Whatever...

Big Brother – you ain’t seen nothing yet!

By Ryan Whelan

Each year, millions of us in the UK tune in to watch the latest series of Big Brother, but what many people don’t realise is everyday we’re increasingly taking part in a similar series ourselves.  With CCTV everywhere, biometrics in passports, fingerprint scanning to enter the US and more on the way, the surveillance society of Orwell’s 1984 seems closer than ever. 

With more than four million cameras, Britain is already the CCTV capital of the world and there are now plans to introduce road pricing, which will mean purchasing a tracking device to fit in your car.  This device will monitor your every movement via road, pretty much the same as an oyster card does.  If these plans come to fruition, we will no longer be able to travel unmonitored, unless we walk everywhere - and even then, most of us have mobile phones that are capable of pinpointing our location.

The latest example of ‘Enemy of the State’ Britain was splashed all over the front page of the Metro the day after I decided to write this blog: a story about the government’s plans to unleash a ‘super-database’ of our personal details, apparently in a bid to ‘improve public services’.  It just gets better, doesn’t it? 

OK, so what ‘improvements’ are the Government actually talking about?  There are two main reasons why it wants to introduce all this big brother technology. 

Firstly, to save itself the embarrassment of making stupid mistakes like contacting one family 44 times in a six-month period to confirm details of a fatal accident.  But secondly, and more pertinently, because the Government has a real problem dealing with criminal and terrorist activity in an intelligent way. 

So, as a result of its inability to find the real criminals, we’ll all be treated like one, just in case.  And this is despite the fact that the government itself has admitted that approximately one third of people whose DNA records are held on police files have not been found guilty of any crime. 

The madness doesn’t stop there.  Just when I thought it was safe to leave the country to escape from the all seeing eye, I read about a system that the US government has been quietly operating for years – the Automated Targeting System.

Many of you reading this will have visited the states in recent years and have had your fingerprint scanned – but what you probably don’t know is that you will have been investigated and assigned a score before you even leave for home.  The score is supposed to represent the terrorist threat you present, but you are not allowed to see the score, find out what information was used or challenge the score.  What’s more, it is kept on a database for 40 years.  This is technically illegal as it appears to contravene restrictions that forbid assigning risk scores to people who aren’t on a ‘watch list’…

We live in a world where presidents and prime ministers talk about removing dictators and introducing democracy.  However, in their own countries, they plan to use technology to do the opposite, by making it compulsory to hand over biometric info and install in-car tracking devices (although we can try to fight this one by signing this petition).

This all underlines the fact that governments habitually abuse advances in technology for their own benefit – I don’t know about you, but this isn’t exactly my vision of e-Government…

(and if all this isn't worrying enough, just check out some of the other ideas currently under review by the Government)

Pardon my English!

By Marjorie Meyer

So, here I am, writing a post for Johnson King’s blog…  Oh, but pardon my French!  From now on, we French are meant to erase the popular and well established word “blog” and swap it for “bloc-note”.  However, I’m sure this term is never ever going to be used by any French person over here!

This article on Silicon.fr made me gently smile.  In 2005, the same journalist reported the following: we should say “arroseur” (arroseur means waterer) instead of spammer and ASFI instead of Wi-Fi.  Well, I have never read this anywhere nor heard someone say that and we are now in 2007!

But do we really have to fear that Shakespeare’s language will crush Molière’s langue?  It reminds me of a conversation I had with a journalist who was pretending not to understand me when I said “set-top-box”. “Could you please speak French” was the answer I was given. I thought this was a joke given that she was a journalist supposed to be specialised in new technologies – but no.  So, next time I call her, I promise to say “décodeur numérique” to be sure she lends me an ear.

Isn’t it a bit ridiculous to turn English words into French when they have been used in the everyday language for a while?  We use loads of English terms, especially in the IT sector, and it is probably because most of them are easier to say, shorter and less pompous than they would be in French...

iPhone, but will wePhone?

By Tom Kirkham

As industry trade shows go, Macworld Expo must surely have the edge over the likes of Storage Expo and Aircraft Interiors Expo in the coolness stakes (though feel free to email if you wish to dispute this).  This year, the event has made the national front pages, largely thanks to Apple's most anticipated launch since the iPod: the iPhone.  But while it's slim and it's sexy, and I'm admittedly feeling a little seduced, this time I'm not sure if the world is going to fall in love.

Steve Jobs claims, "the iPod changed everything in 2001", and he's absolutely right - it completely revolutionised the music industry and has gone a long way towards killing the CD. However, the iPod was essentially a brand new device.  Yes, there were a couple of MP3 players floating around, but the iPod’s design and capacity made the format mass-market and - through close integration with home computers and the internet - has transformed the way people purchase music.

