The title is sort of stating the obvious, but let me explain. I think the majority of my generation caught the back-end of cable TV before digital viewing came in (e.g. SkyTV and Virgin Media). However, with the help of the internet and the greater competitive development of technology, televisions are getting “SMART-er”.
The Death of TV on a Telly
For years now, Sky, Virgin and BT have been a pinnacle part of our furniture. Much of TV viewing requires a box on the TV stand which contains hundreds of different channels. From Hollywood to Bollywood. From Bollywood to Nollywood. Then to Friends on every other channel. I think some show sport, but rumour has it you have to sacrifice a limb for it.
You know when it all changed? When screens replaced buttons on devices which became heavily reliant on the internet. That changed television in a way which we constantly overlook. It is leading to the death of television on a telly (if it has not already happened). Netflix became the ‘King of the Jungle’.
It costs significantly lower than TV boxes, and you don’t actually need a box to view it. Sky Originals from previous years often appear on it, so no need to buy boxsets. In fact, many major TV networks put their shows on Netflix. It offers pretty much the same thing a TV box would, yet you don’t even need a TV to watch it all. Your phone, tablet or laptop can all show it in the same quality.
Streaming is taking over. TV boxes will soon become a thing of the past. Think about it. Streaming services are half the price, accessible everywhere at any time, accustomed to you and…NO ADVERTS!
For the majority of the 10’s, Netflix dominated the streaming scene. I mean Hulu have been around and Amazon Prime snuck in too. But Netflix is the first name you think of in this discussion. However, other big name players are entering the new game. Disney recently launched Disney+ and both ITV and BBC have created a joint service, BritBox, to keep British television up-to-speed.
The question is, what can the likes of Sky and Virgin Media offer that these services can’t? Rather than offering a wide-variety of channels, these services actually analyse your viewing and will recommend shows for you. It saves you flicking through an endless library. I am pretty sure these TV boxes are not able to do that. Oh, and you don’t need a TV license either.
TV’s don’t just have channels anymore, they have apps. You can even browse the web on your TV. On my TV remote, there are actually buttons for Netflix and Amazon Prime to take you straight to the apps. To me, this indicates that one of these is the first place a viewer would go. It is certainly the first place I go. It tells me they expect you to stream your TV shows and not plug in a box.
It’s hard to see how this isn’t the death of TV boxes. It could be a critical blow for the likes of Sky. Even though they have a deal with Netflix, will it be enough to save their platform?
Not just because I want to be more environmentally aware / active, but hype for no reason other than a few thousand Retweets and a couple comments suggesting it is “goals” is repelling. For those who know me personally, they will know I have a habit of commenting on most popular trends which have no explanation as to why they have become so widespread. Today, my chosen topic for scrutiny is viral travel destinations.
The admiration social media users have of travel hotspots has actually caused some issues. These problems are not Tweeted about so much…
The prime example of a “Twitter Holiday” (not an official term, but one which fits the point) is Santorini. I was sick of seeing:
“Omg 😍 NEED to go”
“Me + my boo + this sunset = GOALS”
“I guess Heaven does exist…”
Well, something along those lines anyway. Over the past couple years, my timeline has been bombarded by ‘influencers’ who know how to provide a pretty aesthetic. The volume of content which contained videos of the, I must say beautiful, Santorini sunset over the distinct whitewashed buildings was surprisingly high. I say surprising because I found it to be slightly random. Why was everyone obsessing with Santorini all of a sudden?
Whatever caused the viral yearn for a week in Santorini, it has caused a huge spike in visitors to the island. From their perspective, it may have been seen as an opportunity to boost the economy. However, is the weight of pros heavier than its binary opposite? It does not seem so.
The small island has not been able to deal with this unexpected surge of tourism. Although it was already one of the most popular destinations in Greece, the number of tourists that visited in 2018 and 2019 was much higher than usual. According to Greek Travel Pages, Santorini saw more than 2 million visitors by the month of November. The island saw 1.7 million after the entirety of 2017. We are talking nearly half a million more visitors than the previous year. As a result of this, the island has put a cap on visitors to the island. Greek City Times picked up a remarkable statistic which tells you all you need to know. They mentioned that on some days, there were up to 18,000 visitors descending from cruise ships alone. There are approximately 15,000 people who live on the island…
Nikos Chrysogelos, a Greek politician and environmentalist, fears that Santorni (and the entirety of Greece) do not have the infrastructure for the fast-growing tourism in the country. No European country has seen this growth of tourism in the past decade (Telegraph, 2018).
Think Before Travelling
It is all well and good seeing the world. We all want to do it. Our planet is a wonderful place with many memorable sights and experiences to be had. Don’t be selfish. ‘Overtourism’ will damage the ecology of our most admired destinations. Are you really serious about the environment if you contribute to the issue? Are you really the caring, rational, considerate millennial you shape your social media to reflect? Are the aesthetics for a good Instagram photo more important than the livelihood of those who live in these exhausted destinations?
Where to Now?
Like most trends, people got over it. I no longer see the views of Santorini every third tweet. Influencers have moved onto the next place…
…Kyoto, Dubrovnik and Venice just to name a few.
Overtourism is an issue not enough people are aware of. It’s not an easy one to get across because travelling is something which the majority wish to do in their lifetime. There is a whole world out there and it’s almost crazy to not want to explore it. But, is it worth damaging the environment and ecology of admired lands for the sake of “living your best life”?
Think about the actual destination before you think about your Instagram.
I had an interesting discussion of recent. It revolved around the power of branding – in particular, high street branding. It was around the idea of trusting the products you purchase. Consumers tend to trust products with a particular label on it. In fact, they are more likely to trust a product with any label on it. Let us delve deeper…
Washing the Brain
Capitalism has allowed for there to be a face on every
single item you purchase in your weekly shopping. In other words, when you are
shopping for groceries, whatever product you are buying there is already a
brand that you go to without even thinking about it. For example, butter is
next on the shopping list and, without even thinking about it, the Flora
packaging is what your brain is telling you to look for (or whatever butter is
your preference…maybe even margarine).
