In the beginning was Word — but now…?

Thoughtful article by Jeremy Reimer about how the world has changed since Microsoft Word first appeared.  It originated from Bravo, the word-processor designed by Charles Simonyi at Xerox Parc and was first released for the IBM PC in October 1983.  I was a user from the beginning and was entranced by the DOS version, especially by the way it used style sheets.  Word for Windows always seemed to me to be a step backwards from that original, Linux-type idea.  But for years I stuck with it, partly because of the lack of an alternative with equivalent functionality, but mainly because of the network effects: it had become the de-facto standard for office work, and my colleagues built elaborate peer-review systems around Word’s commenting and track-changes facilities.

In the last few years, though, I’ve noticed that I use Word less and less — and only for ‘work’-based activities.  Among the reasons for the change are: I like an uncluttered writing environment; I don’t want to be distracted by the endless temptations of sophisticated formatting options; I like to use outliners when I’m trying to think things through. 

But mainly the reason I’ve gone off Word is that it’s a program designed to help people compose paper documents, and increasingly — like Jeremy Reiner — I write for the web.

So I wind up using web-authoring tools like VoodooPad, blogging tools like WordPress and ScribeFire, sophisticated text-editing tools like TextWrangler and even Apple’s Pages (especially using its nice full-screen view which shows only a white sheet and a live word-count).  Word has been reduced to the tool I use only when a colleague sends me a draft with Track Changes enabled.

Footnote: Quentin and I were talking about this today, but neither of knew the other would blog it. Great minds etc.

Politico and the news cycle

There’s a good piece by Michael Wolff about Politico.com in the August issue of Vanity Fair. I was struck by this passage.

CNN changed the nature of politics and political reporting by compressing the time it took for something to happen, for it to become widely known, and for newsmakers and the public to react to it (i.e., the news cycle) to half a day—whereas the newspaper news cycle, from next-day publication to day-after reaction, was 48 hours, and network television’s news cycle, from one day’s evening news to the next day’s evening news, was 24 hours. Politico brings the news cycle down to about 15 or 20 minutes.

Sony getting smart? Surely not.

At one level, this is a charmingly silly video which makes use of a copyrighted song, owned by Sony. Until now it would have been subjected to a takedown notice. But notice the “Buy song” button. Apparently it has propelled the track into the charts again. Could this be an indication that Sony has finally begin to understand the value of surfing a wave rather than doing its own celebrated imitation of King Canute?

LATER: Neil MacNeil sent me a link to this post, which details the beneficial impact of Sony’s decision.

Hooray! I’ve won

Latest spam message:

We wish to inform you that you are one of the winners of
STATE EDUCATIONAL STUDENT AWARD July 2009,your e-mail address won and
Therefore you have been approve for a lump sum of (900.000.00 Usd)
Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars to support your Education through the
internet Wedsite .This promotional program takes place every year,and
is promoted and sponsored by eminent personalities like the Sultan of
Brunei,Billgate of Microsoft and other corporate organizations.

N/B: This is to IMPROVE THE LEVEL OF EDUCATION WORLDWIDE AND TO
ENCOURAGE THE USE OF INTERNET AND COMPUTERS WORLDWIDE.

PAYMENT PROCESSING FORM FILL IT AND SEND IT TO THE BANK FOR CLAIM .

(1) My Name is ……….i came from……..i hereby apply to claim
my prize that i won, as winner of the STATE EDUCATIONAL STUDENT
AWARD,i am requested to claim my prize of…… which my school email
id was among winners of the year July 2009.
(2) AGE………..(3) SEX…………(4) COUNTRY…………
(5) PHONE NUMBER ………(6) OCCUPATION:………..

Contact the bank and call them:
Name: ALI HASSAN
Email: fund_transferofficedept@yahoo.com
Email: trustbankplc@rocketmail.com
PRO ACCOUNT Officer In charge.
Phone:+234-704-0960-772.

Can’t wait!

Er, who falls for this crap? Somebody must.

ITV: a case study in intellectual and moral bankruptcy

I could never understand why ITV bought Friends Reunited, never mind why it paid £175 million for it. At the time I published a blog post saying:

Television people are constitutionally incapable of dealing with the web because they have been socially and professionally conditioned in the world of ‘push’ media with its attendant control freakery and inbuilt assumptions about the passivity and stupidity of audiences. Very little of their experience or skills are useful in a ‘pull’ medium like the web, where the consumer is active, fickle and informed, and history to date suggests that if they are put in charge of internet operations they screw up.

That particular idiocy was committed by Charles Allen, the Granada CEO who presided over the network’s implosion. But eventually Allen departed and was replaced by Michael Grade in the hope that he would prove to be the CEO who would save ITV from the knacker’s yard. I’ve known and admired Grade from the time when I was the Observer‘s TV Critic, but it was obvious that he was the wrong guy for the Internet era. He was a genius in the old push-media world: a brilliant scheduler and commissioner in a time when broadcast TV was the dominant medium. (He commissioned The Singing Detective, for example, when he ran BBC1.) But he’s an old-world popular entertainment impresario and has never really ‘got’ the Net. The Board of ITV was stuffed with guys who didn’t understand the new ecosystem either, so of course they thought he would be just the ticket.

A few weeks before his ignominious departure was announced, I was a guest at a posh dinner in Claridges at which many of the other diners were the extinct volcanoes of the old push-media world. I sat next to a member of the ITV Board, for example, who stoutly maintained that Grade had been a brilliant appointment. As if on cue, Michael came over to us and in his best confidential-male-bonding-back-clapping style told us the latest score in a big premiership match then being played. It was touching in its olde-worlde, locker-room charm.

