Check out this bizarre musical tribute site to RTE newscasters:
http://www.myspace.com/songsaboutrtenewscasters
Worth a listen, but quickly becomes old and irritating....
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Monday, September 01, 2008
Electric Picnic 2008; the verdict
To give my quick rundown of 'Electric Picnic', detailing my high's and low's, read on...
After hauling myself and dragging my stuff to and from this year's 'premier' festival, here's my take on Ireland's largest annual 'picnic':
Firstly, a big 'Yes' to 'Ginderman', 'Josh Ritter' and 'Santogold'. Yes to 'Cut Copy's' live gig despite their recent albums' scrappy and disjunctured mixing. Yes to 'The Herbaliser', to 'Franz Ferdinand' and to 'Elbow'. Yes to 'Sigur Ros' but 'No' to their lack of uptempo tunes on the set-list. On a 'more' subjective note; CSS really 'sucks', the poor sound quality killed 'The kills', we yawned and promptly escaped from 'The breeders' and woe there funkastic 'Chromeo'; too slow!!
On to food and drink: Yes to 'Taco-man', to marshmallow dunked 99's in M&M's Cafe, to 'Fine burger' (half pounders) and to 'Moon' fries. 'Here here' to the 'Farmers Market 'and to a general abundance of quality cake. Yes to 'Motion Lotion' (Buckfast mixed with Cider), to lashings of Brandy and to 'Pear Kopperberg'. A thankful yes to sunny weather, to colourful clothes and people. Yes to free 'Lyons' Tea and cadbury flake, to 'Chai Tea' with flapjacks and to 'Mad-hatter's Tea Party'
Sorry but 'No' to knacks with getto blasters banging out 'Scooter' in the campsite. Of similar note, 'No' to some 'illfitting' Oxygen blow-ins. No to lengthy complaining and 'detailing' of toilet experiences. No to lack of bins, lack of showers and at times a lack of sanitation. No to tea shirts entitled; 'IPOOD'. No to penis graffiti art on tents and EP property. No to careless urinating anywhere and everywhere. Yes to some good sober fun; to 'Lucent Dossier', 'Fausset's Circus', to spinning swings, to the outdoor arcade and its fire dancing performers. Yes to choice theatre, art and crafts, to cinema, comedy and 'talk' tents. Yes to the 'turf cottage' and to other santuary chill-out haunts in 'Body and Soul.'
Yes to the 'Temple of Truth' and its symbolic burning, but a big 'No' to “Burn the f*&King thing already” chants from indifferent as said Oxygen blow-ins. Yes to 'Live Food demo's' in 'Body and Soul' with accompanying free sunday roast dinners, barbecue and desserts. Yes to random erupting 'dance offs', to spontaneous 'Tower of London' quicksteps and to strangers random acts of kindness.
No no to incessantly 'loud' and boisterous lager louts at 6am onwards in the campsites. Nay to careless parents with their lost wondering kids. No to wasps descending on Stadbally from across the country. 'No' to long traffic holdups on the friday approach and mud stranded cars on the monday exitous.
Yes Yes to metal clad campsite pavements, Yes to gazebo's equals 'taken' ground. Yes to quality fairtrade, organic and locally produced food, but 'No' (as usual) to excessive food prices and other acts of 'gombeenism'. Yes to underbearing Gardai presence and lack of trouble at the events. Yes to variety, variety, variety, with plenty on offer all weekend. Yes to 'Bodytonic', trance music and 'silent disco'. Yes and 'Oh No' to friction free spending opportunities galore. A resounding 'Yes' to the people, the staff, the performers and the overall spectacle of the 'Electric Picnic'. And finally a big grateful 'Yes' to 'Electric Picnic'; once again worth every dime...
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
After hauling myself and dragging my stuff to and from this year's 'premier' festival, here's my take on Ireland's largest annual 'picnic':
Firstly, a big 'Yes' to 'Ginderman', 'Josh Ritter' and 'Santogold'. Yes to 'Cut Copy's' live gig despite their recent albums' scrappy and disjunctured mixing. Yes to 'The Herbaliser', to 'Franz Ferdinand' and to 'Elbow'. Yes to 'Sigur Ros' but 'No' to their lack of uptempo tunes on the set-list. On a 'more' subjective note; CSS really 'sucks', the poor sound quality killed 'The kills', we yawned and promptly escaped from 'The breeders' and woe there funkastic 'Chromeo'; too slow!!