Brands have unlocked a door in the human brain which allows
them to control how you percept them and almost implant their image into your
mind. David Eagleman, a well-known neuroscientist, offered the idea (in his
fantastic book ‘Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain’) that you do not remember
such actions of the day because your brain is so accustomed performing that action,
it does not require your conscious mind to be aware of it taking place. Actions
such as opening the front door when you come home from work. Do you remember that
action at any given time? Do you even think about it? The answer for the majority
is ‘no’. It’s embedded into your brain that this is just something you do.
This trust in branding has a major impact on pricing, and the worst part is people would still pay ludicrous money for something which has many cheaper alternatives. For example, I recently went to Homebase looking for a few things I could use to clean my car. The brand Karcher popped up many places. However, when looking at the specifications of alternative products, they were exactly the same, if not better, than what Kaucher offered. Yet, Kaucher products are significantly more expensive. In fact, there was a man looking for the exact same product as I was and he picked up Kaucher without thinking twice about it. It’s amazing how our trust in brands has us spending our money oh-so illogically.
I believe big brands have done the same thing…or at least similar. In particular, the names which have been around a long time, before our generation. The majority of our parents are not as actively aware of marketing tactics as we are. They easily trusted brands because there was a lot less competition. The internet wasn’t really a thing, it definitely was not as commonly used as it is now. That trust was passed on to us when we were younger. We shop at a lot of the same places or follow a lot of the same brands as we have grown up with them. For example, if I was to purchase some fish fingers, I would always go to BirdsEye without thinking twice about it. I’ve grown up with seeing BirdsEye in the freezer, therefore I’m accustomed to seeing that and lean towards them when looking for fish fingers.
Back to the Question…
…if a child saw an Apple fall from an Apple tree, would they pick it up, take it inside, wash it and then eat it? Or would they leave it because the Apple’s from Tesco come in a fresh clean packet, which is how they are used to receiving their Apple’s?
Is the reason kids prefer the Apple’s from the supermarket because of our parents? And their sub-conscious teachings of brand loyalty?
What do you think? Let us know on Twitter and Instagram!
You see the wildest, craziest, almost unbelievable science
and gadgets on the internet…and they really can be cool AF! You see them used for life hacks, fun in the name of science,
even complete random nonsense. But, can fun science and engineering be put to
better use? Can we use them to make Earth cool again?
In this article, we will take you through a few modern revolutionary items which could be used to create a much more sustainable environment.
This isn’t just an article as to why it could improve our planet, it’s the direction we must go. The 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) was the biggest step we have taken so far into globally agreeing the actions we must all take to save our planet. There were many challenges discussed and many actions to defeat them, but the most significant agreement to have been made at COP21 is that we must not let the planet temperature rise another 2 degrees Celsius. By informing and engaging less-developed countries, as well as agreeing actions within individual nations (such as bans on petrol and diesel cars in many countries), the leaders, the businesses and the people of their respective nations will be doing their part in saving the planet.
As per my last blog article on the current state of our planet (Earth is Dead), I shifted a lot of blame on those in power; whether they be government or private companies; but COP21 will ensure everyone plays a part in providing and relying on more efficient energy sources.
While the plans and actions have been agreed, there’s only one place where we can exceed those expectations and really give ourselves a boost in the mission to save our planet… Science and Technology! And guess what, they’ve already started! Here are three revolutionary products, created by the art that is engineering, which can change the world and give us a MASSIVE boost!
Ooho – Skipping Rocks Lab
To be honest, I don’t know how this hasn’t taken over the majority of packaging materials. This is a game changer. I don’t understand how this isn’t talked about. I’ve told a lot of people about this and yet it seems to be the case that I am the only one who was actually aware of this.
If this is news to you, which I can guarantee it is for the
majority reading this, Ohoo is an ‘alternative’ material for packaging. It’s
not plastic. It’s not even paper or metal. It’s seaweed!
The product was developed by Skipping Rocks Lab and is sold by Notpla. Notpla plan to lease the machine used to produce Ooho’s to relevant stakeholders and customers. For example, if an events company wishes to use Ooho’s to create little sachet’s of sauce or food, then Notpla will provide this. Ooho’s are 100% biodegradable and take around 4 to 6 weeks to “disappear”. It’s been used to create little orbs of water, in an attempt to remove plastic bottles from shelves. A single orb can hold around 20ml to 150ml worth of product (primarily liquids). Head to Notpla’s website to find out more.
I can’t be the only one who thinks this is amazing? If this can be developed further and produced on a mass scale, it wouldn’t just reduce the production of plastic and its use for packaging, it could completely replace it! Now you know what I mean when I say it’s a game changer. However, maybe Ooho’s are not so talked about generally because of how undeveloped they still are. They can only be used for very small packaging at the moment, but I am certain that they will become hugely significant in the near future. We would really be reaching our targets as a planet if we do have a strong focus on the use of packaging and Ooho’s will be a very strong start to that. Plastic is very harmful when being disposed of, but the production of plastic is where it really causes damage. If you think of where and how plastic is used, you’ll realise how dependant we currently are on plastic and how the need for Ooho is essential.
Tesla Solar – Tesla
So simple yet so clever. Many people are already aware of this product. It’s actually taken off amazingly well in America. To put it simply, Tesla have designed roof tiles which have incorporated invisible solar cells. The best part is that it’s actually a cheaper alternative to slate roof tiling. In fact, it offers different materials and slate is one of them!
Tesla’s batteries are already renowned for their efficiency and use of sustainable energy. The solar tiles are integrated with their Powerall home battery which means you are able to rely on your own produced energy and use it as and when you wish to.
Why is this huge? Because it means we wouldn’t have to rely
on massive power plants to power our homes with more expensive and less sustainable
energy. Tesla have already taken this international, but it’s about adapting
this to the existing, rather than just new homes/buildings. It also begs the
question of what new ways we are able to share energy.
Tesla Solar is the first major effort, that I have seen, to change the way homeowners/residents use and gain energy. I mean, obviously solar panels already exist and have done for a while, as well as other renewable energy sources, but Tesla Solar is the first time I’ve seen someone push for sustainable energy as a ‘norm’. It makes the current method of energy-use look somewhat ‘old’. It’s kind of like a “get with the programme” statement.
