Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MrsTrellisfromNorthWales

  • Rank
    MF Addicted

Recent Profile Visitors

568 profile views
  1. Those petitions are meaningless. I signed one demanding that Mr Brown force Radio 4 to axe Quote Unquote. A jolly serious issue, I'm sure you agree. One truly worthy of the prime minister's attention. It's easy to set up a petition on the No10 site. But the whole thing is just bunkum. It's one way that politicians can pay some sort of lip service to the green ink brigade. They'd never pay attention to it any more than they'd pay attention to some wittering on an internet forum.
  2. Ah there's a little blast from the past.... New Strand AND Three Legs
  3. Anyone want to take me up the Lhergy Frissell?
  4. We're down to $2.07 a gallon here. It was $4.50 a few weeks ago. 1 US gallon = 0.83267384 Imperial gallons
  5. Both irritate me. "Can I have . . ." is also wrong. Of course you CAN. It's within the realms of possibility. What we should say is "May I have . . ." And throwing a please in there somewhere wouldn't go amiss, either.
  6. They're a public company, all their figures are available on the net. Been searching. No luck
  7. Johnston Press's digital income is up more than 33 per cent. (Owner of IoM Newspapers) But overall income is still down more than 2 per cent. And they're doing quite well compared with the rest of the industy. It's easy to have a double digit increase from a small base. And overall internet advertising is up and big. That's MY point. My other point is that it's not now subsidising journalism any more. It's going to sites like Google, whose news service is a parasite on news services. A sad local isolated example, but I dont see anything to suggest it's an example of the industry as a whole. http://www.brandrepublic.com/login/News/591717/ I'd be very grateful for a link to a news story that says how much News Corp is making out of the internet through The Times and The Sun.
  8. Good ideas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayosphere is interesting about one experiment along similar lines. Absolutely. It's lovely to chat with your friends and share photos, isn't it? But can you wade through all that to find out if your MHK has voted for the incinerator?
  9. I agree with what much of what you're saying. It's about providing compelling content but nobody's been able to marry that with a revenue strategy that actually pays for it yet. If you've got the answer to that, you're doing better than the whole of journalism academia and the media will pay you billions. Meanwhile, the media flounders around looking for this Holy Grail. Murdoch buys My Space but doesn't know what to do next. ITV buys Friends Reunited but doesn't know what to do next.
  10. Slim, you're simply wrong. Nobody's making serious money from news on the net. But lots of journalists are losing their jobs. http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/NEWS/200...70531manc.shtml The reason the nationals put their content online is not because they're making money from it but that they're scared. They're hoping somehow that the market will grow and become "monetised" as they put it. And if they didn't everyone would turn to the BBC anyway. They also believe that it's about expansion of "the brand". They're turning to "convergence", which is journalists doing work for newspapers, the net and possibly broadcasters too. This is really about sweating assets better. However, the reason they're doing it is that the traditional sources of income are drying up and newspaper companies are experimenting with trying to make money on the net. None has done it very successfully yet. Multimedia (that word is a tautology, it should be multimedium) strategies are a band aid - making the best of a bad job. At the moment, newspaper income from traditional sources is still subsidising web operations. Indeed, as I mentioned, the real cash cows are the worst hit. Classified advertising is going to ebay and it will go to Craig's List once it's really hit Britain. The marketing director of a large newspaper company told me that the change in the rate of migration of job ads to the net in the last six months was "seismic". That revenue went, in part, on journalists' salaries in the past. Now it doesn't. It's not just a newspaper pheonemon, either. Television audiences are splintering because of extra choice, but overall viewing is down considerably because of the internet. Younger television viewers watch far less television now than the same age groups 10 years ago. I'm doing an MA on this. Can you tell?
  11. The biggest problem in journalism today is that nobody's found a way of making money from news on the internet. Meanwhile, newspaper circulations are declining and advertising is migrating to the web, so putting news content on the web (which is normally copy and pasted from the papers) is arguably counterproductive for newspapers and commercial broadcasters. Advertising rates on the internet are minuscule compared with newspapers and radio/tv spots. Meanwhile, the press's traditional money spinners, classified ads and job ads, are going to places such as E-bay, which has no journalism, or other specialist job sites. The question is who's going to pay the journalists' wages in the future? Of course, people scoff at journalists because it's trendy to do so. But how do you really find out about things? Without the traditional media, there'd be nobody sitting in courts or in Tynwald reporting on what's going on. How would you find out your taxes were rising or that your next door neighbour had murdered his wife? All we'd get is a load of me-too ranting blogs. And that would be no substitute. The BBC is, of course, immune to this problem because of the licence fee. About 15 per cent of news visits to the internet in the UK go to the BBC. Nobody else gets much more than 1 per cent. A few specialist publications such as the Financial Times are the only glimmers of hope in persuading people to subscribe.
  12. But do you know what "goodbye" means or whence it came? Let me elucidate: WORD HISTORY No doubt more than one reader has wondered exactly how goodbye is derived from the phrase “God be with you.” To understand this, it is helpful to see earlier forms of the expression, such as God be wy you, god b'w'y, godbwye, god buy' ye, and good-b'wy. The first word of the expression is now good and not God, for good replaced God by analogy with such expressions as good day, perhaps after people no longer had a clear idea of the original sense of the expression. A letter of 1573 written by Gabriel Harvey contains the first recorded use of goodbye: “To requite your gallonde [gallon] of godbwyes, I regive you a pottle of howdyes,” recalling another contraction that is still used. So do you want God to be with you? Do you really? I don't. And I tell anyone who wishes me "Goodbye" that I don't want any evangelical prostheletyzing before I leave them, thank you very much indeed!
  • Create New...