Common Courtesy – Still the Best of British?

What the fuck is going on with (what used to be) the cornerstone of British culture formerly known as courtesy?

Somehow, but don’t ask me how, employers have made the leap from writing back to unsuccessful job applicants (as a matter of course, and common courtesy, to at least acknowledge that applicants invest their own time and energy into attending interviews), to just not bothering to call or write back. Surely, as a basic rule of human interaction, the very least should be a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ by email, and even that would be severely lacking in sensitivity and professionalism. But to simply not contact the applicant..?? I say again: WHAT THE FUCK????!???

Left Uni? Professional CV? Overqualified? You can fuck off too.

 

Have employers become so jumped-up, contemptuous and discourteous that they actually forget the fact that employment is a two-way street? Yes, that’s right, the applicant will be flexible and professional; but, by the same token, a company will lose a great applicant if they don’t conduct themselves properly before, at, and following interview. To make things worse, many of these unqualified ego-maniacal bastards have themselves ‘lucked-into’ their roles and sit behind desks with fewer qualifications than the people they’re inviting to interview. In fact, most don’t even have the skills to:

a) Write an accurate and detailed job description (instead, unwittingly using the interview process to refine what they want, leaving a queue of interviewees and wasted time in their wake. They’ll then simply re-list the revised job later – having, of course, totally failed to contact the people who’s time they’ve wasted.)

b) Review CVs and portfolios thoroughly (leading them to ask idiotic and ill-informed questions at interview – making the interviewee feel like they’ve wasted their time – again.)

c) Exercise even the most common of courtesies: thankyou for your time, but we will not be taking your application any further. I mean, what does it take to simply write that into a letter/email and send it.

At which point in time did companies wake up one day and say: “Get ‘em in for interview and the ones we don’t want – well, fuck ‘em”; whilst a well-meaning but slightly old-fashioned secretary pipes up with: “But Sir – aren’t we even going to send them a letter to let them know?”
“No. They can just fuck off and die for all I care. And if any of them contact us again, straight into the bin please. Especially the ones who are outraged at not being contacted.”

Parody? I wish. This, believe it or not, is the most common employment practice in the UK today. How it happened is a mystery, but it probably occurred one Tuesday teatime on the same day that red telephone boxes were abolished and half a dozen employee-rights were quietly erased from the law books by cretins in Whitehall.

In short – where professionalism and courtesy are concerned, it’s hypocrisy of the highest order. They sit there, mulling over CVs, expecting candidates to conduct themselves professionally, whilst all the time wanking under the table and thinking about Brenda from Accounts. It’s the pot and the fucking kettle. I mean, by what standard, by what measure, according to which school of business, is it ‘okay’ simply to not reply to someone who wants to contribute and devote their working lives to a company…? Well??

Employers: If you can’t treat job candidates with at least the same level of courtesy as they extend to you in timely and respectful communication… well, you should get out from behind that fucking desk and take a long hard luck in the mirror. And perhaps go to University. Three times.  Then try to get a new job. Good luck – you’ll bloody well need it.

GZS

How to weed out the mentally ill: EastEnders

Just check this out:

DeadEnders

“An error which led to a private mobile phone number appearing on screen during an episode of EastEnders compromised privacy. Lisa Edwards’ number was briefly displayed above a text message received by Ricky Butcher from Sam Mitchell.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8644648.stm

But the single most amazing thing about this story is this part:

“Mrs Edwards says she received 2,800 messages after the episode was aired in September, some of them abusive.”

So, that means there are thousands of people who:

a) Watch Eastenders on TV
b) Watch Eastenders on TV – and THINK THE PEOPLE IN IT ARE REAL,

and

c) Watch Eastenders on TV, think the people in it are real (presumably transported into the little glowing box in their living room through electrickery and Hogwarts) AND WRITE DOWN TELEPHONE NUMBERS AND CALL OR MESSAGE THEM after the show’s over.

EastEnders is real life! Me kill you ded if you say it ain't!

Now, glue my eyelids open and make me watch soaps if I’m wrong, but there are clearly two closely connected things at work here: delusional morons and East-bloody-Enders. Unlike the search for the evolutionary ancestry of Homo Sapiens, there is no missing link here.
Mad People + EastEnders = Abusive phonecalls meant for imaginary TV characters.

