. Recent examples include a family in Dorset followed for several weeks to see if they really did live in a school catchment area. Other uses have included examining rubbish to monitor household waste."
From where I am sat this is all part of a larger more nasty side of our society whereby people are getting nervous about walking freely on our streets. Children armed with knifes and guns haunt our streets. There are people living in Britain who want to cause serious injury and death in the name of terrorism. This is the scary life we lead in today's UK and the more we can do to combat and keep an eye on these horrors the better as far as I am concern.
Many disagree - many feel that government and local government are or can take advantage. Small price in my view.
The highlight of my career is an amazing event for me some years ago when I was sent to work for the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation as a broadcast adviser.
When I arrived the country was a thriving, optimistic and relatively happy nation - relaxed and comparatively prosperous compared to today. My mission was to oversee the redevelopment of the national English language radio station, Radio 3. After familiarising myself with the presenters and producers we got to work on 'reinventing' the station. To date this was the biggest and most satisfying consultancy project I had been involved with and definitely the most exciting.
Between us we managed to rebuild the station and retrain the presenters with a streamlined and popular format. This meant prioritising certain programming and creating a more user friendly schedule whilst creating opportunities for advertisers.
Radio 3 was relaunched within about a month and had an instant national impact on Zimbabwe.
The impact on the audience was instant as was the interest from advertising agencies. However none of this success would have been possible without the camaraderie of the dedicated team of presenters and producers who worked under tremendous pressure to improve and popularise their station.
For me the sense of satisfaction was the genuine smile, humour and real friendship which was created out of all this. Above all this I fell instantly in love with Zimbabwe and the Zimbabweans who embraced the plans and ideas with open arms as well as showing such genuine friendship to me personally. This impact on my life and my career was instant and indelible.
Twenty two years on the skeleton of Radio 3 lives on, the concepts, optimism and creativity has evaporated and as for the dear friends I made - I have absolutely no idea what became of them. Today the ZBC is in a stranglehold with President Mugabe's regime. Over recent years I have sent messages out to websites to try and find out what became of my colleagues and friends - but the silence has been deafening.
When I was working in Zimbabwe I was welcomed with open arms - today Mugabe has slandered the British government, the British people and the foreign media. Friendship from his point of view has turned to bitterness and hatred. Thankfully, I know the Zimbabwe mentality well and I know that he might be able to starve his people but he can't fool them.
As many who know me professionally - there is nothing that angers me more than anything than political and governmental interference in broadcasting. Over the years I have witnessed and personally experienced gross political tampering in broadcasting. On the tiny islands of Malta the state broadcasting system was wrecked by political fiddling which resulted in the famous cop-out with the opening of politically operated stations. I used to get privately very annoyed when I dared approach the subject with certain people alleging that I didn't know what I was talking about! In other countries politicians have tried and in many cases failed to play in broadcasting. In Zimbabwe the political hold on broadcasting is now terrifying:
BBC News:
Zimbabwe's public broadcaster ZBC has said it will no longer carry campaign adverts from the opposition party ahead of next week's presidential election.
The Movement for Democratic Change said it would appeal against the decision. Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa defended the move saying international coverage favoured the MDC and never reported the ruling Zanu-PF's position (19 June 2008).
With the Zimbabwe election re-runs scheduled for next week, I now deeply fear the future for many Zimbabweans - to say nothing of the manipulation of their national media.
It's too late to hope that blood will not be wasted - because it already has.
It's hopeless to wish that the Zimbabweans will not suffer - they have been horribly intimidated and suffering for years.
While the world looks on, a day never passes when I do not pause and think of the appalling loss of life, the dreadful treatment, the starvation, the desperation, the hour-by-hour worry, the outrageous inflation, the disappearance of optimism and the vanished smile on the faces of the people I fell so in love with.
Just as level-headed regular UK television viewers are recovering from the horrors of EuroVision the stupid season continues with more bland nastiness all in the dreaded name of “Big Brother” – a horrific programme, ghastly labelled by millionaire producers as “reality television”.
Why on earth I would want to spend my time watching the ins, the outs, the trivia, the loves, the hates and the darn-right annoying of these wannabe Z Class Celebrities is beyond me.
With dangers and worries of another season of racism and general xenophobia on the horizon, the boys and girls at Ofcom (the UK broadcast regulator) must be on red alert for the coming weeks.
Indeed after 9 years I guess the makers of this rubbish presumably guess they must be doing something right by transmitting this crap to a nation whom the programme makers must assume are all idiots.
All this from Channel Four who are “arguing its case for a £150m annual public subsidy”. A station which has earned considerable praise for being brave and diverse in its all important content. For those outside the UK it is quite possible that the “Big Brother” format has been inflicted on your country or desperately copied by some reckless television station near you.
What really gets firmly up my nose is the assumption by the programme producers that we are all completely stupid. We will simply accept any old rubbish transmitted by a national terrestrial/digital licence-holder. Worse still is that British broadcasting is still held with a degree of respect beyond these shores. So, when some of us are ever outside the UK – how do we answer questions like, “I always thought British broadcasting was almost the best – so why do you broadcast this sort of rubbish?” It’s a tough call and a question I find I can barely answer with a degree of authority.
This trash churns my stomach in so many ways – with any luck this season will implode within itself and the whole concept will be consigned to history categorised as: Nasty Rubbish We’d Rather Forget.
The Sun:
BIG Brother bosses last night labelled this year’s contestants the weirdest bunch yet. Sixteen people from the fringes of society entered the house for the start of 13 gruelling weeks. BB9 includes an ALBINO former gangster, a SEX-MAD body-building couple and a BLIND cross-dressing comedian. Show chief Phil Edgar Jones claimed viewers could expect the best series yet.
He said: “The characters this year are like you have never seen before.
“These are people you’d never meet in real life. We combed Britain for the most amazing people you could encounter. It’s going to be fireworks.”
The Independent:
Tonight, for the ninth year in a row, the presenter Davina McCall will bound enthusiastically on to our television screens to unveil this year's Big Brother contestants, including a Muslim convert, a Thai Buddhist and a reformed gangster who was deported from America.
But who will be watching? And as Channel 4 argues its case for a £150m annual public subsidy, is the ageing reality TV show really the kind of programme it should be making? Viewing figures for last year's series were the worst ever, averaging just 3.8 million compared with an average of 4.5 million viewers in 2006. And the show has been struck by a series of rows over racism and bullying.
Last year I was accused of being 'rude' and 'unfair' in my comments about that silly little singing competition where lots of EuroVision member countries compete to sing their hearts out.
This year this 'rude' and 'unfair' blogger went to extraordinary lengths to watch the long, long, ever so boring semi-finals and then forgo a documentary on political Britain in the late 50's / early 60's for the mind numbing 195 minute all screaming, hyper camp and ever so tedious final.
I went through this televisual hell because I wanted to understand what all the fuss, bitching and excitement was all about in 2008.
My distinct memories of this contest were in the 1960's when my family and I all sat down to wonder at the flickering pictures beamed onto our 405 line television from some exotic part of continental Europe. We'd then wander in certain amazement at the cultural offerings from these Europeans. In those days it all seemed so fair and honest somehow. But I guess as a boy growing up in middle class England most things seemed unquestionable and 'fair' somehow - you never really questioned, you trusted and you accepted. That was my adolescent life somehow.
