Peterloo customisers – the knockers.

And of course the extended jamming session goes on  – below is a selection of custom avatars that I’ve come across on my CiF travels that are celebrating riffing on the Peterloo theme – mouseover the images for the creator’s name. I’ll add in more as I come across them or I get them pointed out to me, but so far the Portaloo Massacre is my favourite.

Feel inspired? Download the photoshop templates for easy customisation. Just want a ready made? Originals, all new versions and the photoshop templates here:

Peterloo avatars – scroll down after clicking

Wondering what this is all about?

The Peterloo avatar is being used on the comments section of the Guardian newspaper by posters .

Why Peterloo?

The Peterloo massacre was an attempt to kill, literally, a pro democracy march. The fact cavalry charges and unsheathed sabres were used against women and children provoked such horror that the Guardian newspaper was born to give a voice to the voiceless.

The Guardian’s editorial policy seems to be raising  questions as it often seems to report facts without attempting to explain the importance of the issues for groups affected – like the current demonisation of people who have disabilites and claim welfare by the media, something that the Guardian should be doing more about.  How can it be critical of right-wing policies yet supportive of the Lib-Dems?

It’s also worth stressing that Peterloo is happening because people care enough about the Guardian, to want to try to make it better.

Want to comment but not sure how? click here for tips.

Want to see more articles about this?

Follow c1nf updates from twitter:

Advertisements

Peterloo avatars update

The Pererloo campaign seems to have really taken off – a success due to the hands of many – hence the theme of ripples in the latest round of avatars above.

So I think it’s a good time to take stock of what we’ve achieved so far and where we’re going with this.

Firstly we identified one of the issues as bringing up the topic of the Guardian’s political direction, as this, almost ineveitably, seemed to involve moderation of comments and user accounts. As such it seemed logical that before we could start to bring up the issue of the Guardian’s politcs, we had to first ensure there could be an open and free environment in  which to discuss it.

Lightacandle contacted Liz Forgan, the Chair of the Scott Trust

Thank you for your email which has been forwarded to me as Chair of the Scott Trust.

I am afraid that you misunderstand the role of the Trust in respect of the editorial views and content of the Guardian. It is our job to safeguard the independence of the editor, not to intervene in any way in his editorial decisions. It is this which marks the Guardian out from most other journalistic enterprises and it is a discipline which we guard very strictly.

We attend to the underlying values of the paper and the company, to ensure that the ethical standards we set are being upheld. The leader line on any given issue is a matter for the editor and the paper’s attitude to the coalition is not something the Trust would ever discuss.

As you yourself illustrate, a wide range of opinion is available to readers of the Guardian both in the paper and on line and, though there will always be fierce argument among both staff and readers about all kinds of issues, the proper place for that to be aired is in Cif or through the Readers’ Editor.

Yours sincerely

Liz Forgan

The reply was helpful in highlighting the Guardian’s position on the role of Comment is Free and the Reader’s editor.

Then we broached the subject in CiF higlighting the contradictions in the way the moderators had been responding to  posters bringing up the political line the Guardian took on given subjects, effectively silencing the debate -it was a busy thread so I’ve linked in the key posts in chronological order:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/comment-permalink/12835129

Having cleared the way to freely discuss the issue of the political direction of the Guardian, we’ve since sent a letter as to Alan Rusbridger asking for an open debate about the issue of its  rightwards swing

Looking for the original Avatars?

How to use these

– right click on the image of your choice and save it to your computer
– got to your CiF profile click Edit Avatar (under your existing one)
– click on the browse button and in the area marked “Upload an avatar”
and navigate to the file you downloaded, select it and click “upload”

and that’s it – it won’t show up immediately but just be patient.

Want to make your own and get into the Peterloo avatar customiser’s gallery

I’ve knocked out a Photoshop pdf, where the different elements are in layers for easy customisation which you can get from here:

peterloo layers

note: sorry – this only works with photoshop I’m afraid, Gimp will load it as a flat layerless image, contact me through the https://c1nf.wordpress.com/youve-got-to-see-this/ form if you want a psd.

Want to comment but not sure how? click here for tips.

Want to see more articles about this?

