The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Jimbo caught in Bath, on BBC TV
thekohser
post Sat 26th November 2011, 2:53am
Post #1


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



Could one of our British cohorts take a peek at this video?

Does Jimbo embarrass himself in any way? Was the show live on 11-24, Thanksgiving Day?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Sat 26th November 2011, 4:00am
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 26th November 2011, 2:53am) *

Could one of our British cohorts take a peek at this video?

Does Jimbo embarrass himself in any way? Was the show live on 11-24, Thanksgiving Day?

Does not look as he did.
QUOTE
Lastly for the panel we have Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales who has taken time out of his busy schedule of berating me for money to appear on Question Time. Actually, I have to admit that I don't resent Wales getting all up in my face and demanding cash because I'd be lost without Wikipedia and genuinely think it's the best invention since tracky bottoms. Anyway, he was an odd choice seeing as he understandably knows little about UK politics but that's not to say it was a bad performance by any measure. In fact, he struck the balance just right by pleading ignorance on the things he couldn't possibly know about whilst making sure that his line on the things he did have some expertise on, like freedom of the press, was pretty robust. Not bad going in my book.

This above description of Jimbo reminded me PUSHKIN'S EUGENE ONEGIN. I wish you were able to enjoy it in Russian, but ... here's it in English:
QUOTE
We all have studied by bits and pieces
Something or other and this and that;
So with this learning, God be thanked,
It is not difficult to make a splash.
Onegin was, in the opinion of many,
(Critics both stern and even incisive)
A studious fellow, but somewhat cranky.
He had that very happy knack
In conversation to be carefree,
To touch on everything in passing lightly,
And with an expert's look and bearing
To keep silent when the talk grew heavy
And to make the women smile and admire
An epigram's unexpected fire.


This post has been edited by mbz1: Sat 26th November 2011, 5:10am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sat 26th November 2011, 10:23am
Post #3


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 26th November 2011, 2:53am) *

Could one of our British cohorts take a peek at this video?

Does Jimbo embarrass himself in any way? Was the show live on 11-24, Thanksgiving Day?


See below. I need colour-coding to identify and distinguish between blatant platitude and blatant hypocrisy, but didn't have time. Does this mean it is OK to publish details of all Jimmy's affairs (see his remark about footballers).

QUOTE

First question is on the upcoming public sector strike, about which Jimmy probably knows very little, and sure enough he says (7:50) "I'm not enough of an expert". He goes for the easy option of briefly saying that bankers getting big bonuses is 'criminal' (applause).

Second question (15:30) is on the topical topic of privacy laws, following media harrassment of celebrities.Should there be new privacy laws? 'Over to Jimmy Wales'.

'Er, so this is a very interesting question and I think, ah, on this issue I come from the United States we has a very strong First Amendment tradition which I think is absolutely correct and I think the risk we are running here, because of this outrageous conduct of the media is losing the distinction between freedom of speech and criminal behaviour. And I think the criminal behaviour, ah, is some of the most outrageous behaviour, needs to be very severely punished. This idea that maybe we need to rein in the media and not allow to publish certain kinds of stories is a very dangerous road to go term. Ah, in terms of people going to jail for stealing information for hacking phones, er, blagging to get people's personal details unethically, you know, pass them in jail." "What about the apparently perfectly legal methods of evading people's privacy that we've heard about during the Levensey enquiry?" "Well I think we need to look at all of those and decide, ah, whether or not they should be legal. Ah, if we're talking about behaviour that amounts to stalking and harrassing, if it happened to people in their ordinary lives, a,h we've been saying, that's a bit too far, that's a bit too much. Ah, but in general, if it's just publishing some footballer's affair, and if they expect they can go round and behave in an outrageous way and not be called to test by the public, then ... " "Sienna Miller said today that she was chased down a dark alley by eight men. The fact that they happened to be carrying cameras doesn't make much difference. They are still being chased". "To me that's harrassment. Ah, chasing anyone down a dark alley, ah, that's not right.


21:45 Question "Isn't it about time that the media cleaned up its act. There's a difference between heroic journalism as opposed to journalism on the sleasy end and it's about time there was an external regulatory body rather than just relying on the complaints commission?" "I mean the problem with that is how do you distinguish? If you allow the law to distinguish between sleazy versus responsible, ah, you may get another minister at some point who's got some trouble with the press who is not as upstanding about freedom of the press, who says actually it's sleazy to talk about my driving record and who's driving my car, ah, and we're going to suppress that. And that's dangerous for democracy and that's dangerous for all of us."

30:15 "Are executive salaries out of control?" "I think that in general, yes, I think salaries are out of control, but I think the real risk is that we view this as a class divide, rich vs poor issue, and that we think all high salaries need to go out the window. The problem is, when salaries are clearly linked to performance for the shareholders, this is a good thing. I think one of the problems right now is that corporate governance has got messed up. Too many members of the management of companies are not accountable to shareholders, therefore they loot the company for their own benefit, against the interest of their owners, who are usually ordinary people, ah, who have retirement investments and so on". "Are they really looting" "I would say the word looting yes".

44:35 "Is the coalition living up to its promise of being the greenest government ever". "I think it's a very complicated issue and I am not enough of an expert to be able to offer a sensible opinion. The benefit of not being a politician is that I can say I have no idea".

53:40 "How would you react to a letter of apology from a criminal burgling you" "Yeah, I'm in favour in general that criminals should be forced to apologise to their victim. Actually I'm a bit annoyed with the BBC for making such a huge story out of this, because it's a delicious letter, everyone enjoyed hearing this idiot criminal saying this, but apparently it never went to the family at all. So, it's not quite so outrageous as we might hope, as we are drinking our morning coffee" "... Clearly if we can get criminals to acknowledge something they have done wrong, and make an apology to the relevant person, why not, it seems like a good thing to do".


This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sat 26th November 2011, 10:25am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Sat 26th November 2011, 3:05pm
Post #4


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sat 26th November 2011, 5:23am) *

Jimbo: "Yeah, I'm in favour in general that criminals should be forced to apologise to their victim.


Indeed, even if said apology comes more than 26 months after the crime.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Sat 26th November 2011, 3:06pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jim
post Sat 26th November 2011, 3:08pm
Post #5


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri 18th Sep 2009, 2:29pm
Member No.: 13,917



QUOTE(thekohser @ Sun 27th November 2011, 2:05am) *

QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sat 26th November 2011, 5:23am) *

Jimbo: "Yeah, I'm in favour in general that criminals should be forced to apologise to their victim.


Indeed, even if said apology comes more than 26 months after the crime.


Well, be "charitable", Greg, he was "trying".

And you're all alone with the puns that leap from that...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th 5 17, 5:33am