No world outside The Rock

Our indifference towards news that matters most is far worse than this kind of imagery intended to mock Darwin

Last Wednesday, The Independent (in the UK) ran an intriguing front page story entitled: “Fertility Expert: I can clone a human being” . Furthermore, he claimed to have cloned 14 human embryos and transferred 11 of them into the wombs of four women who had been prepared to give birth to cloned babies.

This is ground breaking news as human cloning is illegal in many countries, and it’s at the centre of many debates about bio-ethics.

Human cloning is the most controversial subject in science, and it also raises a number of ethical and spiritual issues. It is not just another scientific experiment. There are huge implications about what is morally right , the extent to which shall man play god, whether the clone will have a soul, and other issues. The newspapers here have been running follow-up stories for these last two days, and while I was checking Maltese papers on-line, I found no report about this. The Rock newspapers and news portals are inundated with reports about the usual useless petty political squabbles, routine court reports – our own version of gossip/paparazzi pages, requests from carnival enthusiasts, and news about ATMs being installed here and there.

This is not the first time. This year marks another important milestone in science history. Last February, the world – except The Rock – celebrated Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday, and this coming November, the world – with the guaranteed exception of The Rock – will celebrate the 150th anniversary of the publication of his book ‘On the Origin of Species’. Our ignorance and indifference towards these events are ‘historical events’ themselves.

For those who bother to be aware that there is a huge world outside the rock – where significant things do happen very often – here are the links to the follow-up stories:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fertility-expert-i-can-clone-a-human-being-1672095.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/steve-connor-this-procedure-cant-be-ethical-until-it-is-proven-safe-1672096.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/exclusive-video-the-creation-of-a-human-clone-designed-to-be-transferred-into-a-womans-womb-1672335.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-and-ethicists-unite-to-attack-doctors-clone-plan-1672701.html

The rest can keep watching trash television, and read about their nearest ATM.

MaltaBeano

Maltatoday and Beano share the same logo colours. Is my first read on Sunday turning into a comic now? Is Dennis the Menace the role model for MaltaToday?

I have been a regular MaltaToday customer and reader since its first issue, and I must say that I’m disappointed to see this paper going through a very bad phase – content wise – that is. It is being ‘managed emotionally’, and it REALLY shows.

MaltaToday is steadly turning into that kind of sensationalist newspaper that takes a kick out of negative events. Lately it has been flaunting the bad economic situation, and it seems to be preaching doom. There is only a certain degree of negativism that can be presented to the readers. If one goes over this limit, the product beomes boring. Alfred Sant is a typical example of negativity and the result that ensues.

Last Sunday’s story is a case in point, where David Darmanin’s report about Jason Micallef and Toni Abela’s ‘invitation issue’ made the front page, and then it turned out that the story missed some important ‘fine details’ that would have made this story far more irrelevant.

Yesterday’s edition lambasted Jason Micallef for not informing the newspaper last week that he had spoken to a clerk at the ‘House of Representatives’. The newspaper is right to be livid at Micallef’s omission of information. However, basic rules in investigative journalism dictate that whoever is investigating a story should speak to all parties concerned and listen to their version of events.

If the journalist covering this story did his homework properly, he would have found out which office was responsible for issuing these invitations, and would have asked for a comment accordingly. It is not rocket science; just textbook behaviour. Worse still, his editor and news editor failed to point this out. Had they done so, the newspaper would have been saved from the embarrassment of running a front page story based on information that will later result in being incomplete.

My impression is that there was such an adrenaline rush in the newsroom at the prospect of embarrassing Dr George Abela on his very first minutes (MaltaToday has been recently insisting on highlighting Dr Abela’s past ‘mishaps’), that the excitement prevented the people involved from thinking clearly. A whole and thorough investigation should have followed this issue, yet for some reason, it didn’t. This hasty behaviour doesn’t give a good image to the newspaper. A definite no no for a newspaper that tries to find fault in every single person, issue, and event. This, in itself, is good and journalism should not be about regurgitating politicians’ statements.

I’m sorry to say that mistakes like these cost the newspaper its credibility.

On a different issue, the paper’s Managing Editor seems to have chosen to embarrass two of his contributors. He’s been doing this for some time now. I must admit that I read Saviour Balzan’s column regularly as I find some of his insights, how shall I put it . . . . . “interesting”?

I have nothing personal against this guy. In fact, I never met him and I never spoke to him. However, I think that a person who preaches about ethics; constantly criticises people for their actions; and criticises all other newspapers and media houses for the products they offer must be extra careful and think a 1,000 times before taking any form of action.

