KyleNorthern

Planet Earth LIVE – not quite so ‘LIVE’ though

It’s been two weeks since we were able to see the final Planet Earth Live on our television screens. We had Top Gear legend Richard Hammond presenting live from Kenya throughout the programme with updates from Julia Bradbury based in North America. It was billed as a truly epic piece of television, and one that would be talked about for years and years as a pioneer of wildlife television. I found it fascinating. It was truly a beautiful series, but it wasn’t all that innovative.In fact, the only live parts of it were from Hammond and Bradbury during their pieces to camera. The rest? Well, that was all pre-recorded.

The most important aspect of a series like this is the animals. Wild animals in their surroundings, allowing us to see just how stunning animals across the globe really are. Whilst we were able to witness said animals in their natural environment, it wasn’t live, as many people thought it would and should have been. In fact, we saw the animals throughout various clips that had been edited for time purposes and to show only the best parts – some may argue this is good as it cuts out the boring parts, while others, myself included, think that is what makes it so unique. Seeing the animals interacting in such a way, during a live piece of television really would have captivated my imagination and made me want to see more.

Instead, what we got was two presenters, simply interjecting between some stunning videography. To be fair, the presenters were there to stitch the story together, and I understand that. But to have the best part of the programme pre-recorded, and the less important part filmed live seems to really baffle me – the animals should have been the stars, not the presenters.

I’m not stupid, and I do understand that to perhaps capture the important moments in the world of these animals is time-consuming and the camera operators would need to be extremely patient. This goes some way to explaining lack of live action we got to see as viewers. Many viewers took to social networking site Twitter to air their disappointment with Planet Earth Live. A selection of these tweets can be found below:

Lauren Grandidge ‏@LaurenisGrand – ‘Really trying to give #planetearthlive a second go but find it less informative and more patronising. And wish RH would stop with the hands!’

Danny Brooke ‏@DaRkDaN89 – ‘This Planet Earth Live is pointless. It’s not ‘live’ it’s presented ‘live’ the content is all pre-recorded :/’

Jordan Harkness ‏@_jordanharkness – ‘That Planet Earth Live is a farce. 70% of it is in fact, not live.’

Simon ‏@MrFlibble81 – ‘This Planet Earth Live show is not very “live” is it, I’ve seen about 30 seconds of live footage so far, & that’s all been Hammond talking!!’

Twitter is an important tool for media, and this shows why. Producers can really sense audience reaction to their products. In this case, I think it’s important to note that if Planet Earth Live is commissioned for a second series, then it needs to really live up to its tag of being ‘live’; featuring more animals in their environment during live shots, and capturing some truly stunning aspects on live television. That way, viewers could really enjoy the programme a lot more, and really become immersed in the magic of the beautiful environments featured throughout.

It’s important to flip this argument though; does it really matter that it isn’t live? Surely, if we have access to the stunning footage we do, then why should it matter? Some users on Twitter also tweeted their reactions to the show.

Khalid A Shah ‏@KShah_K – ‘BBC’s #PlanetEarthLive is truly a great show. Don’t know why the presenters try dramatise it, the animals manage that all on their own.’

Hadleigh ‏@hadleigh_x – ‘Despite 95% of the programme not actually being live, Planet Earth Live is rather entertaining’

Dave Peat ‏@davepeat86 – ‘Planet Earth Live is not a bad watch, seriously lacking David Attenborough though! #legend‘

It’s obvious to see that some viewers feel that the sheer beauty of the animals, surroundings and the unprecedented access to such beautiful animals around the world is all that matters, not whether it is live or not. I just wonder why the BBC pushed for the live aspect so much, if they weren’t truly going to honour what viewers would have wanted.

Will We Soon be Booking Doctor Appointments and Accessing Medical Records Online?

The Coalition government has today unveiled plans for patients that allow them to book appointments with their GPs online, as well as check test results on the Internet too. Apps for smartphones are to be developed and patients will have access to all their medical records online as well. Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said these plans will give patients more power.

Personally, I welcome this move because I tend to use technology every day. I use a smartphone and actually prefer to have most aspects of my life online, from banking to shopping. This move would really hone in the advances in technology and would allow the NHS to become a more accessible part of people’s lives.

I understand the dilemma a lot of patients face on a Monday morning when they have to book an appointment with their GP, often having to spend a considerable amount of time on the telephone trying to get in to see their doctor. In many cases, when individuals do finally get through they are offered an appointment much later in the week, or in some dire cases the following week. My elderly grandmother faces this dilemma each time she has to book an appointment, and to be honest it really isn’t fair. Much like it isn’t fair for people with children to spend so much time out of their day telephoning their local surgery when they really need to be doing much more important things in their lives. In that respect, you’d think that most people would welcome this plan, wouldn’t you?