An overlooked resource. Bamboo is natural, grows quick and easy and can be used for tons of stuff inside and outside a home! It also absorbs greenhouse gases and grows anywhere and everywhere! I think people need to realise how incredibly useful Bamboo can be. It’s a tough material. It’s used for scaffolding in many parts of the world, in particular East Asia. But not only can Bamboo be used for beneficial tools, it can also be used for luxury items, such as decoration, ornaments, etc.
In all honesty, engineers should take this resource and let their imaginations run wild with it. If any professional region is going to turn this highly reliable, hugely sustainable material into something beneficial for everyday life, it’s them.
…It’s our engineers who have accelerated our journey to a
sustainable planet as they are the ones who innovated such game-changing
products and the ones who have put our natural resources to efficient use.
Our hopes of the future lie in our scientists and our engineers. Developing and growing such ideas like those in this article are what can help the planet achieve our mission from COP21 and can help us ‘Make Earth Cool Again’.
Earth is Open to Suggestions
What innovative products/materials should be used at a higher volume, or should have higher funding and focus, to help develop a more sustainable environment? Let us know on Twitter and Instagram!
Steve Jobs – A true artist of the product. The man who
changed the world because, not only did he have the imagination for change, he
sold it too.
We predominantly know Jobs as the Co-Founder of Apple. He was the face of the brand. He also funded Pixar, allowing the animation company to become a highlight of our childhoods. “Toy Story” was the first-ever computer animated feature film. For some that’s old news, for some it’s new! Jobs was a huge part of that. It was his vision, hence why he funded it. He was even the Executive Producer (Pixar Wikipedia, 2019).
But it was his work at Apple which really implemented his status as one of the great geniuses the world has ever seen.
Modern Day Genius
I recently wrote an article about Elon Musk (which you can read here) stating how we was also a genius of the modern day. Musk has changed the landscape of survival. But in a world which is built of various social beliefs, industries and a million-and-one different lifestyles, Steve Jobs has not only caused a greater impact, he’s shaped the entire future of how we function.
Steve Jobs didn’t care about the money. He wanted to change the world. And I think it’s pretty obvious to say that if you change the world, there will probably be a handsome cheque being written to you at the end of it. The idea was what Jobs thrived off. Not only what it could bring, but how it could grow and become influential.
He Didn’t Sell Products; He Evolved Our Lifestyles
I mentioned “Toy Story”, but as much as that influenced and
evolved the film industry, it didn’t change our lives. But the iPhone, well, that
Our smartphones are more than phones. We rely on them. They’re
our phones, our libraries, our galleries, our games, our music, our wallets,
our news, our maps, our browsers, our emails, our notes, our TV, our jokes, our
interaction with the greater world and, for some, our careers.
I predict, one day, that we will no longer need actual wallets
or car keys or whatever you carry in your pockets on a day-to-day basis because
EVERYTHING will be on your device.
They won’t even be called smartphones, they’ll be called our “ePockets” or
Jobs did that. He changed the world. He launched the iPhone.
He wasn’t the first to come up with a touchscreen phone. But he made the
touchscreen aspect unimportant. They were the trend, yet he decided to not even
focus on that. ‘Yeah it’s touchscreen, but did you know it’s not just a phone?’
is essentially what he said. That was a huge surprise to everyone! No-one
expected that. No-one at all.
There’s been many inventions over the course of recent time
which never took off. Microsoft developed tablets way before Apple came up with
the iPad, but it never took off. There’s a reason for that. It was just another
Microsoft product to be sold. The marketing wasn’t so great, or maybe we just
weren’t ready for it. So how did the iPhone become so successful? Steve Jobs didn’t
sell the product, he sold the vision. People saw this launch and instantly
started to think ‘can you imagine how good this will be in 10 years?’
I still remember the launch. Steve Jobs genuinely blew my
mind with how he delivered it. He knew it was a game changer and you can hear
that in the reaction of the crowd when he said, “Are you getting it? These are
not three separate devices, this is one device…”
“Wait… one device?????”, said everyone.
It still gives me Goosebumps. Legendary.
Watch the iconic launch here:
It’s Not the Same Anymore
Apple’s vision was Steve Job’s vision. I mean, it kind of
still is but it seems different. Jobs thought outside the box. He never thought
of what the consumer wanted, he thought along the lines of ‘this is new, and
people will love it’. His ideas and concepts were not originated from trends in
the industry or keep up to pace with competitors; it was his vision of how he
wanted everyone to live.
But now, their focus seems to be on the current rather than
the future. They’re improving what’s already out there, just like their competitors
are doing. There’s no distinction any more apart from their unique house-style.
In fact, all Tim Cook does is use Apple’s highly perceived brand image and use
it to drive for a bigger profit margin. Whatever Apple sell, people will buy
because they assume that Apple are ahead of the game and still changing the
future due to the work of Steve Jobs. But that’s not the case anymore. Their
competitors have caught up and Apple are, debatably, no longer the most
forward-thinking technology company. For example, I see why AirPods exist (wireless
earphones were always going to happen, it’s no biggie), but why on Earth do
they cost nearly £200? I can get a decent pair of wired earphones from HMV for about
£20 and probably cheaper online. Just because they’re wireless does not mean
they should cost 10x more! Again, it’s the brand image built by Jobs which has caused
consumers to constantly be in awe of everything Apple put out there.
Like I said, with Jobs gone, Apple have lost that out of the box innovation which they were built on.
R.I.P Steve Jobs
His work changed the world. He’s an absolute icon in many
industries. There’s no denying that he was one of a kind. He accelerated
societal development and changed how everyone lives within a decade. Since the
launch of the iPhone in 2007, our devices around the house (and beyond) have
become essential, problematic and debated. We are yet to learn how to efficiently
cope with this drastic change, but there’s no denying we are heading in the
right direction. Jobs’ vision is only directing us the right way. It’s crazy to
say that how we live should adapt to his vision rather than it being the other
way round. That is unheard of.
Every creative agency and creative mind in the world should
have some sort of tribute for Steve Jobs in their offices and/or rooms. He’s an
inspiration to the creative mind. To all the creatives out there, when you’re
stuck in a rut and are struggling to get that ‘light bulb moment’, just ask
yourself the question: ‘What would Jobs do?’
