The Superthings on TV: Trollied

Thursday night, not quite the weekend but not early enough in the week to blag a sickie, the day that feels a bit like Pippa Middleton to Friday’s Kate. (Thursday may have a cracking arse, but it still won’t be Queen of the week) Thankfully, the TV channels seem to know about the Thursday night slumps and has strived to make Thursdays the best nights on TV. E4 especially has had checkmated the teenage audiences to the TV with the likes of: Misfits, Skins, Inbetweeners, Big Bang Theory and How I Met Your Mother all fitting nicely in the 9-11pm slot on E4.

But, it’s now the summer. The amazing Misfits won’t be back until November, (Minus the breakout character Nathan – but that’s for another time) Skins has gone downhill since the writers have ironically managed to create characters who are “edgy” yet completely one dimensional. The Inbetweeners are hitting the big screen and the american sitcoms are rolling on nicely but are soon to be leaving the screens and replaced with a long wait for the series, airing around 6months after they will in America. So, fans of some TV relief on a Thursday are stuck, right? Wrong.

Sky One has recently made it’s own push to output more original productions. I’m sure we all have cast a dubious eye over this idea, after all what does Sky and Murdoch know about original ideas? Most of the shows are bought from others or are a product of the channel FOX Shows such as: Glee, Simpsons and House have now all landed on Sky from Fox so something new really has to stand out. So, we have been showed (somewhat to death) the trailers for the two first original Sky shows: Trollied and Mount Pleasant. From the adverts, the latter looks somewhat car crash, an oddly cast Sally Lindsey throwing herself around a sitcom (some have called it comedy drama, as it’s got the same writers as Shameless but it’s an insult to Shameless comparing the two) full of one dimensional characters played by whoever Sky could get. (Needless to say, the insufferable Angela Griffin makes her umpteenth appearance on a Sky One show after two disasters of her own shows.)  The show seems sloppy just from the trailers, an excuse for old people to talk about willies, boobs and sex whilst trying to convince us they’re still having it. Anyway, I have definitely digressed, we’re here to talk about Trollied.

On the surface, the show may seem a crossbreed between The Office and Supermarket Sweep but it’s also got a large dash of that slightly off center humour that has made the likes of Gavin and Stacey such a hit. Set in a fictional supermarket, Valco (a name like Tesco, a uniform like Asda), and full of a range of staff. A slightly out of her depth, Jane Horrocks, leads the cast playing a temporary manager who is besotted with her boss Gavin, he gives her no signals – not that she needs them – and unfortunately she comes off incredibly deranged, laughing at everything Gavin says and pining after a man who doesn’t really have much going for him. The weird and wacky staff are the real gems. The first two episodes were stolen by the brilliant Margaret, stating random information and not really understanding anything and yet smiling along contently. The disgustingly funny Lisa gets many witty and foul one liners: “Beetroot, I had that once – it turned my piss purple” and is obviously due a gross off with the lazy, incompetent Colin who again steals scenes with his petty theft, filthy tongue and constant rule breaking.

The butchers, Kieran and Andy are often given a bit too much screen time and their story lines are often weak and time consuming. It’s obviously blind to the writers but Kieran works best when paired up with the only sensible check out girl, Katie. It’s just a shame that all their story lines are filled with hints about their crushes on each other – a bit of subtly would be nice! The show on a whole is interestingly put together, scenes of comedy are book ended by scenes of normal, everyday shopping to make us believe that it’s a real store. The biggest shame about this show is that it’s on Sky. It screams BBC sitcom, where it would be right at home alongside the current likes of Miranda and Outnumbered. Due to the show being on Sky it misses a chance at a decent audience so the show will end up sinking into nowhere. Where as on the BBC it could flourish and easily build up a large cult following – see Little Britain and The Office for proof of those. So, will Trollied prove to be a surprise hit for Sky? – possibly. But with a small Sky audience and garbage like Mount Pleasant to contend with it could be soon on the ‘reduced to clear’ section, unfortunately.

What are your thoughts on Trollied? or anything else I’ve said, leave a comment or Tweet me. @superthings 

Was it a Royally Reported Wedding?

