Comments (0)

By Jamie, July 2, 2009 5:33 pm

Disturbing news of the terms and conditions of O2’s mobile broadband from the NoDPI forum:

“By using O2 PAYG mobile broadband, I will agree to allow information about me and all aspects of my communications to be ‘used and disclosed’ to other parties. (para 15.1).

I’m also asked to agree to all of my personal data & communications traffic being analysed by O2 and other/third parties for marketing purposes (para 15.2). Even location data too (15.3).”

The message here is simple: O2 mobile broadband cares nothing for its users’ privacy.

Comments (0)

By Jamie, July 1, 2009 8:49 am

I was heartened this morning to read that the “government” has stripped National Express of its franchise for the East Coast main line.

When services are failing to meet the set standards action needs to be taken.  National Express’ financial situation allied to its failing services prompted the “government” to act.  In an interesting statement Lord Adonis said

“The government is not prepared to renegotiate rail franchises, because I’m simply not prepared to bail out companies that are unable to meet their commitments.”It is simply unacceptable to reap the benefits of contracts when times are good, only to walk away from them when times become more challenging.”

In a statement, the government added that it believed it had also had grounds to end National Express’s other two other rail franchises – Easy Anglia (sic) and c2c.

Being a relocated Brummie I don’t have any experience of the East Anglia and c2c franchises.  I do have plenty of experience of the old Central Trains franchise.  Unreliable services, dirty trains and less than helpful staff meant I was glad to see Central Trains disestablished and LondonMidland come along.  Being relocated as I now am I don’t know if LondonMidland has continued the promising start I experienced.

If you undertake a rail franchise you must be prepared to improve services for customers, not cut service provision to try and maintain a failing business.  Charging customers to reserve seats didn’t go down very well. Cost cutting on new staff uniforms didn’t go down well either.  As for cutting ticket office hours, that wasn’t a very bright thing to do.  The delays in December didn’t help public perception.  All this appears to have been done in the name of saving money so that the franchise can be maintained.

Richard Bowker, the Chief Executive of National Express has announced his resignation.

Comments (0)

By Jamie,

Ed Balls is clearly upsetting a lot of people with his ideas and methods.  As a politician one cannot always be popular.  But there is a difference between making good yet hard decisions and conducting oneself like a repellent bully.  Mr Balls’ 5 yearly tests for teachers’ licenses is not a good yet hard decision.  It is completely lacking in Clue and typical of this “government” in that it refuses to even acknowledge the other issues in schools.

Over at The Spectator there are a couple more examples of Mr Balls at work.  This post didn’t go down well with Mr Balls, who took issue with being accused of mendacity and demanded that the post be removed.  Fraser Nelson is having none of it.  Read the comments on both posts; clearly I am not the only one with a dislike for Mr Balls.

Gerg Hands writes on CentreRight about his experience of Brown, Balls and Balls staff at work.  It says a lot about Ed Balls as a person and his methods:

The overriding memory of this Prime Ministerial visit to my constituency is that Brown and Balls surround themselves with officials who might be even more hectoring and bullying than their masters.

Comments (0)

By Jamie, June 30, 2009 7:24 pm

As if any more reasons were needed not to vote Labour at the next general election, another prime example has come forward in the shape of Ed Balls.  His latest idea, the 5 yearly teaching MOT is another pie in the sky, half-witted theory from someone who has no teaching experience at all.  Mr Balls is an economist.  Another theory man.

Let’s look at the school environment for a moment.  When I was at school teachers were respected.  Some were liked, some disliked but all respected.  The head teacher was respected and the ultimate arbiter of justice.  Not so any more.  Now teachers go into school every day fearing for their safety.  Hardly a day goes by when a secondary teacher doesn’t get threatened, verbally abused, their parentage questioned or their safety threatened.  Things have changed.

Has the education system been reinforced to protect teachers and ensure discipline?  No.  Now pupils have more rights than teachers.  I would never have even raised an eyebrow to my head teacher .  Now one head teacher I am aware of is too scared of his pupils to take any kind of action when one calls him “a lanky c**t” straight to his face.  This is the reality of education today: teachers can’t even defend themselves from physcial attack.

