NEWS & MEDIA

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RAGE AGAINST THE MC ELDERRY!

The race for the Christmas number one is heating up as two hugely different songs go head to head:

Rage against the machines: Killing in the name off vs The Climb by Joe McElderry

One is a song born of angst, a response to the race riots of Los Angeles, an angry rap metal ballad written by a group of young Los Angeles metal pioneers in a dingy and dirty warehouse in early 1990’s Los Angeles. The other is a turgid piece of manufactured pop which is actually a cover, so it’s not even an original piece of crap; it’s a cover of piece of crap. I’ll leave you to guess which one is which.


You can probably already figure out which artist I am rooting to be at the number one spot and yes I have already downloaded it (legally) from I-tunes. The Rage tunes popularity is the result of a facebook campaign that has snowballed over the last week after originally being conceived by John Morter and his wife Tracy. It is a response to the repetitive nature of the Christmas number one being constantly dominated by the x-factor winners new single and they seemed to have the support of a large proportion of the population that think the same. Speaking to NME Morter said: "We've nothing personal against him [Cowell] at all; we just do not want yet another Christmas chart-topper from that show again." Simon Cowell has branded the campaign as “cynical” but many people have also commented on the irony that Simon Cowell has a vested interested in Sony Music who own the rights to both tunes, so isn’t he the real winner here? Rage recently appeared on radio 5 live and had to be faded off the air as they failed to edit out the swearing on their live performance after originally promising to do so, predictable really when you consider the line reads: “F**k you I won’t do what you tell me.”

While this increasingly tight race can be seen as interesting and light hearted the fact that the Rage tune is outselling the X-Factor says something fundamental about how the majority of people in the UK feel. Tom Morello, guitarist from the band, commented on Radio 5 live that the internet campaign "tapped into the silent majority of the people in the UK who are tired of being spoon-fed one schmaltzy ballad after another". It is interesting to see what happens when people rally around a cause and really get behind something, what people can achieve without coercion from the media or government. A lot of people in the UK, and across the world in general, don’t play a part in politics, don’t vote, don’t watch Saturday night TV and don’t give a toss about the X-factor, it’s interesting to see what happens when these people raise there voice.  I personally am excited about this development in people power and believe the power of the internet to rally people around a cause has the potential to be huge. It’s exciting and liberating to think that people can get together and cause such an upset without any government or media involvement and that those who look at the x-factor, society and modern celebrity culture with bemusement and detachment are finally having there say. Let the revolution begin. Get out there and download the Rage tune and lets have all have a Merry Christmas!

WRITTEN BY JOHN CLARKE            NEWS & MEDIA WRITER FOR NSP MAGAZINE

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COPENHAGEN SUMMIT: THE HEAT IS ON!

It’s been a few days now since world leaders met in Copenhagen to discuss measures to reduce greenhouse gases and global warming. It is effectively crunch time, if concrete proposals and targets are not put in place then scientists warn that a temperature rise of about 4c could occur by 2050 causing catastrophic changes for mankind. For the UK this might not be such a big deal, a rise of 4c might only mean we can actually get some sunbathing done in the summer months rather than suffer the predictable onslaught of cloud and rain. As usual though it is developing nations who are likely to suffer the most as, due to their geographical location and financial position, they will be most affected by the rising sea levels, droughts, deforestation and not have the resources to adapt too or prevent these changes.


Already from the talks though it looks like measures are being out in place to try and help those developing nations in combating the effects of climate change. EU leaders have pledged 7.2bn Euros to help developing nations generate infrastructure and defences against the aforementioned problems. Will it be enough though? Many argue that the figure is wholly inadequate and somewhat reprehensible when you consider they are footing the bill for the way we in the developed world have been living for the past few decades.

As well as measures like this concrete proposals need to come out of the agreement or we may well all be screwed, some scientists say it’s too late and we already are but others argue if we act fast and in unison we may be able to avoid the worst of it. Is it likely that the Copenhagen talks will work then? Here’s a few of the drawbacks they face:

•    No as the sum of the nations can never agree on universally fixed targets and these targets are never binding.
•     Domestic politics and support will always trump international agreements; if the measures require popular support back home can democratic leaders accept them if it means risking the support of the people who keep them in power?
•    The majority of people are selfish and apathetic; yes they want to save the world but do they want to change their lifestyles? No way. Hence the point above.
•    Even if nations agree it will take the efforts of large nations to make it work such as China and India. The European proposals are pointless if not backed by major polluters and industrialised nations.
•    The dangers are still some decades away. Anymore immediate problems that impact more directly on a nations people (the recession) will always take priority over the reduction of emissions.

WRITTEN BY JOHN CLARK                       NEWS & MEDIA WRITER FOR NSP MAGAZINE

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/12/06/article-0-077E11E8000005DC-271_306x423.jpg

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BANKS AND BONUSES


Alistair Darling is currently at war with the banking industry in a battle that could ultimately determine the fate and future of the UK banking industry.
The issue at hand:  Should bankers be awarded bonuses as a reward for the amount of money they generate for the banking system. The political and financial institutions are seemingly at loggerheads. On the one side Mr Darling is arguing that it is the big bonuses and money making campaigns that have got us into this mess, why should we be rewarding these people and shouldn’t we be looking at a wholly new financial system in the aftermath of the credit crunch. On the other hand the banks argue that without bonuses expert bankers and those generating profits will just move abroad, work in political systems where they will be awarded bonuses reflecting the profits they are making.

It is easy to side with Alistair Darling on this one, some commentators claim that propping up the banks has cost the average UK household 40,000 pounds, a lot of money when you consider most people wont even earn this much money in a year, or, in some cases, like me, a lifetime. Politicians now feel they have a moral obligation to clamp down on these bonuses as if they don’t how can the Labour party expect to win the next election? The general public are of the opinion that these rich fat cats have screwed us all over, why should we be paying them big money once again?

Well ideally we shouldn’t, but the problem is we live in a capitalist economy, how can we expect not to pay the bankers their bonuses? What other system can we put in place? Bankers who make lots of money will always be paid bonuses for this, that is the nature of the system we live in and for better or worse you cannot go around changing it. The philosopher and thinker Franz Kafka once stated that "the machine works and it’s own justification," his view of the nature of politics and society can be readily applied here, this is the system we live in and it cannot be changed and trying to change it will only cause problems. If bonuses are cut, the bankers generating profit will leave, the banks will stop making money and we could soon find ourselves with a sluggish financial sector compared to other competing countries. London would soon loose its position as a financial centre, companies would look at setting up in other cities, investment would slow down and we could see ourselves facing greater problems. So the right thing to do is not always the best thing to do, no-one can deny that bankers bonuses should be cut but to do so would only create greater problems. The government is now starting to realise this and, as Alistair Darling has also announced, he will now start looking at heavy banking taxes rather than directly targeting the bankers themselves.

WRITTEN BY JOHN CLARK  NEWS & MEDIA WRITER FOR NSP MAGAZINE