12 Nov 12

eonenergy.combestdeal is not a web address

eonenergy.combestdeal is not a web address

Watch this, then listen to the web address read out at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZCh1EHiEpY

It's partly (very slightly) Olivia Colman's fault for not knowing how to read a web address, but mostly it's the several links in the long chain of people who'll have edited, produced, reviewed, and aired the ad promoting their latest boat-load of pricing nonsense. OK they've typed out the address correctly, but it's usually commonplace to read the / character out loud.

They're not the first, but the ad's been running for a number of weeks now and it boggles my mind. How does the sound engineer and director not notice it at the point of recording, and how does it go through so many levels of checks before being aired, without someone saying "Er, aren't we reading out something that isn't a web address?" Just try visiting eonenergy.combestdeal and you'll see what happens. OK, what probably happens is that Google steps in and gives you a search result for the right address, but that's beside the point isn't it? Isn't it? No, not really, but I don't think I'm being a pedant when I say it's not too difficult to read out a fairly uncomplicated URL for people who don't have their eyes glued to the screen at that time. Plus it's got nothing to do with whether it's convenient for people: she's not reading a web address! And breathe.

By the way, I love Olivia Colman, I think she's a brilliant actress... but a professional voice-over artist born after 1960 should know how to say "slash", right?

Photo by Diego Torres Silvestre

22 Jun 12

Alan Partridge is the next weapon in Murdoch's war on public entertainment

Alan Partridge is the next weapon in Murdoch's war on public entertainment

Now that BSkyB are unable to have a finger in every media pie, they're instead making do with ruining British TV. It's fine that Sky Atlantic shows American TV shows because they're freely available on The Pirate Bay (that link works at the time of writing), but shows like Alan Partridge which won't be so freely distributed are verboten to those that don't want to give the Murdochs any more money than they deserve.

Coogan, Iannuicci and those involved are wilfully fisting their fans - people like myself who have paid for books, videos and live shows - by moving to a niche channel that half the country is not able even to pay for without stripping out their old TV systems or in some cases (like mine), moving house.

I really don't like Internet rants, and being the kind of guy who has to deliver them. It's always better to see the neuences in a situation and try and see things from different angles. But this is a wilfully wrongheaded move by people I thought were more savvy.

The Times worked so hard at getting their paywall up, after their senile Vogon leader rambled about "stealing" (without understanding how search engines legitimately work and bring traffic not leach profits), that you'd think Murdoch would be aware of the irony that his Sky Atlantic is now actively encouraging piracy, by holding on to its toys and refusing to let others even pay to play with them.

Publicly available TV and radio made Coogan, Iannucci, Morris and people of that ilk. In a world where Channel 4 was still finding its feet, the BBC gave them, if not a start, then a place in British society. (I remember watching the first run of Knowing Me Knowing You when I was a nipper, and loving it.) Now greed has won out, and all I can think of is how sorry I am to have had to write such a bilious and haughty post.

If you have the means to record the show and upload it to The Pirate Bay or similar, please do. Let's bring British telly back to the people. And if it helps tamp down Murdoch or Coogan's fears over loss of income, I'll even sit through the ads. What I won't do is move house so I can get a satellite dish and a third-rate Internet connection. I'll do anything for Alan, but I won't do that.

8 Feb 12

In Defence of 10 O'Clock Live

In Defence of 10 O'Clock Live

Last year a new live comedy show began on Channel Four. It was called 10 O'Clock Live, and starred David Mitchell, Jimmy Carr, Charlie Brooker and Lauren Laverne. It had a tricky start among my friends, and from what I understand, got a bit of a drubbing by critics. Ahead of the new series tonight, I just wanted to say that they were wrong.

I think a common question levied at the show last year was what Lauren was actually for. To me the answer was obvious. She was the anchor. She needed to be witty, not hilarious; she needed an air of authority without pomposity. She needed the common touch but be able to take the high ground. And that she did. Yes there were a couple of pieces here and there that didn't work, but I thought she did rousing very well. Lauren's call to vote was a little bit spine-tingling, as was her Save the Arts piece.

Jimmy's opening punchline-crammed monologues started the show off and running, and were his best contributions. Most of his sketches didn't work, as the only person Jimmy Carr can be is Jimmy Carr. He just happens to do it really rather well. I'd guessed - but might be wrong about this - that the producers had cottoned on to the fact that, under pressure or difficulty, his reactions got big laughs (check his SAS sketch), and so as the series went on, he ended up in sillier and more stressful (for a performer) situations.

The po-faced critics of the Media Talk podcast criticised David Mitchell for not being hard enough on his guests, which may be true, but I thought there were flashes of brilliance in his round-table discussions. Maybe they were due more to good booking than good chairmanship, but I thought he had just the right level of ironic gravitas.