Tell me Mr Balls, have you ever had a thug stand over you and threaten to put you in hospital?  Have you ever had a thug hold a blade to your face and threaten to slit your throat or disfigure you?

When a school does say “enough is enough” and enforces a strict code of conduct after informing parents, there are complaints from those parents to the newspapers!  Correct me if I’m wrong here, but surely one attends school to be educated, not behave like a lunatic thug?  There are rules in place in society, clubs and workplaces so school rules really should come as no surprise.

The “New Labour generation” isn’t about doing the right thing, proper respect for oneself and others and taking responsibility for one’s actions.  It is about “I want this now, I want it on my terms and if you don’t give it to me I will bully and threaten you.”

Tell me Mr Balls, how much front line teaching experience do you have?

Certification is, in theory, a sensible idea.  Consider the reality: teachers spend a year being trained where they receive daily supervision.  Teachers spend a probationary year where they receive daily supervision.  Like any workplace they are subject to regular line manager appraisals and occasional supervisions.  Add into that OFSTED (my thoughts on OFSTED could fill a book.  Suffice to say that there is a new line to the phrase “Those who can do, those who can’t teach” which goes “Those who can’t teach become OFSTED inspectors”)

The head teacher of the school is going to be responsible for delivering these observations.  The head teacher is already supposed to be responsible for implementing policies, managing budgets, enforcing discipline in the school and perhaps teaching some lessons.  This brings to mind more questions:

• How are they expected to fit this additional workload into their existing workload?
• What of those heads Mr Balls wants to bring in who have no teaching experience? How can their judgement be trusted if they do not have that vital experience?
• Is the license renewal dependent on one supervision? What if the teacher doesn’t see eye to eye with the head teacher but is still a competent teacher?
• What appeals process will there be? It needs to be independent and transparent
• Talking of budgets, where will the funding come from to ensure that CPD is ongoing?
• Will teachers be given protected time to devote to their CPD?
• Who sets the requirements for this license?

That last question is a serious one.  Teaching, like management, has its fads and fashions.  Chopping, changing and interference in curriculums helps nobody.  And don’t even get me started on National Challenge.

The guarantee of personalised tuition for all pupils who have fallen behind in English or maths is a great soundbyte but does it bear detailed scrutiny?  I’m not sure it does unless you are prepared to increase staffing levels and provision to cater for those who fall into this group.  Again I highlight the lack of discipline and therefore commitment on the part of some pupils.  Some pupils genuinely struggle.  Others do not, are more interested in larking about and disrupting the lesson.  If I had £1 for every time I’d heard “there’s no doubting they’re intelligent but he/she isn’t prepared to pay attention and do the work” then I could fly to Los Angeles.

Head teachers’ leader, John Dunford, said: “We expect our doctors to be up to date when they treat us. It is reasonable for the public to expect teachers to be up to date when they teach their children.”

Does my GP or my dentist get compulsory assessments to confirm they are up to scratch?  I think not. I have yet to see multiple certificates of competence from the last twenty years of testing posted on the walls of my local GP and dental surgeries.  Correct me if I am wrong Mr Dunford, but does the education curriculum suddenly change because of a new discovery or development?  As far as I am aware, math is math and hasn’t changed that much over the last few years.  Teaching fads and ideas for the teaching may have changed but the basic principles are still the same.

Then of course there’s the implementation of this.  What of all the teachers currently in post?  Are they all to be tested en masse?

In conclusion Mr Balls, your latest idea may be well intentioned but is deeply flawed.  Once you have given schools and teachers back the authority to enforce discipline and made it clear to parents that they have a responsibility to teach their children to respect schools and teachers then you can start looking at ideas for certification and CPD.  Your interference and failure to provide a decent educational system is driving decent teachers away because they are disillusioned.  That’s not the fault of the pupils, that is your fault.

I’ll make a deal with you Mr Balls – get in touch with me and let’s organise a couple of sessions where you teach a class.  I’ll sit in the corner and film it.  If you’re going to get involved with teaching it’s only fair that you have recent real life experience.

Are you up for it?

