Assesment 1: Blogging

Blogging is one of the most popular forms of journalism; an online diary which you can update as and when.
It is a modern, convenient way of communicating in the 21st century. Blogging has fast become the best way of keeping up to date with current events, reviews and shows.
Many journalists are using internet blogging, as the internet is becoming more and more popular. It makes more sense to post a blog, as the chances are more people are going to see it; and if you’ve written it, it’ll always be there unless you chose to delete it.

Although blogging is a fairly new concept, it has already evolved since it began.
Blogging ranges from a simple site where you just upload a blog such as blogger.com to a website like Twitter, which uses a different concept of blogging, by only allowing you a certain amount of characters in hope you will update what you are doing as often as possible.
Another concept of blogging would be a site such as BBC News; where they update articles and news stories as often as possible.
This all shows how blogging, and the concept of blogging has changed throughout it’s history. It was mainly used for an online diary, but it has now evolved into something which the world has gone crazy about; updating every two minutes to inform people of what they are doing.

The main purpose of blogging is simply to express your opinion. Justin Hall who began personal blogging in 1994 while a student at Swarthmore College, is generally recognized as one of the earliest bloggers. This is generally where blogging began, more as personal diaries, which then evolved as more and more people became interested and joined the blogging trend.

Assessment 2: Podcasts & blogging

Podcasting and blogging are closely related. Podcasting is basically the audio version of a blog. Instead of writing up a blog, you use a microphone to record what you think, and people can download the programme and listen to it.
Many people prefer podcasting to blogging, as it’s much more convenient.
They are basically the same thing, just in different formats. However, they tend to appeal to different people.
You can download a podcast onto an iPod or MP3 player and listen to it whenever they want, which is more convenient for someone who’s busy and constantly on the go, whereas a normal blog will appeal to someone who is more likely to sit as a computer to read what has been written; someone who has time to spare.
A podcast can also let you hear the tone of a person’s voice, which is beneficial so you know exactly in what context they are meaning what they are saying.

One prime example of a blog is Perezhilton.com. The American journalist uses his website to post daily blogs to bring the latest celebrity gossip from Hollywood. This is basically how Perez Hilton found his fame. Many people are very interested in the latest Hollywood gossip, and it’s much easier to post it on the internet, as it’s quicker to access than a newspaper or magazine. Perez Hilton has a lot of fans purely through his website. The website has also brought Perez Hilton a lot of bad press, as he regularly slates celebrities as well as bringing the latest gossip.
Magazines and newspapers will always be popular, but the internet has grown extremely popular in the past few years to use as a basis for expressing your opinion. Podcasting and blogs will always be popular among people who want to keep up to date using modern technology.

New comment: Facebook is taking over.

Social networking sites have always been popular. Facebook, Bebo, Myspace….most folk have one. Infact, most people recoil in horror if they know someone who doesn’t have one. The question is; are social networking sites taking over our lives?

I myself am a self confessed social networking nut. I have a myspace, facebook and a bebo. I do however find it quite worrying how quickly it is to become rather…addicted to these sites. Gone are the days when we picked up the phone, or actually ventured outside to catch up with a friend. Now all we need to do is write on someone’s wall, or deliver a ‘poke’.
And it’s not just teenagers who have cottoned on to this new, modern way of communicating; even the older generation are starting to use them, and celebrities who want to keep in touch with their fans.
But how far can it go? Are we eventually all going to turn into recluses, with no other means of communication other than these sites? Yes, Facebook, MySpace etc is an acceptable form of keeping in touch with friends and family, but perhaps we’re all taking it too far. Staying on it for hours on end, using it as the sole means of communicating with the people we know…it’s not very personal, is it?

As much as I love using social networking sites, I know there’s a limit. I still love picking up the phone and arranging to actually meet up with my friends, rather than sending a few comments and that be it.

Maybe we should all realise that there is more to life than Facebook.

