It is currently Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:23 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:07 am
Posts: 2261
Location: Lancashire
Ill-informed, bile filled rant as is true to form. Anonymous, too. Very big and very clever:

Quote:

Quote:
Booktrust is a typical chattering class charity. When the chattering classes’ own interests are threatened, they fight like cornered rats.

I wasn't aware that East Lancashire et al were bastions of "the chattering classes" now - or are they at least acknowledging that by the time this government's finished, only "the chattering classes" and above will have access to the tools and the education to know how to read? :evil:

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:23 pm
Posts: 764
Quote:
By Stephen Pollard who is Editor of The Jewish Chronicle and biographer of former Education Secretary David Blunkett.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2EYGNdMKd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


No idea who he is though, sounds like a charmer.

Edit. This was his response to Leveson

Quote:
And, surprise, surprise, Ed M wants to legislate. Makes it nice and simple: DC believes in freedom, Ed M believes in the state.
Stephen Pollard, editor, the Jewish Chronicle


Worra tool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:07 am
Posts: 2261
Location: Lancashire
They've added that author credit in since the article first broke. I picked it up earlier, but couldn't get to my PC to post it.

That's not a tool - that's a toolbox.

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 5:43 pm
Posts: 3908
Location: Chuffing Barsetshire
Quote:
Formed as a charity in 1992 with the laudable aim of encouraging children to read, Booktrust’s funding was taken over by the Department for Education in 2004 and it effectively became a subsidiary of Whitehall.

This is wrong. Booktrust dates back to the 1920s. What was launched in 1992 was the Bookstart programme: free books for pre-school children. Booktrust is funded, like most charities, by a combination of government grants and private/corporate donations. The Bookstart scheme has been sponsored by Crayola, although the vast majority of its funding comes from the DfE. But the DfE grant was cut from £13m in 2010 to £6m in 2011, and was due to be withdrawn altogether in 2013 — before the chattering classes forced the government to change its mind.

Quote:
Authors – whose interest in Booktrust’s continued tax funding is about as vested as it is possible to be – invented new heights of exaggeration.

Newspapers' opposition to the Leveson recommendations, on the other hand, was proportionate and altruistic.

Quote:
The case demonstrates what happens when a charity whose worth no one would dispute turns itself from a grateful recipient of voluntary contributions into a pushy and demanding recipient of taxpayer funding.

I thought right-wing people loved competition and get-up-and-go.

If the charity's funding is cut, its activity, "whose worth no one would dispute", will simply disappear. The DfE did not propose to reduce the grant gradually, giving the charity time to build up its fundraising. It did not suggest that a different organisation could administer Booktrust's work more efficiently. It just decided that what Booktrust does is inessential.

Quote:
All it took to save Booktrust’s tax handout was the bleating of a bunch of children’s authors and some parents who could easily afford to make their own charitable donation if they really thought the cause so important.

And maybe some parents who could not?

When funding is volatile — eg, when most income is raised by donations — charities have to keep more money in reserve. They also have to spend more on fundraising and marketing. Booktrust was bidding for and administering £16m worth of literacy programmes with a staff of just 50. That's impressive.

What does it take to maintain the 'tax handouts' to non-doms like Lord Rothermere?

Here's the Mailite attitude to charity funding:

Quote:
No charity, no matter how worthy their particular cause is should be tax-payer funded. If people wish to give to a charity they will.

- Lesac , Southport, United Kingdom, 09/12/2012 06:34 Rating 92

Booktrust received less than £5,000 from individual donations in 2009. Yet "no one would dispute its worth".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23597
Location: England - the old fashioned tolerant one.
Hang on - is he saying that getting kids to read is, in fact, serving the 'vested interests' of authors?

Then why does Michael Rosen have to work for a living?

The man's a pig.

_________________
Where there is great doubt, there will be great awakening; small doubt, small awakening, no doubt, no awakening.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:23 pm
Posts: 5090
Location: West Midlands
Absolute agreement here. As for the vested interests comment, well, yes, authors need money to pay for goods and services essential for modern living. Just surprised he didn't drag up Pullman's atheism.

_________________
Ten seconds... the pain begins.

Fifteen seconds... you can't breathe.

Twenty seconds... you give up and turn off the Jeremy Vine show.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:07 am
Posts: 2261
Location: Lancashire
I was very much reminded of the article (albeit not a DM one) that claimed that authors were against library closures purely in their own self-interests.

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23597
Location: England - the old fashioned tolerant one.
If ever there was a group of people whose acting out of self-interest I could wholly support it would be authors.

_________________
Where there is great doubt, there will be great awakening; small doubt, small awakening, no doubt, no awakening.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 1:23 pm
Posts: 5090
Location: West Midlands
That's another Mailite tenet - everyone (except PLU) should do whatever they do for free, out of a sense of duty.

_________________
Ten seconds... the pain begins.

Fifteen seconds... you can't breathe.

Twenty seconds... you give up and turn off the Jeremy Vine show.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:08 am
Posts: 7417
Squeaker wrote:
Quote:
By Stephen Pollard who is Editor of The Jewish Chronicle and biographer of former Education Secretary David Blunkett.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2EYGNdMKd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


No idea who he is though, sounds like a charmer.

Edit. This was his response to Leveson

Quote:
And, surprise, surprise, Ed M wants to legislate. Makes it nice and simple: DC believes in freedom, Ed M believes in the state.
Stephen Pollard, editor, the Jewish Chronicle


Worra tool.


Editor: (What's the betting he has a better looking brother who's a Doctor).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs reading and literacy
PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:07 am
Posts: 2261
Location: Lancashire
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
If ever there was a group of people whose acting out of self-interest I could wholly support it would be authors.

I can't find the original article, but here's Philip Ardagh responding to comments in a similar vein.

_________________
"If the past really is a foreign country, I'm surprised that 'The Daily Mail' would want to live there.” - Roger Quimbly


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Big Rob and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group