Dystopia

The Peter Kirk European Scholarship

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:06:00 +0000

I'm extremely pleased and excited to have been awarded a Peter Kirk European Travel Scholarship. The scholarships - which were set up to commemorate the work of the late Sir Peter Kirk MP - include a grant of £1,500 to enable young people from the UK and Europe to conduct a research project in a country other than their own. They're typically restricted to individuals between the ages of 18 and 26 but - fortunately for me - will occasionally consider oldies up to the age of 29 if they impress enough. I was even more fortunate in that I initially received a rejection but due to a cancellation from another candidate I got a last-minute interview slot and the rest, as the saying goes, is history.

My successful proposal is titled "20 Years Later: the Soviet Legacy in the Baltic States". I'll be spending around two months later this year in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania exploring both the physical and emotional remains of the Soviet period in these most Western of former Socialist Republics, and examining whether its impact still has ramifications today.

It should be an extremely interesting and enjoyable study, at least from a personal perspective, and one that I would simply not be able to do without the help of the Peter Kirk Scholarship trustees. I'm very grateful for their interest in this project and I look forward to producing an insightful report when I return. Now to arrange some interviews..!

24 hours in Transnistria - a summary

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:16:00 +0000

I've recently returned from a brief trip to Transnistria, the result of a competition run by Wanderlust magazine I won back in the Summer.

It's probably fair to say that a lot of people have never heard of Transnistria; indeed, it's difficult to even find a definitive spelling of the place, with Transdniestr or Transdniestria just some of the versions commonly found in print. Without a doubt it must rank as one of the most obscure countries in Europe - and even that description is up for debate...

Transnistria - or the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, as it's known locally - is an internationally unrecognised country forming a narrow strip of land between the Dniester River and Ukraine. Created in the aftermath of the Soviet Union's collapse in the early 1990s, tensions between the mainly Russian-speaking Transnistrians and Moldova - of which the PMR is considered an integral part by most international observers - broke out into a bitter civil war that witnessed around a thousand killed. A de facto state of independence has been maintained ever since, with the presence of the Russian army all but guaranteeing the current status quo.

It's also a place that, to put it mildly, has suffered something of an image problem over the last two decades. Weapons smuggling and human trafficking as well as human rights abuses are all accusations regularly directed at the authorities in the capital Tiraspol. So it was obvious that I was going to have to check the place out.

To get to Transnistria on the cheap I would need to take advantage of cheap flights, and I duly did so by travelling to Bucharest with budget outfit Blue Air. From the Romanian capital it was then a matter of an overnight bus to Chişinău in neighbouring Moldova and then a shared 'maxitaxi' - what we'd call a minibus - to Tiraspol.

Aside from the self-evident attraction of visiting a place that sees few visitors, another of Transnistria's claims to fame is the retention of communist symbols and monuments that have long been consigned to the scrap heap in other areas of the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries, a little like Belarus (a country I visited back in 2008).

During my time in Transnistria I met up with Mila Selezneva, a local student and trainee journalist with Dnestr TV; she had heard about my impending trip to the region and was keen to talk about the media and life in general back in the UK. After a chat over a coffee we travelled to the station's studio housed in an apartment block in the neighbouring city of Bendery, and there we had an impromptu talk (with Mila translating) to the rest of the team in front of the cameras - you can see a brief clip here.

Mila also introduced me to Aleksei Buchkov, current president of the Student Community of Transnistria and all-round political activist. Between the three of us we had some interesting chats about Transnistria's current political status, identity issues and what it means to be Transnistrian - and Russian at the same time. It was with some sadness when it came to saying goodbye the following day.

Mila and Aleksei were both very keen that I should return to Transnistria, and I'd very much like to take them up on their offer; 24 hours isn't nearly long enough to understand this place and why it stubbornly decides to go it alone. I also had the privilege of meeting two very mature and intelligent young people, and the opportunity to explore more of their country - as well as socialise with good friends - is one that's simply too good to pass up.

In the meantime I'll attempt to write this trip up in a more readable fashion, and also upload the bulk of the pictures that don't feature here already; I'll post an update when the time comes...!

Update 11/02/2012
I've finally uploaded some of the pictures from the trip here. In case you're unfamiliar with Panoramio, it's a website which features uploaded photographs on Google Earth, which is a nice way to guarantee that at least a few people should see them.

The Berghaus Adventure Challenge - vote for me!

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:14:00 +0000

Some great news - I've been shortlisted for this month's Berghaus Adventure Challenge! It now goes down to a public vote and it would be fantastic if you would consider lending me your support; the winner will walk away with a cool £1000 in cash and £1000 worth of gear to go towards the expedition so it'll really help me become the first person to cycle the circumference of South America.

In order to vote just click here; it only takes a moment and even if I'm not successful it still offers a great opportunity to promote the Cycling South America project...

Job application feedback from the BBC

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:18:00 +0000

I finally have some good news on the job hunt. The BBC have sent me some feedback on not just my most recent applications but on all those that I've made over to the organisation over the last couple of years, a dozen or so in total. On the downside it took an application under the 1998 Data Protection Act to secure it; a little excessive, perhaps, but endless rejections (over 130 since July 2010) have a tendency to bring the more militant out in people. To the BBC's credit they decided to waive the £10 fee, although I'm not entirely sure why.

The feedback itself isn't particularly detailed; it's essentially a list of the scores that were awarded to each of my answers. I was hoping for some annotated comments or some objective marking but it's entirely plausible that for an organisation which receives so many applications these scores are the only notes that are made for each candidate. This of course begs the question as to how we are to know that the same criteria are being applied to each candidate and that each is being assessed fairly and equally, but I guess I - as well as every other person applying to Auntie - will never know.

