Nigella Lawson - the seductive chef who turns baking a
cake into an altogether suggestive affair - has hit the headlines this week
following her new show and the high calorie contents of the desserts
featured.
Many people (the Daily Mail included, naturally) have
jumped on the bandwagon to criticise the once curvacious-but-now-not-so-much
cook for her calorie laden recipes, branding her as trying to make the nation
fat.
But can we really blame Nigella for our waistline woes?
True, one of her new recipes on this week's programme
featured a cheesecake which contained a whopping 7,000 calories (but then
again, it is almost made of 100% fat) and another saw Nigella sandwich ice
cream in brioche.
However, I fail to understand just why there has been
such a negative response - after all, isn't indulgence and 'a little bit of
what you fancy' the brand that Nigella has always promoted? With her recent
weight loss aside, Nigella has been one of very few chefs who truly eats what
she cooks, therefore winning female fans for her honesty and male fans for her
evocative use of food.
A little escapism is what this nation needs, particularly
when we are constantly being told what we can't eat because of any number of
reasons. As long as you don't indulge in her recipes every day, I say find
another bandwagon to jump on.
After all, if it's good enough for Nigella...
Thursday, 4 October 2012
Thursday, 21 June 2012
What if the Eurozone just keeps applying sticking plasters?
A thought occurred to
me watching Channel 4 News last night.
We are all it seems waiting for some anarchic / cathartic moment with
the Eurozone crisis. A cataclysmic
earthquake which causes the entire structure to fall apart and countries forced
to start printing their own money. We
are all expecting to see massive capital flight to safe havens, terror stricken
faces on central bankers, horrified Germans, delighted Tory MPs and various
economists trying to tell us that they predicted this all along.
But what if this
doesn’t happen? What if the Eurozone
leaders keep on applying sticking plasters just big enough to stem the bleeding
but not big enough to finally cure the patient?
I suspect we have been
conditioned to expect the anarchic resolution scenario in this country in part
due to our ejection from the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992. That day all hell broke loose with massive
currency trades, emergency interest rates of 15 per cent, a Chancellor of the
Exchequer caught in the headlights and screaming currency arbitrage traders
bellowing at each other across London trading floors. Oh and George Soros looking very happy
because he made billions that day and Peter Jay of the BBC seemingly the only
person who knew what the hell was going on!
Ultimately, however,
the experience was cathartic. The UK
economy, released from the stranglehold of the ERM blossomed, which is what
many predict will happen if the likes of Greece and Spain are cut adrift or
leave the Eurozone of their own accord, devalue their currencies and use
inflationary pressure to reduce debt.
Then again, nobody is really sure.
Personally, I am
beginning to believe that the key date is not when Greece or Spain’s next
government bond repayment is due but the German elections when Angela Merkel
has to face the electorate next year.
Once Merkel herself is released from trying to get re-elected then we
might see some progress on a growth strategy for the Eurozone.
As I write I note that
Angela is talking at the G20 about getting the “big bazooka” out to finally
deal with this. We’ll see, I’m
increasingly of the belief that European leaders are not up to the task and
that we are condemned to one sticking plaster after another with European, not
just Eurozone, economies bumping along the bottom for a good while yet!
Monday, 18 June 2012
Forty years ago today journalism started on the road towards its finest hour!
40 years ago today the Washington Post carried a small story at
the bottom of page one with the headline “Five held in plot to bug Democratic
offices”. This was the start of what is probably the greatest
journalistic triumph of all time.
At the time nobody much cared, but within two years the
dogged pursuit of the story by the Post, in particular journalists Carl
Bernstein and Bob Woodward, had caused the story to be renamed, creating a suffix
which has become synonymous with political scandal ever since.
Watergate, as it became known, is the mother of all
‘gates. In simple terms it was, in Nixon’s words, a “third-rate burglary”
of the Democratic Party office in the Watergate complex perpetrated by White
House henchmen and designed to uncover embarrassing information about
candidates for the Presidency.
In reality, it is the story of how journalists on the Post, in
the face of unprecedented political and peer pressure (for months no other
newspaper would touch the story) uncovered a political scandal which brought
down a President.
In many ways this was the high water mark for the
profession. With a series of brilliant scoops, often using unnamed sources,
the Post linked campaign contributions to the Committee to re-elect the
President, or CREEP as it was known (you couldn’t make it up!), to the bank
account of one of the Watergate burglars and then linked the White House to the
burglars in the person of Charles Colson, Special Adviser to the President who
was effectively in charge of campaign dirty tricks.
When Nixon embarked on a cover-up, the Post continued its
pursuit alleging that the White House had instructed the CIA to illegally block
the FBI investigation and that documents had been shredded at the Justice
Department.