Now the iPhone is certainly as visually appealing as the iPod, but for all of its touch-screen-based ergonomically advanced aesthetically pleasing lovely-rita-meter-maid-playing features, it's still a mobile phone - not a new class of device - and one with an established set of criteria.  For instance, handset manufacturers continue to put number keys on their phones because the market has (so far) refused to accept anything more advanced.

Apple isn't creating the market this time around, it's entering an existing one in which handsets are heavily subsidised, churn is massive, and operator tariffs play a huge part in determining which handsets people choose.  As The Register has pointed out, Apple's primary focus should be on bigging up the iPhone to operators rather than customers.  Given the huge investment made in 3G in Europe, and the emergence of technologies like HSDPA, trying to sell in a GSM handset over here also represents a potential stumbling block.

It would be foolish to predict out-and-out failure for the iPhone given the colossal strength of the Apple brand, and the company's unerring ability to make grown men drool.  But the mass-market will surely need a lot of convincing if it is to embrace such a radical new design, especially since some people have owned bog-standard mobiles for years and still haven't figured out how to send a text properly. 

It's a tough one to call, and should it succeed or fail, Apple surely deserves credit for the scope of its ambition and sheer audacity.  What's more, there are only a handful of companies that have ever managed to create such mass obsession with a single product - and this despite the fact that iPods usually break after about twelve months!  It's a company with a blueprint for success, and who knows... if there are enough gadget freaks that get genuinely turned on by hi-tech toys (I'm thinking there are a fair few in the JK office), the iPhone could just push the Apple brand even further into the stratosphere.

Can jail-mail boost prisoner morale?

By Eilidh Beaton

So, the home office is planning a pilot project to give inmates email access to enable them to keep in touch with loved-ones.

This announcement is bound to rile some folk in the outside world - particularly certain Daily Mail readers - but without wanting to sound all wishy-washy liberal, provided the emails and the addresses they are sent to are closely monitored, I think it’s a great idea.  After all, prisons aren't just about punishing people - they're also about preparing them for taking an active and honest role in society once they leave (or at least that's the theory). 

Having quality contact with family and friends whilst in the nick has proven benefits for boosting inmate morale, leaving them better prepared for effective rehabilitation - in particular, helping prisoner-spouse and parent-child relations.

Also, by increasing their IT confidence, inmates may also feel better equipped to get a job once they’ve served their time.  As well as the obvious technology skills they will acquire or strengthen, using the written word on a regular basis could also help to exercise their communication skills.

A strict email policy will obviously have to be implemented, with prisoners made aware that what they are writing will be monitored, and that inappropriate content will be detected and not be tolerated.   Inmates will also need to be educated on proper email etiquette and appropriate network security measures will need to be put in place. But provided these issues are fully addressed, this is not an unfeasibly difficult project to undertake.

Of course, a line may need to be drawn somewhere - certain members of prison society should arguably be refused this perk.  For instance, convicted hackers and online fraudsters should be among those denied email access I would have thought…

All I want for New Year... are some well prepared interviewees

By Flora Haslam

An estimated 48,000 people work in the UK PR industry today, and PR consistently ranks in the top three career choices of graduates.  But what continues to surprise - in what is clearly a competitive field - is how many candidates arrive at interviews completely unprepared.

We hire for entry-level PR positions all year around, and admittedly have a fairly rigorous recruitment process - but it never ceases to amaze me how many candidates fail to get through the initial round because they simply haven't thought about the interview before they turn up.

Just typing 'interview preparation' into Google brings up a host of resources including likely interview questions and ways of answering them.  But of course, it's also a good idea to ask yourself if this is a job you actually want to do.  For instance, 9/10 candidates say they want to do PR because they're a "people person" – unfortunately, this doesn't necessarily mean you'll be very good at it, or indeed that you'll enjoy it!

The key point that comes up again and again is research.  Anyone currently working in PR would hopefully appreciate the importance of research, but many more hopefuls could be more successful if they spent just 30 minutes on preparation.  At the very least, it'd be a good idea to have a look at the company website, find out what they do and the things they talk about. 

So, for those candidates who are doing some research and checking out our blog before coming for interview, I'll let you into a secret - here's some of the questions you're likely to be asked:

·          Why do you want to work with us? ("Because my recruitment company set up the interview" is not an appropriate response!)

·          Why do you want to work in PR? ("Because advertising is a really hot area" is not going to go down too well either!)

·          Give us some examples of good or bad PR in action.

Oh, and a couple of don'ts...

·          Getting the interviewer's name wrong (it might make you memorable, but for all the wrong reasons...)

·          Consistently saying "no, I can't think of an answer, normally I could, but my mind is blank" (Just say something, anything!  The answer itself isn’t as important as your ability to think on your feet)

And finally, show a bit of enthusiasm – please!  It'll go a long way to endear you to the jaded interviewer who has spent six hours listening to the same old thing.