The EuroVision Song Contest of modern day Europe seems as related to it's original concept as I am related to you or your neighbour.
The voting may seem bizarre to any normal level-headed human being but if your neighbour is competing and you (for the sake of argument) rely on him for oil or gas, or if you want to keep him sweet for whatever reason, you are bound to vote for him - it's human nature. As for the song - who cares?
In fact why not save valuable airtime, creativity and empty hopes and simply ditch the songs altogether and replace the current concept with a glorified back-slapping contest.
Simply vote for your favourite EuroVision member country - then sit down for three hours on a Saturday evening and watch a highly incestuous feast of why these nations are so popular and adored by their neighbours. Then during the last hour we'll go to all the presentation and continuity studios across Europe to hear the votes from the individual countries - ensuring of course that each presentation announcer gives a firm pat on the back to host country for "such a marvelous show - the best show in the history of EuroVision".
Yes! Yet another brilliant television concept from Ian Waugh!
Meanwhile - the future of the UK in the contest is now seriously in question - I wonder if I'll be blogging on this next year at this time?
Vote now and don't forget your calls could cost you your credibility - terms and conditions kind of apply.
With the EuroVision 2008 final only hours away - a continent waits with breathe bated. Indeed as I sit here at my desk banging out these words I can feel the tension from within the United Kingdom and across the channel. Not for generations have the people of Europe felt such a feeling of anticipation. My goodness the tension is as unbearable as passing a kidney stone.
If only this were true! Because it clearly isn't!
This year I wanted to get an overall perspective of this creative multi-cultural feast. So I actually dedicated real time to viewing the semi-finals. Two hours each evening viewing the over zealous, the outright rubbish, the camp, the genuine talent and the darn-right stupid all blended into this screamingly silly waste of broadcasting air-time.
I had my fiver placed firmly on Malta's entry - Vodka. An excellent, well-written, well-produced and superbly performed song swept away as an instant memory. When I see crap like the Latvian attempt - "Pirates of the Sea" given preference to real talent then I know for sure I haven't lost my marbles alltogether! It reinforces my overall opinion that this Song Contest is a complete and utter waste of time.
So what is The EuroVision Song Contest these days? Is it a means of displaying genuine talent? Is it a method of bringing EuroVision member countries closer together? Maybe a way of projecting national and European identity? Is it some sort of pan European joke? Or is it a vehicle for member nations to point fun and ridicule other nations?
It's a gross embarrassment for genuine entrants like the Maltese. It causes serious damage to the overall national image of countries who aren't talently recognised and especially for this small and well-meaning nation.
Taking Malta's position with the contest - it has nothing to do with the local selection board, it's members or the talent that competes locally to represent the Republic. It's no good pointing fingers locally. It's no good bitching endlessly in the vain hope of gaining certain personal local kudos. Because of the nature of the contest there are decisions taken outside Malta that are beyond Maltese control.
The fact of the matter is that the overall EuroVision Song Contest has turned into a total confusing fiasco where the genuine talent avoid it like the plague for fear of professional tarnish.
If your national pride is at stake. If your country's credibility is on show. If you respect your cultural identity. With the best will in the world and the most fantastic talent - my advice is to walk quietly and respectfully away from this gory and currently exceedingly embarrassing contest.
You should avoid this public relations fiasco until such time as the organisers of the semis and finals have stopped taking the piss out of well meaning and intelligent countries who respect their national pride and identity more than being associated with a cheap, tacky and rather nasty (and long-term damaging) talent contest.
In the mean time the final is tonight. I wish my home country well whilst I commiserate with certain nations who must be asking themselves: "Why?"
Its that time of year again, whilst Spring has sprung, the birds are singing in the garden, the FA Cup has been and gone - Summer is tantalising us on the horizon - oh! what joys this time of year brings!
Except, around the corner, looming like a big unpredictable camp and slightly silly monster is the image of EuroVision 2008!
Last year I moaned about the lack of appearance by the brilliant Maltese entry. Strangely (maybe it's something to do with the air, maybe too much sun ... who knows) the normally peaceful and intelligent Maltese take EuroVision very, very seriously indeed. Websites and blogs are full to bursting with moans and counter-moans about how this is all handled locally - the bitching, back biting and insults abound like nothing else, from the selection to the actual board who run Malta's representation at this contest. In fact the whinging is almost as entertaining as the big night itself with more Maltese 'EuroVision Experts' than you can wave a stick at
Chill-out you guys .... please!
Personally as a mere punter I think Malta stands a very good chance and wish them all the very best. You can go their Official Malta EuroVision website here.
This year the Republic of Malta's entry is fantastically feisty, strong, very Mediterranean and high representative of today's Malta. Still not convinced? Still think tiny little Malta has no hope? Well, dear reader, here is the mouse that's going to roar at EuroVision 2008 from Morena with 'Vodka'. Incidentally very big congratulations to the crew and producers of this really brilliant video:
Meanwhile it looks the UK learnt a few lessons from last year's fiasco. "BBC One viewers have picked Andy Abraham and 'Even If' to represent the UK in the 2008 Eurovision Song Contest in Serbia" (so says the BBC):
Just in case you thought EuroVision 2008 has taken on an air of partial sophistication don't count your chickens ... here, for all you happy sailors, is the Latvian attempt - called "Pirates of the Sea":
Well at least you can smile about it ... for those obssessing - why not stop taking it so seriously for all our sakes!
As for me - I'll order up my annual supply of tranquillisers, pain killers and Gin - who knows what feast of glitz, naffness and complete rubbish we are going to be inflicted with this year!
I am a boring, dull, typical 50 something who has an equally dull, boring routine. In fact I pride myself in such dullness - there's a lot to said for routine. If being dull and boring is the label generally attached to old farts like me - then fair enough! Who am I to argue?
Part of my alleged boring routine is getting up during the week at 5.30am and, after diving (ok, crawling) into the shower I head for the kitchen in time for my 4 Weetabix and only coffee of the day all thoroughly releshed with BBC Radio 4 (the middle-Britain, middle-age, no nonsense, occasionally humorous and constantly informative talks radio station).
By the time I have staggered into the kitchen it's normally about quarter to six and therefore in plenty of time to listen to Farming Today - that bastion of agri/horti cultural information just before the first slice of doom, gloom and reality - the 6.00 news and the Today Programme.
So, early on Thursday (or was it Friday?) morning this week my calm routine was shattered by the breaking agri/horti cultural news that a guy called Gordon Ramsey who became a 'celebrity' by using the "f" word in nearly every sentence he has uttered on British television has proclaimed that there should be a law passed whereby us ordinary folk should only be allowed to purchase fruit and vegtables when they are in season in the UK.
This somewhat "fascist type" statement came as something of a shock to little me as I was chomping away at my Weetabix. On hearing this for the first time I have to say that my mumblings just before the 6.00am news were not dissimilar to the language used by Mr. Ramsey when he broadcasts to the nation.
Then, I thought, maybe this guy has lost his marbles and the men in white coats were, as I was swearing like a trooper at my beloved kitchen radio, carrying this poor, somewhat demented soul away from public life forever.
If this bloke does manage to get a law passed whereby I could be locked up for eating strawberries in November - does this mean the end of democracy as we know it?