Comments (0)

By Jamie, June 29, 2009 8:22 am

I still smile warmly when I think of Pakistan’s victories in the semi final and final of the World Twenty20.  As should everyone.  I’ve said before that world cricket needs a strong Pakistan side.  Their strength and talent should never be doubted, it is their consistency that has been lacking.  Add consistency to their undoubted talent and you have a team ready to worry and perhaps beat the best in the world on a regular basis.

Osman Samiuddin’s piece in Cricinfo celebrates the Pakistan team’s gift to the nation.  As usual there is some excellent stuff there which sheds extra light on things for we Westerners.  Younus Khan comes in for deserved praise and is compared to Inzamam-ul-Haq for his dignity.  Such comparisons are wrong.  Younus Khan is better than Inzamam because Younus hasn’t had a moment of madness like the one Inzamam had at the Oval.

You know, the one where he and his team refused to take the field.  Yes, Younus was a part of that team and we may never know exactly what transpired in that dressing room to result in the mess that happened.

I’m willing to bet that if circumstances like those in that test match do arise again, Younus would have the dignity and awareness to act with the grace and sense which had left the senses of many on that day in 2006.  A fine player to watch, a fine captain and above all he comes across as an excellent human being.

Remember, this victory comes despite the efforts of the PCB to alienate themselves from everyone else in the world cricket community.  The match referee for the final was Chris Broad, the former England opener who Ijaz Butt had raved about deserving to be banned.

Did we hear anything from Mr Insensitive then?  No.

Wouldn’t it be a joy to see Pakistan at the top of the ICC test cricket rankings?

England will host two test matches and two Twenty20 games between Pakistan and Australia.  This is great news and I hope that Headingley and Edgbaston are awarded those games.  If you haven’t been in a city where Pakistan are playing then you cannot know what kind of an atmosphere there is.  The mercurial side against the mean machine – to watch those games as a neutral (well, neutral-ish) would be a delight.

Comments (0)

By Jamie, June 25, 2009 10:10 am

UK furniture store Habitat’s foray into the world of social networking crashed onto the rocks of tastelessness when it was shown to have used Twitter’s hashtags feature to advertise its products.  That’s certainly annoying and less than impressive but when these hashtags included Iran (which is being used to highlight the terrible events going on in Iran) the boundaries of taste had been shattered and steamed past.  Habitat stood accused of trying to use the events in Iran to get more people to visit its site.

Tiphereth wrote an excellent article showcasing a case study of how not to use Twitter.  Starring Habitat.  It wasn’t long before the story picked up more media coverage: Yahoo, BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Index On Censorship, The Register, BrandRepublic, Marketing Week, Retail Week, eConsultancy and Furniture Today to name a few.

There are lessons to be learned here.  Once Habitat explained how these postings came to happen in the first place.  Which their intial explanation didn’t mention.  Was an external consultancy or agency responsible?  Was a member of Habitat staff responsible?  Whichever (and people want to know because they felt offended at the apparent lack of ethics) damage to Habitat’s brand and reputation has been done and would continue until a fuller explanation was forthcoming.

Which it duly was in a comment further down the page by Habitat’s press office:

In response to speculation, we would like to clarify – this was not done by an agency. The hashtags were uploaded without Habitat’s authorisation by an overenthusiastic intern who did not fully understand the ramifications of his actions. He is no longer associated with Habitat.

Ah, the “O” word.  Using “overenthusiastic” or “overzealous” to try and justify wrongdoing is always a sign that someone has seriously messed up and/or got things wrong.  “Overzealous policing” has become a euphemism for Police overreaction.  Then of course we have Phorm’s famous “over zealous” editing of their Wikipedia article.  Someone went too far and got picked up on that.

This highlights an area that organisations need to be very aware of.  When people are assigned to public facing duties they need to be trained and made very aware that the things they say and do are a reflection on that company and have an effect on that company’s public profile.  Even more so when dealing with internet presence.  Once it’s on someone’s screen it can easily be saved and passed around.

Bad news always travels faster than good news.

So where did the training and awareness process fail at Habitat?  The “overenthusiatic intern” lacks Clue and perhaps a level of ethics but Habitat itself should accept that it has failed in a very public and humiliating way.  Habitat needs to publicly acknowledge that there are lessons to be learned here.  After all, it isn’t rocket science.  We’re back  to apologising, what it should mean and how sometimes an apology is actually meaningless again.