R.I.P Steve Jobs.
Follow us on social media and get involved! Any ideas, conversations, jokes…I’m all ears (or eyes in this case)!
The Beatles are one of the most significant events which pushed the music industry further towards the ‘industry’ side and away from the ‘music’ side. Let’s be honest here, their music isn’t even that good. They had some sort of flare and charisma about them which was the reason for their popularity. They had a very conspicuous presence, which led to (as the cool kids might say)… “hype”. They started this trend. If I am going to be honest, The Beatles MADE pop music.
Today, no one has used the patents of The Beatles more effectively than Drake and Beyonce. In this article, I will tell you exactly how and why. For any Drake and Beyonce fans, prepared to get (another one from the cool kids)… “triggered”.
Beyonce is a Brand, not an Artist
Beyonce has had some great songs over the years, whether it was solo or when Destiny’s Child were slaying the charts. ‘Say My Name’ is a personal favourite at the Karaoke. However, despite the belters she has under her belt, I would think of Beyonce as a commercial success in the industry before I would think of her as an artist. In fact, I wouldn’t even call her an artist at all. She’s created her own brand, the ‘BeyHive’, and that has been a pinnacle part of her success.
Beyonce does not write her own songs. Therefore, can we even call them her songs? In my eyes, she’s just the ambassador of the Beyonce brand. Just like Taylor Swift and the like have done. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how the music industry works today. The quality of the content has spiralled downwards, yet the numbers get greater each time. The true power of branding. Beyonce is branded as “Queen Bee” and she is perceived to really be a Queen; the most powerful of them all too. She could literally breathe into a microphone for a whole concert and the ‘BeyHive’ will still scream her name. They are hypnotized. They have fallen for the commerce.
I’d also like to take this opportunity to call out the ‘BeyHive’. I know they will disagree. They are brainwashed beyond restoration. For anyone apart of this fanbase reading this article, I would like to know why you disagree on Twitter. Click here to tweet me. I will prove you wrong.
Drake is a Genius…
…And I can’t stand his music. I’ll tell you why. Drake is talented, I’ll admit that. For those who know me personally, they will know it pained me to say that. Anyway, with that being said, Drake is still a commercial success.
He knows how to make a hit. Every song created by Drake has the intention of being a hit. He’s the only person in the music industry with the ‘Krabby Patty Secret Formula’, so to speak. He knows what you want to hear and how to create content to gratify your ears.
His talent contributes to his success because of its diversity. The formula for success mixed with the diverse skill set he brings is exactly why he has more hits than the Beatles. He’s dominated Rap, RnB, Pop, Afrobeats and even Reggaeton. You can see why the numbers are as impressive as they are!
But this is exactly the reason I am not a Drake fan. I can admit he’s very successful. But music is an art and he is making a mockery of it. He has no intention of making meaningful, true music. He’s a 32-year-old grown man singing songs about teenage heartbreaks and parties. I could never be a fan. He’s doing exactly what the Beatles did, gathering attention and “hype” and producing a compelling brand image which is guaranteed product sales.
I Know Many Disagree…
…So, tell me your view. I would love to hear it. Tell me on Twitter or Facebook:
Also, follow out Instagram page below for more frequent content:
I first came across this idea back when I was a student. In one particular lecture, my professor asked the question “Is Elon Musk really trying to save the planet or is he exposing a hot topic for profit?” Those who thought he was a hero stood on one side of the room, the others on the opposite. It was 50/50. I thought (and still do) that Elon is the hero we’ve been looking for, but the result of that question genuinely had me surprised. In this article, let us explore both arguments.
Who the Hell is Elon Musk???
He’s the man of the hour. He might just be the man who saves us. He is his own franchise (not sure if that’s the right word here). He’s not only an entrepreneur, but he’s also an engineer, an investor and an all-around genius.
He’s the co-founder of PayPal, founder of The Boring Company, co-founder of Tesla as well as the founder of, my personal favourite adventure of his, SpaceX. These are not the only companies he has founded by the way, just the ones which are more commonly known amongst the general population. He’s the CEO of three of those companies. He has a net-worth of over $20 billion. He’s made it on to two of Forbes most prestigious lists: ‘21st in The World’s Most Powerful People (December 2016)’ and he is the ‘40th Richest Person in the World (April 2019)’. If you want a more detailed background on the man, check out his Wikipedia page.
In this article, we are going to look at his three most recognised successes: PayPal, Tesla and Space X. It will talk about why or why not they may be beneficial to the future of our home. It’s time to decide whether Elon Musk is our saviour or our super-villain.
Not a great amount can be said on PayPal in all honesty, aside the fact it is contributing to the whole ‘cashless society’ movement. It was an early move from Musk, more of a start-up to fund his more recent projects rather than going straight for the sole purpose he conveys.
The whole cashless society idea, which I believe is estimated to be lodged around 2030, is a movement which can really benefit the environment. The printing of cash will be a thing of the past and so intangible monies will significantly reduce the resourcing and use of paper.
However, PayPal incurs fees for commercial purposes for sellers. It’s a fair amount too but there’s many variations, dependant on geographical location, which you can see here (Finder, 2019).
Now, the question is here is: Is Elon Musk passionate about advancing towards intangible cash to reduce paper-use? Or is he using this reasoning to take advantage of the extra costs of using card-payments, whilst applying his own fees, for higher profit?
Tesla are the automotive and energy company who are really on
the come up. The quality of their vehicles is second-to-none. Although founded
in 2003, it is only recently that Tesla are becoming quite the popular name.
Why are they popular? It’s because of the efficiency of
their products. Tesla cars are entirely electric, yet they are still as
powerful, beautiful and luxurious as your top-end car brands (such as JLR,
Aston Martin, BMW, Mercedes, etc). Only once have I sat in a Tesla car, but oh
my is it quick! It’s easy for me to drift on a tangent here and talk about why
it’s probably the best brand in the motor industry right now, but let me stick
to the point here. It wouldn’t be fair for me to say Elon Musk has changed the
industry by focusing on electric motors, as many other car manufacturers are
also taking the route of electric (and even hybrid) vehicles, but he is
certainly accelerating the rate of pace in which electricity-run motors are
taking over our roads by producing the best quality product through the only well-known car manufacturer who do
not rely on fossil-fuels.