And of course we come to Charlie. Oh, Charlie. I think he's become a victim of that wholly idiotic habit people have of blaming a person or band's popularity on that person or band. From what I can tell, Brooker hasn't changed - apart from his hair, maybe - over the years I've seen him in front of a camera, or appeared to have "sold out" in any way, but because he occasionally appears on mainstream panel shows, that must be a sign that he's no longer cool, right? Ugh. Anyway, back to the point. Brooker gave us what we expect from Brooker: bile, self-loathing, creative swearing and lots of clips of other TV shows. I love him.

One of perhaps the biggest problems with the show - and something I think the Guardian bunch pointed out - is the pandering to the performers, of its very liberal audience. Liberal is fine of course, and I'm fairly wooly myself, but it all feels a little off-key when the audience react in exactly the way you expect, every time. But how many hard-nosed conservatives and borderline racists are likely to watch Channel Four?

In conclusion then, yes there were sketches that didn't work; yes some bits fell a bit flat, and maybe occasionally they could've better deployed their satirical arsenal, but I got a genuine sense of excitement every time I watched that show. Very few TV programmes have given me that buzz. I felt I belonged with that show, that it echoed my beliefs, and made me feel a part of something. I think it's superb. Roll on series two.

And if you've not watched it yet, do. It's Channel Four, 10 O'Clock (natch) on Wednesdays. Or on 4OD.

11 Dec 11

Network for the App Store generation

Network for the App Store generation

I don't write about TV shows or films I've watched much, but I thought I'd explain what I meant by this tweet, for anyone who hasn't seen the film.

At this point I'll say that, if you've not watched Fiften Million Merits and you plan to, don't read on just yet. And if you're still reading, sorry if this is a bit gushy.

Network is one of my favourite films. It was - and still remains - incredibly ahead of its time. If you're not familiar, it's a sort of cautionary tale in satirical form about the effects and dangers of celebrity shock journalism. Prophets of doom like the fatally dimwitted Glenn Beck should take note, and view one of its main characters, the once suicidal Howard Beale as a harbinger, not a poster-boy.

After Beale threatens, live on telly to kill himself, he is made a superstar. His plea to his viewers becomes a catchphrase when it was once a mantra, and the tropes of the "mad prophet of the airwaves" become little more than the little dance Dermot O'Leary does at the top of each X Factor show.

Fifteen Million Merits, written by Charlie Brooker and Konnie (or as she was more formally credited, Kanak) Huq, and the second in Brooker's trilogy of Channel 4 dramas, mixed the excesses of avatar and app culture, the innate hunger our younger generation has of achieving fame at any cost, and for any reason, and our own willingness to cast others' hopes and dreams away with the wave of a hand. To me, it was one of the most well thought-out pieces of telly in a long while. Even the use of the word "merit" (a form of currency gained by cycling to generate energy) conjures up thoughts of Orwellian Doublespeak.

But the clincher is Bing's appearance at the judges' table, shard of glass to his throat as he pours his heart out. I've never willed a character to kill hum or herself, but I really hoped Bing would. And to see how his fury and desperation was turned into a tawdry piece of ignorable and forgettable telly was heartbreaking.

But while that's the end of Fifteen Million Merits, that's only really the start of Howard Beale's story, so again if you've not seen Network, I thoroughly recommend it; it's only £3 on Amazon for Jebus' sake!

I can't applaud Brooker and Huq's show, as that just feels sort of arrogant, and assumes I've understood all the messages and read all the subtext, and totally "got it", which may be completely untrue. This is just what I got out of it. I thought it was masterful in so many ways, and felt less blunt an instrument than the first in the trilogy (oh, there's that arrogance creeping in, sorry).

Anyway, I think that's possibly all I have to say. Would've made a good film I reckon. Can't wait for the final chapter of Black Mirror next week. Thanks again Mr Brooker, you wonderful warped-minded, sad-eyed creature.

4 Feb 11

Compare the shithouse

Aleksandr OrlovIn 2009*, a CGI meerkat called Aleksandr hit UK screens with a one-word catchphrase and a dressing gown. Since then, price comparison websites have been scrabbling desperately for something that would catch the imagination of the British public in the same way.

Aleksandr now has two websites, a Twitter account, and a book, whereas Money Supermarket and GoCompare have two fat faux foreigners who were never funny**.

VCCP (or Vallance, Carruthers, Coleman and Priest if you like) work with the likes of O2, McDonald's, npower and Aunt Bessie's, producing quirky TV ad campaigns, but I doubt very much that a few drunk creatives could have imagined such longevity, even if now (as I believe) its star is on the wain.

But after sitting through a commercial message for Money Supermarket, featuring two fat talentless tosspot sellouts who should be doing something infinitely more important with the brains God didn't give them - after seeing the one cultural fraud plopping himself between the two hellish creatures from the blonde lagoon that call themselves the Jedwards - I had quite a large sad to myself. But at least those ads are just poor; they're not trying to be irritating.