On a personal level the results still make for interesting reading. On a scale from 1 to 5 (with 1 being the worst and 5 being the best) I rank a decidely lacklustre average of between 2 and 3 for each answer provided; likewise, I failed to secure a single 4 or 5. It still strikes me as strange that the only formal interview I ever secured with the Beeb was a couple of years before I completed a postgraduate journalism qualification, but I guess the competition is simply getting stronger and £5,000 courses are pretty much two-a-penny these days. Gosh, I'd love to get my hands on some of the successful application forms and see where I've been going wrong.

What I have learned, however, is that the world of recruitment is shrouded in secrecy and that this is true for both the private and public sectors. People who meet all the criteria listed in a job description are routinely and casually turned away without explanation; gurus talk of the need for 'networking' when in any other walk of life such activities would be rightly classed as nepotism; where the number of rejections is matched only by the number of employers that don't bother to acknowledge applications; and where the almost complete lack of feedback or any other form of transparency means that applicants can only guess where they went wrong and then proceed to make the same mistakes all over again.

Indeed, in a society where we're starting to question - nay demand - this very same transparency in government and in our politicians it's amazing that there is so little desire for change when it comes to our jobs. Perhaps we're all scared that by asking too many questions we'll scupper any chances of securing an interview. It's a really sad state of affairs and it's one that I believe needs addressing. Urgently.

As for the BBC, it's hard to understand quite why they were so reluctant to acquiesce with my original request when the data that they were obliged to provide me with by law contains absolutely nothing that could threaten to derail their recruitment process. Their Kafkaesque objections that this might provide an unfair advantage have proven entirely unfounded.

I'll still keep plugging away and who knows, perhaps one day I'll even score myself a 4 or even a 5 and prove that I really do have a reasonable grasp of 'content awareness' or 'knowledge of diverse communities'. I know that the BBC is by far the most desirable media organisation to work for in the UK today - despite the failings of the Delivering Quality First initiative that has done so much to retain the livelihoods of bureaucratic management on 6-figure salaries at the expense of those who actually make programmes - and that it's worthy of my professaional aspirations, as it has been for over a decade. The organisation is a bastion of quality impartial journalism and provides essential services for people not just here in the United Kingdom but acrosss the entire globe. Our lives would simply be all the poorer if it did not exist.

Now let's just hope I haven't annoyed them too much by asking too many questions...

I’m off to Transnistria..!

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 19:49:00 +0000

Back in August I bemoaned my distinct lack of success in securing any of the numerous travel bursaries I have a habit of applying for; indeed, in the last week alone I've received rejections from both the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust and the Peter Kirk European Travel Scholarships fund. Needless to say these awards are extremely competitive and I guess I shouldn't really be downhearted.

Yet things might finally be starting to turn around. I've just found out that I'm one of the lucky winners of Wanderlust's brilliant 25 Trips for Under £250, a competition which invites proposals for a budget adventure starting and ending in the UK. Those deemed the most imaginative will have their trip paid for and - perhaps even better - there'll be the opportunity for the journey to feature in an issue of the magazine next year.

My idea is to visit Transnistria, a small de facto but internationally unrecognised state on Moldova's eastern border with Ukraine. Transnistria is chiefly famous for existing as if the Soviet Union never disappeared, with Hammer and Sickle emblems and public monuments to communist heroes aplenty. It should make for a fascinating visit.

I'm not going until January - I'll be flying to Bucharest the day after attending The Outdoors Show - but I'm already really looking forward to it. No doubt you'll hear all about it when I get back..!

Cycling South America: an update

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:00:00 +0000

Things on here have been fairly quiet of late; most of my energies have been spent constructing the Cycling South America blog, Facebook fanpage and a booklet aimed at potential sponsors that you can see and/or download here. I've also put together a press release that's already been sent off to a few local newspapers and the like; with any luck it might elicit some interest. I'll be sure to post any developments as they happen here as well as on the Cycling website too.

Once things are a little more settled I'll aim to be back blogging here as per usual, but in the meantime if you're interested in the Cycling South America project just click on one of the aforementioned links to find out more...

Cycling South America

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:08:00 +0000

A little while ago I bemoaned my lack of success with applications for travel-related bursaries and scholarships; by their very nature they are extremely competitive and demand will always far outstrip supply. I've applied for quite a number over the last six years or so and never really got anywhere, figuratively and literally.

So I decided that - rather than just sit on my behind and whinge - I would instead do something about it and have my own adventure, a journey to distant lands where I could immerse myself in landscapes and cultures far removed from mine own.

Thus was borne Cycling South America. My aim is to circumnavigate the continent by bike, taking in almost a dozen countries and travelling somewhere in the region of 25,000 km. It'll be a mammoth task, and whether I'll actually go will depend on securing donations and sponsorship from interested parties.

To that end I've put together a blog full of news and updates and where people can have a look at the reasons behind trip, see lots of inspirational links and offer feedback. There's also the obligatory Facebook fanpage and I'll be using Twitter to promote the journey as well.

So if you'd like to take part in my South American odyssey please have a wander over to the Cycling South America website. It could just be the start of quite a voyage...

Should unsuccessful job applicants be given feedback?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:50:00 +0000

In the past year or so I've applied for precisely 111 jobs. Thus far I've managed to secure interviews with three of these - the Navy, RAF and, er, Asda - and been offered a position with the former, albeit with an expected start in around three year's time. It's only slightly ironic that I secured my current soul-destroying 9 to 5 via a recruitment agency and not by direct application.

