Tuesday 24 November 2009
Press cutting - Bournemouth Daily Echo
I found the following press cutting in the Bournemouth Daily Echo on Thursday 19th November 2010. What can you say other than given the typo, use of the word "members" only serves to make things worse!
Annoyances 2
“Independent” radio stations that have identical presenters, identical playlists and identical programmes. Most irritating however is the requisite traffic report girl (always a girl) who, when having to describe a traffic jam with no obvious cause, will ALWAYS state that it is due to “sheer weight of traffic.”
How does this differ from merely “weight of traffic?” ‘Spose it could be worse. (Referring to Annoyances 1) it could have been “actual weight of traffic.”
This does not happen by chance. Somewhere, there will exist a curriculum for training traffic report girls where it will be written in black and white that this term must be used in all situations. Somewhere, potential traffic report girls are failing exams and being thrown back into the massed ranks of unemployables because they forgot to use the word “sheer.”
TV listings magazine and TV announcers who, for reasons I cannot begin to guess at, believe it is their job to tell you what is about to happen in the programme you have decided to watch.
Would we do the same thing in the theatre? “Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats for the next act where the Macbeths discover that being royalty isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I told you to keep on eye on that Macduff.”
Drivers (and I use the term loosely) who regard the use of indicators as something that should be used by other people. Where I live, this would be about 75% of all drivers. I have lost count of the number of times I stand on the pavement waiting to cross only for the oncoming vehicle to turn off without any indication.
Anyone who listens regularly to PM on Radio 4 will know already what some of us knew before – that it is almost impossible to listen to a weather forecast and have any idea what was actually said. This is probably why you can watch BBC TV and get a local forecast for your region, immediately followed by a contradictory forecast from the Met Office. Switch channels and ITV will often give you a third choice of possible weather. I suspect that there is a pack of “weather cards” – the various presenters select some then have to predict whatever is on it, ensuring that no duplications take place.
I don’t know if this is true, but I was once told that a school had invented the most accurate weather forecasting system ever. Basically it said “Tomorrow will be like today.”
How does this differ from merely “weight of traffic?” ‘Spose it could be worse. (Referring to Annoyances 1) it could have been “actual weight of traffic.”
This does not happen by chance. Somewhere, there will exist a curriculum for training traffic report girls where it will be written in black and white that this term must be used in all situations. Somewhere, potential traffic report girls are failing exams and being thrown back into the massed ranks of unemployables because they forgot to use the word “sheer.”
TV listings magazine and TV announcers who, for reasons I cannot begin to guess at, believe it is their job to tell you what is about to happen in the programme you have decided to watch.
Would we do the same thing in the theatre? “Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats for the next act where the Macbeths discover that being royalty isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I told you to keep on eye on that Macduff.”
Drivers (and I use the term loosely) who regard the use of indicators as something that should be used by other people. Where I live, this would be about 75% of all drivers. I have lost count of the number of times I stand on the pavement waiting to cross only for the oncoming vehicle to turn off without any indication.
Anyone who listens regularly to PM on Radio 4 will know already what some of us knew before – that it is almost impossible to listen to a weather forecast and have any idea what was actually said. This is probably why you can watch BBC TV and get a local forecast for your region, immediately followed by a contradictory forecast from the Met Office. Switch channels and ITV will often give you a third choice of possible weather. I suspect that there is a pack of “weather cards” – the various presenters select some then have to predict whatever is on it, ensuring that no duplications take place.
I don’t know if this is true, but I was once told that a school had invented the most accurate weather forecasting system ever. Basically it said “Tomorrow will be like today.”
Wednesday 11 November 2009
Annoyances
I’m in a scathing mood so time to let rip. Things that annoy me are manifold and include:
Getting unsolicited text messages which result in you being charged £4.26 when you open them even though you immediately hit the red button to stop whatever it’s trying to do. Equally annoying would be phone companies (in this case O2) who imply that it is in some way my own fault and refuse to refund me. I wonder how the service from Virgin will compare …
Cruel, politically motivated media types who manipulate the grief of a bereaved mother for their own devious purposes. If poor Gordon Brown’s letter looks like it might have been written in a hurry well, maybe that’s because he’s got a country to run. And if the real issue is the state of his handwriting or even spelling, then someone has got their priorities very badly wrong.
The privileges granted to the very rich. I am a fan of the Armed Forces and have nothing but respect for their bravery and professionalism. As a result, I might decide that I would like to attend a Remembrance Day parade. However, people seem to take great offence (and ask me to leave) merely because I choose to attend in a gorilla costume or disguised as the Frankenstein monster or even Groucho Marx. So, how then can it be right that members of the royal family have the right to adopt fancy dress every year – colonels, generals, rear admirals etc? A cynical person might suggest that their undeserved adoption of the uniforms of high office devalues the skills, hard work, bravery and length of service of those that actually earned them.