There are critics of these new plans for the NHS. As ever, we need to look at the positives and negatives of the changes. We might be keen to see the NHS adapt to the 21^st century advances in technology, but many patients may not be ready to put their phone down and pick up a laptop. A lot of elderly patients will feel left behind, out of the loop and quite frankly angered by the new plans. In the technologically advanced generation we find ourselves in, are our older generations being left out or should they in fact embrace any future advances in technology?

The government needs to tread carefully when these plans are turned into reality so that users who don’t have Internet access or don’t use smartphones are included and can still easily access their local NHS branches.

It’s not only about being able to book appointments online. Patients will eventually have access to their medical records online, as well as test results being made available online too. This will raise questions about the issue of security for the proposed plans. Is allowing patients’ medical records to be accessed online a good thing, or will it be only a matter of time before hackers make their own plans to sabotage this information?

However, the government plan to enhance the system of booking appointments, they obviously need to take into account people’s views on security and sensitivity about their private information online.

But, to the vast majority of Internet users, who use online banking and enter their bank details online on a daily basis, is it any different accessing your medical records online and having test results sent through cyberspace?

The Sky is the Limit for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner was developed by Boeing Commercial Airplanes and seats between 210 and 290 passengers. Boeing claims that it is the company’s most fuel efficient plane.

The design of the Dreamliner sets it apart from other planes on the market. It features 50% composite materials, 20% aluminium materials, 15% titanium, 10% steel and 5% other materials. The wing and tail edges are made from aluminium whilst titanium is used on the engines.

Added efficiency is contributed with new electrical architecture instead of bleed air and hydraulic power sources. Using electrically powered compressors and pumps means the 787 eliminates pneumatics and hydraulics from engine starters and brakes.

A wing ice protection system has also been introduced. It uses electro-thermal heater mats on the wings instead of hot bleed air thus improving the quality of the aircraft during turbulence.

The Dreamliner is made up of around 32, 000 kg of carbon fibre reinforced plastic which is made with 23 tons of carbon fibre. Carbon fibre has an increased strength-to-weight ratio than materials that are used on traditional aircrafts. This in turn helps make the 787 a much lighter aircraft.

The interior is something that Boeing is proud of. They have tried to ensure as much passenger comfort as possible, and have attempted to improve the experience for passengers. The interior cabin width is about 18 feet, which is 15 inches more than the cabin width of the Airbus A330 and A340.

The interior of the new Boeing Dreamliner 787

People with disabilities are also able to manoeuvere around the aircraft as new features designed by Boeing engineers allow these passengers to access parts of the aircraft easily. The centre wall of the on-board toilets can be adjusted so that the two toilets can become one that is accessible for wheelchair users.

First Class Boeing 787 Dreamliner airliner — First class in the Dreamliner

The cabin windows on the 787 also cover a larger surface area than other cabin windows on other aircrafts. Specialised auto-diming glass is used instead of window shades, which means glare is reduced but passengers are still able to take in the views without having to shut the outside world out. Instead of bulbs, the aircraft uses LEDs in three colours with a combination of 128 colours throughout.

Boeing 787 Dreamliner beds — Beds for the cabin crew

Adding to the comfort for its passengers, the 787 Dreamliner also boasts an internal cabin pressure to the equivalent of 6, 000 feet. This is provided by electrically driven compressors compared to the engine-bleed air used on traditional models which means the need to cool the air before it hits the cabin is eliminated.

A truly stunning aircraft, one that apparently flies very well and ensures the best possible comfort for its passengers.

Do you need a Twitter-sitter?

It appears that some users on social networking site Twitter really do need somebody to watch over them whilst they tweet away. Recent stories in the media have shown at best a lack of common sense from users and at worst a basic lack of human respect for individuals; it’s probably more a mix of both.

With the recent revelations that users on Twitter revealed the name of a rape victim and then proceeded to abuse her over the social network, it means that either people aren’t thinking before they write online, or Twitter and other social networks have become a platform for the most vile people across the world. The victim had already obtained a court order that prevented her from being named, but that didn’t seem to matter to Twitter users. According to reports, the victim’s name was retweeted and tweeted so many times that it was trending over the weekend, meaning it was one of the most talked about things on Twitter at that time. It’s pretty sickening to be honest. I have never once thought of naming somebody on a social network like that, especially somebody who is a victim of such a heinous crime.

Not content with naming the victim, users then went on to abuse her and degrade her further. In my recent article about cyberbullying, this is exactly the type of example I referred to. These users hide behind their keyboard; they write these vile things and then watch when the media hype around the social network increases tenfold. These bullies aren’t school children. A lot of them are grown adults. Grown adults, who you’d think would know better. Clearly not. It’s obvious that instead of employing babysitters for their own children, they need to employ Twitter-sitters so they don’t overstep the mark when taking to the site to tweet their thoughts. Most of these thoughts aren’t even needed anyway.