By far and away the biggest object of my professional affections is the BBC, with the organisation accounting for around 10% of those 111 attempts and many more before that. All - bar one back in around 2006 I think - have been completely unsuccessful, not even getting past the initial stage in the recruitment process.

Like so many employers the BBC is incredibly reluctant to offer any semblance of a reason as to why a particular applicant has been rejected. Below is a fairly typical response:

The key get-out clause being: "...we are unable to provide more detailed feedback on individual applications at this stage in the process".

Now I've never been one to challenge what is a fairly typical shirking of care by an organisation towards those with a desire to work for it; because recruitment at the BBC - like so many other places - is utterly opaque I've always been worried of any repercussions should I choose to challenge these blanket rulings. Being seen as a troublemaker is not a good way to convince a prospective employer to take you on at a future date.

But, 111 applications on, I'm starting to get fed up spending several painstaking hours filling out forms only to be rejected without being told why. General frustration aside, it strikes me as simply being bad manners not to include any sort of explanation. Even a single sentence along the lines of "You don't have the required amount of experience" or "You have an inability to form coherent phrases" would suffice.

So after receiving the latest round of rejections from the Beeb - this time for the excellent Aim High Scheme which I would have dearly loved to have been considered for - and despite being told that feedback would not be offered I decided to ask for some anyway. I figured that since I clearly wasn't offering anything that might interest the Corporation in any meaningful way I didn't really stand much to lose by asking.

To the BBC's credit I received a response fairly soon afterwards. No, they wouldn't be able to provide any feedback. Too many applicants, you see. OK, I said, given that this Scheme is run in conjunction with external stakeholders would they be able to make an exception in this case? No, came the reply. My suggestion of initiating a system of feedback on demand also fell on deaf ears. They categorically refused to say why I had not progressed to the next stage.

So I decided on a change of tack. I asked to see the criteria used in making their selections; it occurred to me that I could at least try and work out by a process of elimination where I had been found wanting. Again came the prompt reply, this time with the original job application attached. I was informed that this was the only criteria used in selecting candidates.

It didn't take much to realise that this was complete nonsense; if it were true all applicants that met those criteria would at the very least make it through to the next round of the process. And there was nothing on the attached form to say how individuals would be scored or compared to each other. In short I felt like I was being fobbed off.

So yesterday I emailed back with these concerns. The following is the reply that came back this morning:

Essentially it's stating that any and all criteria used to discriminate between candidates that does not feature on the job description is confidential - a surprising admission for an organisation that prides itself on transparency and accountability. It's not that I'm not aware that recruitment is a select and secretive world hidden from the eyes of those that seek employment and based on the discriminatory whims of HR, it's just that I expected more from what is by a long shot the foremost and most desirable employer in British media today. I genuinely can't understand why this information is being hidden unless there's something untoward to hide. Needless to say I'll be emailing back with some feedback of my own.

Of course the great irony in all this is that it would have been far quicker to simply tell me why my application was rejected rather than engage in a monotonous dialogue for nigh on a fortnight. As I pointed out in one of these emails even the smallest amount of feedback would mean that any future applications would be a lot stronger and that the BBC would receive a consistently higher grade of applicant - a genuine win-win situation. It would also make for a much more positive experience for those on the receiving end of rejections.

I also have to admit that I've never really bought the 'excessive number of applicants' excuse so beloved of the BBC et al and trotted out whenever they can't be bothered to tell an applicant that - in their opinion - they aren't good enough. By way of example I received a rejection letter from the British Transport Police only yesterday, in which they state that they had over 4,000 applications. They've also included a four page document detailing exactly what criteria were used to select successful candidates and how they were applied.

Now it seems fairly obvious to me that if an organisation wants fewer applications to sift through they should openly apply more restrictions at the point of advertising the role in question. In fact I would go further; there needs to be complete and utter transparency in all aspects of recruitment so that everyone knows that their applications are being considered equally and fairly. Anything else is just darn rude.

I'll still keep applying for jobs at the BBC; I've no idea how much this recent exchange will have damaged my future prospects but given that I've nothing to go on in terms of feedback I guess I'll never really know. I desperately want to work for the BBC and as such I want to be able to submit the best applications that I can. It's just difficult to know that I'm doing so without being told where I've failed previously by the very people I'm trying so hard to impress.

New blog poll: should we be more involved in Libya?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 14:42:00 +0000

It's easy to draw parallels between Libya and the Iraq of a decade ago; both oil-rich Arab nations under the totalitarian rule of a despotic military dictator. And whilst Libya's current upheaval is largely driven by a populist domestic opposition that was largely absent under Saddam Hussein's regime the tentative nature of NATO's involvement in the crisis is owed in large part to the harrowing experience of insurgency in the Middle East post-2003.

So the current DEM poll is a simple one; should we - whether in the guise of NATO or the UN or as a national military force - be getting more involved in Libya and having more input into the conflict's outcome, which appears to be nearing endgame? Or are we right to keep our distance and allow events to take their course, whatever they may be?

Are there too many cars on the road?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:17:00 +0000

At the moment I'm lucky enough to be able to walk to work; it takes just over half an hour and the majority of the route takes me along the Leeds and Liverpool Canal. At the moment it's teeming with fish and the journey makes for a surprisingly pleasant commute.