Who knows where this might lead. It could come to the point where
Tesla are the leading brand in the industry and so other car brands would have
no choice but to accelerate their own pace of throwing out the oil-run motors and
relying on electricity. It would lead to public transport relying on electricity
too. It might even expand further than the roads. Our boats on the waters and our
planes in the air could all follow
in the footsteps of Tesla.
However, there is another side to this. Does Elon Musk want the others to follow Tesla?
A forum on Quroa suggests that Tesla does not supply their batteries to other cars. This is because Tesla’s technology is different. They’re ahead of the game. Their batteries/chargers wouldn’t be compatible with other cars, or even if they were, would not work as well. By offering better product which is more advanced tech than your competitors, and by keeping in-house and quiet, it will give you a distinct advantage in the industry and will definitely induce profit even though they are not selling it.
Does Tesla want to take over? Do they not want their competitors to succeed? Do they want to get so far ahead they kill them off? Do they want 100% of the market share? ALL the profit? Do they want to be just like Apple in their quest of world domination? Or do they really want to create efficient motors and be the only ones to do so? Does Elon Musk think he’s the only one with the “right” vision and doesn’t trust the others in following that path?
What do you think Elon is trying to do with Tesla?
SpaceX, supposedly, is here for space exploration, transportation
and developing space technology. They’ve developed a rocket (Falcon 9) which is
“re-usable”, and by that I mean it doesn’t just fall off into the sea it
actually lands back on Earth and can be sent up again.
But you know what their mission statement is? Their “ultimate goal” is to enable people to “live on other planets” (SpaceX, 2019). In other words, even though Elon Musk is trying to save this planet, even he knows it’s f****d. In my eyes, SpaceX is a programme to get us the hell out of here before it’s too late. It’s his ‘Plan B’. Just watch this video and you’ll know what I mean:
He wants to send people to Mars by 2024. You know why? Because
once that step is done, and considering the pace Musk’s companies develop at,
there won’t be many more steps before people can actually live there. Recent discoveries
from NASA have suggested that there once may have been life on Mars, with some ice
under the surface having been found.
How could Musk possibly be using this programme as a venture
for profit rather than an escape plan? There’s not much against it, in all
honesty. I might be saying that because I am, admittedly, slightly bias. I love
his work. The only argument I could possibly think of is that he’s exposing an
industry which only he is capable of being successful in. He has the finances
to fund such a venture, as well as the advanced technology to actually have a
massive presence there. The longer they stay there and develop their technology,
and potentially exceeding NASA, it turns into a bit of a monopoly. NASA will
have no choice but to buy from SpaceX (they’re already putting their astronauts
on Falcon 9) because if they don’t, SpaceX will do it themselves. They have the
knowledge, technology and, at some point, will definitely have the money. They’re
either a threat or friend to NASA.
It’s difficult to suggest that SpaceX is some sort of “exploitation”. It’s nothing close to that in my eyes. Yes, it is guaranteed profit; if you factor Musk’s technological ability, his financial stability and his excellent entrepreneurial skills; but you need that if you are going achieve a mission which people don’t think is possible for DECADES! The big money is essential if he is going to achieve that goal. But I guess you could always ask ‘will he ever achieve it?’
Is Elon Musk a hero or a villain? After reading this, it
would be great to hear what you think of Musk and his projects!
Let us know on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram (and give us a follow while you’re there):
Regardless of our efforts, our planet is doomed. The only ‘green’
which is important to this world is money. The life of a business is more
important than that of a breathing organism. This is something I have said for
a while, to be honest. But recently, I’ve been thinking about the current state
of the environment and I have realised more than what I had previously thought.
It’s not only what I have read, watched or heard; but things I have noticed in everyday life. The change in weather and exponential rise in concern are probably the most noticeable. However, one thing I have also realised is that, as consumers, it’s not so much our fault anymore. In fact, I’m not sure if it ever was.
Commercialism has killed us…
…Not just physically, but our minds too. Corporations are
the biggest reason for our planet’s death. Who do you think makes all the
plastic bottles? Who delivers them? How do you think they deliver them? They definitely
do not use fuel burning big metal machines…right? I mean if they do, them
machines definitely breathe pure clean air………right?!
But the worst part is we’re made to believe that we should be more responsible. Recycle your plastic, cans, paper and glass boys and girls. We’re not doing enough. Our grandkids are not going to see old age because this planet will be inhabitable and that’s our fault…apparently. Us consumers and workers are the reason for the death of our planet. WRONG. The polls don’t lie, as you can see here. We only buy the rubbish material or the thing with excessive packaging because that is what you give us. We can only use plastic bags because that is what you give us. It’s very easy to lose plastic bags. We can’t use public transport (in the UK anyway, and other nations with privatised public transport) because it’s an extortion. We end up driving old, less efficient cars because, for many, that is all we can afford.
The problem is not the consumer. To those who believe the people need to do more, there is little more we can do than the efforts we currently make. But we’re blinded by constant content which all repeat the same message of “protect our planet”. But the big name corps are the ones who should be taking most of the responsibility here.
Old McDonald has a…
…massive franchise which mass produces beef (if you didn’t
know, cows are a significant contributor to CO2 emissions due to the large amounts
of methane they produce), mass distributes bad plastics, builds itself in pretty
much every town and city, and so much more.
Amazon are another fine example. Have you ever ordered
something small from amazon, but it comes in a box which really does not need
to be as big as it is? Or uses loads of “protective” plastic (e.g. bubble
wrap)? Yeah, I have too.
The number of trees cut down for resources is somewhat frightening. The lack of control of the waters is dangerous. We all know how polluted our waters are. They’re like that because only 3% of the ocean is actually protected. This article from Richard Branson tells you the importance of protecting our oceans.
“Our Planet”, narrated by the great Sir David Attenborough
and can be viewed on Netflix, really puts it all into perspective. A really
touching piece of work which tells you how commercialism is killing Earth. It’s
sad. It’s sad because it’s all true. And the worst thing is, a lot of it we
already know, but we don’t know the scale of it.