But this isn’t the first time someone has thought of using terrible events as a promotional tool.  I doubt it will be the last.  Step forward Phorm CEO Kent Ertugrul in an interview with the Washington Post:

“The problem for newspapers is that a story headlined ‘Two Dead in Baghdad’ isn’t very product-friendly,” said Kent Ertugrul, chief executive of Phorm, a behavioral targeting company working with British newspapers. “But if you know who is looking at the page, that’s where the opportunity is.”

I’ll leave you to make up your own minds about that quote.  Personally I think it speaks volumes.

Comments (0)

By Jamie, June 24, 2009 12:29 pm

Most employers now do some internet research to learn more about current and potential staff, ostensibly to help determine that the well turned out person who interviewed well and looks the part isn’t merely putting on a professional mask.  Some would see that as cyberstalking.  After all, an employer should surely employ staff on the basis of what they do professionally, not judge them on which football team they support (I don’t), which celebrity actor or actress they fancy (Bonnie Langford), who their friends are on Facebook (I don’t do Facebook) and who they follow on Twitter.

That’s a valid topic for discussion.  Especially in the city of Bozeman, Montana which was recently discovered to have gone further than that and asked all potential employees:

Continue reading 'Bozeman Montana Backs Down From Demanding Facebook IDs'»

Comments (0)

By Jamie, June 22, 2009 11:40 pm

Astaire Securities, the company that recently published advice to stockbrokers to buy Phorm shares (in an article that seems to bear a few similarities to a similar document issued by Charles Stanley Securities in April 2008), has been fined by the London Stock Exchange for breaching the rules of the Alternative Investment Market.  The article details the breaches of the AIM rules and the judgement of the LSE.

Just thought I’d mention it.

Now, let’s quickly look at the advice document.  It doesn’t discuss the legal and privacy issues in any real depth (no surprise there) other than to say that there is an “overblown privacy issue”.  To which I respond that the EU clearly doesn’t think so.  What was that quote from Mr Strohmeier again?  Oh yes…

Mr Rudolf Strohmeier stated that in all his years working at the Commission there had only been 1 or 2 other issues which had generated such a high volume of written complaints from the public so they were taking the matter very seriously, which is why they initiated infringement action against the UK Government last month.

It’s a great little quote that.

The classic “We have little doubt that Phorm’s OIX platform complies wholly with the letter and spirit of current legislation”  gets an airing too.  Has anyone at Astaire seen qualified legal opinion confirming this?  You know, the one I’ve been challenging Phorm to publish for over a year now.  The one I am sure Commissioner Vivian Reding would also love to see.  Or are we still in the realms of my back foot cover drive – totally non existent?

Ah yes, here we go again.  Another favourite:  “…endorsed by the UK’s Home Office, the Prime Minister’s Office and The Office Of The Information Commissioner”.  Seems like the author  and those who edit and proofread this advice have missed a few very important facts.  Again, no real surprise there.

It seems from this advice that I’m a “disgruntled blogger” and “self-styled privacy campaigner” who “prolongs the tedium”?

Try and ride a coach and horses through the law and you’re damn right I’m disgruntled.  Try to obfuscate and twist a valid debate and you’re damn right I’m disgruntled.  Launch a petty smear campaign worthy of a ranty teenager and you’re damn right I’m disgruntled.

But you know that one can judge an organisation and its people by how they behave.

Know this: there’s nothing tedious about ensuring the law is enforced correctly.  My challenge to Kent Ertugrul and all the pro-Phormers stands: Prove to me that Webwise is legal under UK and EU law.

It doesn’t matter how often you repeat things, if they’re garbage then repeating them ad nauseam does not make them any more true.  If it did then I might just be opening the batting for England at Cardiff sometime soon…

Comments (0)

By Jamie,

The BT Corporate website has a section entitled “The Way We Work“.  It makes interesting reading.  It’s good, solid stuff I’d expect to see from companies determined to show that acting ethically is inherent in everything they do. It’s the kind of stuff I’d expect to see from the Co-Op, an organisation I have come to know and respect over the years.

But this is BT we’re talking about.