Walking along roads, however, it'd be tempting to guess that the same can't be said for others making a beeline to the office. Leeds, like any other urban conurbation, suffers from terrible traffic problems particularly at those peak times when everyone is rushing to or from work. Cars crawling along barely make it out of second gear, horns are honked, expletives are shouted and profanities are gestured. Generally speaking it's not an overly fun experience.

And yet I can't fail to notice that the vast majority of cars only have one occupant. It was a phenomenon I first became aware as I sped past stationary lines of traffic on my bicycle; vehicle after vehicle with only a solitary driver to keep it company. Anecdotal, perhaps, but I suspect the situation is readily replicated all over the country.

I've never really understood this addiction to the car. Granted, some people will be genuinely unable to get to the workplace using any other method, particularly in rural areas where distances are large and public transport provision patchy or unreliable. People can and do insist on living a long way from work, or - in today's world of restricted job opportunities - be unable to find employment closer to home. But does every car on the road at 8:30am or 5:30pm really need to be there? I mean, really?

Cars cause a lot of problems. Other than the aforementioned congestion they also cause thousands of deaths and serious injuries in the UK every year; they reduce air quality and can increase the rate of respiratory illnesses, particularly amongst the young; result in the destruction of countryside to make way for roads and motorways; decrease the propensity for exercise; and ensure that our oil-thirsty governments remain dependent on despotic and undemocratic regimes that constitute much of OPEC's membership. Given that the price of petrol is also a staple concern of our overwhelmingly right-wing press you'd think that those would be plenty of reasons to leave the car at home.

Yet those same people who bemoan the cost of driving seem to be the ones most reluctant to give it up. It's as if motorists have a god-given right to indulge their addiction, even as it impacts so negatively on everyone else's quality of life in a way that no other form of transport does.

It's true that our roads are in many ways essential, not just so people can get from A to B but also to boost our economy and maintain our general wellbeing. It can't be denied that the car is in many ways the most convenient and liberating to travel. What we need is a way to prise people out of their cars and encourage them to take alternatives whenever possible, particularly for journeys that are repeated on a regular basis. The commute is the most obvious of these.

Truth be told, cycling and walking aren't for everyone. At the moment the bicycle is collecting dust; my workplace is surrounded by an entrance to a motorway and simply isn't safe to get to on two wheels, another example of the prioritising of the car over all else. It's also fair to say that walking and cycling in bad weather can put most but the hardiest off even when there is adequate provision of pavement and cycleway.

Which all means that it is public transport that will have to do the most if we are ever to conquer the car - and that means making it affordable, accessible and comfortable. It'll be no easy task in this world of privatised public transport companies with their high fares, cherry picking of profitable routes, lack of cohesion between rival companies, addiction to subsidy and all the rest of it. Quantifying everything in monetary terms is not an accurate method of cost-benefit analysis.

Yet sorting out our public transport really must be a priority for any government. Our addiction to petrol simply cannot go on forever - it's a finite resource, after all - and the sooner we search for alternatives the better. If we could all just try to use our cars a little less we would all stand to benefit in so many ways...

A trip to Malta...

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:32:00 +0000

I've not long got back from a short trip to Malta, a small group of islands in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea that constitutes one of the world's smallest independent nations. It was my first trip to the archipelago and one that I thoroughly enjoyed, even if daytime temperatures hovering around the 35°C-mark made for occasional discomfort for this Englishman more accustomed to cooler climes.

Yet for a lot people this heat is the very raison d'être behind any trip to Malta; the islands have developed something of a reputation as a destination for beach lovers and needless to say the place was packed. The summer holidays are by far and away the peak time for the tourist hordes to descend; for those seeking solitude or harbouring desert island fantasies it's probably best to look elsewhere.

But Malta has a fascinating and varied history and was this that made the trip worthwhile. Because of its strategic location it has played host to occupying Phoenicians, Romans, Arabs, Normans, Spanish, French, and British, in addition to being the home of the Knights Hospitallers for several hundred turbulent years. Each has had a significant and often profound influence on the development of today's idiosyncratic Maltese culture.

The island's relationship with the last of these - the British - has generally been strong, and evidence of the links between Malta and the UK are evident almost everywhere you look, from traffic that drives on the left side of the road to red post and telephone boxes to the official status afforded to the English language. A statue of Queen Victoria even stands proud in the middle of Republic Square.

This lack of general antipathy towards the former colonial power might have something to do with the events which led to Malta becoming part of the Empire on which the sun would never set. Fearful of French excesses during the Napoleonic wars the islanders actually petitioned the UK government for protection as a British Dominion. Thus began a 150 year link that only ended with independence in 1964 and the declaration of a Republic 10 years later.

For a Brit abroad this steady blend of Mediterranean and North European makes for a stimulating history lesson. What I found most interesting was the acceptance of the island's colonial past without any palpable sense of modern grievance; clearly the experience of a foreign administration is far from a globally uniform one.

The English riots 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:48:00 +0000

Watching the riots breaking out across England over the last few days has made for a curious, almost voyeuristic experience; this feels like a once-in-a-generation event, and that's exactly what it is. I can't recall anything quite like it happening on such a widespread scale anywhere in the UK - Northern Ireland aside, perhaps - and once the disturbances have died down there will be a lot of questions asked about how and why this has happened and why this has been allowed to happen.

Now I want to be clear about one thing. The actions of the rioters and the looters is utterly disgraceful. This is not some English Spring modelled on the efforts of our Arab brethren earlier this year; there is no political agenda at work, nor battle for social and democratic rights. This is not a valid form of protest; it is simply a collective act of mass criminality that has long since overshadowed the tragic circumstances surrounding its genesis.