For some weeks now, he has been running The one-minute resto crit. To start off with, this piece is a gazillion light years away from Ken Blanchard’s The One Minute Manager series as Blanchard gives concise and sound advice about the issue that the particular book deals with. Balzan’s contribution is only made up of a poor generic description of the restaurant’s main product, the address, and average price per person. If this is critique, then the Yellow Pages must be an encyclopaedia for restaurant critics.

However, the issue here is not Balzan’s review skills. The real issue is that his behaviour is obnoxious, demeaning and condescending towards MaltaToday’s own restaurant critic. The very same newspaper engaged a long time established restaurant critic whose website boasts of thousands of visitors every day. On Daphne’s blog, there were people who claimed that they actually buy the paper just for Mona’s Meals. Yet, Balzan’s decision to do his own ‘reviews’ conveys the message that he is not satisfied with his contributor’s work.

And if this is not enough, he is now taking the habit of lambasting another contributor – Vince Farrugia. To clarify, I agree with Balzan’s comments on Farrugia, and I think that the PN’s move to approach Farrugia is poor indeed. However, I don’t think that there’s any other newspaper in the world that officially picks on its own contributors and, above all, awards them the sarcastic Man of the Week spot!

These things should be dealt with professionally and internally. If he thinks that Farrugia is a twat, then he shouldn’t have him on the contributors’ list. It’s like a restaurant owner telling patrons not to accept food delivered by a particular server.

This is even worse than having one of MaltaToday’s journalists publishing an article against Balzan on the same paper; as this is a top-down issue. Staff don’t choose their bosses, but the opposite is true. So if Balzan isn’t amused by Farrugia’s behaviour, he should deal with the issue professionally by discussing it and agreeing on a desired outcome.

I am very disappointed at this kind of behaviour, and I truly hope that MaltaToday will walk its talk.

Mhux kollox ighaddi . . . .

Sale Sale Sale. Sale at San Anton Palace. Everything must go. All items at half price.

If I didn’t know who the person in the picture is, I would have thought that this is a promotional poster for a retail outlet where everything’s half price: half flags, half a lampshade, half a fireplace, half a chair, half a clock. The expression kollox nofs kedda fits the bill perfectly.

This picture is a joke, but the sad news is that it wasn’t meant to be that way. I don’t want to give the impression that I comment on issues just for the sake of it, and at a first glance, one may think that the President’s official photo is a non issue. It is. In normal counties, though. His is the zone where normal things don’t happen very often, and even simple routine events like taking the President’s photo end up being an issue. The main reason: shear amateurism.  Even a circus monkey would have done a better job.

The photo should have never made it outside the printing lab. Even I could do a better job. Yet, the President’s team and the DOI failed to see it, and it had to be Joe public to point out that this is simply not acceptable. Now, they are pondering whether they should distribute another picture. I don’t know why they’re taking so long to decide. This is photo is simply a non starter.

The real issue is not whether Dr Abela looks good, or whether he should sit or stand. The issue is that there’s a complete lack of pride when it comes to ‘official icons’. How many times have you seen a national flag still flying after dusk, or at night? I can never forget the grey (as opposed to white) and red flag at the post office in my childhood. The poor flag hadn’t been washed for decades.

Unfortunately, Mintoff’s attitude towards protocol seems to have rubbed off on many people. Worse still, it seems to be carved (or shall I use entrenched?) into our general collective psyche. Would you imagine the photo incident ever happening in the US, or the UK? Forget it. In many countries, anything that symbolises the nation (be it the flag, the President’s / Monarch’s photo, or any other symbol) is sacred. There’s no way that people will treat them with disrespect.

This is not a film set where one is allowed to have a number of takes until the director is satisfied. It is  neither a release of some cheap Beta version software awaiting testers’ feedback. This is official business, but those responsible for this mess seem to be oblivious to the cliché that image is everything. I bet my head that even his passport photo would have looked better.

In contrast with the popular saying, this photo conveys the message that whole is smaller than the sum of the parts.

Maj lingwistikk dajlema

Is it a 'dilemma' or a 'dajlema'?

I am one of the many people who cringe when they see words spelt like: “kowc”, “bagit”, “junjin”, and other strange looking words in a language we called “Minglixx” (pronounced Minglish using English phonetics).

At school, my friends and I used to take the mickey (no pun intended) out of grammatical mistakes by writing phonetic Maltese which was identical to the examples I just cited. Little did we know that this would have inspired the Maltese language gurus who turned this into official language!!!!