Immediately across from us sat Charles Allen, the guy who bought Friends Reunited: he too seemed similarly unaware of the extent of his misjudgement. And I remember thinking at the time that people like him (and Tony Blair) will die before they change their minds and admit the errors that will forever define their careers. And in a way that’s understandable: after all, how do you maintain your self-esteem if you have to admit to a colossal blunder? Better to die in denial than to live in shame.

All of which was brought to mind by a terrific piece by Carole Cadwalladr in today’s Observer. She begins with the original Friends Reunited purchase:

We’ve all made shopping mistakes, those never-to-be-worn impulse purchases left mouldering in a plastic bag at the bottom of the wardrobe, but in ITV’s case, it would have to be a pretty big bag, large enough to hold a £175m website and not the sort of thing M&S will give you a credit note for.

Four years ago, it bought Friends Reunited, which was, even then, the internet’s version of the poncho, briefly fashionable, already hopelessly dated, paying £175m or, as it turns out, around £160m too much. And, last week, it was doing the corporate equivalent of sticking it on eBay, crossing its hot little corporate fingers and hoping for a buyer.

It’s almost enough to make you feel sorry for it. And yet not. Because there’s a nasty, invidious connection that links the blowing of £175m and the picture of Rebecca Langley in the papers last week, red, swollen, battered; another dark ITV executive secret.

The nasty secret is ITV’s reliance on one of the most morally-repugnant programmes I’ve ever seen on British TV — the Jeremy Kyle show. The peg for Cadwalladr’s piece is a court case which concluded last week in which a man was convicted of a violent assault on his girlfriend — with whom he had appeared on the Kyle show:

Rebecca Langley was a guest on The Jeremy Kyle Show and last week a judge found her boyfriend, Jamie Juste, guilty of grievous bodily harm and jailed him for two years. Sentencing him, Judge Sean Enright said the show contained “plainly an element of cruelty and exploitation”.

Twenty-three-years-old and 4ft 10in tall, Langley was left with a shattered eye socket and cheekbone and bite marks. The attack happened after the couple watched their appearance on The Jeremy Kyle Show with the judge concluding it had “fed his insecurities.

It turns out that this is almost par for the course.

In 2007, Judge Alan Berg, presiding over a case in which one guest on the show butted another, said that he believed its sole purpose was “to effect a morbid and depressing display of dysfunctional people whose lives are in turmoil”. Then in February last year, one Craig Platt found out via a DNA test on the show that he wasn’t the father of his baby, live on the show. A week later, he pointed a loaded air rifle at his wife’s head.

There is no shock. ITV knows exactly what it is doing. A year ago, I watched a recording of the show and discovered, by chance, that an 18-year-old man who was shown being abused by his drunken neighbours in a pub car park in Hemel Hempstead had bipolar disorder and paranoid schizophrenia.

At the time, I thought, naively, that that would be that: you couldn’t knowingly abuse mentally ill people for the sake of entertainment and get away with it. But it turns out you can.

So, Cadwalladr concludes:

The Jeremy Kyle Show is the polar opposite of a social network. It’s not about meeting “new people” or sharing knowledge or “staying in touch”, as the Friends Reunited website claims, or as the internet can be at its best. It’s a divide-and-rule strategy dreamed up by an authoritarian overclass who create the conditions to humiliate the very poorest, weakest and least able members of society for one purpose alone: to accrue wealth for themselves. Better viewing figures mean larger audiences mean more advertising mean higher bonuses.

This is a nasty, brutal, cynical show, not in terms of the guests it attracts, but in the television executives who commission it, who preside over it, who direct their spokesmen to defend its exploitation of the mentally ill and its humiliation of the weak and unfortunate; a plastic bag of despair at the bottom of ITV’s wardrobe.

Spot on.

Puzzle of the day

Q: Who said this?

When power leads man towards arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the areas of man's concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of his existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses, for art establishes the basic human truths which must serve as the touchstones of our judgement. The artists, however faithful to his personal vision of reality, becomes the last champion of the individual mind and sensibility against an intrusive society and an officious state. The great artist is thus a solitary figure. He has, as Frost said, “a lover’s quarrel with the world.” In pursuing his perceptions of reality he must often sail against the currents of his time. This is not a popular role. If Robert Frost was much honored during his lifetime, it was because a good many preferred to ignore his darker truths. Yet, in retrospect, we see how the artist’s fidelity has strengthened the fiber of our national life.

A: JFK, in a speech he made shortly before he was assassinated.

[Source.]

Thinking of presidential interest in poetry, I was reminded of a terrific piece Robert McCrum wrote about Seamus Heaney in the course of which they talked about the stroke that Heaney suffered a few years ago (and from which he has mercifully recovered). It happened in Donegal, so he was rushed to Letterkenny hospital. Heaney then goes on to relate what happened next:

“Clinton was here [i.e. in Ireland] for the Ryder Cup. He’d been up with the Taoiseach [Bertie Ahern] and had heard about my ‘episode’. The next thing, he put a call to the hospital, and said he was on his way. He strode into the ward like a kind of god. My fellow sufferers, four or five men much more stricken than I was, were amazed. But he shook their hands and introduced himself. It was marvellous, really. He went round all the wards and gave the whole hospital a terrific boost. We had about 25 minutes with him, and talked about Ulysses Grant’s memoirs, which he was reading.” Then Clinton was off, back to the airport.