People (and by people I mean women) who insist on trying to eat their meals using only a fork. These are invariably the same people who use said fork to pointlessly and constantly re-arrange the food on their plate, time and time again. A cornerstone of mankind’s evolution must surely be the ability to initially devise tools and then to use and further develop the ones which aid their purpose. Therefore, if you insist on eating a meal without using the available (and historically well proven) knife – accept the fact that you are a genetic throwback more suited to a cave than a house. Sorry.
People who are incapable of talking on a mobile telephone without constantly walking backwards and forwards two or three paces at a time. Pretending to be a yoyo can, in no way, enhance the effectiveness and/or enjoyment of your conversation. Although, to be honest, you are probably “talking” to someone who eats their meals using only a fork and so the word “conversation” is probably somewhat optimistic.
People who are so incredibly, mind numbingly idiotic that they use the word “literally” when what they in fact mean is “metaphorically” – the exact opposite. Do not tell me that there was a spider in your bath that was “literally the size of a house” unless you possess a very small doll’s house and can prove the point. In fact, don’t bother as you would clearly be an idiot either way.
And while I’m kind of on the subject, what about the word “actually” – is there any real point in its existence? Think of a sentence with “actually” in it (and unless the sentence is “How do you spell ‘actually’”) you will probably find that you can remove the word with no loss of meaning.
In fact, it’s nothing short of an insult. When someone uses the word, what they are saying is “I’m going to ask you a question and I can’t trust you to answer it accurately without indulging in a flight of imaginative fancy unless I include the word ‘actually’ in the question.
For example:
“Did you actually tell the boss what you thought of him?”
“No, that all happened inside my head but by including the word “actually” in your question you force me into admitting the truth. Had you omitted the word ‘actually’ I could quite happily have given you the made up version in which I punched the boss on the nose. Curses.”
Women with shopping trolleys. Many of them have clearly driven to the supermarket in cars without having any form of accident suggesting that they have some degree of spatial awareness, hand-eye co-ordination and a degree of understanding of the laws of the road. So why does grabbing hold of a shopping trolley appear to induce symptoms akin to a back street lobotomy?
Why do they swing their trolleys around without looking what is behind them or decide to reverse with an equal lack of vision? Why do they deposit a trolley in the centre of an aisle then wander off to fetch something from somewhere else? Why wait until they are in a supermarket to make all their bloody telephone calls as they attempt to guide the trolley single handedly?
I used to think that this was merely incompetence but my eyes have been opened to a conspiracy, and this is true. Not absolutely true (see below) but merely true as in, not made up. Two women had decided to have a chat in Sainsburys. Clearly, in whatever universe their minds resided, the obvious way to do this was to stand in the middle of an aisle then turn their two trolleys nose to nose so as to completely block said aisle. Needing to pass them, I (with my considerately chosen basket) turned sideways and edged between the trolleys without so much as a nudge to either. At this point both women began to verbally abuse me with much waving of arms. So clearly there is an evil conspiracy at work here rather than mere stupidity
Comedians. Have you noticed how if a comedian says that a story is true, nobody believes them? So now, in order to make the point, they all, and I do mean all, use the term “absolutely true.” Quite how “true” and absolutely true” differ is a mystery to me but it’s not one to spend too much time worrying about as some bright spark will no doubt start describing his made up stories as “absolutely true” at which point all fellow comedians will have to adopt a new terminology.
“Really absolutely true” perhaps or how about “Literally absolutely true” – but this will only serve to confuse the sub-morons who have no idea what “literally” means.
Right, that’s it. I’m now off to the supermarket – and this is absolutely true – where I will make a series of nuisance calls to O2 whilst actually walking repeatedly backwards and forwards crashing my trolley into anything that comes within reach. Then I’m off to find a sales assistant to ask for a cutlery set with no knives in it so that I can look so marvellously sophisticated when I attempt to ham fistedly dismantle a pork chop using only a fork. Literally.
Getting unsolicited text messages which result in you being charged £4.26 when you open them even though you immediately hit the red button to stop whatever it’s trying to do. Equally annoying would be phone companies (in this case O2) who imply that it is in some way my own fault and refuse to refund me. I wonder how the service from Virgin will compare …
Cruel, politically motivated media types who manipulate the grief of a bereaved mother for their own devious purposes. If poor Gordon Brown’s letter looks like it might have been written in a hurry well, maybe that’s because he’s got a country to run. And if the real issue is the state of his handwriting or even spelling, then someone has got their priorities very badly wrong.