Perhaps it could mark the re-emergence of the spiv - that wartime / post war Arthur Daley type who you meet down the boozer who has managed to slip in a few boxes of out of season lettuces or a crate of ever so dodgy raspberries.
Maybe we'll start reading stories like 82 year old Doris Smith from Chiswick who has been banged up by the the Veg Cops for knowingly purchasing out of season carrots, boiling them and serving them to her young great-grandchildren. I can see the news headline and copy now: "PENSIONER DORIS AND THE CARROT SCANDAL" "Mrs Smith, widowed, living on a pension, is now serving a three year sentence at Holloway, is said to be 'extremely sorry' for breaking 'Ramsey's Veg Law'. Her great-grandchildren are now in care under supervision."
Give me strength!
Ok, I agree, wherever you live in the world, it's important to support local farmers and buy as much local produce as possible. I agree about the environmental issues of flying potatoes from Brazil to England (or wherever) and we should all keep an eye out. But if this guy thinks he can dictate to us through legislation, for heavens sake, and start controlling our consumerism as such - then he's got another thing coming.
For a bloke who can stop swearing on national television albeit after the watershed, who's allegedly such a wondrous chef, who clearly thinks he's on some great mission - I suggest he should get off his high horse and get real.
Much as all publicity is essential fuel for these alleged 'celebrities' - I have a feeling this fuel will, with any luck, backfire and blow-up in his face.
I had a most strange, although not all together surprising, experience in the middle of April when I was having a look around at some of the Maltese radio station websites.
I also viewed, much to my dismay and great disappointment, a studio webcam which the operator of this particular station has available to the world online.
Having a webcam transmitting your business activity of course represents the company, the business and whatever the aforementioned supports.
To add more horror to this public relations disaster - I can now reveal exclusively on this blog that I wasn't the only person in the UK, in the broadcasting industry and around the world watching this car crash of gross employee mistrust! Indeed this display was the topic of conversation for quite sometime in certain quarters here in England!
I have been asked which station was responsible for the images I watched - but being the consummate professional I am, I have refrained from divulging the stations' identity - suffice to say that I have a very strong feeling the following was read in The Times of Malta - and the next time we viewed the webcam the behaviour of the presenter I referred to was a great deal different.
Oh! The power of the press!
The Times of Malta - mid April 2008:
The Public Face in Public Life
In broadcasting we know only too well that image is everything. Indeed even when your ship is sinking it is vital above all to maintain an air of calm and professionalism.
While things around you are, to say the least, falling apart, it is crucial that despite the fact you are paddling like mad everything on the surface as far as the listener or viewer is concerned is 100% honky-dory. This is the art of the professional and seasoned broadcaster.
Like all media folk I have a curiosity that knows no bounds. It’s very easy in this business to know what your fellow broadcasters are up to because by the nature of the business it is of course in the public domain.
There is a well known industry adage that you are only as good as your last performance.
In the intensive, commercially competitive, over-crowded broadcast market in Malta doing ‘memorable’ programming is crucial. Stations live, breathe and die a painful death by their audience reach. Low reach – low commercial confidence – low revenue and then it’s “goodnight and goodbye from us”! It’s not an unfamiliar scenario.
My curiosity got the better of me the other day as I was trolling the endless radio and television websites. I was dipping in and out of streamed output, listening to and watching styles, links and overall presentation. A few of these websites have ‘live studio webcams’ where you can actually watch the show being produced and presented.
Then my curiosity turned to dismay. I had already listened to the audio of this particular station and I knew instinctively that the guy broadcasting into people’s homes, in their cars and online cared as much about his job as a broadcaster as I care about flying to the moon.
So, when I clicked onto the station ‘webcam’ I was mortified to see the ‘presenter’ (a public servant) with both feet up on the control desk, with dust and dirt from his shoes falling into the delicate and expensive equipment, with the microphone angle poise stretched as far forward as possible, the guy slouched back in his chair chewing gum whilst presenting his programme.
I viewed this shocking disregard for professionalism for about 20 whole minutes. As the online world watched, I actually felt sorry for the owners and shareholders of this station who were clearly oblivious of this embarrassing PR abuse.
Broadcasting is a profession not to be taken lightly. We are all pubic servants licensed to transmit into people’s homes. When you go into a shop, we expect a modicum of politeness from the person serving us – you don’t expect a sales assistant to have his (or her) feet up on the counter, mumbling and chewing gum without a care in the world. Despite the flood of deregulation over the years there is still the unspoken trust – a special bond – between broadcaster and audience. If you loose the special relationship you are finished – the selective consumer simply moves on.
We have always put broadcast training and development at the top of our development agenda. Training budgets are always built in to our business models and we have always maintained that despite the costs involved that training is an investment for the future.
Image is absolutely everything - it is premium.
So my tip is – if you know there is a webcam installed in your studio at least pretend you care about the programme you are inflicting on the consumer because you never know who is watching you!
Having just revitalised and spruced up my somewhat neglected blog I start with a few words I sent to a newspaper in Malta, where, much to annoyance of certain people and the delight of others I am currently celebrating (or rather reflecting) on my 20th anniversary of first being professionally associated with those wonderful islands.
This was published in today's Independent in Malta:
I always look forward to reading Charles Flores’ contribution on the Opinion pages of The Malta Independent on Sunday and (this) week was no exception. His piece: “A Moment in Time: The King and I” was, as usual, fascinating and frank reading.
Charles was referring to being in the wrong place at the wrong time – being immortalised in a split second then being consigned to history in a shutters flick of a photographer’s camera.
I maintain that my biggest personal regret was being politically misunderstood. The political culture in Britain is in some ways on another planet in comparison to Malta. In Britain I get the feeling that the electorate care as much about politics as the brand of toothpaste they use. We normally don’t think twice about it – we use a brand probably because we always have and there are far more important things in life like West Ham one day winning the FA Cup.
If you ask someone which way they vote in Britain (because there is a very high probability you wouldn’t know), they might tell you to mind your own business, they could say they don’t care because “all politicians are the same” or they might just say they “don’t care”. One or two might reveal their little political secret.
To be absolutely honest, I never knew which way my family voted. My parent’s politics were a secret and the only way I might surmise which way my grandfather voted was by the fact that he used to read The Daily Express! But he never really seemed a Macmillan supporter somehow! As for my grandmother, she was more interested in the volume of greens her only grandson could consume! “Eat your greens, Ian, or you’ll never grow big and strong!” doesn’t have the same political ring as “Your grandfather and I went on a CND rally last weekend and had tea with Harold Wilson”!
Despite the vast millions spent persuading Joe Blogs to vote one way or the other, the general view of UK politicians is probably down there with estate agents who seem to get an equal poor career rating.
In Malta politics is a national obsession. Worryingly, it seems that everyone knows everyone else’s political leanings. Is it true you might possibly admire someone more because you know that person might lean your way, so to speak?
I’m proud to say I’ve been professionally and personally connected to Malta for exactly 20 years this month. It was in May 1988 when I was engaged as an adviser for Xandir Malta. I have to say that many of the people I met (including Charles Flores) made an incredible impression on me. Looking back, the one single thing that struck me by some people at Xandir Malta was a sense of unswerving professionalism and commitment despite the political bullying and nastiness that often used to go on.