On to food and drink: Yes to 'Taco-man', to marshmallow dunked 99's in M&M's Cafe, to 'Fine burger' (half pounders) and to 'Moon' fries. 'Here here' to the 'Farmers Market 'and to a general abundance of quality cake. Yes to 'Motion Lotion' (Buckfast mixed with Cider), to lashings of Brandy and to 'Pear Kopperberg'. A thankful yes to sunny weather, to colourful clothes and people. Yes to free 'Lyons' Tea and cadbury flake, to 'Chai Tea' with flapjacks and to 'Mad-hatter's Tea Party'
Sorry but 'No' to knacks with getto blasters banging out 'Scooter' in the campsite. Of similar note, 'No' to some 'illfitting' Oxygen blow-ins. No to lengthy complaining and 'detailing' of toilet experiences. No to lack of bins, lack of showers and at times a lack of sanitation. No to tea shirts entitled; 'IPOOD'. No to penis graffiti art on tents and EP property. No to careless urinating anywhere and everywhere. Yes to some good sober fun; to 'Lucent Dossier', 'Fausset's Circus', to spinning swings, to the outdoor arcade and its fire dancing performers. Yes to choice theatre, art and crafts, to cinema, comedy and 'talk' tents. Yes to the 'turf cottage' and to other santuary chill-out haunts in 'Body and Soul.'
Yes to the 'Temple of Truth' and its symbolic burning, but a big 'No' to “Burn the f*&King thing already” chants from indifferent as said Oxygen blow-ins. Yes to 'Live Food demo's' in 'Body and Soul' with accompanying free sunday roast dinners, barbecue and desserts. Yes to random erupting 'dance offs', to spontaneous 'Tower of London' quicksteps and to strangers random acts of kindness.
No no to incessantly 'loud' and boisterous lager louts at 6am onwards in the campsites. Nay to careless parents with their lost wondering kids. No to wasps descending on Stadbally from across the country. 'No' to long traffic holdups on the friday approach and mud stranded cars on the monday exitous.
Yes Yes to metal clad campsite pavements, Yes to gazebo's equals 'taken' ground. Yes to quality fairtrade, organic and locally produced food, but 'No' (as usual) to excessive food prices and other acts of 'gombeenism'. Yes to underbearing Gardai presence and lack of trouble at the events. Yes to variety, variety, variety, with plenty on offer all weekend. Yes to 'Bodytonic', trance music and 'silent disco'. Yes and 'Oh No' to friction free spending opportunities galore. A resounding 'Yes' to the people, the staff, the performers and the overall spectacle of the 'Electric Picnic'. And finally a big grateful 'Yes' to 'Electric Picnic'; once again worth every dime...
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
The things Clinton did not say
A measured response to Hilary Clinton's speech from Michael Tomaskey at 'The Guardian': http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/aug/27/hillaryclinton.democrats2008
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Chinese Games: Overall opinion and analysis
You've got to give it to the Chinese, they know how to put on a show!! A spectacular opening ceremony and equally dazzling and epic closing ceremony wowed China and the World. Overseen by renowned director 'Zhang Yimou'; an 'artful','grand' and 'unparalleled' display captivated its audience, China's spectacle clearly signified the ambitions of a nation.
The ceremonies and the buildings showcased the heights of human capacity as well as the level of sophistication with which technology has reached in the 21st century. But in all of this dazzle, we must ask the question; can we separate art and the aesthetic from the moral? Many commentators on the 21st Century have noted how we live in an increasingly schizophrenic world, is this such an example? Can we appreciate the 'esthetic' knowing the circumstances from which it arrose? or should be shun this spectacle, and cynically denigrate this episode of human history? Thus, how should we think about the games?
The Chinese Olympics passed flawlessly thanks to; human rights abuses, the brute willpower and (what seemed like) unlimited financial means of an authoritarian state. Protests around the world ensued prior to and during the games commencement; the argument being that the Olympic Games and its audience had served to legitimise for China the means through which these games came to fruition, as well as the climate from which these games took place. This being a sad case of the end justifying the means. How could we celebrate these games and its grand ceremonies, when to do so; we vindicate, commend and at best only admonish the Chinese State; in turn fueling the internal propaganda accompanying the spectacle and strengthening it's 'Raison d'être'? Was there a better alternative? Perhaps to Shun the games in protest?
Here are some points for consideration:
In the past I've worked with a number of Chinese people and was always struck by the enthusiasm and conviction they displayed for their country, all seemingly assured that China would gain planetary hegemony in the years to come. Though we might argue in the west that such minds have fallen prey to repetitive propaganda and restrained freedoms relative to the west; we cannot ignore that a significant proportion of Chinese felt proud of their country and it's hosting of the games. As millions of Chinese lay glued to their TV, thousands upon thousands contributed to the organisation, performances and hosting in varying capacities. Though a top down approach, success resulted from the hard work of the Chinese people. Overall, it seems we have to acknowledge their allegiance and more significantly; we must acknowledge and commend the fruits of their labour (however misguided we feel they are).