10 things guys don't want to hear.

10. “I’m celibate”
9. “Not tonight”
8. “No!”
7. “Does my bum look big in this?”
6. “Have you done this before? Cos I havn’t”
5. “Is that a pube or your penis?”
4. “Put this on first”
3. “I love you” (On the first date)
2. “I’m pregnant”

1. “Is it in yet?”

Underage drinking.

The legal drinking age in Britain is 18. The actual drinking age is probably about 14.
Walk past any park on a friday night, and you can pretty much guarentee there will be a gang of teenagers, bottles alcohol in hand. As they get older, the park turns into their friends empty house when the parents are away; and the empty house finally turns into pub or club when they turn the legal age. (or when they are old enough to know where to obtain a fake i.d)

Obviously, the legal drinking age is there for a reason. But how many people can actually say they never touched a drop of alcohol untill they were 18? Not many.
It's not made any easier by the fact a lot of alcoholic drinks are made to taste like juice; making it easier to forget what you're actually drinking, and before you know it, you're ten drinks down and in a drunken stupor.

I'm not saying we should all embrace the fact there are hoards of fourteen year olds out on a friday night drinking themselves into oblivion, but what I do think, is that we need to accept the fact it's happening. Perhaps the more we try to drum it into kids how bad drinking is; the more we're just enticing them to rebel and drink.

Drinking is a form of socialising. I enjoy nothing more at the weekend, than sitting in a warm friendly pub with a group of mates having a drink.

Like I said, I'm not saying we should all let 14/15 year olds drink whenever and whatever they want, but perhaps we realise it's not really such a bad thing; after all, there is so much more wrong with the world than a few kids having a few swigs of buckfast on a weekend.

I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day.
Frank Sinatra.

I now pronounce you, husband and...husband.

It has only been recently that being "gay" has become somewhat acceptable. It's become more and more common to see two people of the same sex in a relationship.
However, modern laws make it impossible for it to become full accepted. Same sex couples do not have the same marriage rights as an opposite sex couple would have. They simply have to make do with a civil partnership, which, there is no denying is a giant step forward from where we were a mere few years ago; but is it good enough?

A marriage is based on two people who want to devote their lives to each other; wanting to be there for each other for the rest of their lives. So why is this restricted to only a man and woman? Surely, if a same sex couple feel that strongly for each other that they are prepared to spend their lives with one another, they should be allowed to do so, in the same ways any other couple are allowed too.

When it comes down to it, there is no difference between a straight and gay couple. They are simply two people, who care for each other, love each other and want to make each other happy, so why should there be laws that restrict this?

Many religious beings argue that in the bible, it was deemed as wrong and horrible. Being gay is dirty to the bible, it's wrong, corrupt, and should not happen. However, it's also stated in the bible that 'Jesus' loves everyone of his people, no matter what, which, in theory, would mean it doesn't matter what your sexuality is, as Jesus loves you anyway. So what's the problem?
Are we just too close minded as a society? Too judgemental to accept something other than the "norm"? (whatever the "norm" may be)

The sooner more people learn to accept that there are people who are in same sex relationships, the better. They are no different to any other couple, and should be given the rights to live the same marital life as straight couples.

Live and let live is what I say.

GOD; just a dyslexic dog?