Of course, the dominating story tonight, and most likely for weeks to come, is that of the marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton, (in my books she’s not Catherine, she was introduced to the media as Kate and that’s how she’ll stay. She should just be pleased that she’s not been called KaMid) The pair of them in the biggest Royal Wedding in thirty years and that it’s given renewed strength in the British Monarchy. (you’ve all heard these facts countless times today, i’m sure) Of course, the wedding was the total media circus that we had all expect it to be. Sky News had been reporting since 6.30am.

But, like the majority i suspect, I watched the coverage on the BBC. Huw Edwards awkwardly placed as anchor man, doing my pet peeve of live events presenting and stating the slap bang obvious that we can see. (“Oh and there is the Queen arriving, dressed in yellow”) The longer into the coverage we got and the more I realised that Huw was in fact an incredibly odd choice to lead this event. Surely someone such as Jenny Bond, with more royal secrets that Paul Burrel’s autobiography, would have been a more apt presenting force for today’s coverage?

Sophie Raeworth and Fiona Bruce were announced as co-anchors but it seemed that they were no-where to be found during the day’s reporting which seemed a kick in the teeth for the two highly capable presenters. (and dare I say it, potentially a better pair to be taking us through things rather than Huw?)  Sophie especially, was presenting every programme in the build up to the Wedding, filming seemingly endless hours worth of shows about old weddings, cakes, veils and flowers. But she ended up handing the excitement that she had built up with these programmes to Huw. I should point out that I have no issue with Huw, he just seems to be better at reporting serious news so when something more joyous comes along, he seems to struggle to shake of his “serious event reporting” voice and persona.

My real bug bear with the presenting team however is the choice of the “roving reporters”, seemingly throwing out the presenters that they deem to be popular or relevant to ask the public their thoughts on the wedding day. Alex Jones earned the “worst placed presenter” award, when she was placed in Bucklebury – Kate’s home town. But of course, everyone of any interest was at the wedding so she was interviewing random townspeople who pretended to be happy but were obviously miffed at the lack of an invite. (even if they would just stick it on eBay) Edith Bowman was a slightly odd choice (dressed like a runaway ballerina) she was somewhere that again, wasn’t hugely interesting but she remained hugely upbeat about it all. Matt Baker was placed at Downing Street, which basically meant two interviews with David Cameron and no-one deserves to have to spend that much time with him.

Fearne Cotton was clearly to interest the “young, hip” audience and she came across very “BBC” and more subdued that usual (Celebrity Juice is where she really lets loose) She may need to brush up on the interview basics though. She was placed at Buckingham Palace for a portion of the day and asked a royalist how she was finding the day, the woman was wearing union jack flags as a skirt and replied that it was a really good event because it’s something cheerful on a day where there is many awful things happening in the world. What was a distance Fearne’s reply? “Yeah, it’s a great day all round”.

Although, the worst – by far, of the presenting team was Chris Hollins. I don’t really know why the BBC big wigs thought that an attention seeking, unfunny, sports reporter would make a good choice to help out on the day. For some annoying reason, he seemed to have a majority of the interviews with people on the street which meant he soon created a catalog of gaffe’s that would be competition for an episode of You’ve Been Framed! He asked two 16 year old girls if they were having fun with “Mummy and Daddy” the girls laughed awkwardly whilst the rest of us cringed. He complimented a woman’s face painting by stating “What a wonderful coloured face you’ve got there” again, causing everyone to shuffle with awkwardness. The “Mummys and Daddys” continued for the rest of the afternoon to the point where it became a reflex to mute Hollins every time he cropped up on screen, which was annoyingly regularly. He also had awkward “banter” with Huw, once such piece was about Hollin’s taking a cupcake from a bunch of children to give to Huw, when they refused Hollins just told Huw he would go hungry. The real hunger he seeked was good presenting skills from a roving reporter.

However, the wedding it’s self was wonderful. It was the first royal wedding of my lifetime and it really was a day that will be well remembered, the BBC did always made sure we missed nothing. (minus the slight blip of showing barely any Royal Family arriving to the wedding and yet showing about 10 minutes of the Beckhams in the queue to go inside. ) Every detail was beautifully done, and the Royal couple really did feel like the publics. From simple actions such as Kate’s humbling “wow” as she stepped out onto the balcony to see the adoring public, showing her ‘commoner’ spirit could never really go with a simple gold ring. The pair seemed to welcoming into everything, the waving from the cars, carriages and abbey, they looked as if they actually wanted to be waving to the public as apposed to feeling like they should. The cheeky second balcony kiss proved that they were a couple deeply in love instead of the many royal marriages that are simply to produce heirs to the throne.