And yet, and yet...

Many have been quick to condemn the rioters - and rightly so - but have dismissed the entire saga as a completely spontaneous event, as if its unprecedented magnitude has been created from nothing. Others have focused purely on the punishment aspect, making that age old rightist mistake of prioritising cure over prevention and ignoring the root causes. Clearly something more than throwing people in jail or enacting repressive legislation is going to be needed to stop this from ever happening again.

But similarly it cannot do to simply blame adverse social conditions, budget cuts and unemployment, even if it is tempting to suggest that the most serious urban disturbances almost always seem to take place under a Conservative administration. True, these have a very real part to play - would these riots have occurred before the current recession? - but lack of social mobility cannot excuse opportunistic looting and arson even if it is a prime causal factor.

Something obviously isn't right here. Some have identified a lack of respect for the authorities as the primary motivational factor, but I see that as a symptom of our current malaise, rather than a cause. No, there is more to the story then that. It is capitalism.

Bear with me for a moment with this. Capitalism is the economic system that priorities competition and the profit motive, where the concept of private business trumps that of net social benefit. It is a system based on greed, that dictates that the means of production are to controlled by the few and that the greatest priority in existence is the unrelenting pursuit of wealth. It prioritises excessive consumption over all else and forces us into a state of eternal competition and mutual suspicion.

Such a system is inherently corrupt, morally or otherwise. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, the greatest crime of capitalism is that it knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. It's the paradigm that brought us the current financial crisis and the excessive actions of irresponsible banks that has caused far more economic damage - in monetary and social terms - than teenage thugs ever will.

But it is the emphasis on the primacy of the individual that is the most insidious aspect of capitalism. Ever since Thatcher destroyed the unions the utter dominance of the market has become institutionalised, dominating British politics and policy no matter who has been holding the keys to Number 10. It has created a society where this conspicuous consumption is to be coveted and where selfishness undermines any real social cohesion. It's the sort that worships celebrity, causes eating disorders, creates massive personal debt, and - yes - nurtures a disrespect for authority and anything else that stands in the way of that consumption or ideal image. It puts us all in competition with each other, rather than encourage us to work together. We have created a 'me first' culture that holds notions of shared values in contempt and renders David Cameron's idea of a Big Society a futile waste of time. We're stuck in a deep social rot that will never be cured whilst profit remains king.

The ultimate cause of the riots? It's the economy, stupid. But it'll need more than simply creating jobs to stop it happening again...

Tom Ruffles' blog

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:51:00 +0000

I like to think that I inherit some of my passion for writing from my father, who has penned quite a few articles for various publications over the years. These musings cover lots of different topics but in the main focus on paranormal matters and the cinema, two of his great loves that were ably combined in the book Ghost Images.

He's been gradually uploading his bibliography on his blog, which you can visit here; it's well worth a look if you fancy an interesting and thought-provoking read.

Comments on blogs

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 09:57:00 +0000

It's always nice to get comments on blogs. It shows that people people are not only reading your scribblings but that they deem your point of view engaging and worthy of discussion, even if it's to disagree vehemently with what you've written. It's this engagement with an audience that essentially constitutes the blatantly exhibitionist raison d'être of blogging; just how many people, after all, would continue to update their online writings if they knew no-one was watching?

But a lot of bloggers like to monitor the comments they receive, often requiring pre-approval before they are published. This is entirely understandable; not only can feedback be occasionally abusive but the proliferation of spurious spam comments - replete with links to dubious websites - often makes this prescreening a necessity. Hosts such as Blogger do employ a spam filter but they can still sometimes slip through.

And yet some authors continue to enthusiastically police and delete comments that are neither abusive nor spam. Léargas, the online persona of Sinn Féin President and Louth TD Gerry Adams, is a prime example. A quick trawl through Léargas' ramblings will reveal not one dissenting or disapproving comment on any of the posts contained therein. Some are nauseatingly sycophantic, others merely fawning; all, however, in agreement with the point or points being made.

Now it could be that only those people who agree with Adams' worldview read and comment on his blog, but I know for a fact that this is not the case. I've made around half-a-dozen dissenting submissions over the past few months and none of these have been published. I've posted nothing abusive, mind; just merely challenging some of the points of whatever is being discussed at the time. That other praiseworthy comments are published on these same posts suggests some discretion is being exercised, a peculiar stance for a politician who must deal with dissenting views on a daily basis out in the real world.

Comments, of course, can often tell you as much about the general readership of a blog as it can about the author. The Daily Mail website is a prime example; articles often attract hundreds of comments and each can be rated positively or negatively by other contributors. The frequent direct correlation between the ultra-reactionary nature of these comments and a high approval rating can make for surprisingly depressing reading. Interestingly I've also made critical comments on some of the Mail's articles which have subsequently not been published but this could possibly be down to the sheer number that they receive. Possibly.

But if certain blogs are attempting to stifle genuine debate by deleting comments that fail to tally with their respective author's narrow world view they are merely masquerading as a forum for the exchange of ideas. Blogs as mere propaganda tools are completely contrary to the spirit in which they should be held.

Travel bursaries

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 10:05:00 +0000

One of the things I like to do in my spare time is searching and applying for travel bursaries. There are a surprising number out there but needless to say they're almost always ultra-competitive and extremely difficult to secure.