Follow c1nf updates from twitter:


Peterloo customisers

One of the great things about the internet is, it’s like an extended jamming session. People pick up ideas and run with them doing their own thing. Below is a selection of custom avatars that I’ve come across on my CiF travels – mouseover the images for the creator’s name.

Feel inspired? Download the photoshop templates for easy customisation. Just want a ready made? Originals, all new versions and the photoshop templates here:

https://c1nf.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/peterloo-avatars-update/

Wondering what this is all about?

The Peterloo avatar is being used on the comments section of the Guardian newspaper by posters .

Why Peterloo?

The Peterloo massacre was an attempt to kill, literally, a pro democracy march. The fact cavalry charges and unsheathed sabres were used against women and children provoked such horror that the Guardian newspaper was born to give a voice to the voiceless.

The editorial policy of late has been puzzling and raises questions on the amount of trust that can be placed in the Guardian’s journalistic integrity remaining intact – how can it be critical of right-wing policies yet supportive of the Lib-Dems.

The other issue is the appearance of supporting the free flowing spirit of web 2.0, while falling down on the practicalities.

Which, in all fairness the Guardian has listened to and acted upon:

PhilipOltermann 14 October 2011 3:05PM

Thanks for your response. Your point about talking about mutualisation being one thing, and actually engaging with readers’ comments being another: completely taken. And if you think it can sometimes look hypocritical from a readers’ perspective, again, I think that’s a fair point.

All I would like you to appreciate is that making the news gathering more open to readers is a process that will take some time. It means changing the habits of a lot of people. I know a lot of journalists who worry that they don’t have time to properly check their facts and follow minor leads because they have to now monitor Twitter, Facebook and comment threads. That’s not to say they won’t get the balance right eventually. But the point is: you can’t just change a switch from one day to the next. And while I do believe that some areas of journalism are very suited to ‘open’ journalism (e.g. comment, Datablog, liveblog of the riots coverage), others are less so (e.g. investigative, ‘behind the scenes’ stuff).

The rolling comment blog was an experiment: some bits worked (we had a really good discussion in the Labour conference thread about what sort of poll lead Labour would need now in order to win the election), but other bits really didn’t. More than happy to take your criticism on board there.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/comment-permalink/12835129

Peterloo is happening because people care enough about the Guardian, to want to try to make it better.

Looking for more on avatars

Want to comment but not sure how? click here for tips.

Want to see more articles about this?

Follow c1nf updates from twitter:


Peterloo update

I’d like to say a big thank you to Light a Carrot for looking after the blog and particularly for this beautifully eloquent post. Having been more out of touch than I had intended I’ve been reading back over what I missed while I was away, and boy was it an exciting read.

I have to say it came as no great surprise that Julian Glover has decided to leave his job as journalist and chief leader writer of the Guardian, and I wish him every success with his new venture as script writer for David Cameron – who is no doubt hoping Julian will help him to pick up those “lost liberals”.

It was however continually surprising that he was working for the Guardian. I say surprising as his career choices certainly would have indicated his heart lay elsewhere politically

Julian Glover is the Guardian’s chief leader writer since 2006. He launched the Guardian Unlimited Politics website ahead of the 2001 general election, before joining the paper’s news desk. He moved to report from Westminster in 2005. He worked with John Major on the former prime minister’s autobiography and at the Economist and on several BBC Radio documentaries.
http://www.ufollow.com/authors/julian.glover/

Of course now that he is gone does this mean we’ll be saddled with worse? Is that actually possible?

The feral beast: Glover digs in heels at Guardian

Sunday, 11 April 2010

News reaches me that Julian Glover, The Guardian’s token right-winger, is resisting writing leaders endorsing Labour in the election.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/the-feral-beast-glover-digs-in-heels-at-guardian-1941140.html

Don’t get me wrong I have no intentions of bashing Mr Glover. It is just so zeitgeisty, all this pretending to do the opposite of what you actually are doing. And yet.

It’s that feeling isn’t it – of making do as none of the choices you’re being given actually match what you want, and it’s that feeling of needing to do, something, that this gives rise to.