We must also recognise there have been positive as well as the negative consequences for china. For example, Road, air transport and other infrastructures improved greatly for many parts of Beijing and beyond. World class sporting venues were erected of benefit to chinese athletics. The west learned more of China as China learned more of the West. Internet restrictions were laxed during the games in view of visiting journalists, though we must question whether this will last? The world drew focus on despicable human rights abuses in China, as well as ethnic divides among Han, Tibetan and Uyghur factions, will political good come of this? Up to 1.5 million Beijing citizens were evicted from their homes to facilitate construction, authorities initiated hidden and untold human rights abuses in Beijing to ensure the games were a success. Thousands of performers heavily drilled daily for up to 2 years in advance of the games, the mammoth cost of preparation being something they shall not easily forget. It is in times like these that the character of an authoritarian state is revealed to its citizens and to the rest of the world, we may feel saddened and helpless when it occurs but we can only but hope that change can result as a consequence. What seems clear is that we simply cannot predict or direct the unintended positive and negative outcomes which result from the Beijing games, whether the positive will outweigh the negative or vice-versa is a matter of time. To take an extreme and narrow view on this episode of history at this stage would be foolish and unwise.
Overall, what the West can do is to 'lead by example'. 'Acceptance' is key here. Let us acknowledge and commend the Beijing Games. That does 'not' mean we shouldn't cast a critical eye over precedings or that we should be affraid to issue deep concern and advice to the Chinese people; we simply need to work with the system as well as to challenge it. To do otherwise would fuel bitterness and anamosity towards the West from those who 'know no better'. We need to build bridges to affect change not direct distain and blanket criticism.
In all of this, an argument can be made that the games were a real triumph for sport itself. The world celebrating sport and prepared to dedicate so much time, energy and resources serves to emphasis that humanity can trump sport above economic considerations. China's economy wound down for the Olympic games as other values gained prominence. Though we must recognise the increasing economic ties and economic justification with hosting such games, the games and its athletes won the hearts and minds of countless million spectators. They provided 'in themselves' great joy for Chinese people and the world.
Given that I've explicated points for consideration in how we ought to think about the China games, lets return to and reiterate the central guiding question here; how can we appreciate art and the asthetic dimensions of life given the moral and cognitive dimensions to which they are bound? Paradoxically it seems, to dismiss the aesthetic dimension in such a case, 'is' to act schizophrenically. That is to say; to deny or paint our very senses, our innate appreciation for beauty; is to truly become internally turmoiled. It is in recognising our paradoxes that we reconcile our paradoxes. Our appreciation of art does not take away from our moral fibre or our reasoning. Let us feel one thing but to think and speak another, that is what it can be to be human afterall...
See article: 'China's Totalitarian Games' ; http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/08/24/chinas_totalitarian_games/
See article; 'The price of the Chinese Olympic Games'; http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-olympics26-2008aug26,0,4466878.story
See article; 'Beijing Olympics London 2012 handover blow to British pride.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/london2012/2614357/Beijing-Olympics-London-2012-handover-blow-to-British-pride.htmlCopyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
The ceremonies and the buildings showcased the heights of human capacity as well as the level of sophistication with which technology has reached in the 21st century. But in all of this dazzle, we must ask the question; can we separate art and the aesthetic from the moral? Many commentators on the 21st Century have noted how we live in an increasingly schizophrenic world, is this such an example? Can we appreciate the 'esthetic' knowing the circumstances from which it arrose? or should be shun this spectacle, and cynically denigrate this episode of human history? Thus, how should we think about the games?
The Chinese Olympics passed flawlessly thanks to; human rights abuses, the brute willpower and (what seemed like) unlimited financial means of an authoritarian state. Protests around the world ensued prior to and during the games commencement; the argument being that the Olympic Games and its audience had served to legitimise for China the means through which these games came to fruition, as well as the climate from which these games took place. This being a sad case of the end justifying the means. How could we celebrate these games and its grand ceremonies, when to do so; we vindicate, commend and at best only admonish the Chinese State; in turn fueling the internal propaganda accompanying the spectacle and strengthening it's 'Raison d'être'? Was there a better alternative? Perhaps to Shun the games in protest?