Now it’s all over the place: newspapers, books, television and magazines. It’s a complete eyesore and I hate this form of ‘grammar’ with a passion. When I look at this issue purely from an emotional viewpoint, I reach my verdict in 0.0000000000000000001 seconds. Flush this language down the toilet. Punto e basta.

However, when you look at this issue from a logical, practical, and linguistic point of view, you can understand the validity of our gurus’ logic. Let’s take a word that we use practically every day. The verb ‘to park’ in Maltese is ‘tipparkja’. It doesn’t look awful doesn’t it? It’s all psychological. I think that it doesn’t look bad (at least in my eyes) because all the letters in this word have their own proper sound.  Hence the word looks Maltese.

On the other hand, the ‘oa’ in ‘coach’ is replaced by the ‘ow’ in ‘kowc’. This looks absolutely ridiculous and phoney.  Having said that, if we had to use the verb ‘coaching’, ‘tikkowcja’ looks much more appropriate than ‘tikcoachja’.

There’s more. Take ’spray’ for example. If we had to keep the original English spelling (which I would prefer – on an emotional level), would tisprayja work? Definitely not. It’s a smorgasbord of different languages with disastrous results. It’s akin to using zalzett tal-Malti instead of pork to create a Chine/Maltese sweet and sour recipe.

Malti Safi enthusiasts may rebut this claim by asserting that we have a semitic word for this, and therefore there should be no issue. The Maltese word is ‘tharreg’ but this is not a correct replacement of ‘coaching’. Tahrig is training and there is a marked difference between coaching and training.

While I believe that the gurus are wrong to change the structure of plurals (like ghelieqi instead of eghlieqi; and ghasafar instead of aghsafar) because of popular ignorance towards the structure (which is quite easy when you realise that ‘Razzett’’s changes form to  ’Irziezet’ – the vowel precedes the first consonant), I can understand that the only way to make ‘imported’ words work is by giving them a Maltese structure.

20 questions on G20

This is an interesting link from The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/31/g20. This page currently tops the list on the ‘Most Viewed on guardian.co.uk’.

I wonder why our media never come up with this kind of stuff. Instead of wasting time covering politicians cutting ribbons and utterung senseless rhetoric, they can start trying to be journalists rather than comic book writers. The tragedy is that they’re not even good at that!

Do you have a problem? Try religion and you’ll be absolved

It’s night time and I’m at the crossroads past the ship building on my way towards the fishing village. On my right, there’s a big black spot. It’s the cemetery dedicated to Lady Dolores.

As I eagerly awaited the traffic lights to give me the green light to move, I killed time by scanning my surroundings. A billboard about some Easter pageant caught my eye. It was the only one with a flood light illuminating the huge promotional poster of a soldier nailing a bearded dude wearing a thorny crown. The violence in this poster is explicit.

I thought to myself: what if someone had to promote a video game or a movie using a snapshot of a violent scene? Would it be censored? Would parents complain? Probably – or most likely – YES. But since this is related to religion, it becomes acceptable. EUREKA. This was a light bulb moment for me. From now on, if there is anything unusual that I would want to do, I would have to somehow link it to religion.

Let’s go back in time. Think of the crusades and the inquisition. Murder was accepted in time of oppression as it was being done in the name of god. Suicide bombers in our times apply the same logic. Land expropriation and ethnic cleansing in the New World were also committed by god’s loyal servants.

Back to our time. Let’s take a look at village festas and processions. The enthusiasts take up the few parking spaces on the streets close to the churches because they want to set up pedestals. People have to clear off the streets and park miles away (even if they have a reserved parking because of a member’s disability) are expected to find an alternative space to put their car. Just because a handful of enthusiasts happen to practice a hobby that is somehow related to religion, they have full control over the village streets.

And what about being dead drunk in the morning? Jumping bare-chested troglodytes swearing at every single person on god’s chosen list (with the exception of the patron saint of the village) showering everyone with hennikin or lager are permitted to do so – even though police are present. Since this is being done during an event that is somehow linked to religion, all laws protecting public decency are null and void. Religion takes precedence.

This is precisely the reverse of the Nadur carnival debacle. People can dress up as doctors, nurses, pilots, and other professionals. It’s ok to poke fun at people who have very respectable vocations, but if you dare to link religion to carnival, our friend Torquemada will rise from the ashes and crush you.

Now, I think I have an idea. In these times of hardship and financial difficulties, how can I link a bank robbery to religion? I hope to find the key fast enough . . . . .

PS Who of these two will say “I’ll be back” first?

Another reason to bite the bullet . . .

Three days ago, I posted a blog about the need for political parties to stop their TV operations.