As Nixon wriggled on the hook the Post linked Presidential
advisers of increasing importance with either the original break-in or the
cover-up, eventually forcing Nixon to sack his most senior advisers, namely
Chief of Staff HR ‘Bob’ Haldemann and policy adviser John Ehrlichman. When the Senate started
investigating, and the Oval Office "tapes' became public knowledge,
Nixon's fate was sealed. In all 43 people went to prison for Watergate
related crimes, although of course not Nixon himself.
Forty years on the media landscape looks very
different. The web is making traditional print news look, at best
sluggish and, at worst, positively outdated. Newspapers across the
country are closing, merging or going down one edition per
week. Social media is making us all into 'Citizen Journalists' armed
with our iPhones to record events to post ourselves on YouTube. Twitter
and trending allow instant sharing of information.
Most importantly, journalism itself is now in the dock. Parallels
between phone hacking and Watergate have been made before, but it is startling
that the key lesson, that the cover-up is at least as bad as the original crime,
appears not to have been learnt. For the
White House substitute News International with all of its alleged shredding, obstruction
of justice and non-denial denials.
However, it would be wrong to paint journalism as an outdated
and dying profession. The Telegraph’s
investigation of MPs expenses proved that investigative journalism can perform
a public duty in the 21st Century.
The challenge for Leveson is to bring the press into line without
strangling the opportunity for the sort of investigation which holds our public
officials up to scrutiny and can bring down a President.
Labels:
journalism,
Leveson Inquiry,
Washington Post
Friday, 8 June 2012
You can’t have your cookie and eat it…
Now before you ask, I’m not talking about the tasty baked
treat loved by a sesame street character with a voracious appetite, but rather
the less appetising internet variety. You can have your chocolate chip cookie and
eat it you’ll be glad to know, but for the other type of cookie it is a
different matter.
The cookies I’m talking about are the ones that have been central
to online privacy debates since the dotcom boom and more recently EU
legislation governing how they are to be gathered by websites (not the Cookie
Monster… nom nom nom). For those of you in the marketing world this is an
important piece of internet legislation to be aware of.
In the UK, the law has recently changed to make sites more
open about how they track their users, requiring sites to give consumers
notification that their site uses tracking files, and a chance to opt in or out
of such measures, or else face penalties.
Now, this all seems fairly straight up and not something you
could really pick a bone with – who wants to be followed unknowingly? It ain’t
nice in a dark alley and it ain’t nice online.
However, if websites that track users now have to allow
people to opt out (presuming a good chunk will) the advertising model that is
central to the online revenue stream for many sites is under threat. Naturally,
the majority of the UK’s largest websites have made no signs of compliance with
the new laws
so there’s no immediate danger but it is still worth considering the
implications.
You see, web advertising is far cheaper than alternative
media and therefore trying to increase its value is vital to the strategy of
many sites. User tracking helps this in two ways: firstly, it fixes the basic
mechanics of tracking which adverts get clicked, and how often. The second
method, though, is the key: cookies track your internet activity – your
searches, the sites you’ve visited, what you’ve downloaded etc. So, when you
search for flights to Spain, the next time you go online an ad might pop up on
a website with the latest hotel and flight packages for the Costa del Sol! Quite
smart really, even if sometimes it can be a tad hit and miss.
Ultimately, better use of data and tracking means better
advertising and a better user experience. The information economy needs it to
survive – Google and Facebook included.
If online consumers now decide to opt out of these tracking
files in their masses then the implications are quite simple, the advertising model will collapse, leaving
two alternatives: paying for the services a site offers, or letting it shut; a
case of your money or your (online) life.
Labels:
Cookie laws,
Cookie Monster,
Online advertising
Tuesday, 1 May 2012
Is Regeneration In Need Of Some Retail Therapy?
The
news that Ikea is building a new town, Strand East, complete with 1,200 homes,
bars, restaurants, hotel and Piazza but no Ikea is fascinating.
I’m
not as excited about the pedestrianized streets and the sustainability aspects,
but the fact the major retailer is using the talents of its development team to
diversify into wider initiatives.
The
trend for the big retailers developing larger mixed use schemes has been
growing in recent years. Take a look at Spenhill, the regeneration division of
Tesco and you will see some impressive investment, like the New Square in West
Bromwich, which is transforming the retail fortunes of the town with an
imaginative new retail and leisure quarter.
With
retail development now being seriously scrutinised, the opportunity to use the
experience of the development teams to unlock the potential of sites seems a
natural and positive progression. If
you drive round the centre of cities and towns (like I did round Wolverhampton
last week), you will see significant sites crying out for development.
This
is putting pressure on councils to attract investment and be seen to inject
vitality to the core centres. As a result, I believe there is a new wave of
willingness to look at proposals and, where perhaps these didn’t stack up
commercially previously, some lateral thinking could unlock potential.
