TECHNOLOGY DOWN OUR CHILDREN'S THROATS

Now here's an interesting article:

"Are New Technologies Time-Wasters?"

I'm setting up my son's email account, for my son's phone, as he looks to head off to Intermediate School next year.  I had forgotten what a convoluted, unnecessarily complicated bollocks it was.  I had almost forgotten . . .  [flashback, shimmering scene change, Twilight Zone music . . .] 

A couple of years ago, my wife and I were going to buy our wee girl (then almost 11) a mobile phone for Christmas.  She was going to have a 30 minute bus ride to/from her intermediate school, so we agreed that a mobile phone with some games would be an entertainment tool as well as an emergency contact device for our daughter - especially in light of the Christchurch quakes.  We thought it might be complicated, but we had absolutely no idea ….

2-Degrees is the newbie mobile provider, here in New Zealand.  We were very clear to the 2-Degrees shop in Christchurch The Palms; we were buying this for our 10 year old daughter, going to intermediate next year.  We knew she wanted games, but there was no way we were giving her unfettered access to the internet!  Sadly, it seems, the basic mobile phones have games no longer!  Gone are the days when the Nokia brick had some fun, clever, basic, and PLAYABLE games.

The solution seemed to pull us – inexorably and reluctantly – down the “smartphone” route.

Oh but wait.  The Samsung Smartphone we looked at needed an email address.  The Android operating system by Google (the mobile’s version of Windows) needs an email address, you see.  And not just any email address – it has to be a Gmail account from Google.  However, we were told, as long as we didn’t link our VISA card to that email address, our daughter could download free games.  But she needed that email address .  . . 

There we were at Boxing Day, like many of you will be in 6 weeks time.  We had the phone charged, and we now set up a Gmail address.  I typed in our daughter’s name, password and phone number ….  And we’re told she is too young to have a Google Account.   Now that I had linked my daughter’s format to her phone number, Google will always tell me that she is too young for the account.  Because I have been honest and entered her details correctly, I have lost that email address for her for the next three years – and possibly forever.  Had I been dishonest and entered false details, I wouldn’t need to be moaning about it to you now.  A sad indictment on our lives today, don’t you think?

Is there a “Contact Us” feature in Google to seek advice?  Couldn’t see it.  Is there a Google phone number to phone for help?  Not on your life.  The media seem to be able to contact Google at the drop of a hat for comment, but when users of Google – the very people who keep Google alive – want help – well, we can whistle Dixie. 

I guess what was frustrating and disappointing about our experience – even before we tried to set up the phone – is how these things are sold to us.  When we explained to the 2-Degrees shop in the Palms, that we wanted a smartphone but no internet, we were actually laughed at (albeit with a degree of restraint).  We explained we wanted an Android phone, but we wanted to restrict our daughter’s internet access.  Again this was greeted with denigrating mirth:

Salesman: “Why would you have a smartphone and not use the internet? [snigger]”

Me: “Oh, I don’t know – perhaps because we want the games, but don’t want her delving into the darker depths of the worldwide web, chatrooms, Facebook or worse - as she’s only frakking 10!!”

Were we being so unreasonable as to want a phone for our daughter, with games, but with limited internet access?  It would appear so.  The conversation continued:

Salesman: “What about using YOUR Gmail account?”

Me: “I am NOT letting my daughter – or the potential ratbag that might steal her phone – have access to my email.  And what was the point, anyway?  Because, if I download games for her, and she changes accounts when she comes of Google age, the games disappear with her account change.”

Salesman: “So, what about using your account to download games then log out rather than delete the account?”

Me: [Heavy sigh, knowing the answer to my next question] “OK.  Can you show me that you can log out of your Android phone?”

Not one salesperson could show us how to log out from a Google account on an Android phone.  Can’t be done. You can only DELETE your Google account.  You do that, and you lose all those games you have downloaded and may have paid for.  It’s really quite insidious, isn’t it?

