I've just seen this press release that's being circulated today:

----

Education Committee

Select Committee Announcement

23 January 2012

For Immediate Release:

ORAL EVIDENCE

EDUCATION COMMITTEE WANTS YOUR TWITTER QUESTIONS FOR MICHAEL GOVE EVIDENCE SESSION

What one education policy question do you think the Committee should ask Michael Gove?

On 31 January the Education Committee holds an oral evidence session with Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove. MPs on the Committee want to ensure that their questions reflect the most pressing concerns in the world of education and want to hear what questions you would put to the Minister.

Submit your question via twitter, by adding the hashtag #AskGove to your tweet, by 11am on Friday 27 January.

#AskGove on twitter

Further details of the session will be announced in due course

FURTHER INFORMATION:

Committee Membership is as follows: 

• Mr Graham Stuart (Chair), Conservative, Beverley and Holderness
• Neil Carmichael, Conservative, Stroud
• Alex Cunningham, Labour, Stockton North
• Bill Esterson, Labour, Sefton Central
• Pat Glass, Labour, North West Durham
• Damian Hinds, Conservative, East Hampshire
• Charlotte Leslie, Conservative, Bristol North West
• Ian Mearns, Labour, Gateshead
• Tessa Munt, Liberal Democrat, Wells
• Lisa Nandy, Labour, Wigan
• Craig Whittaker, Conservative, Calder Valley 

Specific Committee Information:  educom@parliament.uk / 020 7219 6181

Media Information: Hannah Pearce pearcehm@parliament.uk 020 7219 8430 / 07917 488162

Committee Website: www.parliament.uk/education-committee

Watch committees and parliamentary debates online:  www.parliamentlive.tv 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

I was forwarded this email yesterday, which encourages people in Birmingham to show the press that we don't all agree with the EDL:

-----

An urgent message relayed by Peter Babbington the anglican minister at St Francis Bournville  through the Churches Together in B30 network

You may have heard that the English Defence League (EDL) is planning to hold a protest in Centenary Square in Birmingham this Saturday, 29^th October. This is an organisation linked to the far right, the effect of whose meetings is often to stir up hatred between communities, and, usually targeting Muslims in its rhetoric, sometimes provoking violent outbursts.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Toblerone have been offering a measly 400g bar of their chocolate to one lucky retweeter (on Twitter, obviously).

What do they gain from that? They had no link to a web page, just a hashtag: do they hope that #TobleroneTuesday will start trending? Or do they think it's enough just to get lots of people thinking about Toblerone? Even then, will a mere 400g bar be enough to make people want to retweet? Apparently so. It's a very cheap way to spread their name, but do they also piss people off? Well, retweet competitions certainly piss me off.

So I'm running one of my own.

This is an experiment. What will happen if I offer twice as much as they do (still under £10 worth of 'prize'): nothing? Or will they have to up their offer?

One lucky person will win 2 x 400g bars of Toblerone if I receive 500 retweets by midnight Tuesday 16 August (BST); in other words, you've got this afternoon.

(And yes, I do realise that this could simply amount to extra, free marketing for them. Sorry about that. It wasn't the intention.)

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

I recently emailed my MP - Lynne Jones - about the Digital Economy Bill. This is her response:

----

Thank you for your email regarding the Digital Economy Bill.  I share your concerns about the Bill which the Government is attempting to push through under the process known as wash-up.  This means that only those provisions in the bill that has cross-party support will be included.  In view of this, it is likely that I will be opposing it at its Second Reading in the House of Commons on 6th April.

I am particularly concerned about measures in the Bill, which would allow the Government to disconnect people it suspects of copyright infringement and I entirely agree with you that the Bill should not be rushed through without proper Parliamentary scrutiny and debate.  In my view, it is extremely important that a proper balance is struck between the need for measures to reduce piracy and the need to protect innocent parties who might be falsely thought to have illegally downloaded others’ work.  

Although I am in favour of proportionate measures to tackle online piracy (it is estimated that half of all the traffic on the net in the UK is content that is shared illegally), it seems clear that the method of identifying offenders using the IP address of a specific computer may well penalise those who share a web connection.  As it is impossible to disconnect an individual there is a risk that entire households could be cut off based on the activities of one member.  I further note that TalkTalk's Director of Regulation stated that, “Disconnecting alleged offenders will be futile given that it is relatively easy for determined file-sharers to mask their identity or their activity to avoid detection”.  I am also concerned about the potential impact of the Bill on cafés, pubs and airports that offer Wi-Fi access, which will not be exempt from its proposals.  It is my understanding that this will mean that Wi-Fi hot spots could be closed down and businesses prosecuted if it is found that customers have used those networks to download or share illegal or copyrighted material.  These issues are complicated and I agree that they need proper examination.  Liberty, an organisation that seeks to protect civil liberties and human rights, has outlined significant concerns over the approach taken in this Bill to online infringement of copyright.  If you would like to read their briefing document, please clickhere.