Earlier today, the Broadcasting Authority sanctioned two TV stations after they broadcast programmes which breached guidelines on the portrayal of vulnerable people. One of these stations is One TV.

The BA examined editions of Arani Issa broadcast during November and December 2008. In one edition, the show’s producer chose to focus on a participant’s physical defects, in a manner which the authority believed was excessive. BA guidelines state that close-up shots should be avoided when they constituted an invasion of privacy, including close-up shots of physical or facial defects.

In addition, the show’s presenter made a number of comments concerning the participant’s personal and private issues. Given the difficult experiences which the participant had gone through, the authority believes that such statements were a needless intrusion into the privacy of a vulnerable person.

In light of the evidence provided, the station was found guilty of breaching regulations, and fined €1,164. Now, the issue here is not the measly €1,000 fine. It’s the fact that the party which is supposed to safeguard the rights of those who feel disadvantaged is found guilty of exploiting a person’s weakness. Let’s face it, one must be really desperate to accept this kind of treatment: a TV crew filming the very areas you are personally and specifically unhappy with, and a Kamikaze Lover prancing around explaining how that person is going to be transformed from an ugly duckling to a graceful swan.

This is definitely one hassle that any political party can do without.

For the record, the authority also investigated the candid camera TV show Issa c-Cans, broadcast on the Family Television Network. On an edition of the programme broadcast on 4 January, a number of minors were subjected to pranks which the authority’s CEO believed were excessive, and which could have had a negative psychological impact.

The Commissioner for Children had previously expressed her concerns on the programme. The station maintained that the children’s parents had consented to their participation, but nevertheless admitted to the breach of guidelines and was fined €931.

(Source: www.di-ve.com)

I rest my case

This is precisely what I meant earlier on when I wrote about political TV stations and half truths they churn out. Take a look at this excerpt:

“’Freedom Day is part of a chain of events that shaped Maltese history and should be given equal importance as other national days,’ said opposition leader Joseph Muscat during a recorded interview by l-orizzont editor Frans Ghirxi, aired on One TV yesterday morning.

Dr Muscat added that it is a misfortune that the Nationalist Party and its media are denigrating the 30th anniversary of Freedom Day and portraying it as a partisan day. This shows that the Nationalist Party has not yet reached political maturity and that a national consensus on Malta having one national day can never be reached with this attitude.

The PL acknowledges that Freedom Day could not have happened without the important milestones Malta acquired, chronologically, in the 7 June 1919 riots, Independence Day and Republic Day. ”

You can read the full report on http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=85121.

Now it is quite cheeky of Joseph Muscat to talk about political immaturity. This is what my friend Dr Siggie Friend calls “Projection” where a person’s personal attributes, unacceptable or unwanted thoughts, and/or emotions are ascribed onto another person or people. Dr Friend tells me that projection occurs when a person’s own unacceptable or threatening feelings are attributed to someone else.

It’s no secret that many people question Joseph Muscat’s maturity for his post – both in terms of political maturity and life experience. Was he projecting, then, when he claims that the PN has not reached political maturity? Let’s see.

One of his former leaders in recent history, The ONE and ONLY SAVIOUR (though the only time he saved Malta was in 1998 from Alfred Sant’s erratic behaviour) was the one to remove Independence Day from the list of public holidays. His successor, KMB retained this decision.  For the record, Muscat was full of praise for il-Perit,  and has now decided to imitate his unique negotiating tactics with other countries.

It was Eddie Fenech Adami’s administration in 1987 that resorted 21 September as a Public Holiday while keeping 31 March on the same list. Additionally, it is high time that the Labour Party will stop treating us like fools and – even worse – give its leader the possibility of communicating half truths on its own TV station.

It was agreed in the independence treaty of that the British troops will leave the island in 10 years time, and with a possibility of a further 5 year extension. Who was in government 10 years after the Independence? Then, by inference, who agreed to extend the troops’ stay by five more years? So far from freeing the Rock from British troops, our dear SAVOIUR went for the further 5 year extension. I hope that Muscat knows this.

However, even if it weren’t so. Even if the one and only Dom had negotiated the retreat of the troops. It is not more important an event than Independence. Negotiating your independence from your coloniser is by far the most difficult thing to do for a government. Let’s take a look at the bloodshed that other countries all around the globe had to go through in order to obtain (in some cases) independence. In some other cases, people are still fighting their fellow citizens or their colonisers in order to be able to govern their own country.

And just to prove that this is the zone where normal things don’t happen very often, I will invite you to take a look at ALL the other countries that were ones colonised, and see which is their national day: the day they obtained their independence, or the day that the troops left their land?

I rest my case.