Most of these Xandir icons have now retired from public life – but they have left behind something very special, which, I have to say, is lacking in today’s local media jungle. Despite my professional admiration for these people, I have never found it necessary to enquire about their politics. If politics, like any other subject, was discussed privately then fair enough – it’s a private discussion.
Reading Charles Flores last weekend reminded me of certain assumptions that were incorrectly and cruelly made about me years ago in Malta, which resulted in a certain newspaper alleging I supported a certain political party in Malta.
This hilarious notion (which could not have been further from the truth) must have been cooked up by some bored hack who was having a slow news day. The crazy, crazy assumption was that I was definitely a nasty supporter of a certain political party.
Not only was I an interfering foreigner meddling in things I should leave alone, I was doing it with the backing of a certain party. What complete rubbish! This silliness carried on until I guess the hack found some other scrap of gossip to blow out of proportion.
Today, all this (is) water under (the) bridge – but it does leave a certain bitterness somehow.
Sadly though, this has gone down as an inaccurate speck of history archived somewhere, just sitting there like an annoying spot that you just can’t get rid of.
If the hack who brewed up this heap of untruths had the decency to actually ask me my politics – then fair enough. But nobody ever asked me about my politics so the naïve and the silly made an assumption. Assumptions are dangerous and damaging – being a marked man for something you most certainly don’t support is painful.
But why let the facts get in the way of a good story!
Well, what a great week for news - especially for those still left residing in the UK.
I say that with a large and distasteful slice of unseasoned irony rammed in my mouth. We hear that about 200,000 British folk a year are packing their bags and waving goodbye to this green and, in 2007, not so pleasant land.
Many of these people are fed-up with the cost of living, the cost of housing, the danger of a terrorist attack, the weather and the appalling now seemingly out of control violent crime in this Country.
Ages ago I was lambasted by the Maltese for daring to suggest that if the Maltese judiciary didn't come down hard on the unruly and violent youth then the islands would turn into a cloned "nanny state". Well this week (indeed this year) has proved what a "nanny state" culture can do to society.
With far too much nannying going on we have a memorable year in Britain for kids with guns, kids in gangs, kids with knives terrorising the streets of Britain. And if you thought this was a class thing, you'd be very wrong dear reader. This deadly culture is rife across every social divide in good old blighty.
We have seen endless accounts of our youth murdered in our streets and in our homes. This has become a festering growing nightmare.
Even as I scribble this we are reading news reports of an 11 year old lad shot dead from behind after coming home from a footie practice. He died in his mother's arms the other evening.
I am not ashamed to say that as a 53 year old grown man I was reduced to tears as I saw the boy's mother and father appeal for help to find the 13 - 15 year old who shot and killed their "baby" in the back of the neck.
So, going back to my allegedly "over-exaggerated" words recently in the Malta Independent - we are now living a more dangerous more nasty nightmare in this country.
Time to pack off nanny and time to get tough - time to get put society back in adult well-adjusted control.
I never thought I'd say this but the words "national service" are creeping ever more onto the lips of many in this frightened and shocked nation of ours.
Little wonder so many are on their way out seeking a safer and better life.
I was up at 05.30 as usual this morning by 06.00 the lead story on Radio 4's Today programme was the fantastic news of the release of BBC Gaza Correspondent Alan Johnston.
This report from BBC News Online:
BBC correspondent Alan Johnston has been released by kidnappers in Gaza after nearly four months in captivity.
He said it was "fantastic" to be free after an "appalling experience". TV footage showed Mr Johnston, 45, leaving a building accompanied by armed men.
He later appeared beside Hamas leader Ismail Haniya and thanked everyone who had worked for his release.
Rallies worldwide had called for Mr Johnston's release. An online petition was signed by some 200,000 people.
The BBC reporter was handed over to officials of the Hamas administration in the early hours of Wednesday morning.
Hamas' military wing had said it would actively work towards securing Mr Johnston's release, warning his kidnappers it was prepared to use force.
Gunmen from the Palestinian Islamist Hamas movement overran Gaza last month, expelling their rivals from the Fatah faction.
Fatah's defeat in Gaza prompted its leader, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, to sack Mr Haniya as prime minister.
Security push
Mr Johnston was abducted on 12 March by the Army of Islam, a shadowy militant group dominated by Gaza's powerful Dugmush clan.
The group released three videos, two of which featured footage of the kidnapped correspondent.
It said it would kill its captive if its demands for the release of Muslim prisoners in British custody were not met.
A senior Hamas official, Mahmoud Zahar, said no deal was done with the kidnappers to secure Mr Johnston's release.
He added that Hamas did not work towards the release "to receive favours from the British government".
"We did this because of humanitarian concern, and to achieve a government aim to extend security to all without fear."
A Hamas leader living in exile in Syria, Khaled Meshaal, told the Reuters news agency Mr Johnston's release revealed the failings of the preceding Fatah administration.
"It showed the difference between the era in which a group used to encourage and commit security anarchy... and the current situation in which Hamas is seeking to stabilise security," Mr Meshaal was quoted as saying.
'Dreamt of freedom'
Appearing at a press conference alongside Hamas leader Haniya, Mr Johnston thanked everyone who had worked towards his release.
Hamas officials have claimed credit for Mr Johnston's release
"The last 16 weeks have been the very worst of my life," he said. "I was in the hands of people who were dangerous and unpredictable."
"I literally dreamt many times of being free and always woke up back in that room."
Mr Johnston said he was not tortured during captivity but he did fall ill from the food he was served.
He said Hamas' seizure of power in Gaza and its subsequent pledge to improve security in the territory had facilitated his release.
"The kidnappers seemed very comfortable and very secure in their operation until... a few weeks ago, when Hamas took charge of the security operation here," he said.
The journalist said he was moved twice during his spell in captivity.
Radio contact
Having worked in Gaza for the past three years, Mr Johnston said he was well aware of Palestinian traditions of hospitality and regarded his abductors as an "aberration".
Palestinian reporters have led demands for Mr Johnston's release
He described his experience of captivity as "appalling" and "occasionally quite terrifying".
"It became quite hard to imagine normal life again," he said.
He said he was looking forward to being re-united with his family in Scotland, expressing sorrow that his "actions" had brought turmoil to their lives.
He had a brief conversation with his father over the telephone after being released.
Mr Johnston said he stayed aware of efforts to free him by listening to the BBC World Service on the radio.
News of global demonstrations in his support was a source of comfort to him, he said.
The BBC has issued a statement expressing relief and delight at its employee's release.
Mr Johnston left the Gaza Strip later on Wednesday morning, entering Israel via the Erez crossing.
A father passing by his son's bedroom was astonished to see that his bed was nicely made and everything was picked up. Then he saw an envelope, propped up prominently on the pillow that was addressed to "Dad." With the worst premonition he opened the envelope with trembling hands and read the letter.
Dear Dad:
It is with great regret and sorrow that I'm writing you. I had to elope with my new girlfriend because I wanted to avoid a scene with mom and you.
I have been finding real passion with Stacy and she is so nice. But I knew you would not approve of her because of all her piercing, tattoos, tight motorcycle clothes and the fact that she is much older than I am. But it's not only the passion...Dad she's pregnant. Stacy said that we will be very happy. She owns a trailer in the Woods and has a stack of firewood for the whole winter. We share a dream of having many more children. Stacy has opened my eyes to the fact that marijuana doesn't really hurt anyone. We'll be growing it for ourselves and trading it with the other people that live nearby for cocaine and ecstasy. In the meantime we will pray that science will find a cure for AIDS so Stacy can get better. She deserves it.
