8 posts tagged “online”

I have to give props to the developers of the Mimbo skin for Wordpress—it’s a very good one that takes into account the needs of bloggers. Below is one of the sites we’ve been building—it’s not ready for prime-time yet, as it doesn’t have enough entries or contributors at this point. Mimbo needed little customization and we were able to make it look more distinctive than the out-of-the-box version.
   Prior to that, we were trying a German skin called Overstand, which was quite good in appearance, but not as easy to use. That might have been down to the language barrier. Mimbo seems to use the Wordpress features better and from what I could tell of the coding, is more logically structured.

US Life on Mars might not be as cheesy as the trailer (posted at the weekend) suggests. From a test-viewing subject in the US, who spilled the beans on her experience:

I actually hopped on to tell you what I watched last night—a preview of Life on Mars on my computer! (I am probably not supposed to tell or something, but I had to tell you, because you told me about the original version and it was so funny that at a certain point I knew what it was from your description.) Anywho, it was actually pretty good, although a lot more serious than I would have expected, and also I didn’t expect that he was going to tell everyone his story. I liked the whole ambiguity of whether he was really there or it was all in his head. The female lead is played very well, and Sam is played by a favorite actor of mine who can't seem to get a break…maybe this is it? I just don’t know how the general public will feel about watching a show set in the seventies. The fashion and the cars were great. Oh, and I got the episode as part of one of the survey groups I belong to online—but I had never gotten anything like that before. I wonder if they are thinking about it as a summer show?

   More on the Live Journal page where I found this comment. I think it bodes well if it is ‘serious’ as some who viewed the trailer thought it would be parodic.

I spotted the below on Ninemsn today and thought, ‘Poor Brian.’

   I clicked on the first link and found quite the opposite:    It’s not as embarrassing as the network, and the Murdoch Press, reporting on the Miranda Kerr incident two years late and getting the venue wrong, but it’s still an about-face.
   Netizens will be able to work out that the first link came about because the Ninemsn website reported that Delta Goodrem turned down boyfriend Brian McFadden’s marriage proposal. Then, the site’s staff found out more and had to instantly change the piece, but due to caching or the way the Ninemsn site is structured, the headline link on another page had not changed.
   This is not abnormal and at least the link goes to an accurate item of news.
   And Ninemsn was not alone, as Murdochs did the same thing:
   It all makes me wonder about the wisdom of such immediacy when it comes to the gossip press. Usually, the items are of little significance. They are disposable news, so what harm is there with a brief delay to get the facts right? The contrary argument is that since these items are inconsequential, then why should the facts need to be dead right?
   I realize that’s not the way celeb-based factoid-reporting works, and on the web, even more rules get chucked out in the quest to be the first on to Google News with the headline.
   But we are representatives of the media. We are, supposedly, journalists and editors and publishers. And as the fourth estate, we have a duty to the public.
   Call me a traditionalist, but I would prefer to get everything straight before committing to press in any medium, even if it means a delay.
   After the Miranda Kerr embarrassment, propagated by Sky, news.com.au and The Daily Telegraph (Australia) newspaper, I have had to conclude that I can’t trust Murdoch Press items at all. Before this week I took only The Sun and News of the World items with a grain of salt (remember all the speculation about who the next James Bond would be?), but am saddened to have to apply the same doubts across more of the Murdoch Press. Especially since the chief himself, Mr Keith Rupert Murdoch, has (thank goodness) vowed to up the journalistic standards at papers such as The Wall Street Journal.
   Maybe I should not lecture since I have never been on dailies, but my feeling is that the damage to goodwill across a group is too great when this sort of misreporting starts happening regularly.

I love it. Dr Jay Parkinson of Brooklyn, NY, has gone online with his practice:

http://www.inter-actions.biz/blog/2007/10/is_there_a_doctor_in_the_house.html

That means you can reach him via electronic means and he will do diagnoses accordingly, even after hours for emergencies.
   Now, I would love to see lawyers do this. Even an e-court. Parties or their attorneys feed in their evidence to a site with limited fields and a judge decides. No emotion, no BS. The decision comes swiftly. Any mitigating factors can be fed in, but lawyers would be encouraged to write everything briefly. They would be unable to hide extra charges. And if they think anything’s been missed, then the process could go to appeal before a live court.
   It would lower the price of getting justice because the system would no longer need to support a live District Court, and appeals would be at the current price of the original claim. It would also make things faster.
   Best of all, the legal profession, branded as shysters even in Shakespeare’s day, would appear more transparent. It would start going up the ladder in people’s minds.
   I would love to see a country like Singapore, or even New Zealand, give this sort of thing a shot. Singapore prides itself on e-governmental processes and this would be an ultimate test. New Zealand’s system is far too entrenched but I’d love to see a party adopt this idea.
   It’s far too radical for Labour, and certainly would be gobbledegook for National.
   Greens? United Future? The Alliance?

By 2009 or 2010, we’ll see some amazing, swish, but ultimately home-made and favour-using advertising campaigns for small businesses through YouTube. These aren’t corporations targeting the web, nor are they adaptations of ads made for other media. We’ll all marvel, and we’ll consider these campaigns the turning points; how they use the sort of special effects we have seen on The Lord of the Rings and the like. They might even come from unexpected countries, probably nations with strong ad heritages like Brazil, or innovative places like India. The commentators in the MSM will probably condemn it, and the global online audience will lap it all up.

If anyone is wondering where I have been, the answer is Facebook. Darn, that site is addictive. There are groups on there as well as a social-networking function, and my opinion (with my initial opposition) has turned 180 degrees thanks to Facebook’s good service and the tidiness of its interface. The groups themselves have more or less supplanted my interest in Yahoo! Groups. I can even import my blog entries.
   There are half a dozen Jack Yans on there, however, though I imagine you do not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out which one is yours truly.
   There is an awful lot of Canadians there, which is interesting. I am not sure if Facebook is a Canadian site, but their nationals seem to have taken to it more than any other group.
   Any friends reading this, feel free to link me. Quite a few of my contacts there appear to be fellow bloggers to whom I am linked through my main site’s blog roll.

I know the majority of readers of this blog is American, and you’ll see ads like the ones at left, for Ford and AT&T. We don’t down here, because ad agencies now geo-target their ads, and it’s a shame. Instead, we see some pretty awful gambling and free-download ads for the most part, and it’s driving me nuts.
   I’ve put this post up in case any Australians or New Zealanders doubt me when I tell them we do get some decent international advertisers, and we’ve seen L’Oréal and Revlon. Oh, even Condé Nast’s style.com!