Hey guys, bite the bullet

Oh dear. I’m knackered today. We had a dinner party at my good friend (Dr) Sggie’s house. If it weren’t for Minnie, I would have spent the whole night talking to two people who are involved in the local media scene and I’d like to share one of the many conversations we had.

We started off by discussing the pleasant absence of Tista’ Tkun Int and drank to its lack of presence from our airwaves. We must have drink a whole bottle of champagne to that; but that’s irrelevant now.

Then we discussed the quality of the programmes on air, the budgets, costs of production, lack of talent, and other interesting topics. This led us to party-owned stations and their pointlessness. I really wished that Paul and Jason were there as I would have loved to ask them if they really intend to keep running their TV stations.

Running a political party doesn’t come cheap. So why add a massive burden to their finances? The problem is that Net and One are highly unlikely to sway an election result. This is usually determined by the floating voters who in turn do not fit the profile of a Net or a One viewer. Anything but that.

Hence, essentially, what these stations are doing is: preaching to the converted. They’re contributing to the useless political divide. The unnecessary polarisation between cousins and second cousins living on a rock that’s practically as big as Heathrow Airport (well, not quite, but you get the drift). So let’s work out this syllogism to test if it makes financial sense for political parties to on their tv stations or not:

1. Television is very costly: both in terms of producing material, and in terms of managing and running it
2. The main source of revenue for tv is advertising
3. There are very few companies who can afford to run constant advertising campaigns on television
4. These few companies have, in turn, very limited budgets
5. The vast majority of Net and One supporters are avid party supporters: hence they’re preaching to the converted
6. Both stations are running at a big loss
7. Political parties need a lot of money to pay their employees, fund research, and fund their campaigns
8. Political parties need to spend a lot of time discussing policy and strategy
9. The losses perpetrated by the political stations are forcing their owners to spend a lot of time thinking about mitigating these problems – instead of discussing policy
10. The major goal for every political party is to win elections – which requires attracting the biggest possible number of votes
11. The political stations are mainly watched by party loyalists
12. Very few floating voters watch party stations regularly
13. The only exception to 12 may be the main news bulletins
14. Floating voters determine who wins the elections
15. The number of floating voters is on the rise year after year

I think that even my dog Osama will conclude that the above points show that there are more –s than +s for political parties to have their own stations.

Now put this within this island’s context. Less than 50% read at least 1 book per year. The education system (up to university) makes it damn right sure that our students do not form an analytical frame of mind.

Just look at the way westerners discuss issues (very dispassionately), and look at how the Rockers look at any given issue. We tend to look at issues passionately, get worked up about it and most of the time put our religious and/or political paradigm blinkers on. Most of the time people also tend to embark on a fault finding goose chase to see whom they’re going to pin the blame on – even if it is completely irrelevant to the issue.

Some might argue that we’re Mediterranean, therefore we have to be passionate. Not necessarily. Just look at our neighbours who live on the boot peninsula. Despite them being passionate, they can discuss serious issues very logically and in an articulate manner.

So, many individuals are not analytical, but they’re passionate. They are brought up in families who ram the parents’ own beliefs down the children’s throat. The children are not analytical and they are likely to ‘inherit’ the beliefs. Now, at some point in life, something may happen to them and their beliefs are challenged. Because these beliefs are not based on logic, and there is no ownership, these tend to be rejected as a whole. In the same way that they found their way inside the individual’s heart and mind as a whole, they find their way out as a whole.

Moreover, some people’s disgust towards politicians (and priests) is increasing on a daily basis. Just listen to the sweeping statements uttered in intellectual circles around a bar (or a kazin) table. The Rockers are losing their confidence in the same classes that their fathers used to once, literally, adore. Just look at the arguments against the proposal of having a parliament building instead of the opera house, and you’ll see that these are more a case of anti-politicians than being anything else.

The realisation by these same individuals that the political parties are fuelling the divide between the islanders’ indignation towards politicians. Some people actually cite the unnecessary divisive language, half truths, and sound bites used by the party media to fool the viewer. “In-nies m’ghadhomx cwiec” they utter, and then they go on about how ALL politicians are corrupt, are “in it for the money”, are only interested in fooling people, all they care about is their own pockets, etc, etc. Once again, generic statements as a result of lack of analytical training.

So basically, what I want to point out is that in the long run, political party stations are not only a massive burden on the parties’ finances, but they’re also having a boomerang effect on the political class.

Isn’t it high time for Paul and Jason to sit around a table and bite the bullet? Is it worth squandering all this money for just a few months every five years? Why don’t they just broadcast in the run up to and during the electoral campaign?