When the UK population becomes 95% comprised of socially-malajusted slightly unhinged soap addicts it’s going to be Soapageddon. I say that we should waste billions of pounds of taxpayers money, not on failing banks or MP’s expenses, but on an Elite Anti-Soap-Nutter Taskforce who unbundle themselves from unmarked vans during the next episode of DeadEnders, storm these people’s houses and drag the raving morons into large Soap-free recovery insitutions. Institutions where sterilisation is mandatory and all forms of electronic communication and entertainment are restricted.  I know, I know – I’m a  soft touch.

GZS

Cameron: He’s no Twat.

Conservative leader David Cameron has apologised for using a four letter word during a radio interview about the social network website Twitter.

more about “BBC NEWS | Politics | Cameron sorry f…“, posted with vodpod

Well, at least there’s one good reason to vote Conservative.

At last, a politician who’s not pandering to some misguided notion that the electorate want their leaders to be ‘down with the kids’ and get all ‘hip’ on us. By saying what he really thinks about the time-wasting self-absorbed oiks who ‘tweet’ Cameron’s clearly got the measure of Twitter and Twitterers.

I’m only sorry to hear that he’s since apologised for the use of a pretty tame four-letter word. In my opinion it would be much more appropriate to hear Brown and Clegg apologise for advocating the use of Twatter in Government; using public money to haemorrage a torrent of inane bullshit onto the internet – that’s the real outrage.

GZS

To Tweet or not to Tweet – that is the twatting question.

Tell everyone about your meaningless shit - all day, every day.

I’ve already covered what’s ‘wrong’ with social twatworking site Twitter here. But…

If you thought it was astonishing that there are human beings who regard “I’ve just watched TV for an hour and taken a shit” as worth putting into cyberspace, now we have our elected and tax-funded government doing it too.

And look at the torrential flood of uncertainty that it’s generating. Nobody’s sure whether Twitter is of any serious or long-term value whatsoever, yet we have stories in the news like this:

Government Advice Urges Tweeting
New government guidance has been published urging civil servants to use the micro-blogging site Twitter.

It beggars belief! Armies of civil servants being told by their bosses that that can spend an hour a day on Twitter!  What useful information is going to make it into those 140-character ‘tweets’? Okay, if it’s a news service then you might be able to argue that they’re just using Twitter as a bulletin service, HOWEVER the intention is:

“[to] produce between two and 10 tweets per day, not including replies to other Twitterers … Tweets should also be limited to issues of relevance or upcoming events rather than just campaign messages, and insights from ministers are encouraged.”

So, expect a flood of meaningless crap, paid for by your taxes, as civil servants struggle to find anything useful to put into 140 characters ten times a day. Listen up you Government types: Less is not more when it comes to of politics and the electorate. More quips for political sniping, more headline-grabbing but shallow soundbytes and more off-the-cuff policy rhetoric is NOT what we need. We need detail, we want full explanations, more information. Really, us kids can handle it.

Meanwhile…

Clegg Takes Over His Own Twitter Name
Lib Dem Leader Nick Clegg has reclaimed a Twitter account in his name from a supporter
“This is obviously something I do with some really great people in my office who are much more gifted at this than I am. You wouldn’t want me to tweet all the time.”

That’s right, Nick – we don’t want you to Tweet all the time. You and all politicians should recognise that jumping on the high-tech social-networking bandwagon, while it might ‘sound’ good, just creates another faceless electronic barrier between you and the electorate. I like the web, I really do, but people want to be heard, they want to meet their errant local counsellors face to face at least once a millennium. (Also, who the fuck would ever describe anyone, or themselves, as a ‘gifted’ at Twitter?? I mean, that’s like saying you’re ‘gifted’ at pissing.)

And then, back at H.Q….

The confusion really sets in:

Council Bans Staff From Twitter
The council said the use of Twitter was being reviewed to ensure no messages, or “tweets” may damage its reputation.

