Speaking of adverts, is it just me or does “I can’t wake up without my furry alarm clock” (Iams cat food advert) sound kind of ‘rude’?

Labels: advertising, TV

Confronting mortality on a Monday evening

Is the new Lloyds TSB “…for the journey” ad campaign totally egregious and depressing or what? It features a fat animated couple on a streamlined animated train passing through life from cradle to grave, accompanied by poignant music, purchasing financial products from Lloyds TSB at each critical point.

Thank you, Lloyds TSB. I am aware that my likely to be unremarkable life is slipping away towards my likely to be unremarkable death and that looking back my most significant contribution to the planet will probably have been to have acted as an income stream for various financial institutions and businesses. But, on a Monday evening in front of my television after work, I do not care to receive stark reminders that the sands of my hourglass are inexorably trickling away as I continue to consume.

Labels: advertising, TV

Racism

I appreciate that I am well off the pace with this one, but I have had more important things to worry about, like being hounded by various London Councils with their demands for unjustified fines in relation to fanciful offences.

However, I am sure that it will not have escaped you in the meantime how extremely stupid it is that a programme which documents what happens when one incarcerates a number of stupid egomaniacs in a confined space has had such an impact on worldwide political and media debate, to the extent that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been compelled to make a statement of apology to the outraged, effigy–burning people of India.

One might think that this Big Brother debate is something of an irrelevance, when our neighbors are apparently proposing to kidnap members of our armed forces in order to torture and behead them on live webcasts. Never mind what is happening in Iraq. However, the Government’s terror about being seen to condone racism is revealed by the statement from Tom Kelly, Downing Street spokesman:

“What clearly is to be regretted and countered is if there is any perception abroad that in any way we tolerate racism in this country. What the response to the programme has shown is precisely the opposite: that there is no level of toleration in this country for anything which, rightly or wrongly, is perceived to be racist. The message should go out from this country loud and clear that we are a tolerant country and we will not tolerate racism in any way.”

That is not the statement of a tolerant country. It is the statement of a hysterical, terrified country. We are so bloody tolerant that according to the spokesman for our Prime Minister, “there is no level of toleration in this country for anything which, rightly or wrongly, is perceived to be racist”. What a position to adopt! If any nutcase, at home or abroad, entirely without justification, feels that the British are being racist, the message is that this Government will not rest until the racist sons–of–bitches responsible have been hammered.

Slow down, Tom Kelly. Here is some advice. We should stop pandering to people who insist upon getting outraged and offended at everything in order to promote their own agendas. Instead, we should treat these as the childish tantrums that they are. The Government should stop being so terrified about looking bad in the media and actually try offering some strong leadership and common sense. Jade Goody should kick herself for making herself look like an ignorant bitch and potentially throwing away a highly remunerative career being a professional idiot (jury’s out on this one — a highly remunerative career being a professional recovering former racist in rehab idiot may still be available). Shilpa Shetty should continue laughing all the way to the bank and enjoying the millions of pounds that will now no doubt flow in her direction thanks to the hard work of Max Clifford.

Labels: TV, UK politics

Who is the strongest man in the world?

(‘My Dad’ aside, obviously).

World’s Strongest Man is ace. A January televisual institution that gets us through a dark time of the year.

However, watching this year I wondered what had happened to some of the athletes. For a few years, it always seemed to be Pudzianowski of Poland, Zydrunas Savickas of Lithuania and Vasil Virastyuk of the Ukraine who were battling for podium places. Pudzianowski and Virastyuk got the victories but Savickas was perhaps the most consistent with three second places in consecutive years, two to Pudzianowski and one to Virastyuk (with Pudzianowski in third until he was disqualified for failing a drug test).

Pudzianowski’s still around but where are the other two? A quick bit of internet research reveals that, like with the darts, strongman has split into two rival federations: the Met–Rx event and the rival IFSA (International Federation of Strength Athletes).

The parallel with the darts perhaps goes deeper. While one federation gets all the TV coverage (the Met–Rx), arguably the world’s best are to be found in the other federation. Many say that Savickas, currently IFSA World Champion, is in fact the strongest man in the world at the moment, as he holds several records for overhead lifts and has won the Arnold Classic Strongman competition for the last four years, finishing ahead of Pudzianowski.

Unify strongman, I say, and let’s see who really is the strongest man in the world!

Labels: sport, TV, WSM