On a recent trip to Edinburgh, I was stopped whilst walking down Princess Street. The first question I was asked was “Are you religious?”. Upon admitting I, infact, wasn’t, I was told I could repent my sins, convert to their religion and I would save myself from being sent to hell in an afterlife, which of course, is what would surely happen to me due to the fact I did not believe in “god”. Of course, I promptly told them where to go, in no such words and was on my way. I was asked that same first question again, further along the street. It got me wandering; if I was too stand on the streets of Edinburgh, shouting about my beliefs and trying too convert people too atheism, how would I be received? I’m pretty sure any religious individual wouldn’t take too kindly to me shunning their God. So, taking that into account, why should I have to endure a variety of individuals telling me I’m going to hell because I do not believe in worshipping someone I cannot see, will not answer me and even though he’s such a saviour, still lets our world today crumble under the harsh cycle of crime, poverty and desperation? I do not appreciate, as I’m sure any other self-respecting individual doesn’t, being told I’m going to hell, because I do not agree with certain people’s beliefs. I myself do not choose to believe a God/s exist, in any way shape or form, however, I don’t wish to stand on street corners and dismiss anyone else’s beliefs and morals, telling them they’re wrong for believing in whatever they may choose to. I have every right too stand on the street and shout about my beliefs, as does the woman mentioned before, however there is a massive difference between stating your opinion and letting people know what you think, and shoving it down peoples throat and trying to force them too convert to your way of thinking and believing, and I don't want to cross that line. I know that people have different beliefs than I do, and I understand that religion means different things to different people, giving them morals and guidance throughout their lives. Now, I may not understand why they believe or why they can gain morals and guidance from it, but I understand they do, and I wouldn't want to try and change that for them.


I did go through a period of time when I was younger when I did actually become religious. However, maybe I was too young to begin dabbling in religion as I didn't really understand what being a Christian really entailed. Furthermore, I didn't understand the whole concept of 'God' either. My whole family are non-religious, however my mother has always been supportive and I've always known if, for any reason, I was too convert to some sort of religion my mum, and the rest of my family would support me. So, my mum sat me down and explained, as simply as she could, what exactly 'God' was and what he done. She even gave me an old copy of the childrens bible she was given as a child. I read some of the stories, I prayed, I helped people...but I never felt as thought I actually gained anything from it. It felt like I had to do all this 'work' but never got praised for it. Even as a child of eight I questioned why I should pray, if I was never going to get an answer. I felt as though it was a waste of my time, praying, asking god questions when in reality, I wasn't ever going to get my answers. Soon enough I got bored with being a Christian and gave it up.
As soon as I was old enough to understand what the concept of religion and God really was, I knew it was something I just couldn't grasp. To me, it just doesn't seem plausable. I am the kind of person that needs concrete proof and evidence before I will let myself believe something, therefore I just cannot believe something which is really nothing more than a book written thousands of years ago. No-one knows whether it really happened or not, and I don't understand how anyone can believe something, just going by what has allready been said. I'm going to put this into perspective for you, let me set the scene. You've been in a loving marriage for almost thirty years now, you have two grown up children and you're both retired. Suddenly one day, you get a phonecall telling you your spouse is having an affair. You don't know who the caller is, and they have no proof. All they can do it tell you that it's happening. Now, surely you wouldn't take it as concrete evidence and believe them, pack your bags and leave, would you? No, you would need hard evidence and proof, which could be the basis of a life changing decision to leave your spouse. So isn't religion the same? Choosing to follow a certain faith is a life changing decision, it shapes your life and way of thinking, so why would you choose to do that, when you have no proof that it actually exists?


This leads me to my next argument against religion. In todays society, religion is one of the biggest factors contributing too wars and violence. Take, for example, the ongoing battle between catholics and protestants, or as it's more commonly known, Rangers and Celtic fans. The battle between the two has existed for centuries, and though the religion side of it is now not as prominant as football fans defending their team is, I dare to say that if either religions didn't exist, the rift between the two would not be nearly as bad as it is.
The current war with Iraq is another example. It all began when two planes were hijacked and crashed into the Twin Towers in New York, America, as a suicide terror attack.The hijackers were part of a terrorist group who had claimed that 'Allah', their God, had told them to carry out such an act. Now, I'm not an expert on the Muslim faith, but surely any God, no matter what faith or belief system it is a part of is supposed to be a 'saviour' and bring hope and harmony into peoples lives, not cause death and destruction upon thousands of innocent citizens. The worst thing, in my opinion, is that these people who carried out such a horrific act, truely believe they are going to heaven because of it. It sickens me to think that they, in their own mind, believe they are going to be rewarded for killing thousands of innocent people. Barbaric acts ot violence and terror should not be justified by claiming their god told them to do it, it's not an excuse or a way out of it.
Catholicism tells you that no matter what you have done, if you repent your sins and say seven hail marys, the Lord will forgive you and whatever you have done will not matter. It gets to me that if a Catholic was too commit a crime, they would be able to live a guilt free life if they simply sit in a little room and tell one person about it, who isn't going too judge them or tell a higher authority so they get the punishment they deserve. If you choose to follow a certain faith, you should learn how to follow it without causing harm to others, and, like I said before, if any God was as they say they are, and were here to help people, they would not 'order' people to harm others.