I loved how they did things their own way such as driving out of Buckingham Palace in the Aston Martin with the pair of them looking like a real couple, without being escorted around like royals they are. Seeing them together as they head to the second celebration event in their newly changed clothes just shows that they act like everyone else and seeing them taking the time to even thank a pesky paparazzi member before they climb gracefully into their car for their wedding banquet. They seem to be so happy together and a pair of throughly nice people and today I have been incredibly proud to be a British person. Congratulations Will and Kate.

Should there be punishment for Churnalism?

Churnalism. The very notion of the word creates images of people chewing up copies of newspapers and spitting it onto the head of a journalist. Luckily, the “churn” is all about the stories, which is good as I would be nervous enough on my first day at a newspaper – the last thing I would need to worry about would be being eaten.  Anyway, I’ve drifted. Churnalism is the turning of press releases into news stories, often with little or no editing or additional sources/facts added.

The world of journalism seems to be in two sides about this, one half are very vocal about it and they will often boldly call Churnalism the death of journalism. The other half are simply churnalists who regurgitate the opinions of the first half. I personally believe it to be a very bad thing to hit journalism, especially as I’ve only studied the subject for a year and I could re-create churnalism. So what is the point of me continuing?  Let’s hope there is more too it or else I am paying far too much money and wasting two years to do a job of a churnalist I could easily start tomorrow.

In the “defence” of churnalism, it can be difficult to keep up with the world of 24/7 news and so much must be coming into newspapers and internet news sites that it must be difficult to sift through stories, but the solution of  ‘just hire more journalists!’ seems so painfully logical that it must have been suggested. The more journalists who can work on a story surely must mean that the story can be finished quicker and to a better, non-regurgitated standard?

I presume that many journalists who are made to ‘churn’ often do it out of wanting to keep their job as apposed to actually wanting to take the lazy option out of the situation, I would hope that journalists would think that way at least. However, the boring repetitiveness of churnalism must get the people down as just regurgitating press releases to send out as copy really requires no flair and no passion for the job or any skill. (This is not to mean that I see myself as unskilled, without passion or flair as I mentioned my ease on making churnalism earlier.)

With press conferences becoming news makers, journalism can be accused of flooding the press with pseudo events, the idea that news is becoming far too inundated with so called “news” which is nothing more than fabricated, premeditated, prearranged events that are easily for journalists to report on because they are preset and are often a story waiting to be written, an example being an interview with a movie star or a music awards show. I do believe that the news could easily snow ball into becoming purely pseudo events if such aspects as churnalism go on unstopped.

Websites such as Churnalism are great at showing us what it is but surely someone needs to be stopping churnalism, it’s almost like having a website showing where robberies are taking place, but if no-one is doing anything about it then it is utterly pointless. Maybe, however, there is too much pleasure from those in power about how cheap, quick and easy churnalism can be that they don’t really want to change it, they would be quite happy to see the whole 6o’clock news programme contain press releases.

Where does this leave journalists? are we one day going to just print press releases without it being churnalised into copy? Will the journalist soon just be a ‘CCPist’ (a cut, copy and paste journalist)? Simply, pasting everyone elses work and presenting it without ever getting recognition or being able to show true talent?

It seems as if we are stuck between a rock and a churned place, everyone seems to be standing in the middle with their knees shaking, no-one seems to be actually doing anything. Do you stand and watch a tractor approach you and cut you up into pieces or do you run? Someone needs to decide what we’re doing soon or else we’ll all be churned up and forgetting what our own voices sound like.

Journalism will ruin your life…..but in a good way!

I’ve only been studying Journalism for about a year but already I can see it making an impact on my life in weird, wonderful and – maybe to you – hilarious ways:

Everything you write today will have the importance of toilet paper tomorrow.

Journalism is so fast paced that if you don’t get your story done within the hour, chances are you may as well never do it. News is like Usain Bolt, shooting around a race track and you’re like – well you. Except more sleep deprived than usual and you’re trying to catch him before the stream roller that is a deadline runs you over. Grammar errors and mis-quoted sources are the untied shoe laces that will trip you up. A word of warning – wear slip on shoes.