As mother-in-law watched our Boxing Day frustration, she made an interesting comment: “Why don’t you get a simple phone - how long do phones last, after all?”  The throwaway phone: well, we were absolutely not going down that path!  That’s exactly what we are programmed to think by the marketing hype.  Capitalism DEPENDS on that mind set: that we will throw out the phone next year.  It’s typical of today’s disposable retail culture.  Gone are the days when toasters and other appliances lasted 10 years.

The marketeers of the corporations have won.  They have seduced you.

In conclusion, our experience with smartphones has highlighted a number of wrongs on so many levels, as we try to carve out "normal" lives for our children:

• Life is too complicated – made overly complicated by unnecessary technology shoved down our throats.  I think this complicated technology is getting out of control.
• Capitalism doesn’t want to hear about any problems – it just wants our money.
• The people who support this society (and that’s the idiots we vote for) don’t have the will or the way to change this for our betterment.  They are happy to tax, repress, silence and monitor us, but don’t want to give us a real voice for change when nonsense like this arises.  It’s simply too hard for them.
•  The idiots we vote for aren’t interested in hearing about this out-of-control technology – they just want our taxes and for us to spend our way out of recession on such technology, regardless of any personal credit issues.   
• Our government is happy for capitalism to bombard us with marketing messages pressuring us to buy the latest and greatest technology. 
• Why does a child want an (overpriced) iPhone?  Not because the child has any idea of why, but because the child has been bombarded (directly or indirectly) by sustained corporate marketing; so now all her friends have smart phones.
• Retail fast-moving technology – like the smartphone - is a very clever way to bring our children earlier, into this shallow, consumerist, disposable society.
• Fast moving technology has been the death of customer service.  When we are confused or can not use this complicated device, we have to pay someone for the privilege of the solution.   
• Despite the mass advertising of hi-tech devices, despite being marketed that these are absolutely essential technology, we are subsequently told, “If you can’t use it, you shouldn’t have bought it.”

THE JOYS OF THE CALL CENTRE HOLD

Now here’s an interesting link;

http://www.vodafone.co.nz/contact/

 

“We are here 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to help answer your questions.

We have a large customer care team based across New Zealand and in the Philippines. Our team is representative of the many cultures that make up New Zealand.

At Vodafone, we are committed to providing the best customer service, and each team member is fully trained to help you with any questions you have about any of our products and services.”

Well, I phoned Vodafone today.  They are now my landline provider, having bought out Telstra Clear, here in New Zealand.  I wasn't getting a particularly good deal on my broadband package (IMHO), so I wanted to see what options are out there.

So I pressed "1, Sales Inquiry" rather than "2, Your Account."  Strangely enough, I got through to the sales department straight away.  But sadly, it was the wrong option; I needed to be put through to "Your Account."  Well, guess what I’m told by the automated message?  “There is a heavy load on our call centre, and there may be some wait.”  **  sigh  **   

I gave up after 10 minutes, when the speaker-phone function ran down my mobile battery.

So let me get this right, Vodafone:  if I’m not a customer, and want sales information to BECOME a Vodafone customer, I can talk to someone straight away.  If I’m ALREADY a Vodafone customer I have to WAIT to talk to someone.  So, logically, existing customers are less important to Vodafone than non-customers.  

So, before I join Vodafone, I’m prized and really precious.  I’m chased and pursued, like a fresh new girlfriend.  But once I’m hooked, once I’m in bed, I’m an inconvenience.  I become a nuisance; like an unwanted, old girlfriend or awkward one-night-stand.  You’ve got what you want from me.  So once I become a Vodafone customer, I have to wait in line at the call centre.

I have a friend who has a favourite phrase; “Capitalism loves consumers.”  My experience with Vodafone proves him wrong.  An American business consultant once said that call centres are employed by bad directors of bad companies, so they don’t have to speak to their disgruntled customers.  The Yank’s right; the corporations have won  . . .  **  heaviest sigh  **

SPINNING THE TPPA WHEEL

Now here’s an interesting video clip;

 "How does the TPP affect little old me at home?"