What needs to be done? Well, obviously this problem won’t be resolved overnight, no problem can be. It’s important that the correct safeguards are put in place, because prosecuting every user who retweets or tweets something that is offensive and illegal would be a logistical nightmare. Ordinary people need to understand that just because they are writing online, they still have to stick to the same laws as in everyday life. The same rules and laws apply, even though it may be through a social network. It is all about basic human understanding, and the vast majority of us respect and abide by the law so why do some of the same users think they don’t have to when they are tweeting?

It’s not clear why these people tweeted or retweeted what they did over the weekend, but it is clear that the authorities and the government are determined to make examples out of them, and that’s a good thing. Whilst legislation is being drawn up and discussed by the government, I think it is important to shine a light on such cases of illegality on social networks, and to make examples of those users who commit offences so that other users can see real life consequences of what happens when something illegal is published on a social network.

Cyberbullying: How Serious is it?

We’ve all read stories of cyberbullying. We’ve all watched news reports of it. We are all at risk of cyberbullying as well. Social media is increasingly becoming a tool for bullies in their quest for misery and to inflict emotional pain on their victims. According to a report by the Department of Education, published in November 2011, almost 35% of young people and children in the UK have been cyberbullied. The most common forms of abuse were text messages and emails. The staggering statistic is not the percentage of young people who have been cyberbullied, it’s that almost 30% of those young people didn’t tell anybody about the abuse. What is important to realise is that text messages and emails are private to young people. Parents don’t have access to these in most cases, and so surely it’s hard to monitor?

Social media is a new way whereby bullies are increasingly targeting their victims. Hiding behind their keyboard, bullies can inflict as much hurt and pain as they want, with seemingly little consequences. In fact, I watched a story yesterday where a family was grieving the loss of their loved one, a young boy who took his own life because of cyberbullying. It is tragic that cowards behind a keyboard can cause this. The family, grieving and hurt by their loss, set up an online memorial page on the social network Facebook. It was a place where friends and family could mourn the loss of their friend and relative, and remember him in the way they wanted, by leaving messages of love and by sharing their memories. This was not to be though. The same cyberbullies who had targeted the young boy took to his memorial page to further inflict pain on his already suffering family and friends. The father of the boy said it was even strangers who got involved who just wanted to spread hate. Why? It’s simple: people can log onto a website and get away with it. They can set up a page in a fake name, and use it to cause pain and suffering for people. Surely this has to stop. I know there are privacy options on social networking sites, and tools in place so that people can stop others getting into contact with them, but clearly this isn’t doing a great deal.

Another example I would use of cyberbullying is the use of user-generated websites, such as YouTube. Anybody in the world can produce a video and upload it to the site. The video is then viewable for everybody across the world to watch. Great? Yes, great if you want to get yourself noticed, and great if you have a real talent. What strikes me though is the fact that users are able to comment on these videos. We know that some people may give positive feedback, others may give negative feedback. The negative feedback is the one we should be aware of. Negative feedback is all well and good if you’re performing on The X Factor, Britain’s Got Talent, The Voice or any other talent show; but that feedback is supposed to be constructive from professional people. The users on YouTube, who decide to ‘critique’ a video of someone singing, on the whole, aren’t professionals from the industry. They are, for the most part, people who want to be abusive to other users. Yes, there is the option to remove the comment tool from videos; but where’s the fun in that? People won’t get the comments they long for, and the attention they crave. Maybe it is fair game, if you put yourself out there in such a manner, then you lose your right to only positive comments, much like people who enter talent shows on television.

But what we need to realise is that people should not be able to get away with bullying, just because it isn’t happening face to face. Bullying on all levels needs to be stopped, and sanctions put in place to combat it. I mentioned just one example of a young person who took their own life as the result of being a victim of cyberbullies, but I can guarantee that there are plenty of the same stories across the UK. It has to stop. Our next generation should not have to put up with it; if it happened at school, there would be sanctions and punishments to adhere to; why not the same online?

Regardless of what happens now, it needs to happen fast. The government needs to act quickly, in order to prevent more tragedies across the UK. In my opinion, what has happened is simple: bullies have more tools at their disposal, thus meaning they can spread hate across a number of formats. Young people are constantly bombarded with the idea of fame and fortune. They want to replicate what they see on television; sadly to say, television ain’t all that real, a lot of it is blown up for entertainment. I understand that people who upload videos of themselves are fair game for comments, be it positive or negative. But you just do a search on YouTube; how many people on there are clearly disabled or have severe learning difficulties? Loads. Why were they able to upload videos? Who is caring for them? It’s a question I can’t answer, but perhaps education needs to start at home so that cyberbullying can be minimised. Sanctions should be put in place at home first, and then the Internet needs to be dealt with. But, realistically, can we really ever prevent cyberbullying or are the bullies becoming too creative?