Religion is something that is meant to bring harmony and guidance into a persons life. Something to turn to in times of need, for support and comfort, not something to use as a prop too scare and hurt people who do not believe the same as you. Having said that, it should also not be used as a tool too scare the people who do believe into being a certain type of person, while threatening them with hell if they're not.
Religion is something I cannot accept or take seriously, and I doubt I ever will. Praising someone I cannot see, sitting in church every sunday and living my life according to an ancient book is not something I can see any sense in or something that I would be able too gain anything from. I don't feel like I need a religion in my life for any reason. I seek comfort from my family and friends when I need it, and I have been brought up too know what's right and wrong for myself, learning from my mistakes and being guided by life itself and my own experiences. There are too many consequences and negatives from following a religion that I just simply don't see how it would be worth it.

Therefore, in conclusion, my argument is perhaps not too abolish religion completely, which was what I thought a few years ago, as I have realised that there is people who genuinly use their religion as a comfort and form of guidance, and do not use it too harm others or try too change other peoples veiws. However, if everyone was too simply respect that everyone has different beliefs, I feel the world today would be a much better place. It's fair to say you might not be able to understand another persons beliefs, which can even apply to followers of the same faith, as some take their religion very serious and become fanatics whereas others dont. However the moral here is just to live and let live. Have your beliefs, do whatever your religion entails but do not dismiss other beliefs. Understand that I have a different belief than you, and I'll understand that yours is different from mine, but do not try to change my views or tell me they are wrong, it'll only make me more determined about my views on religion. Like I said before, live and let live.

Britain needs a reality check

There's no denying that when Susan Boyle stepped onto that stage on 'Britains got Talent', no one expected what would come out her mouth. A strange looking, wild mannered woman from a small town in Edinburgh, girating her hips and claiming she was a 47 year old virgin was never going to make it to the next round, or so it seemed.
But then she sang.
Allthough in my own opinion, her voice was not that spectacular, there wasn't obviously something special about her. She finished her performance on a high, the crowd and judges going crazy. Within days, her talent had become global, and Susan Boyle was in high demand. However, as more and more interest in her vocal ability developed, one of the main areas of interest with SuBo was her image...or lack of. The fact Susan wasn't a stick thin, glamorous woman seemed to make her more interesting. It was almost as if we questioned how someone so...well, ugly, could possibly be so talented. Pictures circulated the press as she ventured out with newly dyed hair, trimmed eyebrows and new clothes; the fact her hair was still frizzy, buttons strained across her stomach, and the flies on her trousers were down only made her seem more endearing to the great british public.

The press have always made a big deal of image with celebrities. Pictures of beautiful, slim stars plastered in every magazine, website and television programme; being "normal" just wasn't an option. But now it seems we've turned a corner. Perhaps Susan Boyle has shown the world that you don't need to be gorgeous to be successful...but arn't we STILL focused on image? No matter whether we are obsessed with how amazing the actress from that new film looks, or in SuBo's case, how bad she looks, we are still focusing more on how someone looks, not what talent they have. Should we not focus more on how well they can sing, act, dance, juggle, and less on how we look? It makes you wonder if Susan would have had half the success she has if she were a supermodel? Probably not, as she wouldn't have been as interesting.