The phrase “no reason, i’m just wondering” is your best weapon.

If you are searching for information, chances are that you can play the ‘dumb student’ role. Ringing a bus company to gain information on a new night time bus route required me to make out that I had never used a bus before, with the man at the end of the phone having to ask me at one point if I knew what a bus stop was. He was pleased to know that I did, I was just pleased that none of my teachers took me to one side to check that I had not lost the plot.

The phrase works wonders with your peers, especially those who know something interesting but are so hazy due to hangovers that you can ask any and everything out of them. More often than not, their sober counterparts will regret that 6th Jaeger bomb but you’ll be eternally grateful for it.

You can smell secrets on people like alcohol on a tramp’s breath.

Facebook, Twitter and a Google search can help you find anyone, learn anything and outsmart everyone. This will however, lead you to become so oversuspicious of everyone and everything that you may go crazy. Although, being nosey and finding out things can either make or break you, so be careful.

Having someone sub-edit your work is more uncomfortable than those talks with your parents

Having someone slash their pen through your copy, impaling the words “WEAK”, “DOESN’T MAKE SENSE” and “PASSIVE” on your unsuspecting work can be awful. Ultimately, it can help you achieve something really great but for those few minutes you’d have the ground, the sky – even a passing giant eat you up as the experienced eyes of a sub editor scanning your copy is like a worker at baggage control. You panic, even though you know everything inside is good stuff. Both will always find something for you to explain on.

Forget Freddie Krueger, Deadlines get into your dreams and cause you to go insane.

Take my first assignment for example. I was a good student, I handed the work in the day before the deadline, checked, double and tripled checked that everything was handed in correctly so I could have a nice lie in without the fear of a looming deadline. What was the reality? Me suddenly waking and sitting bolt up right at 11am the following morning, despite going to bed late and my alarm not set to go off for another hour. I checked once again and yes, everything was handed in correctly still. Needless to say, I go to bed every night before a deadline with my Turn-it-In receipt laminated and tied to me.

Finally, Grammar

Coming from someone who thought grammar was spelt with an ‘er’ instead of a ‘ar’ I was in for a big shock. Grammar was pushed to the back burner during high school and college, If i didn’t know a word or a piece of punctuation I would just ignore it and use something I knew how to use. That doesn’t apply to journalism. Grammar’s offspring: The Style Guide (It is colored red, it’s not evil in the slightest….) is like a screaming baby clinging to your neck during every piece of work, the slightest error against the guide and you are screwed. Fighting against the style guide and winning is like throwing a bowling ball into the ocean and hoping it will float back up. Learn the guide. Forget your mother’s name and how to drive if you have too just learn the style guide!

 

Despite all of these things, Journalism can be a lot of fun. It’s a wonderful excuse for me to be nosey (I was investigating something!), sarcastic (I was pitching a headline!) to be on Facebook (I was looking for sources!) and to leave your work to the last minute. (It’s not news unless it’s new!) It’s rewarding too, people telling you that your story was the best, the most informative or the fastest to break fills you with a rush and an excitement that keeps you ploughing on the next day. Just enjoy those hours on the pillow while you can because they soon become few and far between!

 

 

 

 

Who asked you?

Maybe it is because everyone is trying to act as if they know exactly what direction the world of journalism is taking, but every person who teaches me journalism always seems to be telling me the same things:

Social Networking and People’s Opinions.

Social Networking seems be the journalism equivalent of ‘the second coming of Jesus’. Every journalist who wants to stay on trend is running to Twitter like a duck to mysterious waters. Many just tweet about they’re own articles, (many of which are pretty great, although I didn’t need the advertisement for it.) many seem to end up erupting into spats with other journalists or even celebrities, with everyone watching open mouthed as the news reporter becomes the news maker. Some journalists tweet the usual useless information that we all do about how wonderful sandwiches are and asking who the hell Rebecca Black is.

But Twitter’s crowning glory to most, is it’s ability to link us with the world of journalism and more importantly for us to give our opinion any time we like, whether journalists want to hear it – or not. Comment boxes scatter every newspaper website, shamelessly asking for thought and opinion because apparently it’s interesting to share.