Here are some points for consideration:
In the past I've worked with a number of Chinese people and was always struck by the enthusiasm and conviction they displayed for their country, all seemingly assured that China would gain planetary hegemony in the years to come. Though we might argue in the west that such minds have fallen prey to repetitive propaganda and restrained freedoms relative to the west; we cannot ignore that a significant proportion of Chinese felt proud of their country and it's hosting of the games. As millions of Chinese lay glued to their TV, thousands upon thousands contributed to the organisation, performances and hosting in varying capacities. Though a top down approach, success resulted from the hard work of the Chinese people. Overall, it seems we have to acknowledge their allegiance and more significantly; we must acknowledge and commend the fruits of their labour (however misguided we feel they are).
We must also recognise there have been positive as well as the negative consequences for china. For example, Road, air transport and other infrastructures improved greatly for many parts of Beijing and beyond. World class sporting venues were erected of benefit to chinese athletics. The west learned more of China as China learned more of the West. Internet restrictions were laxed during the games in view of visiting journalists, though we must question whether this will last? The world drew focus on despicable human rights abuses in China, as well as ethnic divides among Han, Tibetan and Uyghur factions, will political good come of this? Up to 1.5 million Beijing citizens were evicted from their homes to facilitate construction, authorities initiated hidden and untold human rights abuses in Beijing to ensure the games were a success. Thousands of performers heavily drilled daily for up to 2 years in advance of the games, the mammoth cost of preparation being something they shall not easily forget. It is in times like these that the character of an authoritarian state is revealed to its citizens and to the rest of the world, we may feel saddened and helpless when it occurs but we can only but hope that change can result as a consequence. What seems clear is that we simply cannot predict or direct the unintended positive and negative outcomes which result from the Beijing games, whether the positive will outweigh the negative or vice-versa is a matter of time. To take an extreme and narrow view on this episode of history at this stage would be foolish and unwise.
Overall, what the West can do is to 'lead by example'. 'Acceptance' is key here. Let us acknowledge and commend the Beijing Games. That does 'not' mean we shouldn't cast a critical eye over precedings or that we should be affraid to issue deep concern and advice to the Chinese people; we simply need to work with the system as well as to challenge it. To do otherwise would fuel bitterness and anamosity towards the West from those who 'know no better'. We need to build bridges to affect change not direct distain and blanket criticism.
In all of this, an argument can be made that the games were a real triumph for sport itself. The world celebrating sport and prepared to dedicate so much time, energy and resources serves to emphasis that humanity can trump sport above economic considerations. China's economy wound down for the Olympic games as other values gained prominence. Though we must recognise the increasing economic ties and economic justification with hosting such games, the games and its athletes won the hearts and minds of countless million spectators. They provided 'in themselves' great joy for Chinese people and the world.
Given that I've explicated points for consideration in how we ought to think about the China games, lets return to and reiterate the central guiding question here; how can we appreciate art and the asthetic dimensions of life given the moral and cognitive dimensions to which they are bound? Paradoxically it seems, to dismiss the aesthetic dimension in such a case, 'is' to act schizophrenically. That is to say; to deny or paint our very senses, our innate appreciation for beauty; is to truly become internally turmoiled. It is in recognising our paradoxes that we reconcile our paradoxes. Our appreciation of art does not take away from our moral fibre or our reasoning. Let us feel one thing but to think and speak another, that is what it can be to be human afterall...
See article: 'China's Totalitarian Games' ; http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/08/24/chinas_totalitarian_games/
See article; 'The price of the Chinese Olympic Games'; http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-olympics26-2008aug26,0,4466878.story
See article; 'Beijing Olympics London 2012 handover blow to British pride.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/london2012/2614357/Beijing-Olympics-London-2012-handover-blow-to-British-pride.htmlCopyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Free audio lectures download.
I came across this site several months ago and thought I'd share it! It's a site aggregator for recorded public affairs lectures. There are a few I've listened to thus far which are particularly appealing and which I'd recommend:
1. The Natural State.
2. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a window into human nature (Very funny too!!!)
3. Darwin Days 2008: Are We Changing Evolution?
4. We-Think: the power of mass creativity
5. The Logic of Life
6. The New Politics of Identity
7. Culture in a time of Waste
The site link follows : http://uc.princeton.edu/main/
Enjoy!!
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
1. The Natural State.
2. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a window into human nature (Very funny too!!!)
3. Darwin Days 2008: Are We Changing Evolution?
4. We-Think: the power of mass creativity
5. The Logic of Life
6. The New Politics of Identity
7. Culture in a time of Waste
The site link follows : http://uc.princeton.edu/main/
Enjoy!!