Going
a stage further, I believe it is not just councils receptive to offers but
housing associations too. The larger ones are under pressure to hit social
housing targets, are being encouraged to think outside the box and partner with
the private sector. For sure the public sector funds will not stretch to meet
the aspirations of most social
housing group plans.
So
may be the time is right for the development teams of the major retailers to
put down their retail carrier bags and go shop for bigger, all- encompassing
schemes and really show their brilliant skills in other sectors.
Labels:
Ikea,
NewSquare,
Regeneration,
retail,
Spenhill,
Strand East,
Tesco,
WPR Public
Friday, 27 April 2012
Online Social Signals essential to PR…
It seems that page 1 of Google is becoming just as much the
bread and butter of good PR as coverage in top print titles these days…
This was my thinking, at least, when I read about the recent
survey from Branded3 which found
that URLs receive a significant boost in Google rankings when they are shared
on Twitter, with those receiving over 7,500 tweets almost always ranking inside
the top five results on search engines.
Naturally, being a generally savvy bunch many in the PR
industry have already capitalised on digital opportunities and we’ve been
blessed with an array of much celebrated integrated campaigns for brands over
the past couple of years. However, whilst there’s been plenty of speculation
with regards to social media’s SEO impact, I have to say that this is the first
piece of research that has provided tangible results that I can relay back to
clients when recommending online PR.
The correlation between tweets and search engine rankings is
big news for PR professionals. Social media is PR in its most organic form –
direct dialogue. If this direct dialogue can now impact the hotly coveted page
1 of Google then surely that’s good news! Particularly if you need to, ahem,
push down some of the less attractive search results that appear for some
brands when searched. It’s my firm belief that good PR is now essential to all
parts of digital marketing – getting people talking about your brand is
essential to SEO.
Now what this means for Twitter and its rather fledgling
business plan, I’m not sure. I remember thinking earlier in the year than the
likes of Snoop Dog tweeting about Toyota’s ‘Swagger Wagons,’ and a host of
celebs tweeting about Snickers UK was an opportunity missed for Twitter as
third party ad agencies had capitalised on the talent pool and reach that the
social network has at its disposal. Perhaps the news from Branded3 will
convince more brands to part with the huge budgets required to set up promoted
accounts and tweets on Twitter?
Either way, this is big news and confirms what many have
been thinking for some time.
Labels:
Branded3,
Online PR,
SERPS,
Twitter,
WPR digital
Tuesday, 24 April 2012
Phone hacking: despite appearances the centre of gravity has moved West
With the Murdoch’s
due to appear at Leveson this week and Labour MP Tom
Watson publishing his new book, Dial M for Murdoch, you could be forgiven for
thinking that the UK remains at the centre of the phone hacking crisis engulfing
the Murdoch media empire.
You’d be
wrong. Almost out of sight is a development which threatens News
Corporation in the US, as opposed to News International in the UK and that is
very, very significant. The Dowler
family lawyer, Mark Lewis, now claims that he is representing four individuals
whose phones were hacked on US soil. At least one is a US
citizen. Others are, apparently, coming out of the woodwork
daily.
According to a
Guardian report last week, there is evidence that Fox News, Murdoch’s US cable
TV operation is now implicated. For News Corporation, the holding
company, this is a nightmare come true.
If phone hacking has
crossed the Atlantic then senior management at News Corporation could find
themselves in the dock. Federal law states
that an individual who violates telecommunications privacy for commercial
purposes can face five years in prison with a 10 year tariff for a subsequent
offence. What’s more, civil courts can also offer damages in
relation to the profits gained by the violators with punitive damages possible
thereafter.
How big a deal is
this? Let’s put it this way. In the US, News
Corporation's cable properties constitute over 60 per cent of operating income
for the company. With News Corporation making circa $1.06bn (£888m) net
profit in their last quarterly filing to the SEC it is clear that any
implication that Fox has been up to dirty tricks has massive
implications.
However, it doesn’t
stop there. The Met Police’s investigation of bribery of public
officials also has the potential to cross the Atlantic if it hasn’t already.
The Foreign Corrupt Practises Act offers the opportunity for the
SEC to investigate the operations of News International in the UK but prosecute
senior officials of News Corporation in the US.
The big question is,
where
does all this end? My own view is that a number of very high
profile people, some of whom have had access to the very highest levels of UK
government (you know who I mean!) are going to prison. Probably for perjury,
possibly for bribery and possibly for perverting the court of justice.
Unfortunately James Murdoch, who was recently spirited out of the country to a new position in the
US, in an attempt to distance him from phone hacking, may find that New York is
uncomfortably close to the SEC headquarters in Washington DC.
Labels:
Leveson Inquiry,
Media,
Rupert Murdoch
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)