Don't worry Dad. I'm 15 and I know how to take care of myself. Someday I'm sure that we will be back to visit so that you can get to know your grandchildren.
Love, Your Son John
PS. Dad, none of the above is true. I'm over at Tommy's house. I just wanted to remind you that there are worse things in life than the report card that's in my centre desk drawer. I love you. Call me when it's safe to come home.
Wow! Last night I sat through the three very long hours of what can only be described as the worse television I have seen since TSW's opening night show* in the early 1980's.
Yes, it was the excruciatingly ever so dull 2007 Eurovision Song Contest which was dominated by the the former Warsaw Pact states all as unbearably incestuous as each other. If ever I watched a more politically chummy back-slapping feast of rubbish it was this. The only thing that prevented me from chucking something large and bulking towards my television set was the production skills of Finnish Television, the host broadcaster who did an exceptional job and saved the evening from unspeakable disaster.
The biggest laugh (and by now I was in tears of hysterics) was the ghastly representation of British musical writing and performing talent, namely a bunch crass individuals called 'Scooch'.
When the voting came it became clear that the UK entry was going to sit in its rightful position at the bottom of the heap. Then the biggest laugh of night when our dear, darling friend in the Mediterranean, the Republic of Malta gave their top vote (12 whole points) to 'Scooch'!
I almost passed out with sheer unbelievable shock! The roar of laughter could be heard right across London! I was in hysterics! But then the laughter changed to a painful feeling of deep concern when I asked myself "why"? Why vote for this this appalling UK rubbish when there was some quite good material to give the 12 valuable points to like Greece for example (see below).
Much as I love the Maltese, if this is their display of appreciation of musical talent then I think there is something seriously wrong! Boy, am I worried! The quite incredible thing is I thought Malta's entry this year was extremely good - I cannot understand why the UK entry got through the semi finals with something so truly horrendous and yet Malta with their obvious talented song didn't. But you see, I will never get to grips with this weird televisual feast - perhaps its true, I just have no taste or an ear for good music. Perhaps I should start appreciating the overtly camp outdated crassness of the 'Scoochs' of this world.
But hey! Thank you Malta for saving the UK from the gross embarrassment of coming last - if I were you I wouldn't have voted for us and let us suffer the indignation of coming last because I think it would have taught us a lesson. Just a shame we didn't do the same for you last year.
From The Times (London)
May 14, 2007
Bloc-voting proves that, on Eurovision night, everybody needs good neighbours
Lucy Bannerman
Tactical voting, Sir Terry Wogan and performers of ambiguous gender are the guaranteed features of the annual kitschfest that is the Eurovision Song Contest.
But when Serbia was propelled to first place this weekend — thanks in no small part to the maximum points offered by six of its Eastern European neighbours — some commentators decried the victory as one neighbourly favour too far.
While historical alliances have long been tolerated as part of the Eurovision experience, cynics risked accusations of sour grapes by suggesting yesterday that unchecked block voting is putting the UK, one of its biggest financial contributors, at a disadvantage.
Last night’s results revealed that nations east of the Adriatic Sea occupied the top 15 places in the competition, in one of the strongest indications of the political alliances and unofficial voting patterns that have come to characterise the event.
In contrast, it was a humiliating evening for the four nations that bear the lion’s share of the costs of Eurovision, with the UK, France, Spain and Germany languishing among the bottom six places.
Serbia racked up 268 points, with eastern countries and all its fellow ex-Yugoslavs — even those that were its enemies in the wars of the 1990s — showing united support for Marija Serifovic. They included Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Hungary and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
In an indication that Britain will have to try harder to offset the friendly alliances enjoyed by the Eastern European contingent, Scooch, a camp ensemble that had been thought to tick all the obligatory Eurovision boxes, found themselves virtually friendless. Scooch scored only 19 points, 12 of which came from Malta.
The league table, top heavy with triumphant entries from the Balkan and Baltic blocs, was in marked contrast to previous competitions, which used to be dominated by Western nations such as Ireland, France and, thanks to Katrina and the Waves in 1997, the UK.
Although some commentators enjoyed the flagrant bias of the voting, others expressed disappointment at its political nature, which they claimed threatened to overshadow the competition.
Pete Paphides, The Times music critic, said the eastward shift left the UK and all its future Eurovision hopefuls with a big challenge. He said: “The song needs to be spectacular to overcome what is now becoming a distinct disadvantage. I could not believe how many countries Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union had broken into: they just kept on coming. Maybe a bit of humility and a recognition of how we are perceived by those countries might not go amiss.”
Eurovision websites were clogged with traffic from fans expressing various degrees of disappointment and delight in the aftermath of the three-hour final, which took place in Helsinki’s largest stadium on Saturday night, and attracted a British television audience of 10.9 million.
One fan fumed on an online forum that predictability, once affectionately tolerated by viewers, has now skewed the results beyond reason, and urged organisers to impose restrictions ahead of next year’s competition in Belgrade: “It is quite appalling that countries such as Malta, who year after year submit good songs, are block-voted out simply because they have no near neighbours. The obvious solution is to rule that countries cannot vote for their closest neighbours.”
The BBC denied that tactical voting had spoiled this year’s competition. A spokesman said: “That sounds awfully like sour grapes. Serbia won support from across Europe, not just its Eastern bloc friends.
“It is about more than just how the different parts of Europe vote, and at the end of the day, not even our Western allies showed much interest in our entry.”
Alan Howard, an expert in human geography from the University of Reading, who has surveyed 1,000 fans of the contest on voting tactics, said: “In general it seems that culture rather than politics is most important. Countries in Eastern Europe may well share a cultural affinity but in recent years the contest winner has garnered support from both East and West.”
Here is Malta's brilliant entry which very sadly only reached the semi-finals (pictures: TVM (PBS Malta) via YouTube):
*Television South West (TSW) were awarded the ITV (UK) contract to serve the south-west of England from 1 January 1982 for a ten-year period, succeeding incumbent Westward who had served the area since 1961. Their opening show was memorable for all the wrong reasons.
I have been a fan of Charles Flores’ writing skills for nearly 20 years, ever since I first met him when he was Head of Radio at Xandir Malta.
By the time we met he was already a vastly experienced journalist and published writer.
Today there is nothing I enjoy more than reading his articles on-line in The Malta Independent on Sunday – in fact I actually collect his “Opinions”, so I have the opportunity to read his work again and again (which always fascinates me because of that certain wry smile he seems to inject into his writings!).
I was particularly interested in his comments about political speeches last Sunday.
We have enjoyed a Labour government in the UK since May 1997 and despite the controversial move by our Tony to back America on Iraq, this government has without doubt changed the face of Britain.
Life in the UK BT (Before Tony) was a different place. General elections during dear old Maggie’s time were punctuated with long, long, boring, boring, yawn inducing political dialogues. Great sermons delivered by her and her out of touch boys in the Cabinet.
Maggie finally hung up her blue handbag in 1990. We then endured the sleaze ridden days of John Major who bored the practically comatose poor electorate and future generations of UK voters. His doomed “family values” proclamations have become legendary! Since then there has been a whole raft of Tory leaders in opposition.