Well, the text for the TPPA agreement is out, and all the interested parties – those previously denied the text – are pouring over the 30,000 pages.  The debate will now rage as to how truthful the government and its corporate buddies have been; about what they’ve been telling us in the run up to the agreement.   I believe that we've been led up the garden path by a deliberate, sophisticated  campaign of duplicitous spin.  Mike Hosking’s cuddling up to John Key’s government is symptomatic of the campaign.    I think we need to revisit that . . . right before the text reveals the TPPA affects our democracy more than we thought.  Now, I don't watch TV1's "7 Sharp" (I simply can't stand  Mike Hosking) but I did watch this clip where Professor Jane Kelsey was interviewed by Hosking, referenced here, also.  It's actually quite funny:

 "Jane Kelsey Seven Sharp TPPA"

At about 4 minutes into the interview Hosking started talking about how trade disputes are ironed out at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Professor Kelsey corrected him, pointing out there is a great difference between State-to-State disputes and Investor-State disputes; Investor-State disputes are where corporations sue countries.

After the interview Hosking IGNORED what he had been told about 4 minutes previously and suggested again to viewers that there is nothing to worry about as the WTO will resolve it like they did the Apples importation issue into Australia.  And exactly HOW many apples have we actually sold into Australia since then?!

So, this is either sheer right-wing political bias on Hosking's part, willful blindness, or a failure to understand the difference between State-to-State disputes and Investor-State disputes.  Despite his political leanings, Bryan Bruce graciously suggests the latter.

Bryan Bruce explains; disputes between states are worked through by the WTO and there are no big fines because it is a country vs country issue (as in the now resolved issue of Australia refusing the importation of the NZ apples).  Disputes between corporations and states are completely different.

In some trade agreements - of which the TPPA will be one - foreign investors can actually sue Nation States in offshore tribunals (not courts) if they believe their shareholders are out of pocket because the country changed its laws and they lost profits as a result. (Nations, by the way, cannot sue Foreign Investors).  Tim Grosser, our Trade Minister negotiating on our behalf, says, it's "highly unlikely" we'll be sued.  In his comments, Grosser is trying to convince us that his negotiating skills outweigh those of all the powerful contributing US corporations and lobbyists.  Remember, these are the same corporations and lobbyists that have access to the deal terms - but we don't!  And John Key says, New Zealand has never been sued before under a trade agreement . . . so, of course, it won't happen (!)

Does it happen? Oh yes - and on our doorstep.  It's happening right now in Australia over plain packaging of cigarettes.  Tobacco giant, Philip Morris, was able to initiate legal proceedings under the Investor Dispute terms in Australia's "free trade" deal with China.   The Sydney Morning Herald revealed, in the article below, that Australia has already spent $50 MILLION on legal bills defending its cigarette plain packaging legislation before a tribunal in Singapore:

*   "Australia faces $50m legal bill in cigarette plain packaging fight with Philip Morris" [Sydney Morning Herald]
*  "Tobacco giant sues Australia" [Yahoo News]

And that's only for the initial hearings!  If the Singaporean tribunal decides there is a case for Australia to answer . . . watch that legal bill soar!

This is exactly the kind of scenario NZ could face under the TPPA Investor State Disputes provisions.  As taxpayers, we will foot that bill.

Back to the video.  So, Hosking finished the programme by remarking "the proof will be in the pudding." Well, if we don't like the pudding, we can't leave the restaurant.  The TPPA is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for future governments to withdraw from, as South American countries are finding with their current "free trade" deals with America.

Personally, I'd like to stick with a main course Trade deal - we'll sell you some beef and lamb and you sell us some cars and computers. However, that's not going to happen as long as corporates have access and lobbying to the TPPA terms, but we The People don't.

Oh .. and I'd like to see the menu before I order, if that's OK.  US corporate lobbyists are inserting terms into the TPPA, but we won't see the final terms until AFTER the TPPA is signed!!!  Call me old fashioned, but that's not democracy.  But then again, we don't really live in a democracy, do we?

