I believe in you ( Chrismas 2011 song )

Cher Lloyd - 'X Factor Better when I was in it'

I love the media! (i.e. tabloid journalism) NOT!

1st it was their utter twisting of what Jeremy Clarkson said (see previous post) and now they are doing the same to Cher Lloyd.

For those that don't watch X Factor uk. She came runner up last year to Matt Cardle and has arguably had a more successful career so far since.

This is not about whether or not I like Cher or her music or anything like that (I don't)

This is about is how the media make a story out of absolutely nothing yet again and get it spread into almost every tabloid out there when it is not at all true.

The headline on MSN, Daily Mail, List, Female first, Metro, Unrealitytv, 4 music, Usspost, Heatworld and loads more states 'Cher Lloyd snubs this year XFactor saying 'It was much better last year when I was in it ''

Er, NO she did not!!!!

She said ' I don't think this years XFactor is particularly better than last years'
With no mention of herself whatsoever.

That is Completely different to 'It was better when I was in it' !

I posted this on on two of the above mentioned websites and guess what, within an hour of me posting the comments were REMOVED.

Tabloid MEDIA! Arghhhh

(Thats why I never read papers or watch the news other than the local paper ... )

Funny CV review

Well, thought I would share this one as it's amusing and vaguely music / entertainment related as you will see!

I saw a Job advertised and in order to apply for it I had to upload my cv to a job site ( having made sure I unchecked any boxes allowing sharing to other sites). They obviously ignored this totally because I got a 'thank you for registering / sending your cv to us' from 4 other jobsites and a phone call from an agency wanting to sign me up.

As well as the above, I also got an email saying than you for sending us your CV for a free review (huh????!!! when was that?! I did not!)
'We will thoroughly examine your CV and send you afree appraisal within 24 hours.' Okkkkaaaaaayy.

So they did; I quote:  Thank you for requesting a FREE CV review from **Total-CVs**. We have given your CV a thorough appraisal..........

........and I got 6/10 layout, 6/10 content and 7/10 Language. (With very non specific generic comments about each, Which did not consider the profession the cv was aimed at in any way, for which their comments are actually WRONG)

Hmm I thought. I know it's not perfect but I was disappointed with my score as it's taken lots of years to get it about right. (not that teachers/lecturers need cv's much - it's all done by long winded repetitive appllication forms!)

So I had an idea.

I made up a new hotmail account and invented a person, based on David Walliams, who I called David Williamson.

I made a fake address and post code and phone number that don't exist. Anywhere.

I made a REALLY BAD CV

I headed it properly but in each heading had things like:

'TV superstar'
'comic relief'
'massive tv personality'
as seen on TV
and wembly
and in the thames
etc

about half a page long, badly written, loads of typos and no real information of any use.

So, after they gave it a 'thorough appraisal'...

I got an identical score, identical email, identical comment, ended the same of my 'real' one with: please send us lots of cash and we will do it properly for you.

So... the moral is, even David Walliams can't write CV's :-)
or: next time you write a CV, pretend to be someone else!....

er no, thats not it,

the moral is; people BLATENTLY LIE on websites , even seemingly professional ones and somehow get away with it. I'm sure it's actually not acceptable / illegal to advertise that you are going to do something and then don't. Isn't that called Lying? I thought there was a law against that in business?

hmmmmmm

-ant

The Clarkson Effect

Right!
I am getting totally pissed off with the comments online about supporting Clarksons view on public sector workers (shoot them and their kids)
and also the opposite, about people angry at him for saying it.
heres the truth people

It's the freaking MEDIA!!!

He was on the show for an hour and the 20 minutes previous to the comment he was supporting the public sector. He said it as a 'Clarkson ism' i.e. he was BORED and was trying to be funny. OK it was a bit OTT but it was a freaking JOKE. He was bored with the boring politicians on the show and after sooo long he threw that in to liven things up. ( it worked!!)

So sad people on MSN who actually think he was serious need to go down the pub and get a grip on reality. What a bunch of sad idiots this country has become if you can't see past the shallow media bullshit thats gone on around this pointless story. and they banned him for a bbc QI because of this ! mad mad mad.