So far it's been a reasonably busy few months, with a successful trip to Knoydart courtesy of Gore-Tex providing some respite from disappointment elsewhere. I've just fired off a proposal for the Royal Geographical Society's Journey of a Lifetime for the sixth time in as many years, with the suggestion of a trip to the Indo-Bangladesh enclaves. The deadline is not until the end of September so there's still a little while to wait.

I've also applied for a bursary from the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust proposing a journey along Mali's Bandiagara Escarpment, spiritual home of West Africa's Dogon people. It was an idea rejected by National Geographic's Expeditions Council, the Gordon Foundation and the Timmissartok Foundation but I'm hopeful that the people in London might look upon it more favourably. Again the deadline is in a few month's time so fingers crossed.

The most disappointing rejections, however, are almost always in direct proportion to the amount of work that goes into an application. Most of the grants I've already mentioned often require little more than an outline of an expedition and how it will be achieved, presumably to ease processing of the sheer numbers that each organisation must receive. Some require a bit more than that.

Take the Finnish government's Foreign Correspondents' Programme. This scheme offers a month's living and working in Finland and although aimed at under 25s - I had to enquire beforehand whether I'd be potentially considered at the grand old age of 28 - I still spent many ultimately fruitless hours working through the application and writing the accompanying essay. It's perhaps one scheme that sadly I won't be able to apply for again next year.

But the biggest disappointment so far has to be the rejection I've just received from the Wyndham Deedes Memorial Travel Scholarship, run by the Anglo-Israel Association. Proposals have to not only include details of the study - in this case recording a radio documentary examining contemporary Christianity in the context of an Arab-Jewish state - but also references and the contact details of organisations within Israel and the West Bank willing to support the study. Gaining these took many months of emails, telephone calls and follow up emails; I contacted colleges, schools and religious institutions and even securing references from the academic institutions I'd attended in the UK took an almost Herculean amount of patience but eventually I managed to get several extremely interested parties on board eager and willing to help. To then not even secure an interview is rather dispiriting but as the Association said it gets "many requests and with limited funds it is not always possible to help." With contacts all in place I would dearly love to proceed with the project on my own but I simply don't have the money to do it.

But it is possible to take comfort in the fact that, just like me, there are many more dejected and unsuccessful applicants out there then there are successful ones and that organisations like the AIA have extremely limited access to funds. I'll keep plodding along in the hope that something might come up but in the meantime I'm going to start looking at the possibility of attracting funding for projects outside of the bursary model. Watch this space...

New blog poll - is too much attention being paid to phone hacking?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:00:00 +0000

A new month, a new blog poll - this time asking whether too much attention is being paid to the ongoing phone-hacking scandal and (alleged) dealings between employees of the News of the World and other News International publications, the British political establishment, the Metropolitan Police, and various other figures now caught up in the public eye. Are we being subject to hyped-up overkill by vested interests? Or is it only vested interest that is telling us to turn our attention elsewhere?

The poll is in the usual place, at the top right of the page.

Are nightclubs legally allowed to discriminate?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 22:30:00 +0000

Leeds has a reputation for having a vibrant nightlife scene; having worked in a couple of clubs since moving here a few years ago I've experienced first hand what can be a pretty boisterous crowd on a Friday and Saturday night. There's certainly fun to be had but it helps to know where to find it.

I also occasionally like to indulge in a spot of clubbing myself, if only to enjoy the company of friends. So it was last last weekend that I found myself outside one of the numerous bars in the popular Call Lane area of the city. So far, so good.

Except that after 20 minutes or so waiting outside a particular establishment I was informed by the burly and somewhat intimidating gentleman on the door that I was to be refused entry on the grounds that I was "not dressed smartly enough". Unfortunately I was at the back of the group of friends I was with and my entry was barred after they had already been waved through. I was not permitted to inform them of the situation and thus that was the end of my somewhat frustrating night.

Now I suspect this is a fairly regular occurrence in any place that has a least one pub or a club to its name but what I want to know is where this process stands from a legal point of view. If it's illegal to discriminate on grounds of race, gender or sexuality is it permissible to discriminate on grounds of appearance? Should an establishment that enforces sartorial rules display these criteria in a prominent location so that people need not waste their time queueing to get in? How are such rules legally enforced so that they are not prone to subjective interpretation from establishment to establishment? And are bouncers legally entitled to enforce these rules?

I'd genuinely be interested to know the answers to these questions. If anyone knows of any legal challenge to rules governing appearance when it comes to pubs and clubs and the outcome of these proceedings please do let me know...

Google Street View

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:45:00 +0000

I've just noticed that Google Street View has expanded, adding the Isle of Man and Jersey to the rather eclectic mixture of countries and territories that have subscribed to mapping by the digital imagery service. This means that the British Isles are now pretty much the most densely covered region in the world.

Controversies aside one of the most fun aspects of the Street View application is spotting inadvertently captured images, such as Aberdeen's famous Horse Boy and other inopportune moments that wouldn't look out of place in a Hogarth print.

Take the image below. It's a shot of a road going through Nantou County in Central Taiwan. It takes the viewer slowly up a winding mountain pass in rainy weather.

Just around the corner it's more of the same...

There's still nothing whatsoever to suggest what could be coming up next...

Yes, it's the driver giving his camera a wipe. Slightly surprising but at the same oddly reassuring. Google's Street View is a snapshot of the world as seen from the roadside; it's easy to forget the very real human stories that have been captured for posterity.