In many ways Susan Boyle is a role model for every woman in Britain, scared by what people will think of their looks. But in other ways, she's shown us all that no matter what you look like, that's how you are going to be remembered, judged by and percieved. Whether she be world known now, Susan Boyle would never have gotton to where she is today if she wasn't that strange looking, wild mannered woman from a small town in Edinburgh.

Do Ghosts Exist?

Ghosts and ghouls; many believe they are simply fictional characters created to give horror stories that extra edge. However, there are also many who believe ghosts exist. The spirits of deceased beings wandering another “world”.
Of course, there have never been any real evidence to prove either side, but personally, I have always had a belief in the after life.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think there’s such a thing as figures in white sheets and chains wailing and roaming around empty halls, but I do believe in spirits.
I believe that if you’ve been a “good” person, you’re ‘set free’ when you pass on, so you’re able to look over your loved ones, and guide them through their lives.
I took great comfort in this believe recently. My gran, affectionately known as “Granny Mac”, was admitted into hospital 4 months ago, after she fell and broke her leg. Her leg healed 6 weeks after, yet it became apparent that she wasn’t going to let home for a while. She was constantly battling infections, have several at the same time, and after three months of hell, it looked like she was about to give up. We got “the phone call” ushering us up to the hospital as soon as possible.
Now, this was the first time I’d been in this situation before, and having to deal with the fact my only grandmother was about to die was hard.
My Granny Mac is fortunately still with us; however, I know that when she does pass on, she isn’t going to be totally leaving us. I know she is going to be watching over us all, looking after us and making sure we are okay. I know she will still be there for me, that she will help me in times of need.

I’m not religious, not at all. I don’t believe in “Jesus”, or “Allah” or “Buddha” for that matter. I take solace in the fact that I know my loved ones who’ve passed on will guide me when I need it. I don’t need religion to help me lead my life.
I also know that when my time is up, they’ll be there waiting for me; my great grandparents, my sister, my auntie…

So for those of you who say you need proof to believe in ghosts or spirits. I truly believe you’ll get proof, when you need it.

A Real Life Big Brother

A plague of shows such as “Big Brother” have sent the media into a frenzy in recent years. A handful of fame hungry individuals living three months of their lives under constant surveillance, the best moments of which aired on television for our amusement.
But how would we feel if we were living in a real life Big Brother without realising?

I once read a book, which told the story of a young girl, who is told that she is actually living in a make believe world. The village she lives in held captive without their knowledge, with the ‘real world’ able to pay to watch their every day lives.
The best way I can describe it is in comparison to “The Simpsons Movie”, when the town of Springfield has a massive clear dome placed over it…that is exactly how I imagine our Earth.
We believe that our world is the only one that exists; and why would we think any different? Many would argue that that’s because there has never been any reason to doubt the fact that isn’t true. However, isn’t is possible that it’s because we haven’t been allowed to think anything other than what we know.
If what I’m saying is in fact true, which I believe it is, all measures would be taken to ensure we never figured all this out surely? There may be the few stragglers, like me, who have their suspicions, but there is absolutely nothing out there to prove my theory true.

So who is this other world? I believe it’s a higher, more powerful society that are able to pay to watch how we live, what we do, how we are. They are basically “God”, or at least, what our perception of what ‘God’ is.

I know it all sounds extremely far fetched; a group of people in a cinema setting, complete with the oversized, overpriced refreshments, sitting down to watch…well, us, but I honestly believe it’s true.
We are nothing more than a mere experiment, a project...a bit of light entertainment. So the next time you settle down to watch the latest ‘Big Brother’ just think about who could be watching you.

Plausible conspiracy theory? You Decide.

Jade? Oh Goody!