Supermarkets are actually an area for other companies and brands to look up to. Brands, like Tesco and Sainsbury’s, are currently in the transition of replacing plastic bags with recyclable bags. By 2020, non-recyclable plastic bags should be a thing of the past. Morocco is a nation who have gone a step further. They have banned plastic bags and have replaced them with bio-degradable ones. Game changer- the rest of the world should be taking notes.
We have until 2030
#EarthDay has just passed, but our attention should still strongly remain on the future of planet Earth. This is a plead to the big guys up in their leather chairs and fine wooden desks. Do more. We do our part. Experts say we have until 2030 to do something about climate change, so do something.
Harming our planet because it’s the cheapest way to carry
out your business is not ethical. It’s too common. Use electric transport for
delivery. Find an alternative for plastic packaging. Stop dumping in the seas
and, in fact, control them. Use your excellent marketing and strategy teams to get
us consumers involved in your movement.
Make a change to your business and save us.
Follow the socials…
#FollowTheFlock and get involved on my Facebook, Twitter and Instagram pages! And remember, you #HerdItHere.
Does judgement, conflicts, selling a lifestyle, posting pointless images with unrelated song lyrics count as being social? Let me ask you a question. How many Instagram (or Twitter) followers do you have? For many, it’s well over 300. Out of those hundreds, how many do you actually know? How many do you actually interact with? If you’re answer is “not many”, or thereabouts, let me ask you one final question. Why do you want strangers to see your life? You’re not interacting with each other, I’m assuming you just want to be looked at. Is this being social or is this just a crave for attention? What was the original purpose of social media? It was to stay connected to friends and family, right? It was a way of keeping in touch without actually keeping in touch. It was essentially an update of your life. Let’s be honest, it’s not used for that anymore (or very rarely I should say). In this article, I’m not going to talk about how businesses use social media (that will come another time), but more how personal users sell their lifestyles on various platforms and how some misuse the channel.
Social media feels like it’s been around forever. I mean, what
did we used to do when we were waiting around for something? What did we do
when we were procrastinating at work? What did we do on long journey’s? It’s
crazy to think social media has only been a ‘thing’ for little over a decade.
But a lot has changed in its use in that time.
When platforms such as Facebook and Twitter first came around,
we were given a purpose for them by the brands themselves. Facebook was
supposed to be used to connect people globally. Twitter was more or less the
same except it was more interactive, especially with celebrities (and such)
being a lot more active and personal on this channel.
What’s changed is that people have let the ideology of being
connected to the entire globe get to their head. The possibilities of what you
can make out of this became endless. For those who realised that early on, they
have become successful. They have created businesses and careers out of it
(e.g. The LadBible and ‘Vine-ers’). But nowadays, everyone wants the same thing.
They want to be seen. They realise the possibilities, so they’ll do anything for
a like or a retweet. And ‘anything’ became worse and worse and continues to do
so. People will embarrass themselves. Matter of fact, they will degrade themselves
if it means they get seen. If you want an example, I have one word for you…TikTok.
What’s changed is that the users of social media have
realised there’s no limit to what they can do or say on the channel. They almost
get lost in it, like it’s detached from reality. It’s detached from reality
because people can be whoever they want. Who says you have to use your real
name? Or your own photo? Or your own thoughts? People can be massive on the
socials but hidden in real life. People have actually forgotten that social
media is a part of the real world.
This can cause trouble. I remember I got suspended in school for uploading a video of a kid singing a Peter Andre song and pranking another kid. I thought it was hilarious. But I forgot the people who were seeing this were real people, and some of those real people were people I had a professional relationship with (the students and teachers). But I was a kid, I learnt that lesson early. I see adults making similar mistakes. I saw someone on LinkedIn telling their life-story of how they got to where they were now, which is fair enough, but some of the content was not relevant for that platform. This lady was telling a lot about her personal life, focusing on her past relationships, on a platform where your professional credentials matter, not your personal matters. Something like this would stand out on LinkedIn because it is content which does not fit the purpose. It’s as if they are looking for the attention so they get views on their profile and likes on their post. Only businesses should live by the saying “any publicity is good publicity”, not people. You’re not getting the views for the right reasons. I highly doubt your future employers have a keen interest in your ex. I also highly doubt it’s doing you any favours.
People who use social media use it in a way to attract a
certain audience. You’re behaving like a business. You want followers to see
what you get up to but you don’t even care about them. You don’t care who see’s
just as long as they see. You’ll behave like someone you’re not just to get them
to see you. You will act like a completely different person online than you
will in real life.
People will only show one angle (literally) of themselves. They only get their good side, and I’m not just talking about their selfies. In order to get them followers, to get that popularity and attention, people only show the best versions of themselves (if it is actually themself).
Does this effect people’s behaviour in real life? I feel like it might. I feel like there may be individuals who get so lost in this virtual world that they change their actual habits. They become this other person, one they prefer, so one they become.
I don’t know…
It could be years of media portrayal of the “ideal” person or lifestyle. It could be the vacuum we call the internet and the virtual world, which ironically could be seen as a disconnect rather than a connect to the real world. It could be something deeper than that.
There are plenty of people who use the socials as a place for creativity, sharing new ideas, alternative news, fun, raising awareness and, it’s original purpose, connecting with family and friends. I respect the people who do that. They’re being positive and are taking advantage of such an impactful platform, rather than getting lost in it.
Here’s the Irony…
Follow the socials! (lol)
Comment below or share your thoughts using the hashtag #YouHerdItHere! And remember to #FollowTheFlock.
I’m sure you have seen the absolute s**t-storm that “Leaving
Neverland” has created on the internet. If you don’t know what it is or haven’t
seen it, it’s a very shocking and surprising documentary which describes (in a
lot of detail) how MJ sexually abused two people when they were children. Wade
Robson and Jimmy Safechuck tell us their encounters with Michael when they were
younger. I recommend you watch it before you read or comment on this article.
Leaving Neverland has divided the internet into two. One
side are absolutely horrified and can’t believe their childhood idol (across several
generations) is a disgusting monster. The other side are not having it. They
think Robson and Safechuck are lying. They think this documentary has 0 truth
and that the whole thing is a scandal to make money because, as you may know, a
dead man can’t defend himself.