In short there is no other outlet in the established media that doesn’t already mouth the same Tory/Orange liberal Freidmanite agenda – and yet that same media outlet has been slowly flirting with the same New Labour/ Caring Conservative/Orange Liberalism. As an opinion it already has more than enough proponents, and it’s at the root of all the ills we face currently from the services being dismantled to the massive debt each one of us has hanging over us.

This is what’s behind the Peterloo Massacre avatars – a quick visual reminder of what people really want – a loud champion for democracy and our basic human rights to counter the backroom deals and debt slavery.

How to use these

– right click on the image of your choice and save it to your computer
– got to your CiF profile click Edit Avatar (under your existing one)
– click on the browse button and in the area marked “Upload an avatar”
and navigate to the file you downloaded, select it and click “upload”

and that’s it – it won’t show up immediately but just be patient.

 

Want to comment but not sure how? click here for tips.

Want to see more articles about this?

Follow c1nf updates from twitter:


The beast of the land?

This post is authored by Cmnimo as part of the Making Ripples that last project:

It’s no secret that the IMF is presently re-negotiating terms with emerging markets. The priority is on re-balancing the relationship of surplus-rich developing nations with those of deficit-laden advanced economies.

Milton Friedman

Top of the list is ‘stabilising’ the Eurozone and the need to pacify the markets has turned short-term auterity measures into an excuse for a wave of mass privatisation. From this point on, there’ll be no turning back. The transfer from public ownership to a global market is already underway.

Christine Lagarde of the IMF has presented this as the answer to recapitalising the financial institutions at risk in the Eurozone but the private insurers and pension funds are themselves in no shape to deal with their own books let alone a mass transfer from public to private liabilities. This could explain the talk of cutting red-tape along with safety-nets. Private investment is geared to cherry picking. The need to reduce operational cost while increasing profits, then to sell off for maximum returns was, in it’s way, a key ingredient of the financial crisis. But these are laws of the market place. Left unchallenged, market forces will place downward pressure on wages and is why credit makes up the shortfall in many household which keeps the price of assets (domestic or otherwise) rising… until boom turn to bust. The money is by nature amoral. Markets do not factor in the human cost, only track human responses.

The ‘Smart Money’s’ not geared to configure the impact and subsequent knock on effects on the real economy. That’s not the business they’re in. We say recession, traders see a once in a generation opportunity. Populations quake at the thought of depression, they dream of vulture-fest. It was why, after giving the private sector every opportunity, successive governments found the only viable response to employment, housing, education, health and general infrastructure was the creation of welfare systems. Despite the lessons of the past, present and clear warnings for the future, across the spectrum, both public and financial leaders state the infrastructures of advanced economies are sound enough to make these welfare systems redundant(ffw 7mins 12secs).

As this consensus was formed in a democratic vacuum, it should tell them what everybody else knows… it won’t work. Likewise Lagarde went for the simplest solution, ignored the data and chose to reinterpret the cause of the credit crisis as individual households living beyond their means but perhaps that’s due to the IMF’sown present vulnerabilities, Here, the areas which have seen large scale privatisation (housing. utilities. transport) are actively increasing the chances of a double dip recession by awarding themselves an ever greater slice of average household budgets while they either penalise or constructively factor out low income customers. Without a counter balance there is nothing to correct these perpetual profit driven errors. What’s impossible to ignore is the inevitable deterioration in conditions for those on low incomes once the safety-net is removed although the IMF does try.

cyan-wolves2

Let the Cyan Wolves look after you - they know best.

A study by the UN children’s fund, Unicef, said there would be “irreversible impacts” of wage cuts, tax increases, benefit reductions and reductions in subsidies that bore most heavily on the most vulnerable in low-income nations. It found that between 2010 and 2012 a quarter of developing nations were engaged in what it called excessive belt-tightening

That couldn’t be a clearer indication. Although the IMF developed its pro-growth/austerity programmes in emerging economies, it offered only a blanket denial and mechanised response to Unicefs report.

”Recent Fund research shows that social spending has increased at a faster pace in countries with IMF-supported programmes … particularly in low-income countries. This is true for social spending in relation to GDP and as a share of total government spending, as well as increases in per capita social spending after adjusting for inflation.”

Want to comment but not sure how? click here for tips.