Blog

I've written for the PG on a number of occasions and agree the current arrangements aren't entirely satisfactory. It's co-owned by ex-PR supremo Matthew Freud and ex-Mirror editor Piers Morgan. And there has been a lot of controversy as a result, with editors boycotting the awards because of Morgan and soforth.

My guess is that they're doing the right thing in getting out. I don't know how they didn't see the difficulties coming in the first place. But the really awkward thing is, if you have to advertise for a new owner on your front cover as the PG is now doing, aren't you really admitting your magazine is in serious trouble?

The full story is in the Guardian and it's certainly a coup for the Murdoch empire. I can't help wondering though, whether it's actually too late. I watched the first few episodes and then sort of tuned out, and according to the Guardian's report |'m not alone.

It wasn't that the episodes had got worse or anything, I should add - just that forcing my wife to sit through the revamped Doctor Who was enough for her to bear and I decided to compromise somewhere (we;ll be recording Torchwood on Sunday, of course, what with Prime Suspect being so good last week).

But Lost shed a lot of viewers between seasons one and two. It's likely to do the same for season 3 and this effect will be magnified by a move to satellite. Has Sky done itself any favours? Personally I think not. Lost is the sort of series whose viewers will frankly already have satellite or cable in their homes. With Freeview coming around as a competitor, if I were in charge of the Murdoch channels I'd be looking for a way to bring new viewers in rather than appease those I already had.

I'll never understand this. we get several years of why we're all doomed because we're spending too much on credit and not usng cash we actually have - then we cut back and people are baffled, saying it's actually bad news.

Anyone who can explain this is welcome to have a go. Or you could just have too much time on your hands. But I'm surprised the journalists never make the connection - isn't it our job to ask the awkward stuff?

As you'll have gathered from over a decade of hype, this is the information age, we're all tethered to the information superhighway and so on.

Well, sometimes. I've been looking at digital cameras and cameraphones just lately - or I would have. Unfortunately I have no fax. You remember faxes - we weren't going to need them once e-mail had set in, and more often than not I still don't. I have an Internet-based fax number on which I can receive the things if people insist, but the idea of sending one is simply antiquated.

Or so I thought, until I discovered once again the vagaries of the PR machine. Yes of course we'll lend you a camera to evaluate, they said. Just print this form, sign it and send it back and that'll be fine.

Grr. I can assure everyone I am not a thief. If I tell you I'm borrowing a camera and I'll send it back, that's what I'll do. Indeed I'm not sure that signing a physical bit of paper would be any more binding than an e-mailed exchange in an instance like that; I'm either a crook or I'm not, and a signature's not going to get in my way if I am.

And yet everyone with loan kit insists on sticking with old technology. Baffling...

The title gives you a strong idea of where the content's going - it's all about the sort of technology designed to make life simpler for all of us, but which so often doesn't quite get there (I should add that the telly I won from the prize draw in the Currys Digital Christmas launch is the exception to this). But unlike, say, Stuff, you might notice something about the cover. And the contents.

To put it bluntly, it's titty-free. Even bikini-clad ones.

I like that. I've been married 14 years last week and honestly, folks, I know what breasts look like. And if I wanted to see some more I'm not shy of buying a suitable publication.

But if I want to read about technology for my home I don't want a mag that's going to get my daughter (6) asking why the lady working the iPod isn't wearing many clothes. I want something that addresses me with common sense as an intelligent adult, within reason. I want something which, like this publication, takes into account that all these gadgets and stuff have to go into the living room and be made to fit into it whilst looking reasonable.

And at long last someone's published something for me. And I'm in it. And I'm delighted.

Great piece from VNUNet speaks of David Cameron's blog which has video and all sorts of clever stuff. It seems he's been clever but not clever enough to register www.webcameron.info - which, inevitably, has therefore been snapped up by UKIP. They've put a comedy sketch about Cameron aping Tony Blair up there.

Except...

They nicked the sketch from YouTube, and it's copy protected. So when you open the page you can't see the sketch.

Tories and UKIP both making fools of themselves at the same time. Oh, happy day....