Moving away from issues relating to illegal file-sharing, I am also worried that MPs have not had a chance to properly debate the radio clauses of the Bill.  The Government has set a target date of 2015 for national and regional radio stations to switch over from FM and AM, which will mean that radio listeners will have to buy new digital radio sets to replace their FM radios, including those in the car.  Ofcom research shows that the average retail price of a new DAB digital radio is £85.00, which is hardly a drop in the ocean, particularly for those who are lower paid or struggling to make ends meet.  If, as has been estimated, between 50 and 100 million analogue radios will become redundant after 2015, there are also issues around a suitable industry scrappage scheme and I am very keen that the environmental impact of any significant analogue radio disposal is minimised through a responsible disposal and recycling strategy.  I am aware, however, that there may be a greener (and cheaper) option for people who do not want to get rid of their radios, and will instead be able to convert them to digital.  I understand that adapters are being planned for this, although they are not available at present, and are likely to cost around £50.00.  There will need to be a concerted Government effort to ensure clear information is made available to vulnerable groups such as elderly people to ensure they are properly informed of the changes and their options.

Finally, I am also concerned about how the Bill might affect the future of local radio and I signatory to an Early Day Motion on this point (copy printed below for ease of reference).

I hope this is helpful.  

LYNNE JONES MP 

House of Commons 
London 
SW1A 0AA 

www.lynnejones.org.uk 

EDM 436: FUTURE OF LOCAL RADIO

That this House is concerned that the Digital Economy Bill in its present form will threaten the future of local radio by creating a two-tier radio industry in which over 100 local stations, that do not have a clear digital migration path, are consigned to an uncertain future on the analogue spectrum once digital switchover has occurred; notes that, with 46 million adults listening to the radio every week and only three per cent. of listeners expressing dissatisfaction with their present service, radio is thriving in its current form; requests the Government to protect the future of local radio by ensuring that where appropriate, all local radio stations have a viable digital migration path; and calls on the Government to address this before committing the industry to analogue switch-off.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

A friend just sent me this in an email. We think it's being organised by Oxfam (originally I thought it was Friends of the Earth but they say not).

-------

Time – 12.18
Date – 21 September
Place – Victoria Square [Birmingham, UK]
Activity – Tck Tck Tck Flashmob

Summary of activity

The Flashmob will gather in Victoria Square, above the Floozy-in-the-Jacuzzi, at 12.15.  They will bring an alarm clock, a mobile phone and a sense of profound silliness.  They may also wear nighttime fancy dress (see below).

Everyone sets their alarm clocks or mobile phones or similar for 12.18.

At 12.17 everyone raises their set alarm clocks (mobile phones or similar) and arms in the air.

A polar-bear-suited conductor will then lead them to sway their hands from side-to-side while chanting tick-tock-tick-tock for one minute.  At 12.18 everyone’s alarms will go off and everyone will wave their arms and alarm clocks in the air shouting ding-a-ling-a-ling (imitating an alarm).

Please note: Jumping up and down like a complete nutter is not necessary or compulsory. However, flashmobbers should feel empowered to express themselves and their prevailing mood.

Then everyone ‘phones the Prime Minister (on a number to be provided) to offer words of gentle and loving encouragement.

This will be a fun family-style event.  Bystanders should feel included, not threatened. So please be nice – even to Gordon B.

Disperse - 12.30.

Participant equipment
Everyone to bring an alarm clock and mobile phone (with an alarm) or similar
Everyone to be encouraged to wear nighttime clothing – pyjamas, nightshirts, dressing gown, etc 

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

ConnectTweet is a tool for Twitter currently under development. It allows one account (eg a corporate account one) to re-post specific tweets from other specific users, making it much clearer whose voice is being transmitted.

This document is unfinished: I am adding to it as I go along.

• The original tweet is published with a hashtag, which may be confusing to other users if it's only purpose is to link it to the corporate account.
• Appending with 'via @...' or 'original post by...' still don't wholly absolve the corporate account of any bad writing or spurious opinion, because it remains unclear whether it went through an editing procedure first. Better may be the option to append with 'Tweeted by...' because at least that makes it clear who wrote it.
• Leaving off an attribution will make it even less clear whose voice it is, because the different tweeters will always have different styles. Therefore it should default to having an attribution, rather than that feature being an 'advanced' feature as is currently the case.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

This is one example of why people should publish full web feeds, or at least write descriptive headlines. It was picked up for me by Google Reader, and doesn't tell me why I might be interested in it:

---

Final Report Launch

The report is the culmination of two years of work by the Commission panel and the Commission secretariat hosted by ippr.

This event will provide an opportunity to discuss the findings of the final report with the authors. 30 June.

---

See what I mean? There's nothing to say what the report's about, what the event's about, who might find them interesting, or where the event is. I didn't follow the link because I was flicking through my reader and didn't want to be distracted by something that may well be of no interest to me.

(Sorry IPPR; this is meant to be constructive though, not critical. :-) )

Permalink | Leave a comment  »