When the great John Smith died suddenly in May 1994, the race was on in the Labour Party to find a new fresh charismatic leader to bring politics and the issues that matter back to the ordinary people of Britain. Tony Blair was that man.
Our Tony is a politician of few words. Someone whose speeches are direct, short and to the point. He also seems to have a sense of clever wit.
In 1997, Blair’s short sharp speeches along with the New Labour agenda swept the Tories aside in a manner hardly seen before in British politics. Labour won a landslide 179-seat majority.
So in this politically charged somewhat stifling environment, I wonder if the hungry politicians in Malta will take a leaf out of Tony’s book and, as Charles Flores hints, maybe introduce a little sharp carefully constructed wit in their campaign to win over the electorate. Don’t get me wrong, clever wit is good ... stand-up comedy is another matter!
As in broadcasting, size really does matter! Short, well defined and to the point is good! With broadcast features and interviews, research has shown that after three minutes the listener or viewer is prone to lose interest and therefore the point – surely this can be applied to political speechmaking!
Politics is pretty low on the day-to-day agenda in the UK. However, the political scene in Malta is legendary! It seems to eat into every aspect of daily life – everything seems to be a political issue. Whichever way you turn you are a “marked man”! Indeed one of my enduring personal regrets was being so politically misunderstood!
Politics can be genuinely “interesting” (trust me on that one!). It’s down to the politicians to stimulate the voter and, for all our sakes, get to the point!
Ian Waugh
LONDON Charles Flores wrote (Sunday 7 January 2007 - Malta - Sunday Independent):
I’d much rather think of the term as the apt name of a favourite rock group, which only a few years back had us fuddled and cuddled in a small, middle-aged crowd for a wonderful concert on a cold, wintry night at Ta’ Qali, than as the ideal Latin expression to describe a stalemate or lack of progress.
As the father told his son in reply to the question what is status quo daddy, “It is, really, a reflection of the state that we are in.” But will it be much more of the same in this new year that we’ve just heralded in?
We have also been through the annual frenzy of political speeches wrapped in Yuletide glitter, well-intentioned marathons and do-gooder advice on binge drinking and driving, partying and other social hang-ups. Will any of it, however, change the status quo that unsuccessfully hides a bitter reality as we continue to live a lie? Even changing and fiddling with statistics has now been described as merely “a matter of routine.” European Union statisticians must be wondering what has hit them since May 2004, unless they too are familiar with the art of hide-and-seek statistics.
Will it really be more of the same as we all too obviously march forward to a general election? For one, I think there should be strict enforcement of the law against polluting the air with a welcome resort to fewer, shorter and better political speeches. We all know liberty does not work as well in practice as it does in speeches. Malta certainly needs more free speech that is worth listening to, because it’s too bad that more people here are more thoughtless than speechless.
The problem with most of our politicians is that they are restricted to four speeches: what they have written down, what they actually said, what they wish they had said, and what they are quoted as saying the next day. If the 2007 status quo is going to be more of this, humdrum is the other word.
The more the general election approaches the more one has to be careful when listening to speeches. When you listen to a political speech it’s very much like shooting at a target – you must allow for the wind. Then also allow for the second wind as soon as they say: “… and now in conclusion...”
Is it going to be a year of dealing with speeches the way one deals with a broiled, too young a rabbit? You just have to pick your way through an awful lot to find any meat. Perhaps those who are already sharpening their tongues for the coming electoral showdown would do well to remember that the recipe for a good speech includes quite a bit of shortening. In fact, the best time to end your speech is when you feel the listening is lessening. A good speech is one with a good beginning and a good ending, and kept very close together.
On a more metaphorical note, a speech should be like a woman’s skirt – long enough to cover the subject, but short enough to be interesting.
Not surprisingly, the recent spate of “Christmas” speeches hardly left us enthralled and it surely does not augur too well for the new year should all the predictions of an early election from both right and left turn out to be correct after all.
Wit has never been the hallmark of Maltese politics, alas. Fiery speeches yes, inflammatory speeches by mass production, sensible and down-to-earth observations plenty, but hardly ever any special wit, give or take the odd remark in the House where there have always been the jokers more intent on raising a laugh than our standard of living.
It is not for want of good speakers, but more as a direct result of the petty politics that tend to keep our politicians strung to the oblique and the ambiguous which provide ample safe ground and the ever-so-convenient status quo. Even our after-dinner speeches or, today, the breakfast gatherings, rarely if ever go above the usual political innuendo. The rest is often a juxtaposition of ideological leanings, statistics and funny little fodder for the media.
Why should we not have more colour and more spice in 2007? We are entitled to it, election or not. It is about time our speakers felt the need to mingle more with the rowdier of our media and to express themselves more in synch with the rest of their listeners, rather than delivering more boring speeches destined to ruin one’s digestion.
When the Scottish novelist and dramatist, J.M. Barrie addressed an audience of one thousand girls at Smith College during an American visit, a friend asked him how he had found the experience.
“Well,” replied Barrie, “to tell you the truth, I’d much rather talk one thousand times to one girl, than to talk one time to a thousand girls.” I wonder what he’d have said after listening to a breakfast keynote speech in third-millennium Malta. Perhaps this: “To tell you the truth, I’d much rather talk to an audience which has truly come out of slumber. Was it the speech or was it last night’s hangover?”
The media also has to cope with copies of the speeches they are invited to listen to and to cover, sometimes rather badly. But you really cannot blame them. Newspaper editors must, at times, feel the same way a rival MP once reacted to Winston Churchill’s highly-amusing decision to distribute printed copies of his most recent speeches to his fellow Members in the House...
“Dear Mr Churchill,” an old parliamentary dog had written to him, “thanks for copy of your speeches lately delivered in the House of Commons. I shall lose no time in reading them.”
Here we going rockin’ all over the world, I guess...
You know when you're getting on a bit when you struggle like hell to reach midnight on New Year's Eve. You don't? Well I was that man!
After spending decades revelling and generally rotting my liver with gallons of booze at new year I now slump (indeed 'slob out') in front of the television until I finally switch to BBC One to watch our capital burn thousands of pounds in a few minutes along the Thames.
Don't get me wrong! The sight of our famous landmarks being lit up like an Elton John creation is quite pleasant in a camp sort of way. This colourful (if somewhat bum-clenchingly expensive) display and generic promotion for London did move me from my semi-slobbed out slumber with a start! As the fireworks exploded along the river I came to with a shocked reaction that maybe we were under attack from some unknown force!
The explosions marked the end of an unhappy and uneasy political year somehow. The misery highlighted by the recent execution of Iraq's tyrant dictator, Saddam, which in turn only highlighted the ridiculous situation we have managed to find ourselves in Iraq.
Although I am a supporter of the current administration here in the UK, I, like many, did not support us going into that country. I felt that in 2003 and I still feel it now as the 3000th US military person is killed in action. 2006 will be remembered as possibly the worse year for our troops, American troops and the civilians of Iraq who find themselves living a daily misery. What have we done to get ourselves into this disaster? It has opened all the wrong doors somehow.
This kissy, lovey, lick-lick "special" relationship with the Bush administration is so beyond me.
“I am so depressed about the future”. That’s my secret thought that seems to whirl endlessly around like an out of control spinning wheel. It clunks and rattles my brain on an almost hourly basis.