The Norway shootings

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 20:42:00 +0000

The terrible events that have recently unfolded in Norway are truly horrific; the bombing of central Oslo and the subsequent shooting spree on the island of Utøya by British-born Norwegian rightwinger Anders Behring Breivik constitute one of the worst massacres in living memory and the worst atrocity in that country since the end of the Second World War. The thought that an individual can take it upon themselves to kill almost 100 individuals to further his own political agenda is truly horrifying.

Yet somewhat unusually for shooting sprees the individual concerned has been captured, meaning that over the coming weeks and months we may find out exactly how and why this has been allowed to come to fruition.

An interesting addendum to this sorry saga has been the printed media's coverage of the affair. The events in Norway happened late on Friday afternoon; with news trickling in slowly this meant that Saturday's papers were rife with conjecture. Who was reponsible? How did they do it? And why Norway?

The answer was simple: the Muslims. The attacks bore all the hallmarks of Al-Qaeda, they said. Norway's limited participation in Afghanistan and recent proscription of an Islamic cleric was enough to make it a target, and a 'soft' one at that. Even when it transpired that the attacker was a blonde white male some alleged that he might be a "homegrown convert" to the Jihadist cause. A case of blind stereotyping? Almost certainly. A logical continuation of the hysterical narrative line so beloved of tabloids like the Daily Mail - who described without a hint of irony the attacker as "the right-wing extremist who hated immigrants and multi-culturalism" - who constantly feed their loyal readers with fabricated stories of councils banning Christmas and Muslim-only toilets? Without a doubt. Apparently some of the major broadcasters - particularly the 24-hour revolving news lot - were not much better.

It also shows up the limitation that time naturally places on the print media. Whilst I was reading about an Al-Qaeda plot the television and the internet were offering a far more accurate and up-to-date picture of what exactly was going on. Papers are great for offering in-depth analysis but when that analysis is woefully inadequate one has to ask whether they are becoming a fundamentally flawed medium playing constant catch-up with other media platforms.

First the 'phone hacking scandal; now this. 2011 is certainly not turning out well for print journalism...

Fake £1 coins

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 22:10:00 +0000

I quite like the BBC's iPlayer, even if - as with everything trendy it seems - it insists on spelling its name with a lower case letter. Having a spare half hour or so yesterday at lunchtime I ended up watching an episode of Fake Britain, a series looking at counterfeit goods and financial crime in the UK. One of the issues it featured was forged £1 coins.

During my time as a student in Sheffield several years ago the surge in fake pounds was a major local story, with bags of them allegedly being offered for sale for market traders and the like. Estimates very wildly but some have suggested that 5% of all UK pound coins - some £73 million - are fake. Most official estimates waver around half that figure but that's still an awfully high amount in real terms.

The programme inspired me to have a look at my own meagre pound collection. I checked my wallet and of the two such coins found therein one was from the Isle of Man and the other was indeed fake, the latter so crude in design that it's irritating that I didn't spot it when I got it.

But then that's the beauty of faking coins as opposed to banknotes. Most people - and certainly most shops - check their notes closely, even more so with particularly high denominations. Dodgy coins, on the other hand, can easily be hidden among others and palmed off to unsuspecting businesses and customers. Their relatively low value is easily compensated with the ease with which they avoid detection.

There's a useful guide to spotting a fake here; from now on I'll be checking my change just that little bit more closely.

Finding people online

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:54:00 +0000

As part of my current job I have to send out quite a lot of letters; despite ostensibly dealing with customers online a lot of our correspondence is dispatch traditional 'old school' snail mail. Naturally I sign these letters off with my name at the bottom.

A couple of days ago I received an email in response to one of these letters. Nothing unusual there, you might think, except that the customer in question decided to contact me using my personal email address. Needless to say this isn't something I include in work-related letters. Instead - and for reasons unknown - the recipient (presumably) decided to locate my name using an internet search engine, found the contact details of someone called 'Keith Ruffles' and fired off an email to their Hotmail account in the hope that this would indeed be the same person. Given that my employer's contact details were given in the letter as the only legitimate means of contact I was a little surprised.

It probably helps that I don't have a particularly common name, but it's still interesting to see just how easy it can be to locate any given individual using the internet. This can have some potentially serious consequences, whether it be embarrassing Facebook pictures on show to prospective employers, unwanted contact from past associates or pretty much any scenario one could think of. Some websites such as 192.com even specialise in supplying information about individuals to anyone willing to pay a fee. It's possibly one of the reasons why a lot of bloggers choose to remain anonymous.

So it's probably best to keep an eye on the information you choose to share online, particularly those things not normally in the public domain such as telephone numbers and email addresses. If not you might like me end up having to deal with work matters in your spare time - and who really wants that?

New blog poll: should the Press Complaints Commission be scrapped?

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:10:00 +0000

Like a lot of people I've been following the News of the World hacking saga with great interest, and in many ways it's confirmed a lot of suspicions we've all had about the rotten state of British journalism. The independence of the (printed) media industry - for so long its strength - may well have brought about its current plight; the abject lack of adequate scrutiny surrounding the shenanigans at News Corporation's UK group over such a long period of time sends a clear message that self-regulation is not working in its current form. The whiff of corruption has now turned into a stench.

So the poll for this month is this: should the system of voluntary self-regulation in the guise of the Press Complaints Commission be scrapped, as all three leaders of the main political parties are demanding? Or should it be retained, albeit as a potentially reformed body?

A new beginning...

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:57:00 +0000

It's been an interesting few months since my last post; I've managed to finally secure some permanent employment which - although hardly fulfilling - will keep me financially afloat for the time being. On that theme I've also been able to devote far more of the time that I had been spending on here to completing job applications, a process which hopefully will begin to pay dividends at some point in the future.