 I am a teacher / lecturer (with kids) and it shocked and annoyed me a bit but i looked up the truth! its not hard to do! get a grip and stop reacting before you find out what happened before you just overreact and exagerate other peoples comments. The media are having a laff with this one. deliberately. and lots of you are sucked right into it. !

Ive seen comments from 'jeremy is a hero ' public sector people are so up themselves and gold pensions etc to jeremy is a twat for saying that, how dare he. Both views are so WRONG!

public sector have had pensions FROZEN for 10 years, and the next 2. then get 1%! ( inflation is 5!) and its been like that since 1970.
In effect , just taking that on board, public sector pay is HALF what it was in 1970
And people who have worked there all their life have just effectively had their pensions cut by HALF. with no choice in the matter.
A lecturer friend of mine worked it out that for 1 teacher, over their career they are effectively half a MILLION pounds worse off.
so for 2 of us athats a MILLION pounds worse off
how would you like that?
last year, was going to get a measly 10k pension. this year we are now not going to get one at all! cause we cant get a full time job and therefore new rule means we dont qualify.
so we get NOTHING
fair?
state pension gets 5% increase. public sector dont get that cause they paid into ( by force) the pension they HAVE to pay into. which they now have cut in half or not get at all.
is that fair?

Get a grip people and grow up . i am sick of how pathetic this country has become when we cant be arsed to see the truth and just fall into the media trap and dont bother actually thinking about anything.

While i'm at it. I've heard parents slagging teachers off for the strike. ERM ITS NOT JUST TEACHERS its all public sector. the media yet again focus on teachers casue they effect the majority day to day. and its the 1st strike for YEARS. anyone else can strike and no one gives a shit. teachers do it , reluctlantly ( and btw most actually went to work that day to get pay and keep up with the work load) and the country slags them all off. They DID NOT WANT TO STRIKE. they HAD NO CHOICE.The ones that striked had to look after their kids like the rest of you. and unpaid. (lost almost 3 dyas pay as well, not 1 cause of the way pay is worked out)
they are overworked and underpaid. not visa versa and like i said before . they are effectively on half the pay they were on 30 years ago, work twice as hard for less pay.

holidays all year? lazy? NOOOOOO
most have kids you know!
they suffer too on strikes
they cannot choose holidays like the rest of you
only in expensive summer  hols, cannot take any other days, stuck with kids like everyone else.
the pay is meant to reflect the fact they have a little more holiday . its called SALARY
and most poele have 6 weeks plus bank holidays etc anywas. teacher get about 10 weeks. big freaking DEAL!!!!
and thats only the 50% who are actually contracted full time. the rest are private / lecturers/ supply etc who get paid PER HOUR WORKED.

Anything else needs sorting out?
good
shut up !

Kicks england in the ass and yells WAKE UP

need help? got a problem. call the A team / DV team ;-)


FFS
England

Is music Dead?

"Is music dead?"

As a music lecturer, I often pose students questions like this to instigate vibrant discussion and research for a thesis or presentation.These are of course, many different ways to approach such a question, much of which would be based on personal opinion and musical preferences, but must be backed up by references and examples as appropriate set against the presented criteria. There is nothing worse that a short, shoddy report based on bad research that is haphazard and not supported by evidence or research in any way.

I decided to takle this question myself as if I was a student being asked to present their carefully researched and referenced assignment to the modern day learning environment.

I looked deeply into examining the current music sales and chart statistics compared to five, ten and twenty years ago.
I looked at the attitude of the public and how they appreciate music in a modern society,
I looked at how music has become a commodity and an ondistry based on finance rather than artistry and talent.
I looked at how music is presented in the moden market of mass media including television and radio.
I examined deep within the industry itself, how music is recorded and produced and how the artist may or may not have lost control and freedom
I looked at as many genres as I could and investigated in depth the similarities and differences between them.
I looked at music historically and ethnically and how this was a relevant factor in the modern day society of multicultural diversity.
I made realms of notes and citations, I interviewed people directly involved in the industry including performers and writers and producers.
I eventually produced my final thesis based on all of the intense research I had conducted.

My thesis based on the assignment brief to summarise all of the research I did and then presented  in a coherent fashion and in less than 10,000 words was thus:

* "NO"


*Please feel free to use this in any assignment work you may have, please remember to reference the author and give due respect and lots of cash for my efforts. Thank you. ©DV 2011