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Suggested reads: The Agile Gene
The Agile Gene: by Matt Rigley
I suggest anyone with particularly determist views about genes and DNA should carefully read this book. It serves as a compelling counterclaim to the ludicris notion that genes 'determine' your physical and in some ways mental makeup. Essentially the argument put forward in the book, 'The Agile Gene' is that your life, your environment; influence gene expression. Environment triggers active genotypes. Thus, your genes express and are an expression of your mind and environment. Whats interesting is that Rigley's thinking seems consistent with 'the santiago theory of cognition' proposed by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela and the 'conceptual framework' for understanding life proposed by Fritjof Capra in the 'Web of Life'.
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
I suggest anyone with particularly determist views about genes and DNA should carefully read this book. It serves as a compelling counterclaim to the ludicris notion that genes 'determine' your physical and in some ways mental makeup. Essentially the argument put forward in the book, 'The Agile Gene' is that your life, your environment; influence gene expression. Environment triggers active genotypes. Thus, your genes express and are an expression of your mind and environment. Whats interesting is that Rigley's thinking seems consistent with 'the santiago theory of cognition' proposed by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela and the 'conceptual framework' for understanding life proposed by Fritjof Capra in the 'Web of Life'.
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Smoking increases Stroke risk in women, analysis of news coverage!
Today, a flurry of news articles pick up on new research released which purports to 'show' smoking doubles stroke risk in young women, with heavy smokers nine times more at risk of stroke. This is just the latest in what seems like a bombardment of news reports on new research findings claiming to 'find this' or 'that'!
Certainly, as research studies on certain phenomena accumulate with peer 'overviews' undertaken; a better indication and understanding of 'causations' can come about. What's objectionable however, is the rush by news agencies to inadequately report on single research findings without providing accompanying limitations and critical analysis of such findings. Rarely do I see an adequate summary of the method used. The vast majority of readers are not trained in epistemology and the philosophy of science. Is it a case of news agencies (locked in an audience battle) wishing to overlook such realities in order to grab audience figures? Or it it just a case of scrappy and absent minded reporting? Take this latest research on smoking and stroke risk, out of several news articles published today (Reuters, efluxmedia, irishhealth etc), little to no proper analysis of the findings accompanied such research. Thus, here is my take on it:
It does seem compelling that smoking increases 'risk', we can point to the physiological changes such as those noted by Dr. David A. Meyerson from Johns Hopkins University Bayview Medical Center; "Smoking disrupts the cells lining the blood vessels. It increases blood fibrogen levels, which makes blood more likely to clot. It increases the stickiness of platelets, the cells that form blood clots, and it also decreases the body's natural clot-dissolving mechanism." (Meyerson, 2008)
But it is important to note, the research does not indicate whether smoking participants have similar diet and fitness levels to those who do not smoke. Thus, is the overall profile of smokers different to non-smokers? I suspect it could be! The research focuses on age and ethnicity but no other genetic/psycho/socio/environmental factors are mentioned in the reports which would play a role in risk assessment. Overall, the research may certainly indicate smoking increases 'risk', but figures such as 'double' or 'nine' times an increased risk of stroke; are ostensible at best.
For a research paper critically evaluating scientific claims, see http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124&ct=1
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Certainly, as research studies on certain phenomena accumulate with peer 'overviews' undertaken; a better indication and understanding of 'causations' can come about. What's objectionable however, is the rush by news agencies to inadequately report on single research findings without providing accompanying limitations and critical analysis of such findings. Rarely do I see an adequate summary of the method used. The vast majority of readers are not trained in epistemology and the philosophy of science. Is it a case of news agencies (locked in an audience battle) wishing to overlook such realities in order to grab audience figures? Or it it just a case of scrappy and absent minded reporting? Take this latest research on smoking and stroke risk, out of several news articles published today (Reuters, efluxmedia, irishhealth etc), little to no proper analysis of the findings accompanied such research. Thus, here is my take on it:
It does seem compelling that smoking increases 'risk', we can point to the physiological changes such as those noted by Dr. David A. Meyerson from Johns Hopkins University Bayview Medical Center; "Smoking disrupts the cells lining the blood vessels. It increases blood fibrogen levels, which makes blood more likely to clot. It increases the stickiness of platelets, the cells that form blood clots, and it also decreases the body's natural clot-dissolving mechanism." (Meyerson, 2008)
But it is important to note, the research does not indicate whether smoking participants have similar diet and fitness levels to those who do not smoke. Thus, is the overall profile of smokers different to non-smokers? I suspect it could be! The research focuses on age and ethnicity but no other genetic/psycho/socio/environmental factors are mentioned in the reports which would play a role in risk assessment. Overall, the research may certainly indicate smoking increases 'risk', but figures such as 'double' or 'nine' times an increased risk of stroke; are ostensible at best.
For a research paper critically evaluating scientific claims, see http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124&ct=1
Copyright © 2006-2008 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