So, on one hand central Government are telling their staff to be twats and twit ten times a day at their own discretion; and on the other we have local councils banning Twitter altogether – essentially because they don’t want the opinions of their employees outside  their direct control. So, my next question is: if Twitter is going to be part of every civil servant’s job function, who’s going to pay for the enormous task of vetting, monitoring and moderating what is ‘tweeted’. What do you mean “you don’t need to” ? This is the Government we’re talking about. In a month or so, (after some scandalous and damaging tweets have been allowed to happen, of course..) they’ll have a choice to make: ban Twitter altogether and save a ton of public money, OR…
Spend a few million quid on a central ‘Twitter monitoring Department’  to ‘ensure quality tweets’ in each town council and government office. Bang goes the new hospital ward you hoped your taxes might pay for, then.

Meanwhile, over at the Department of Smoke and Mirrors….

They’re reading this happy item with sheer glee:

Twitter Followers Can Be ‘Bought
‘Twitter users who lack an audience for their messages can now buy followers.

Gordon Brown, yesterday.

So, as Twitter becomes the popularity-barometer of choice for political parties everywhere, we already have organisations who, for a fee, will do the Twitter equivalent of buying votes. How democratic. What do you mean “they’d never do that”…?

I predict that this phenomenon will mutate into full-blown Twatter-flu within only a few months, burning a giant pyre of public cash on the way. It will become a national epidemic and resist all attempts by sane people to shut it down in favour of longer, more meaningful face-to-face contact with the electorate.

And, finally…

Royal Household Turns To Twitter
The Royal Family has now joined the Twitter micro-blogging revolution.

Twitter was probably invented for this exact purpose – the Queen naturally speaks in 140 characters or less. What she says might be qualified as ‘royal news’, so we’re not going to get Twitter-twatter like:

“One just had a stonking curry followed by six lagers and an absolutely monster spliff. Now I’m orf to watch ‘Ross Kemp on Gangs’.”

GZS

How may I fucking help you? The science of Swearology.

No Fucking Swearing

Some boffins have worked out that swearing like a navvy is actually good for you. Well, providing that you’re in some kind of pain:

Swearing ‘helps to reduce pain’

I suspect that this started out as another ‘waste of a fucking research grant’ which has turned into a ‘fucking interesting and potentially fucking useful fucking bit of Swearology’.

The bastard point that I’m fucking making is that there are loads of twatty fuckers and sad wankers out there who fucking well swear all of the cocking time, and use swear-fucking-words where other shitting words will do, in the merry-fucking middle of normal cunting sentences.

Like, fuck, yeh?

They’re not in pain. They might be standing at a bus-stop and reading the timetable (“Wot the fuck’s the fuckin’ time? When’s the next fuckin’ bus?“), asking a shopkeeper for change  (“I need some ten-pees for da fackin phone fackin’ box, dun’ I.”) or the most prevalent of them all: the almost-literally-meaningless idiot-speak about nothing inparticular to be heard everywhere and anywhere: (“So I went to the, fuckin’ y’know, fuckin’ Mcdonalds an ordered a fuckin’ cheeseburger an’ the fuckin’ bitch gimme a fuckin’ normal fuckin’ burger, an’ I was like fuck, an” she was like ‘oh fuck’, so I said fuckin’ forget it an’ walked the fuck away. Fuck that. Fuckers. I mean, Fuck, yeah?”)

It’s really not worth my time to point out that these people are morons who aren’t and never will be self-aware enough to realise that they’ve fallen into a habitual way of speaking that is roughly comprised of 40% extraneous swear words, 40% conjunctive words and 15% nouns; leaving only 5% for the other words that create meaning.

The main thing here is that these people use these words outside their normal contexts: pain, frustration, anger, comic irony and other kinds of  wordplay.  For example, it’s a useful linguistic tactic to use swear words to highlight extreme situations  – as exemplified by Gordon Ramsay. He’s the perfect example of a man who needs to swear to help failing restauranteurs wake up to the deep shit they’re in (but he’s become a habitual swearer in the process unfortunately). My point is that these people who swear throughout their everyday speech have no-where else to go when they actually are in pain or angry. They’re already at 9.9 on the ‘swearometer’ before they’ve even started!