[With thanks to Bryan Bruce]

SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN THE STATE

Now here’s an interesting video clip:

"News Anchor Completely Loses It"

Poor guy; he’s toast.  His corporate bosses at MSNBC will have him and sack him for “losing his temper”  or “ranting.”  Now, you and I would call that,” being passionate” or “expressing his frustration.”  Regardless, the sad thing is that he’ll be sacked or sanctioned for expressing some real home truths that the corporate establishment don’t want you to know.

What did he mean, by “bought Congress”?  Well, these short videos sum it up beautifully;

"Corruption is Legal in America" [5 mins 50]

"The American Dream" [3 mins 12]

What the newsman’s hinting at, is the fact that there is a real disconnect between what voters want and what Congress actually passes.  For example, most US voters want universal healthcare and gun restrictions.  Yet Congress seems to filibuster and block such legislation!  This is because the  respective health and gun lobbyists have told their bought-Congressmen to vote accordingly:

"20 years of data reveals that Congress doesn't care what you think"

Congressmen are wooed - or blatantly bribed - by persuasive lobbyists representing various interests from America's corporations.  This bribery is actually legal and is labelled, "campaign donations" or "sponsorship." So, because almost every Congressman is addicted to the honey poison or actual money poured in from corporate lobbyists, a Congressman will vote with how his sponsors tell him, not with what his electorate wants.  Therein lies the state of democracy in the so-called “Land of the Free.”

If you look at the accompanying Facebook comments under the video, you’ll see a plethora of support and encouraging comments for the passionate newsman.  So, I would love to believe that something will change.  But it won't.  How can it?  How can you take money away from the establishment that runs our countries; the Congressmen, the chief executives, the excessively wealthy?  You can’t.  And yet, we actually elect that very same establishment!  

In becoming a whore to the US, John Key has taken New Zealand’s democracy to a dangerously similar state as that of America.  Right-wing money owns our media, who tell us who to vote for; through adverts, editorials and subtle messages.  After 30 years of this propaganda, “radicalism” and “social democracy” are now swear-words.  30 years ago, before monetarism, these words meant something; they reflected a desire for community betterment, not the betterment of the few.  

Our banks, the police, the Reserve Bank, the civil service also contribute to actually running the country, and so have no interest in real change, or being accountable to a thinking electorate.  So, none of these sub-strata have any interest in changing the current system.  

The current system is this:

• Justification of tax cuts to the rich by giving broad tax cuts across the board ["Crumbs off the rich man’s table," Luke 16:21]
• Clawing back that tax from the middle-income earners by regressive taxes; increasing the price of electricity, increasing GST and cutting government services.
• Destroying communities by convincing middle-income New Zealand that, they’re fighting for their “individual rights.”
• Keeping the mortgage whores fighting among themselves, as they wrestle each other for the same job promotions, the same prized school spots, or the same overpriced houses.
• Keeping middle-income earners busy and distracted with dumbed-down television, paying off the mortgage, and changing the flag; so they don’t question en masse, political decisions.

Perhaps the police might question the system, or at least your average policeman might.  This is because the average policeman is concerned that the police force is systematically being starved of resources.   However, the Police Chiefs - politicians in uniforms - have their jobs dependent on their right-wing overlords.  As a result, I've never seen a police chief rock the boat.

I digress a little.  Let’s get back to the point of the video – it has relevance here in New Zealand, as I've highlighted.  As a result of years of corporate-orientated, business-funded, right-wing governments, we are more and more being consumerised.  We may be voters and taxpayers, but we are having less and less say in how our country is run and what our government does – supposedly in our name.  The conclusion of the secretive TPPA talks this month, as we are distracted by the bread and circuses of the Rugby World Cup, is a prime example;

"Groser Loses TPP High Court Secrecy Fight: Greenpeace Response"

Something is rotten in the state of our democracies.  Watch Norman Jewison's visionary, "Rollerball." Made 40 years ago, it's scary how close we are to that corporatised world.