But I've also really missed blogging. And what a year it's been for it so far; the Arab Spring, the Japanese earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the death of Bin Laden, the creation of Southern Sudan, the royal visit to Ireland, the ongoing News of the World Scandal, riots in Northern Ireland, the first anniversary of the Coalition, and - though I shudder to say it - the marriage of Wills 'N Kate and all the sycophantic coverage that that event generated. All of it and more collectively consititutes prime blogging material that I've been itching to dispense my own meagre thoughts on even, if it has been discussed admirably well by a myriad of far better qualified commentators elsewhere. And whilst the break has been nice I'm also thoroughly bored of filling out job histories and completing reference requests for employers that frequently refuse to even acknowledge receipt of an application. In short I need a diversion.

And so I've decided to take up blogging again, albeit on a less regular basis. Whilst my reasoning behind this is mainly time-motivated it might well help to keep things more 'fresh', too, and more interesting to boot. At least I can give it a go.

I've also decided to change the name of the blog. By originally calling it the The Daily Rant I inadvertently put pressure on myself to churn out material every day. Far more efficient and able writers than myself can comfortably manage this in their spare time but sadly I've really never got any quicker at putting my thoughts into a coherant block of text.

Deus ex machina, therefore, will be the new project but with the same eclectic mix of leftish ramblings and general idiosyncratic trivialities. Why Deus? Because in my increasingly pessimistic outlook the world needs just such a contrived and possibly divine act of intervention if it has any genuine chance of saving itself from, well, itself. That and I think it sounds pretty darn cool.

So I hope that you will find something of interest to read here in the weeks and months ahead. As before comments and suggestions are always welcome. It's genuinely good to be back.

Book review - Inflight Science

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Mon, 02 May 2011 21:49:00 +0000

Many of the things that we nowadays take for granted would have once been considered impossible. Television; cars; electricity: it’s easy to imagine the general public of a hundred or a thousand years ago laughing at the notion that modern technology could be anything other than a heretical fantasy. Yet it would also be fair to say that the majority of us know next-to-nothing about how these modern marvels actually work.

Take flying, for example. Ever since Icarus flew too close to the sun and da Vinci doodled in a notebook humanity has dreamt about taking to the heavens, and yet it’s only in the last century that powered flight has become a reality. Now almost anyone can hop on an airplane and within a few hours be on the other side of the planet and think very little of it. But what exactly is going on when we’re up there?

Brian Clegg’s Inflight Science attempts to tackle what is a very complex – and potentially scary – topic and present it in a digestible and informative way. How risky exactly is air travel? How do baggage scanners work? Why does a ‘plane stay up in the air? Why does airline food taste so bad? And why can’t you make a perfect cuppa at 30,000 feet?

This book is an enjoyable scientific romp through the various processes that make up a typical flight, from arriving at the terminal to take-off to the world you can see through the window. The narrative is structured to follow a typical flight, so if you’re in for a long haul it’s perfectly possible to use the text as a real-time guide, a kind of virtual tour of the world of flight as it happens. Who of us really knew, for example, that jet streams are so fast that an aircraft flying within one can easily break the sound barrier? Or that a pressurised cabin affords only 75% of the oxygen one would expect on solid ground?

But Clegg is also keen for the armchair travellers out there to get in on the act, too. To that end a series of topical experiments explore some of the scientific principles of aviation, meaning that to understand flight one doesn’t actually have to take to the skies – a relief for all those suffering from incurable aviatophobia.

Where this book’s strength really lies, however, is in its demonstration that science is all around us and that powered flight is just one of the many ways in which scientific principles form the foundation of the world in which we live. And that’s just another thing to consider when we take to the skies.

Inflight Science is available on Amazon.

DR takes a break

noreply@blogger.com (Keith Ruffles) — Sat, 01 Jan 2011 11:15:00 +0000

When I started this site up in February of 2009 I didn't really know a great deal about blogging; I always thought them to be some sort of online diary and I couldn't really ever imagine why people would want to read them. So when I went online and realised what an informative and interesting tool they can be I knew I would have to give it a go.

I also quickly decided that it would be a very general blog, with a few themes that might crop up from time to time but otherwise with no overall focus. Some blogs can be very specific, and for people interested in that particular niche they can be invaluable points of reference. I didn't go down that route for two reasons; firstly, because I lack the degree of knowledge and insight into a particular topic that makes the most successful blogs exactly that, and secondly because I wanted to use the blog as a platform to demonstrate an ability to write on a wide variety of issues. I've always harboured a fantasy to pen articles for publications but sadly that's not really become a reality yet.

But almost two years after I started it I think I need a little break from the Daily Rant. This is mainly pragmatic; as any blogger will tell you it's a time consuming exercise, and I'm currently desperately seeking gainful employment that doesn't involve simply pulling pints in a pub. Since September I've applied for around 80 jobs and have had an offer of an employment from one of those - with an estimated start time of 28 months. Things are getting a little desperate and I need to devote as much free time as possible to finding work as I can.

I also want to devote a bit more time to the trying to get something published and other little writing projects. It might never happen but if I devote some of the time and energy I currently expend on the Rant elsewhere it might finally come to pass.

So I'll be putting this on hold for a short while, although whether that'll be until I do get a proper job or if I simply can't resist the blogging bug it's hard to say. I just want to thank the few readers who stumbled this way for reading and commenting on the posts, and those other bloggers who have been inspirational and entertaining - you know who you are! I'm genuinely looking forward to rejoining you all again soon.