Jade Goody leapt her way into the nation’s hearts as the bubbly, slightly eccentric contestant of ‘Big Brother’ in 2002. Although Goody never actually won the show, her on-screen antics continued to amuse and entertain thousands, leading to a list of contracts, including her autobiography and her own perfume, which led to her being one of the most recognised public figures of the 21st century.
However, for every person who adored Jade there was another who hated her. She was never far from negative press attention, those once lovable habits of hers beginning to grate on the nerves of the British public. She fast became the ‘marmite’ of celebrities; you either loved her or hated her.

It was well known that Jade never exactly thought about what was coming out her mouth, which was proven perhaps too well when she was labelled a racist bully when she was invited to appear on ‘Celebrity Big Brother’ in 2007. Following several major disagreements with fellow housemate Shilpa Shetty, Jade shocked the nation with her racist remarks, which included referring to her as ‘Shilpa Popadom’ and telling her to “Go back to the slums”.
This marked the downfall of her career; as the press slated her and shops refused to sell her perfume and biography, she was further criticised for breaking down on live television whilst making a public apology for her behaviour, many claiming it as a bid for sympathy.
It took months for Jade to regain any kind of trust and respect from the British public, most not willing to forget the past.

However, in 2008, when Jade was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, it couldn’t be denied that as a nation, we were stunned. Now with the news that the cancer is terminal, and she has only mere months to live, everyone is trying to come to terms with the fact Jade Goody will soon be no more. Capturing the whole traumatic experience for her reality television show for Living TV, Jade claims she is doing all she can to make as much money she can for the two sons she will be leaving behind when she takes her last breath.
And following a rather suspicious proposal from toy boy Jack Tweed, she sealed a £700, 000 deal with Ok! Magazine to feature pictures of the wedding. You could be forgiven for doubting Tweed’s motives for the proposal, just as you could be forgiven for doubting the motives of Jades decision to televise her battle; was it really to make money for her sons? Or did she seize the opportunity to leave a last mark in the world, as a last, and slightly desperate attempt for fame; something she’s achieved for…well, nothing really.
But the thing that bugs me perhaps most of all, are the hypocritical messages of support from people who only a few months ago were still labelling her a racist bully. Now that label seems to have changed too “Our brave national hero”.
I’m not in any way trying to say Jade deserves this, or that I wish it upon her, but the fact she is terminally ill does not excuse the way she has behaved in the past.

Jade behaved in a way which was totally inexcusable, and whilst she continues to make money out the more hypocritical members of the great British public, I will stand firm in my belief that Jade Goody is nothing more than a money-grabbing, untalented, dim-witted nobody.

Murder By Music?

October 10th, 2007 marked a date many Americans would never forget. 14 year old Asa Coon entered SuccesTech Academy in Cleveland, Ohio armed with two guns, three knives and a bag of ammunition. He shot at and injured two students and two teachers before turning the gun on himself and committing suicide.
In the days that followed, it emerged that Coon idolised legendary rocker Marilyn Manson. Cleveland then took the drastic measure of banning Manson’s music in its state, and even blaming Manson for the violent attack on the school.

Out of respect for the citizens of Cleveland, Manson cancelled the remaining dates on the world tour he had been embarking on. He also refused to comment about the situation. Doesn’t sound like a monster, does he?
But can Manson really be blamed for the tragedy? In my opinion, no, he cannot. Manson has gained a fan base of millions since he first emerged in the scene, including Coon. Now, if his music was as influential as to make someone carry out such a horrific act, surely it would have affected every other fan?
Manson has a certain look and sound to his music, which, not being a fan of it myself, I can admit that it is quite intimidating. However, just because he sounds a certain way, that doesn’t mean he is responsible for someone else’s actions.
To be able to carry out such a horrific act, there must be something internal, something deep down inside that makes you do it. It cannot just be the simple matter of “I heard this song and it made me kill someone”. It has to be something within yourself that makes you capable of actually carrying out a reign of terror on innocent victims, and has nothing to do with the music you listen too.