Now, this may be thin ice on which I’m skating but surely the reader’s input is not valued above that of the writer? Sometimes, hearing feedback is great and incredibly beneficial. However, more often than not, intelligently well researched articles (Daily Mail, you can leave now) are littered with mindless comments from people who don’t actually care about the article, they just enjoy posting off the wall insults to anyone who is willing to give them the time.

Personally, I feel Twitter is a great for the Journalist, comment boxes just seem to cheaper and weaken the stories that are already sinking in the sands of the Internet.

Bravery, what is Bravery?

I found myself thinking today about what it actually is to be brave. Seeing scenes such as the terrible Earthquakes in New Zealand and Japan really make you value who and what you have in your life because in a fraction of a second it can all be taken away and it can never be given back. I don’t know why I thought about bravery when I think of these disasters. Maybe because if it was me, I’m not sure if I could pick myself up, I think a part of me would want to stay hunched under that desk, trying to pretend I was a child playing hide and seek, not that my whole world was changed in so many ways.

Of course, bravery has two forms, well too me at least. There is the physical side of chasing an armed gunman, rescuing a person from a burning home; fighting to protect someone you’ve never met before in a fight, and all incredibly heroic – all unmistaken acts of tremendous bravery. I honestly believe physical bravery is in all of us, it has to be.

The other type of bravery, emotional bravery, really interests me. I have so much respect for people who are gay, it takes so much bravery to stand in front of your friends and family – the people who influence you the most and tell them who you are and what you feel. I am always baffled about homophobia because it requires so much bravery to be able to ‘come out’, something straight people have never really had to face.

I think the bravery to tell people no, is a vital one. To stand by your opposing view point in a room full of people who disagree and fight your corner. Whenever I tell my mum that I feel like an outsider because I don’t enjoy clubbing every night or drinking until I’m sick in the street, she tells me the same story. I don’t even remember myself in this story and I wish I could remember being there because I think it is the proudest I have been of myself. I was roughly 7/8 years old. I was at middle school. I and all the children couldn’t wait for the release of break times and lunch hours, seemingly endless free time before once again studying likes of Henry VIII and The Turbulent Term of Tyke Tyler. Unlike many other boys on the playground, I didn’t play football. I didn’t prefer rugby, tennis or gymnastics. I just hated football and sport in general, but that is more due to the humiliation of PE and being picked last for teams. Back to the point, I never really engaged in football, I often wonder what I would be like if I had forced myself to enjoy it. I would probably be like many other teenage boys who play football and all like to think we have the skills to present Match of the Day better than Gary Lineker. As unintelligent as society likes to think school children are, the other students were not so dim and they soon noticed I never played football. Of course, as children they didn’t offer me an olive branch of friendship and ask me to join in. They used to bully and insult me. Teachers must have noticed and eventually the stories of me being pushed over and tripped up by the football team got back to my parents. My dad, as wonderful as he is, was then and always has been a Formula 1 fan, he himself was never much into football so he didn’t mind if I liked football or not. My mum also didn’t really care for football but was bound by mothers love to intervene.  She sat me down and said: “Why don’t you just play football with the other boys?” and I replied: “No Mum, I don’t like football, I am not going to do something I don’t enjoy, and people should like me for more reasons than football”. My mum always tells me how moved and proud she was to hear me say that, to stand as my own person rather than a face in the crowd.

I sometimes wish that bravery was just as strong in me these days, I would love not to feel as if I’m totally alone when infact I’m not, but at the same time I would love to be brave enough to not feel ashamed of being alone. My parents have been divorced for about 7 years now and although my dad has found a new partner, my mum holds her head high and is independent, she will sit in a cafe of couples by herself and not care if people look, she will browse the shops by alone while groups of gossipy middle age women scan rails nearby. My mum has wonderful friends but she has no fear of being in her own company and I truly admire that bravery in her and I always will.

I think bravery can be physical or emotional. But most importantly, bravery is always in people, bravery encourages inspiration and inspiration encourages dreams, desires and hopes. Being brave is the greatest quality you can have because it inspires every other part of you.

 

Hello.

Hey,

This is my blog where I will ramble mostly, share the odd opinion or dozen, post up some news stories to practice my skills, share some technology and music stories as thats where most of my interests lie.

I hope you enjoy reading, and give the old Twitter a look for my ramblings 24/7 (ish)

@superthings