No one WANTS to believe this. We all loved Michael. But I
can see why there is such a divide in opinions. If the accounts told are false,
then it’s just another fine example of how the industry cares about literally NOTHING
other than cash.
Personally, I have never said MJ is guilty. I have also
never said he is innocent. But, unlike many viewers, this documentary changed
nothing for me. I still don’t know. Both sides of the argument do have valid
points. I want to cover both sides of the argument here.
THIS IS IMPORTANT. MJ wasn’t just anybody, he was one of the greatest to ever grace the Earth. His music would still be played in 100 years, that’s how impactful he was. But now, I’m not so sure…
Take His Crown!
For many, Michael’s reputation is gone. Finished. He’s
guilty, clear as day. I can see why. The stories in this documentary were very
detailed. VERY. And I think it’s fair to say if literally any middle-aged man
on the planet did the same thing Michael did, the whole world would be
screaming for his head.
Michael has always seemed to be a bit off-key. I mean the
fact he wanted to have slumber parties with young boys is weird. The fact he
paid millions of dollars to avoid a lawsuit seems strange too. The telephone calls
which were mentioned in the documentary could also be perceived in that manner.
There are not many other points which I can say regarding why and how he might
be guilty because that is literally it. He wanted young boys to live in his
house. Need I say more?
The level of detail which Robson and Safechuck went in to was disturbing to say the least. But, considering the relationship they had with MJ, it does have a lot of plausibility. But like I said, a dead man can’t defend himself…
The other side of the internet think it’s all a scandal to get money. In fact, when the question was raised, one Twitter follower had a lot to say about it. You can see the thread here. They suggested that “Robson started off this whole accusation with a book deal” and that the “UK broadcast was 45 minutes shorter” than the USA. There was a lot more said but these points stood out for me. Was this just a ploy to gain some sort of profit? Whether it be financial or reputational? Was this documentary, knowing it was going to get attention because of the context, created for the purpose of gossip? Gossip which would lead to more interest? Interest which would lead to views and greater financial gain? Everyone involved in the documentary knows how eventful it would be because of how one-sided it is and how defenceless the accused is.
Personally, there was a lot of it which I didn’t buy. The accusation is definitely plausible. But, Robson and Safechuck, as well as their mothers if I am going to be honest, seemed off. The way the story was told sounded like it was being made up on the spot. Elements sounded true but a lot of it sounded like they were just making it up as they went along. It felt like they were thinking ‘hmm maybe I can add one or two more things here to make this sound even worse.” There was even one point when one of them said ‘MJ abused me while my parents were in the next room.’ The whole documentary they made it seem like MJ played EVERYTHING safe, so they never got caught, but that did not fit in at all. The tone of the mothers was strange as it always felt like their attitude towards the whole thing kept changing. Either they are just some weird people, or they are very bad at storytelling. I’ve heard all sorts of rumours saying that ‘Robson and Safechuck are struggling financially so they need the money’ and a billion-dollar lawsuit being raised. There are a lot of strong points defending MJ after this documentary and they seem to be somewhat more factual in comparison to the accusation approach from the opposing side.
Why did this have to happen?
The legacy of one of the greatest musicians in history; one
of the most influential people ever; the master of the moonwalk; the one and
only King of Pop; has been severely damaged, if not, destroyed. The worst part
of this is that we still don’t know if he deserves that or whether his name is
being vandalised for commercial benefit.
Is this all just a big money thing? Seriously? That’s
horrible if it is the case. I’m unsure of whether this is true, but I have been
told the Michael Jackson Estate are making a ‘counter’ documentary in response
to this one. Are they doing that for the right reasons? Or because it’s going
to bring down their gain in royalties when angry consumers boycott his music…
I’m still down the middle. I think a lot of us are. But one thing is for sure and that is that I strongly believe this documentary was not made to “expose the truth”. This documentary was made for commercial purposes. Regardless of whether the stories from Robson and Safechuck are true or not, it was Dan Reed who made this. It was his idea. He made it happen. In my opinion, he doesn’t care about the truth. He see’s dollar signs… and that’s a damn shame.
What do YOU think?
I wrote this article as my interpretation of the documentary only. There are a few points from my Twitter followers in here too but I have not done any extensive research to determine more about whether he’s guilty or not. To be honest, the purpose of this article was to just put the product in the spotlight. It doesn’t prove anything, so was there any need for it? At most, this documentary has caused a massive debate worldwide.
But I’d like to hear your take on this. Do you agree with what has been said? What did you think of the documentary? Tweet us using the hashtag #YouHerdItHere or comment below!
Or for more content…
Click on the handles below to follow us on the socials or, alternatively, hit the subscribe button!
You have to pay premium for London. It’s expensive. We know that. But why? That’s the ultimate question really. It goes beyond the fact that it’s the capital city; it’s all about the image. Many agree with the idea that ‘London is more a brand than it is a city’ as you can see on our Twitter poll here.
The Rest of the Country Exists
Most of the stereotypes which tourists outside the country have of the UK are predominantly London-based. Some of them are way off. I remember on a trip to the Grand Canyon when I was younger, we were on a bus with some other world-wonder seeking humans. We (by we I mean my parents because I was only 11 years old and awkward) were talking to a married couple, who happened to be American, and the topic of travelling (on our travel) came up. We asked them if they had ever been to the UK and they said not as of then. For some reason, it was on their wish list. I say ‘for some reason’ probably because I know what to expect from this place and they didn’t. Long story short, they thought Shakespeare was from London. In fact, they couldn’t even name a single city outside of London.
That’s quite shocking. But it makes London a very (if not, the only) popular destination in England. It means the stereotypes tourists had of London, even if they were somewhat accurate, are turned into money grabbing extortionate gimmicks.
Red buses, Big Ben, geezers, pubs, the underground, black
cabs, phone boxes, the Royal Family, posh accents, etc. The list goes on. These
are all gimmicks now.