I mean, what happens if one of these personalities slams their hand in the car door? “Oh fiddlesticks!” ? Don’t think so. It’s more likely to be “Ohhhh FUCK! FUCKING FUCKER! FUCK FUCK FUCK! BASTARD! FUCK! FUCKER!”, which is what you might expect, but it only amounts to a rise in volume and 3% more swear words than ‘normal’. So, to take it up a notch – what if they slam their hand in the door, the car starts rolling towards a bus-stop full of swearing kids and the poor guy drops the lit cigarette from his crushed hand onto the car seat and it catches fire? See..? There’s no where else to go, no more heights on Mount Swear to scale. Or, perhaps there is – it’s just that they haven’t been discovered yet. Maybe it’ll take a habitual swearer, pushed to the extreme, to unlock a whole new realm of Swearology.  I don’t think the universe could take the resultant Swear-energy that would be released – it would probably create some new kind of radiation which punches a hole through the fabric of reality itself into a fifth dimension where swear-words fill the air like a sea of magical ether and Swear-wizards ride the waves by barking out a torrent of  “fuck!” “shit!” “bastard!” etc. Probably.

There’s only one type of person who’s allowed to use swear words in everyday speech – a comedian who understands irony. If, like this man, you swear in the normal course of business you’ll soon realise that (punching holes in the fabric of reality aside) there is no place to go after you’ve used up a full arsenal of top swear words. Apart from extreme violence. Here he is – the mother-fucker Mike Strutter:

more about “Strutter Direct“, posted with vodpod

I say we should keep swear words for the proper occasions, otherwise they’ll lose all their power – and then what will we say the next time some inconsiderate bastard nicks your parking space? “Oh crumbs! What a blasted buffoon.”?

GZS

Twitter – is it bollocks?

Well, according to many it’s the next big thing in ‘social networking’ with high-profile publicity provided by famed ‘twitterers’ like Stephen Fry fuelling the mega-hype that’s made Twitter a household name.

Finally, someone’s proven what the vast majority of us were all thinking:

Twitter IS over-hyped bollocks afterall.

But is doesn’t take a genius from Harvard to work that one out. Consider what Twitter is: it’s a way to communicate with people on the internet via computers using the written word. Wow -revolutionary..! Not at all like email, instant messaging, forum websites or mobile phone texting!

But hang on, there’s something unique about Twitter that sets it apart from all of the above: you can only write 140 characters. Yes, less is apparently more. Allegedly, this is supposed to encourage the ‘Twitterer’ to only ‘twit’ something that is short, direct, meaningful and easy to read.

Now, I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade (well, a short shower maybe) but generally people tend to write things that have a lot more meaning and information in them (or, at least, more meaningful information) when they have a bit more room than 140 characters. Even an SMS message is 160 characters – and still ppl have 2 rite lke a tw@ 2 say 1 basic thing.

So, whereas you might have got an email detailing your friend’s and family’s lives with some degree of interest and depth, you now have Twitter – or, in short, the meaningless bit at the end of the emails that’s just in there to fill space and holds no interest for anyone. Like:

“I’ve just washed the patio with a pressure hose and how I’m knackered”
and
“Off to watch telly in a bit, but might have a pizza later”
or random opinions plucked from the ‘unmitigated self-importance’ portion of the Twitterers brain, like:
“I’ve come to the conclusion that Dostoyevsky’s early work is inferior to Freud.”
and, the Twitter equivalent of shouting “I’m speaking to you from the train!” down a mobile phone.
“I found that I can Twitter from my mobile phone, hooray! “
and, perhaps the most typical kind of twitter-twatter:
“Had a spare minute between watching daytime TV and taking a shit – so thought I’d have a quick Tweet”

It’s like being caught in a world that self-perpetuates, thanks to ever-decreasing circles of logic: I tweet therefore I am therefore I tweet … ad infinitum. If people were ever lucky enough to run out of events of mind-numbing insignificance to tweet about, the natural evolutionary course of tweets on Twitter would be:
Day 1: “Hi, I’m having a Tweet”
Day 2:”Having tweet”
Day 3: “Tweet”
Day 4: “Twt”
Hence, ‘Twitterers’ evolve into the ultimate expression of user-meets-function: the ‘Twatterer’ .

So, if you revel in knowing the minutiae of people’s existance, vomited at you in bite-size chunks about 300 times a day then you know where to go.

GZS