What has happened to the youth of our country? They can’t speak, they won’t speak the English language. They cannot (will not) see the point of creative or worthy ambition. You cannot interact with them on hardly any level at all. Apart from spending all their energies on ‘not caring’, they are threatening, rude, obscene and dangerous. They want everything now. If they don’t get it some will steal it or the cash to get it.
Bad anti-social behaviour is never out of the news. Violent crime is raging. We are living on tender hooks. We’d rather walk on the other side of the street than risk the fear of coming in close contact. Yes! We are frightened of our own youth. They have taken on a self imposed alienation with their hoods, their walk, their language, their interaction and their attitude – this is not culture, this is hell.
You think this is an unfair comment?Think again. The United Kingdom has the worse behaved under 18 year olds in the entire EU. This is damning for the reputation of a nation that still grips so firmly onto it’s past as the alleged colonial masters.
Who’s fault is it? The answer my friend is quite simply the parents and their parents. Previous governments, this adult society and two generations of social order that have slowly but surely brushed this destiny of doom under the carpet.
A Labour government for the second time in living memory is having to put things straight. The difference between Atlee’s post war government and today’s Blair administration is quite simply the task of re-building is so overwhelming and yet this crisis, this social failure has been staring us in the face for decades under other administrations..
Great Britain has become that dark side of town - a ghetto of fear on one side and gross antisocial behaviour on the other.
Bullying has reached a record, violent crime is at an unacceptable level, drug and alcohol abuse out of control, debt levels are ragingly high. There are whole areas of inner cities that are practically ‘no-go zones’ after dark.
But this gloomy scenario isn’t just being played out in good old Blighty.
Now on the tiny islands of Malta the newspapers and online reports are full of this festering developing decease. From drugs, to violence to bullying. The difference is immediate tough action is required to nip this in the bud before the bud becomes a full ugly, nasty, poisonous flower.
In Britain we live in a pathetic nanny state. We don’t punish we just wave a finger and say “don’t do this again” – we can’t give our children a parental slap on the backside for fear of prosecution. The youth are given Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBO’s) by the courts – but they have become a ‘badge of honour’ by the youth.
I have been reading Francesca Vella’s article, “Suspended sentence for teenage bullies”.
“Five students were yesterday jailed for one month, suspended for a year, after they pleaded guilty to bullying a fellow student at the MCAST college in Corradino.
Appearing before magistrate Joseph Apap Bologna, the boys, who cannot be named as they are still minors, were charged with bullying another boy by assaulting, threatening and pushing him to the ground with the intent of hurting him at the MCAST college in Corradino on 7 December and the preceding four months”.
A suspended sentence? With due respect to the learned Magistrate, surely with sentences like this Malta is destined to go down “nanny state road”.
Nation’s live and survive by reputation. We are living the hell in the UK. Malta is small and compact enough to take short, sharp, seemingly painful action now.
By taking this course the jewel that we love and cherish in the Mediterranean will not dissolve into the crisis ridden disaster that is emerging as Britain’s youth and the future of a once fearless nation.
Police Commissioner, John Rizzo, speaking in Malta says, “I am a father too. And we cannot allow students, who are also our own children, to be bullied while our mind is at rest in the belief that they are safe in good schools”.
MaltaStar, one of the e-Newspapers in Malta reported:
“On Friday evening, police arraigned five youths, aged between 16 and 17 in court, on charges related to a case of bullying. One of them was even accused of being in possession of a weapon, with which he threatened the bullied student. All five pleaded guilty to the charges, and the court sentenced them to a suspended one month imprisonment sentence.
A spokesperson for the website YouTube, confirmed to maltastar.com that it was the user who originally posted the movies online, who eventually withdrew them on Thursday. She referred to the website’s Terms of Use and Community Guidelines, which state that “real violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone getting hurt, attacked, or humiliated, don't post it”. If a movie violates these terms, the website would ban the movie or even the user. The US company also stated that they would be ready to reveal the identity of the user who posted the bullying movies if they are presented with a police search warrant or subpoena.”
The Times of Malta reports:
“The principal of the MaltaCollege of Arts, Science and Technology (MCAST) said yesterday that a decision on the future of the five students who received a one-month suspended jail term for bullying would be taken after an internal inquiry is completed.
Frank Edwards told The Sunday Times that the college would take into consideration the offenders' guilty plea and their sentence before taking a decision.
"They have created a serious problem for themselves which could be a serious handicap for them regarding their future," Mr Edwards said.
"We will definitely take the appropriate action to ensure that the students themselves, if they are allowed to stay on campus, will never again be tempted to commit a similar, or any other, crime."
The principal said he wanted to assure the public, parents and students that incidents of bullying would be dealt with clearly and decisively.
Five MCAST students aged between 16 and 17 pleaded guilty in court on Friday to bullying a fellow student. Police began an investigation after video footage from a mobile phone was shown on the online newspaper Maltastar.com”.
First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they carried us.
They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes.
Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints.
We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking .
As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.
Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat.
We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.
We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.
We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because......
WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!
We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.
No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.
We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem .
We did not have Play stations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 99 channels on cable, no video tape movies, no surround sound, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents .
We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.
We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!
Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!
The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!
The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.
We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned
HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!
And YOU are one of them!
CONGRATULATIONS!
Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it?!
It's funny how an age or era evoke feelings of warmth and nostalgia.
The fifties, which didn't really start until the demise of rationing, the early death of the King and beginning of the 'Elizabethan Age', were a time of re-construction and optimism. But in reality of course reconstruction (physical and political) had started in 1945. Indeed plans were well underway when the Germans were still bombing Europe and slaughtering minorities in concentration camps. It was Atlee's Labour government which had swept aside Churchill that did all the hard work in the 40's to make way for the 50's 'never had it so good' era that we prefer to remember. So the 1950s 'era' actually began in about 1953.
The 1960s was apparently the age of 'peace' and 'love' when skirts went 'mini' and 'pop' wasn't an old age reference to your father. This laughable era when all London was allegedly 'swinging' was in fact probably the most dangerous and hypercritical in our recent history. It's estimated that only about 500 - 600 people were actually involved in the 'in scene' in London. Wages were still relatively low, classes were clearly defined, there were no equal rights in the work-place for women and it wasn't until 1967 that homosexuality had any legal recognition in Britain. In 1961 we were almost blown into extinction with the Cuban missile crisis, blacks were segregated all around the Western world and in Britain the middle-classes had their hands over their faces as the front pages were dominated by the sexual encounters of Jack Profumo. Music changed and morphed into what became 'the sound of the sixties' whilst in Vietnam thousands of ordinary people and military personnel were being slaughtered.
And so it goes on. We look back and whisper to ourselves 'those were the days'. But actually they were as dangerous and weird as they are today in many respects. Occasionally images stare back at us to remind us there were a few things that watermarked the era (like the beautiful face of Audrey Hepburn).
I have two lives (lucky old me) - the broadcast guy and the history guy. My mates in the media have no interest in history or historic research (so I never discuss my research or published work) and my history mates are fairly pleasantly ignorant of the dog-eat-dog environment of broadcasting I inhabit.
There are mainly parallels between the recent past (say from Victorian times) to today.
These days we have these massive egos. We believe that we invented the wheel (so no change there - the Victorians believed they invented the wheel as well). All concepts are modern and anything that help build today's life has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the past.