There's what I firmly believe to be a false maxim in advertising, that anything that gets you talking about a product is a good thing. Now, I'm not an advertising expert, but that's the biggest load of bullballs going. This idea that "you remember the name" is correct, but I also remember Harold Shipman's name but I'm not going to ask him to refill my prescription***.

Making people remember the name for the wrong reasons - we buy any car (dot com) - is a sign of nothing more than lazy thinking. Anybody can come up with a catchy tune or a formulaic novelty campaign; it takes balls to stake your money and reputation on a campaign that might flop, but could possibly catch fire. So laziness is GoCompare's crime, but d'you know what the horrible thing is? It apparently works:

Nick Hall, head of marketing at Go Compare explains the paradox: "We launched the campaign in August last year and within the first three months, we saw a 20 per cent increase in customer count."

from Do annoying ads work?

OK, so the first three months is nothing when you consider the ads have been running since 2009 and back then people hadn't had time to get bored to tears by them, so much that they felt they needed a David Mitchell injection (et tu, Mitchell?)

GoCompare and Money Supermarket are the Nokia and Sony Ericsson of the phone world. Apple is kicking seven varieties of crap out of them but they just keep plodding along, churning out the same old nonsense. They must know it doesn't work even if it used to, they know they're not capturing imaginations, but they simply can't think of anything else to do. Creative batteries dead, fuel tanks dry.

I see a lot less advertising than I used to, but I've always seen it with eyes wide open (a facet of my personality that maddens any of my family members unfortunate to sit near me through any commercial TV broadcast). I also have a nose for irritants, and repetition gets right up it, much faster it seems than for many people. But what also jams its way up my nostrils is bad, lazy advertising, stuff that degrades you, me, the client, the agencies, and everyone involved on and off screen.

VCCP and comparethemarket.com are doubtless a bit complacent, and neither will have a hit like that in a very long time, but they've had a good run, and wrestled as much money out of it as they can, while their competitors have been left fumbling for the secret combination, and never finding it. But all three companies will stick with it until it starts losing them money or face.

* Actually I'm certain it's at least 2008, but I can't find any proof online

** Actually I take that back. Djalili had a 3-minute standup routine before the Mummy came along.

*** That joke still works even though he died 6 years ago. Fact.

2 Feb 11

Rastamouse. It's fine. I've checked.

It's been spoken of for a while, but finally the TV series that has stemmed from the books by Genevieve Webster and Michael de Souza (as a response to a lack of fun ethnic characters in kids' literature [Times, Jan 2011]) has landed... an' ting.

Warning: there's quite a high chance I'm going to sound like a total douchebag for much, if not all of this post. You have been warned, K?

That the series is voiced by black actors and the character created in part by a real life Rastafarian matters only a little. That just helps to legitamise it for anyone feeling nervous about the programme verging into Panjid-like stereotypery [see Bertha]. Rastamouse is funny, has a catchy sig tune and the kind of breezy stories I remember lapping up back when Postman Pat was a real courier, not a logistics middle-man with a fleet of vans and a helicopter (that's true by the way; check for yourself).

There's still an affection for Jamaican culture in the UK - with quite a lot of it in Birmingham, put down in my opinion to the numbers of great reggae and ska bands that emanated from the Midlands 20-odd years ago - which, bastardised though it is in mouse-form, adds the strangest level of credibility, and seems, in my opinion to make the show an instant leveller.

I think people of my generation are so surprised to see an "ethnic" character played with gusto, and for laughs, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that at no point are the characters or the culture the butt of the joke. The wouldn't have played 10 or 15 years ago, but I think it's that level of "is it OK to laugh at/with this?" that makes it a guilty pleasure for adults.

What I also like about the show is that it's not going to wash over kids too much, in that way that most, too-accessible telly does... the kind that's made by people who think you'll turn off or stop listening the second you hear a reference you don't recognise. Kids aren't going to catch every syllable, even with the patois turned down quite a few notches (if Dat by Pluto Shervington could be considered 11 on the patois scale, you're probably looking at a low 2 at best). Floating a few things over kids' heads is how you get them hooked; at least that's what I think. You learn new words and phrases through context, so a few noises they won't yet recognise won't, I hope, cause people to switch for the off button.

Bob the Builder, with his box of tools and gang of white, somehow middle-class friends promoted all that was mediocre about kids' telly, whereas I can't wait to see a Rastamouse track hit the no1 spot, 'cos it'll give me a smile. I don't listen to the radio much, so I probably won't even get the chance to hate it either. Bonus.

Plus, if there's even a chance that the @rastam0use Twitter account is genuine, I applaud everyone involved.

Easy now.