The company that has secretly and illegally tested Phorm’s technology on their users.  The company that has repeatedly denied the testing until confronted with the evidence.  The company that has banned any discussion of Phorm from its support forums.

This is BT’s Statement Of Business Practice by Ian Livingstone, BT Group CEO.  Emphasis here is mine.

BT’s business principles – or ground rules – provide guidance on how to compete fairly, deal with conflicts of interest, act within the law, manage risks, protect the environment etc. They also challenge us to consider other facets of our behaviour – our relations with one another, our customers and with the communities we serve.

BT operates globally in markets with close regulatory and legal supervision. However, even more important than that are our values and ethics, both personal and corporate. Each of us must seek to ensure that we always live these values in the way we work, and act with integrity at all times. Your personal actions make a difference no matter what part of the company you are in.

Our reputation for acting with integrity strengthens each time we stick to our business principles. This might mean that we have to reject potential new business if it looks as though it would force us to compromise. A tough call but one that BT people should make if it’s appropriate.

If you experience any difficulties – if you are not sure what the right thing to do would be in any given situation – just ask. Have the courage to speak up if you are worried that any activities conflict with our way of working.

I truly believe that a successful company is one that acts with integrity, sticks to its core values and earns the trust and respect of its peers. It is a company that customers want to do business with, that shareholders want to invest in and that we can all be proud to work for.

These words do not tie in with the behaviour of BT and its involvement with Phorm.

Some of the full business principles deserve examination too.

We will act within the law, our licensing/authorisations obligations and any other regulations.

Protect our brand, physical, financial and intellectual assets.

Protect the confidentiality of company, employee and customer information.

Be truthful, helpful and accurate in our communication.

The EU says BT didn’t act within the law when you secretly tested Phorm’s technology on your users.

BT’s brand is now like that of Virgin Media, plummeting in the public perception and losing worth and value.  In no small part down to its association with Phorm.

How does BT’s testing of and involvement with Phorm protect customer information?

If BT is truthful, helpful and accurate in its communication then why did BT deny its secret testing of Phorm’s technology?  Why has BT deleted threads discussing Phorm from its support forums?

One of the excellent leaders with whom I had the privilege of working has a vision for the sector in which he works.  That vision drives him and integrates with his ethical standards which are of the highest standard.  Working on a change programme he quoted Gandhi

“Be the change you want to see in the world”

This is one of the rules he lives his life by.

My challenge to Ian Livingstone is along those lines.  Your words on their own mean nothing.  If you are a man of honour then you must be the living embodiment of those words.

And you can start right now by being completely open and honest about BT’s involvement with Phorm and acknowledging BT’s illegal actions in its testing of Phorm’s technology.  If you truly care about behaving ethically and protecting customer information then I challenge you to do what the Guardian did – dump Phorm and make a public statement confirming it.

The ball is now in your court, Mr Livingstone.

Comments (0)

By Jamie,

Congratulations to Pakistan for winning the mens’ World Twenty20 competition and to England for winning the womens’ World Twenty20 competition.

Pakistan’s heartwarming triumph comes despite the stupidity, insensitivity and general antics of the Pakistan Cricket Board, who are probably the most unfit for purpose of the national cricket boards.  Given how bad some of them are that really is an indictment of the PCB.

So let’s push Mr Insensitive, Ijaz Butt, out of the way and celebrate the mercurial Pakistan team.  I’ve always had a lot of time for Younus Khan as a player.  As a captain he’s managed to do what only Imran Khan did for Pakistan cricket and mould a team which won a major prize.  He has given Shahid Afridi back his confidence.  Afridi’s man of the match performances in the semi final and final show a cricketer who has matured.  He is a livewire, a match winner and cricket is the better for his presence.  Note also that no Pakistan player played in the recent IPL.  Does that tell us something?

Never doubt the talent that Pakistan has available.  Quite why Pakistan can produce 17 and 19 year old international cricketers who are ready for that level of cricket and England can’t I don’t know.  It’s a joy to watch.  Just think what Pakistan cricket could achieve if they had a sensible, well constructed administration overseeing the game.  Again we’ve seen excellent support for Pakistan, India and Bangladesh here.  If Pakistan isn’t to host home test matches, why not bring host them here in England?

Continue reading 'World Twenty20 Afterthoughts'»