The privileges granted to the very rich. I am a fan of the Armed Forces and have nothing but respect for their bravery and professionalism. As a result, I might decide that I would like to attend a Remembrance Day parade. However, people seem to take great offence (and ask me to leave) merely because I choose to attend in a gorilla costume or disguised as the Frankenstein monster or even Groucho Marx. So, how then can it be right that members of the royal family have the right to adopt fancy dress every year – colonels, generals, rear admirals etc? A cynical person might suggest that their undeserved adoption of the uniforms of high office devalues the skills, hard work, bravery and length of service of those that actually earned them.
People (and by people I mean women) who insist on trying to eat their meals using only a fork. These are invariably the same people who use said fork to pointlessly and constantly re-arrange the food on their plate, time and time again. A cornerstone of mankind’s evolution must surely be the ability to initially devise tools and then to use and further develop the ones which aid their purpose. Therefore, if you insist on eating a meal without using the available (and historically well proven) knife – accept the fact that you are a genetic throwback more suited to a cave than a house. Sorry.
People who are incapable of talking on a mobile telephone without constantly walking backwards and forwards two or three paces at a time. Pretending to be a yoyo can, in no way, enhance the effectiveness and/or enjoyment of your conversation. Although, to be honest, you are probably “talking” to someone who eats their meals using only a fork and so the word “conversation” is probably somewhat optimistic.
People who are so incredibly, mind numbingly idiotic that they use the word “literally” when what they in fact mean is “metaphorically” – the exact opposite. Do not tell me that there was a spider in your bath that was “literally the size of a house” unless you possess a very small doll’s house and can prove the point. In fact, don’t bother as you would clearly be an idiot either way.
And while I’m kind of on the subject, what about the word “actually” – is there any real point in its existence? Think of a sentence with “actually” in it (and unless the sentence is “How do you spell ‘actually’”) you will probably find that you can remove the word with no loss of meaning.
In fact, it’s nothing short of an insult. When someone uses the word, what they are saying is “I’m going to ask you a question and I can’t trust you to answer it accurately without indulging in a flight of imaginative fancy unless I include the word ‘actually’ in the question.
For example:
“Did you actually tell the boss what you thought of him?”
“No, that all happened inside my head but by including the word “actually” in your question you force me into admitting the truth. Had you omitted the word ‘actually’ I could quite happily have given you the made up version in which I punched the boss on the nose. Curses.”
Women with shopping trolleys. Many of them have clearly driven to the supermarket in cars without having any form of accident suggesting that they have some degree of spatial awareness, hand-eye co-ordination and a degree of understanding of the laws of the road. So why does grabbing hold of a shopping trolley appear to induce symptoms akin to a back street lobotomy?
Why do they swing their trolleys around without looking what is behind them or decide to reverse with an equal lack of vision? Why do they deposit a trolley in the centre of an aisle then wander off to fetch something from somewhere else? Why wait until they are in a supermarket to make all their bloody telephone calls as they attempt to guide the trolley single handedly?
I used to think that this was merely incompetence but my eyes have been opened to a conspiracy, and this is true. Not absolutely true (see below) but merely true as in, not made up. Two women had decided to have a chat in Sainsburys. Clearly, in whatever universe their minds resided, the obvious way to do this was to stand in the middle of an aisle then turn their two trolleys nose to nose so as to completely block said aisle. Needing to pass them, I (with my considerately chosen basket) turned sideways and edged between the trolleys without so much as a nudge to either. At this point both women began to verbally abuse me with much waving of arms. So clearly there is an evil conspiracy at work here rather than mere stupidity
Comedians. Have you noticed how if a comedian says that a story is true, nobody believes them? So now, in order to make the point, they all, and I do mean all, use the term “absolutely true.” Quite how “true” and absolutely true” differ is a mystery to me but it’s not one to spend too much time worrying about as some bright spark will no doubt start describing his made up stories as “absolutely true” at which point all fellow comedians will have to adopt a new terminology.
“Really absolutely true” perhaps or how about “Literally absolutely true” – but this will only serve to confuse the sub-morons who have no idea what “literally” means.
Right, that’s it. I’m now off to the supermarket – and this is absolutely true – where I will make a series of nuisance calls to O2 whilst actually walking repeatedly backwards and forwards crashing my trolley into anything that comes within reach. Then I’m off to find a sales assistant to ask for a cutlery set with no knives in it so that I can look so marvellously sophisticated when I attempt to ham fistedly dismantle a pork chop using only a fork. Literally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