Indeed the past has had a rough time of it in the last 150 years or so - we look at it as some sort of 'golden age' whilst apparently having nothing to do with the present. So, is today tomorrow's 'golden age'? And how long does it take for today to rise in stature to become generically iconic?
Here in the UK there's not much I am quite so proud of these days - maybe it's me, my old age, my enforced lifestyle, the weather, the attitude, the government, the crime rate, the licky-lick relationship we appear to have with the yanks - I don't know. But I am proud of our film industry and the men and women who dedicated their talent to produce the best film productions anywhere in the world.
Two things have happened recently to reinforce this. The introduction of free to view Film4 and the announcement that in Britain more people go to the cinema on a regular basis and support home grown productions than anywhere in the world.
I have followed British Film through the ups, downs and pits throughout my adult life. I have witnessed the wholesale destruction and then rebuilding of an industry that under previous political regimes practically died a death.
Today the picture is strong as these figures prove from the Beeb's news website:
TOP 2005 UK FILMS WORLDWIDE Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - $808m (£435m) Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - $472m (£254m) Batman Begins - $371m (£200m) Kingdom of Heaven - $210m (£113m) Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit - $183m (£98m)
"British films secured a record one-third share of all cinema takings in the UK last year.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire led the way as the top-grossing British film, taking $808m (£435m) worldwide, a report by the UK Film Council said.
It was one of eight UK films to feature in the top 20 of the world's biggest grossing movies, the council said.
One in four people went to the cinema once a month and the numbers watching foreign language films also increased.
The UK Film Council said more than 200 foreign language films in 32 different languages were shown at UK cinemas.
The most popular was the German-made Downfall, about the last days of Adolf Hitler.
Overall, comedies were the most popular films, followed by fantasy films and dramas. "
In these days when we're watching our backs for the next terrorist bomb, sweating our guts out on the oldest most dilapidated underground system and wondering why our media is so obsessed with the idiot lifestyle of our Deputy Prime Minister and other public figures - it's good to be reminded that we are good at something!
I have a great fascination for the 'recent past'. It gives me a certain comfort every so often to pause and look back at a world that is gradually and determinedly fading very slowly away.
One such declining element is the 'greasy spoon' an unglamorous name for the classic Formica cafes that once ordained our towns throughout the UK. "The classic Italian-run Formica cafes of the 1950s have never been given their due - despite their manifest contribution to the (sub)cultural life of post war Britain".
Of course not all of them were exactly salubrious but many were quite amazing. They were a haven where you could indulge in a real truly amazing fry up (totally banned by yours truly today) or a much welcome good cup of coffee. Still not convinced that we should remember these British gastronomic havens?
I agree that they take some convincing especially in this age of organic, fat free processed food but they really were part of our life and now our heritage. Acclaimed by the Royal Institute of British Architects as 'sumptuous... beautiful... breathtaking... deeply evocative...' Click here
Does Kate Moss have an eating disorder? I don't mean anorexia or bulimia, but a strange predilection for fattening, unhealthy food. These days, if she's not stuffing her face with cream cakes in the tearoom at Claridge's, she's tucking into a full English at some out-of-the-way greasy spoon. On present form, the only coke she's likely to be consuming is the full-fat variety.
Her latest discovery is the Troy Café in, of all places, Kentish Town. Could there be a less glamorous part of town than this nondescript postcode in North London? Sandwiched between Highgate and Camden Town, it can't decide whether it's a trendy urban ghetto or an affluent suburban oasis. Like Shepherd's Bush, it's one of those areas that seems to have been left behind by the rising tide of house prices and gentrification. As I stepped out of the Tube, I was greeted by a homeless man clutching a can of Carlsberg Special Brew, but he might as well have been holding up a sign saying, 'Welcome to Kentish Town.'
There has been a significant amount of ‘tourism bashing’ of late but I feel the critics should genuinely put things into perspective.
Tourism is a constant changing and delicate market. Today it’s all about choice and freedom. The punter is far more choosy because there’s far more choice and a great deal more up-to-the-minute resources for those choices to be made.
Malta is not alone with variations in market trends. In the UK, where we are one year on from our worse terrorism attack which killed more than 50 people, the National Gallery, the Tate Modern and the London Eye, three of the top ten most popular sites in the UK, experienced the most severe declines during 2005. However Blackpool Pleasure Beach (in the chilly North West!) had a staggering 5,970,000 visitors during 2005 which made it top of the pops with UK visitor attractions!
Blackpool has a certain ‘kiss-me-quick’ reputation (!) but being top can’t be bad for a destination that’s fighting to conquer markets away from just the ‘fish ‘n’ chips’ brigade.
Reputations and negativity travel fast and if Malta was such a dreadful place to visit how can you explain the 1.1 million visitors who enjoyed a break in one of the most attractive locations in the Mediterranean? Nobody forced anyone to visit the Maltese islands!
From what I read everyday from press and reviews the picture is very positive indeed. Today’s traveller has access to wide-ranging media and are aware of what’s on offer. If they didn’t want to come to Malta figures would be a great deal different.
Low cost air travel has opened a new window of opportunity for tourism across the world. The internet and digital technology has broadened the scope for choice and flexibility for the tourist.
I am disabled and need walking sticks and a wheelchair to assist me these days. For me and millions in my position, travelling any distance used to be an organisational nightmare - but not anymore. Information technology is our greatest aide. At the click of a button, a few emails and the odd phone call we can see exactly what help and facilities are available. And this applies to every traveller.
Malta attracts those with a disposable income, so, most in that demographic have access to the internet and current technologies.
From the comfort of our television or desktop we can pick and choose at ease. We can see the pros and cons. When we arrive at our destination this information should be ongoing and crucially seamless through digital instant media. Technology is mobile – we can bring our multi-media cell phone, laptop or radio with us then when we arrive and just ‘click and go’!
The product (in this case, a visit to Malta and Gozo) must be a happy, user-friendly experience and the availability of information should be current, instant and attractive.
From where I sit I feel the Ministry of Tourism and the Malta Tourism Authority have their finger fairly and squarely on the button.
Bashing the tourism industry from within is so negative especially as Malta is not an isolated country – the internet, satellite and joining the EU framework has seen to that.
Look at the bigger, positive picture. These are exciting times – new technologies are creating the greatest positive opportunity for Malta in many years.
As Shakespeare might have said from his laptop, on his blog, whilst uploading his latest sonnet from Stratford-upon-Avon - “Alas old tech - time to harness the digit and move on me thinks”! (Maybe not!)
I am a
broadcaster, consultant, writer, published author,
historian and researcher. I also have interests in digital
broadcast content.
Despite the ferocity of some personal events over the years I am
fortunate in a great many ways.
As far as my website is concerned,ianwaugh.com is a hotchpotch of passion, luck, admiration,
behaviour,
agreeable times, appalling periods and principle. This is also an
opportunity to have an insight into my performance as a broadcaster and
handiwork as a dedicated historian.
| »
Show chief Phil Edgar Jones claimed viewers could expect the best series yet.
The biggest laugh (and by now I was in tears of hysterics) was the ghastly representation of British musical writing and performing talent, namely a bunch crass individuals called 'Scooch'.
I am a
broadcaster, consultant, writer, published author,
historian and researcher. I also have interests in digital
broadcast content.