I’m going to use the pub culture as an example because it’s
something which is close to my heart and it makes me feel somewhat glad that I am
not from London. It’s a big part of the London culture. You finish your 9 to 5 on
a Friday and head straight to the pub. But come on, £6 for a pint? There’s
probably some economic reasoning behind that too but personally I think the
culture is being rinsed. People will buy that because “it’s the culture”. It’s not,
Let’s be honest, the Royal Family are no different to the Kardashians (other than they’re probably a bit less dramatic). Why are we so infatuated with their lives? They do nothing for us. They’re a tourist attraction, just like the Kardashians are a brand. They are one of the main reason’s tourists want to come here and so, to be fair, why not con them into buying tacky and false patriotic souvenirs.
…surprisingly has not been sponsored by Rolex yet. London has lost its personal value and gained a business value. According to MoneyInc, London is in the top 5 most expensive cities in Europe. Tourism is a huge factor of that. It’s why I call it a ‘designer city’ because you’re paying premium for nothing special. You just think you are because “it’s London”. London city has become one big gimmick.
What do you think?
Some of you will agree, some won’t. I’m very interested to hear what you think. Share us and hashtag “#YouHerdItHere” with your opinion.
Follow us on Social Media:
Follow us on Twitter and Instagram for more conversation! Click the handles below:
April and May have been HUGE for the entertainment industry.
Avengers: Endgame smashed all sorts of records at the box office (which makes
me super happy) and, to be honest, THAT episode of Game of Thrones really should
give Arya her place in the Avengers too (LOL)!
With Disney dominating the film industry right now; with
Marvel’s MCU, Fox’s X-Men, Star Wars and their own house movies; and other big
names jumping into the mix too; DC with Shazam and Joker, Godzilla, Jordan Peele’s
“Us” and many more; the big screen is the big talk of the year (outside of
With that being said, I think it’s fitting to have a top 5 and worst 5 movie franchises of all time! So with that being said, let’s start with the losers:
5. DC Extended Universe
It’s clear what DC are trying to do. Their rivals, Marvel,
have smashed it. They’re dominating the box office because of their movie franchise.
But DC…I mean, they’re trying. I know their mistake, in fact, we all do. They
rushed into it. They didn’t want Marvel to rush ahead, but their constant blunder
of giving Zack Snyder the role as Director just gave Marvel an even bigger lead.
Justice League should have been better than Avengers. I was
so much more excited for a Justice League film (I have always been team DC) than
Avengers, but when I saw it, I left the cinema as Team Marvel.
DISCLAIMER: Wonder Woman was a brilliant film. The only one, which I have seen, which I thought was well-made (probably because it wasn’t directed by Snyder).
4. Disney’s Classics Reboots
I’m talking Jungle Book, Aladdin, Cinderella and, soon to be, Lion King. Why are they making these? Running out of ideas, Disney? Kids are still watching Cinderella (1950) and loving it; that was made over half a century ago. Reboots are a bit of an issue in Hollywood at the moment, but the Disney ones are bothering me. Is there something wrong with the animation? Is it outdated? No, it’s just a given that it will do well at the box office, so they change how it looks to make you think it’s a different film. It’s like dressing King Kong in a cute monkey costume and calling it a new Curious George movie.
Who likes getting the same movie every 2 years…from MICHAEL BAY?!?!
2. Fast and Furious
Just kill it already. Honestly, why won’t you let it go? I never liked it in the first place. Did anyone? CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME HOW IT’S STILL ENJOYABLE?
1. Star Wars
Putting this one on here hurts, but I think Disney killed
one of the greatest movie franchises in history. This new trilogy has been an
unoriginal exposure of our love for both Star Wars and nostalgia. To make
matters worse, D & D (the producers for our much beloved Game of Thrones) are
to produce the next trilogy. Yes…yet another trilogy…
For some, this is great news. Why wouldn’t it be? They’re great producers. But the choice to have D & D on board for Star Wars is for hype before it is for a well-made film. It will be another commercial success for Disney.
5. Star Wars
Regardless of what I just said, it deserves to be here. What stand-alone movie franchise has it’s own THEME PARK! It’s iconic. It’s not just a bunch of movies anymore, it holds a significant place in pop culture. It will never die. It gave us the greatest team of heroes (more so than the Avengers). It gave us the most sinister and powerful of villains. It has given us epic story lines and character development of such greatness, the likes of which is rarely seen.
Even if Disney have ruined the movies, there is no denying the legendary status of Star Wars- whether you are a fan or not.
“Oh man, Avatar. Have you seen Avatar?! YOU HAVEN’T SEEN AVATAR?!”
3. Bad Boys
I know I mocked Michael Bay earlier, but his style, combined with the charismatic performances of Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, allows for movies of epic proportions. It’s action packed, violent and hilarious. It’s straight up toxic masculinity and I’m all for it.
I can’t wait for Bad Boys 3…
A story like no other. The fighting isn’t just in the ring,
that is what makes it so great. The emotion, drama, intensity, action and
realism of it is very admirable.
The characters were ALL memorable. Mr Balboa was just that guy. Then we had Clubber Lang,
Apollo Creed, Ivan Drogo, Paulie, Adrian and Mickey.
Think of all the iconic moments; Rocky running up those steps, Apollo’s shorts, Rocky vs Ivan Drogo, Rocky vs Apollo (Fight 3), Apollo’s death and…who can forget… “AdriaaAaAAan!”
1. Marvel’s MCU
Whoa. Where do I begin. Let me start where they did with Iron Man. 11 years ago was the start of something extraordinary. The film landscape was changed. Marvel did what no-one else has done before. Over 11 years and 22 movies (as well as multiple TV series), Marvel created an entire universe of characters and plots and led it all to the greatest, largest and most amazing spectacle in cinema history.
I could talk for hours about how amazing this MCU is and why. How can one film have an 11-year build-up? All that hard work and patience for Infinity War & Endgame. They created history at the Box Office and deservedly so. Both character and story development grew on a level like no other and we became attached to many of the heroes involved (especially Tony and Cap. they deserve a statue). And the best part is, that’s not the end! The next phase starts with Spider-Man! It’s the ultimate franchise. It can never end. I guess you could say it will last for…an infinity.
P.S. Rest in Peace, Stan Lee. We love you 3000 💙❤️
That’s All Folks…
That concludes my Top and Worst 5 movie franchises of all time! Do you agree with it? What would you say are the top and worst movie franchises? Let us know on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram! Find us on the links below: