When readers write the news

IT must have seemed like a bright idea at the time. The Nottingham Post website has introduced a feature where readers can add their own news stories to the website. I suppose the idea was to generate extra content and, in turn, extra traffic. Well, I suspect it's getting the extra traffic now, but not in a good way.

The website is being swiftly tweeted, judging by the tweets in my inbox, and the Sport section is the area with the most activity. Wind-up merchant posters are filing stories on Nottingham Forest signing Baggio, Salomon Kalou and Carlos Tevez. One story has Steve McClaren quitting and the club going into administration. Some of these stories are being removed as they get spotted by Post staff, but I'd wager that you'll see an upsurge of silly stories again come 1am as rival football fans tumble home from the pub.


Here's a couple of the stories currently up on the site, neither of which has the whiff of reality to them:

A number of the comments from readers seem to be asking if the site has been hacked. Sorry, readers, this is a result of the not-so-carefully-considered plan.

All of the stories are being filed directly onto the site, completely unedited. Nothing is checked. There is no hint of being able to prove what is written. If I was a libel lawyer, I'd bookmark the site right now, and possibly give Robbie Savage a quick call about the story pictured above and ask him if he'd like me to send a letter to the Post.

Over on the news page, there's a story masquerading as news that is nothing more than a plug for a local kitchens business. I'm sure others will follow. The only indication as to whether it is a user-generated story or not seems to be in the byline. If it reads Nottingham Post, it's official. If it's a person's name, it's phony. Which seems to suggest that none of the reporting staff there will be getting any website bylines in a hurry.

You can check out the latest tomfoolery at http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/home

The storytelling of Game of Thrones

Warning: article may contain mild spoilers for Game of Thrones, the first book of A Song of Fire And Ice

THE first time I truly encountered George R R Martin's writing was in the splendid Wild Cards series.

Sure, I'd chanced across his work before - a girlfriend was always urging me to read Fevre Dream or Armageddon Rag, and somewhere behind the screen, his work had nudged at me in the Twilight Zone and Beauty and the Beast. But it was the stories of the hapless Jokers and Aces of the Wild Cards universe that truly introduced me to Martin's work.

For those who have not read the series, Wild Cards is a collection of stories by a multitude of different writers, writing in a shared universe where a virus is released over New York. The virus rips through the population, reworking people at the genetic level. Some gain beneficial abilities - the power to fly, the power to control people's minds, the full range of superhero-style abilities. Most become gnarled and twisted, those who drew the Joker, and who would ever be the butt of that joke. Martin held the umbrella over it all, editing the work of a host of great writers, and contributing his own tales, especially about The Great And Powerful Turtle, who uses his psychokinetic ability to flies under the shell of an armoured VW Beetle. It sounds a mad, crazy kind of collection, but despite containing such a disparate range of stories from writers of all kinds of styles, the series held together strongly, creating a parallel history to our own. In the end, the structure was a collection of short stories, but a collection that was unified and moving in the same direction.

Many people will be coming to Martin's writing for the first time now in the wake of the wonderfully successful HBO adaptation of Game of Thrones, the first of his Song of Fire and Ice series, and it is interesting to note some of the parallels between the earlier Wild Cards series and Martin's fantasy epic.

Game of Thrones has a host of characters - so many in fact that one of the hard things at the start of the TV series was keeping track of who was who. From Jon Snow at the Wall in the far north to Daenerys Stormborn in the far distant lands of the Dothraki, and with a host of lords, kings, princesses, knights and commoners in between, the story sweeps across Martin's fantasy land.

But interestingly, in large part, it is a story told through a series of short stories. The chapters of the book are not numbered, or given a separate name. Instead, the chapters (other than the prologue) are identified by the name of the character through whose eyes the events are being related. Eddard Stark, Catelyn Stark, Jon Snow, Arya Stark, Tyrion Lannister, Sansa Stark, Bran Stark, Daenerys Targaryen - eight characters, each with a role to play in the larger story. Separate their stories out, and you essentially have eight short stories ultimately woven together into the greater novel.

For writers, it is interesting to learn from this. Many a writer friend has protested about the way in which their book is progressing, how it falls short in word count by a sizeable margin, and looking at the way Martin handles his host of characters can be a good tutor. Characters that seem unimportant at first to the direction of the novel build up through their own stories to become essential to the heart of the tale. To those writers struggling along, it's a splendid lesson in the art of introducing a strong and engaging series of sub-plots.

Take, for example, Daenerys. At first, she is a young girl on a distant continent from the main thrust of the action. Her tale could be removed entirely from the book and not affect the majority of the action of the first book. For most of the other characters, she is a distant threat discussed abruptly at the king's council, and that's about it. However, given the chance for her story to be told, her presence grows in the minds of the reader, and the climax of the novel has her character perfectly positioned for the second book. Could her story have been dealt with in that second book? Certainly. But weaving it through the fabric of the first presents a strong and powerful character with a layered personality instead of a sudden, simplistic threat.

Elsewhere, other characters have an arc that is not as powerful as that of Daenerys. Take Bran, for example, or Sansa, who observe more than they act. With each of them, however, you have a sense that there is a destination ahead worth waiting for. Each section is tightly plotted, each character has his or her surrounding cast of friends and enemies, family and history - and many of that surrounding cast comes to an abrupt end, which we feel all the sharper because we have seen their role in people's lives before the swords come out and the blood flows.

Wild Cards had a shared universe structure, and Game of Thrones treads a similar path. Collecting each character's separate short stories effectively creates the shared universe of these individuals, and out of that, the novel is forged. 

The return of Torchwood, how to survive a cliché and why Welsh women should not be messed with.

Altered Instinct is pleased to introduce RJ, who will be writing for us regularly on all things geek. Here, she reviews the first episode of the new series of Torchwood. 

Torchwood – Miracle Day

Aired BBC, 9pm, 14/07/11

After the horror of Children of Earth, it is hard to see how Torchwood could get any darker. Miracle Day looks lined up to show us. For those of you new to the phenomenon of Torchwood, the 2006 spin off from Dr Who, a brief summary is in order.

The Torchwood Institute, created in 1879 as the British response to the threat of aliens, most specifically Dr Who and his adventures. Torchwood spent several centuries defending the Earth, having close encounters and generally chasing down trouble. Catching up with the most recent team in 2006, audiences were treated to two series of a dark and unflinching analysis of mankind's many and varied failings. As the team challenged alien attacks and human conspiracies alike helmed by Captain Jack Harkness (John Barrowman), the agents suffered all manner of losses and indignities, including becoming a zombie, seduction by a variety of alien creatures and death by deeply unpleasant causes . Always engaging, never compromising and often shocking, the series was loved for its unexpected twists, plot relevant erotica and bloody action sequences. Torchwood quickly found both a mainstream and cult audience, and a place alongside Dr Who as a British sci fi triumph.

The long awaited fourth series, Miracle Day, picks up months after Torchwood ceased to exist. Main characters Gwen Cooper (Eve Myles) and Captain Jack are the only surviving members of the Institute, which was systematically hunted down and destroyed in the five part mini series Children Of Earth. Captain Jack (he of the flexible sexuality and inability to die) hitch-hiked away from the Earth leaving a pregnant Gwen Cooper and her partner Reece (Kai Owen) behind. Then one day, out of nowhere, a mysterious email is sent to all the defence agencies in the world, at exactly the same time, bypassing all security. The message is just one word: Torchwood.

In a tiny, sanitised room, paedophile and murderer Oswald Danes (Bill Pulman) is being put to death. The lethal injection administered, all seems well... until he fails to die. Likewise, CIA Agent Rex Matheson (Mekhi Phifer) suffers a fatal collision with the “pole from the back of a truck through the car window” cliché, and similarly fails to die. Odd though this is, it is nothing compared to the sight of Gwen Cooper playing happy housewife on a windswept Welsh beach, miles from anywhere. With a new baby and a loving husband, Gwen seems happy until strangers knock on the door. Viewers around the country relax as out come the guns and the (not unjustified) paranoia.

The plot of the series unravels slowly. As the word Torchwood bounces around the world, the human race stops dying. They still get injured and maimed, but they just don’t die. To demonstrate how awful this is, there are many scenes of injury and overflowing hospitals from all around the world. Danes eloquently explains why he can no longer be kept in prison as his sentence has been carried out and walks free thanks to the American Constitution, which clearly was not written with undying zombie people in mind. 

News reports of people praising and denouncing the crisis in equal measure rouse Agent Rex from his hospital bed and send him and assistant Esther (Alexa Havins) on the trail of Torchwood, once they make the connection between the events and the email. Apparently Captain Jack has also spotted the email from wherever in the universe he was, and comes back to Earth to make sure Gwen and family are OK and keeping out of trouble. Enter Rex, who endures a frantic montage of plane trips, telephone calls and some nice comedy moments of an American in Britain (“I gotta pay for this bridge?”) to get him there on time, oblivious to both Captain Jack and an unnamed enemy helicopter following him. Typically, within 20 minutes Jack and Gwen are back in business, being chased by a gun toting helicopter and annoying Reece. Gwen appears to be openly distressed at the prospect of getting into danger (/sarcasm), as she exchanges grins with Jack over the burning (and presumably still alive) remains of the helicopter and its pilot. But behind the Devil May Care exterior, Jack is hiding a secret...

Fans of Torchwood can enjoy the in jokes and references, including the reappearance of Sgt. Andy Davidson, the over enthusiastic use of RetCon by Jack and the name dropping of “FBI Agent Owen Harper”  which I admit made me shed an inward tear. Fan appeasement may indeed be in order however, as there is a definitely American feel to the new Torchwood, with super shiny technology and the traditional Welsh mother, gun in one hand and baby in another, shooting at a helicopter from the window of a picturesque seaside cottage. A lot to accept for fans, but guaranteed to increase accessibility for the less traditional audiences.

Writer Russell T. Davies is back on mind bending form then, throwing the audience the barbed question of what if? From horrific injuries such as a bomber who is less of a living corpse and more like the bits at the bottom of the BBQ, right through to the natural parental question of whether their children will live forever, the consequences of an immortal population are explored in painful, exquisite detail. The first episode poses global concerns – will we run out of food, run out of space... what will happen to the people that don't die? From the teaser trailer at the end, it appears the answer will be far from pleasant. Davies truly has a talent for hiding very real issues under a veneer of glossy sci fi fantasy. 

For a preview of the next episode, visit the BBC homepage, Torchwood  

Regulating journalism - what next?

In all of the backwash following the News of the World hacking scandal, it has been said time and time again that regulation of journalism needs to be tightened up.

The Press Complaints Commission has been derided by politicians and commentators alike. The PCC itself has responded to this by calling for a more independent PCC. A statement from the PCC reads:

We do not accept that the scandal of phone hacking should claim, as a convenient scalp, the Press Complaints Commission. The work of the PCC, and of a press allowed to have freedom of expression, has been grossly undervalued today.

However, as the PCC has said consistently, it believes that the outcome of phone hacking should be a more independent PCC. It is confident that it is precisely what the Prime Minister's inquiry will also have to conclude. There should be fundamental reform of the system, as we have already recognised and called for. But the PCC can, in the final evaluation, play its part in this. It is already doing so, and this can inform the work of the inquiry.

 Without doubt, though, there is an appetite for change. With the demise of the News of the World, the collapse today of the BSkyB bid and the ongoing accusations about phone hacking, blagging and other activities at a number of newspapers, leaving things as they are is not a realistic option.

The PCC does include, in its Editors' Code of Practice, rules against such activities. Clause 10 reads:

i) The press must not seek to obtain or publish material acquired by using hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices; or by intercepting private or mobile telephone calls, messages or emails; or by the unauthorised removal of documents or photographs; or by accessing digitally-held private information without consent.

ii) Engaging in misrepresentation or subterfuge, including by agents or intermediaries, can generally be justified only in the public interest and then only when the material cannot be obtained by other means.

However, what the PCC lacks is the power to back up its tut tutting. The proof of that could be seen earlier this year, when the Express group of newspapers (Daily Express, Sunday Express, Daily Star and Star on Sunday) decided the PCC wasn't something to be part of anymore, cut off payments and went off on their own. So, at the least, any future body would surely need to be able to compel newspapers to come under its auspices.

But that in itself raises a further question. What is a journalist? I've been a journalist for 15 years, working on a number of newspapers, but today anyone can start up a blog without ever having been connected to a traditional media outlet. During the Ryan Giggs superinjunction rumpus, claims about individuals who had supposedly taken out superinjunctions spilled out through a Twitter account set up for that purpose.

In its considerations about how to ensure there is no repetition of such activities, the planned inquiry needs to consider the definitions of journalist and of media. Does a Facebook post count? Simply talking about the printed and broadcast media ignores the fact that most journalists today are multi-media journalists, tweeting their tales and rushing to web as much as bashing out their words for a print deadline.

The inquiry also needs to remember one other thing. Telephone hacking isn't just against the code of the PCC, it's against the law of the land. The ultimate censure available right now isn't a telling off by the PCC, it's a pair of handcuffs and a trip to the dock. If the PCC is regarded as having failed, the law is facing just as difficult accusations.

First reactions: Google+

Google has launched itself into the social media sector with Google+, trying to dig its way into turf currently occupied by the likes of Facebook and Twitter, and we're giving it a whirl to see how it goes.

Now this is far from the first time Google has dabbled with such things, and there's giveaway clues in some of the links, featuring blink-and-you-miss-it mentions of such things as Google Wave, but this seems like a more substantial effort than previous ones.

One of the neat ideas at its heart is Circles. Rather than, as with Facebook, all your friends, colleagues and acquaintances being lumped into a single feed, you assign each of those you connect with a place in a different circle. So good friends you can pop in one circle, that friend you only agreed to add because frankly it was easier than saying no you can stick in a distant acquaintances only circle, people you do business with you can pop in a business circle.

The advantages of that are that you can share messages specifically with one circle, or all. You may hear less stories of people complaining as on Facebook "I am soooo fed up of work" only to forget they had added their boss who promptly tell them they're fired. I swear that story is an urban myth, but it's a fun urban myth, so let's not disprove a good thing.

In business terms, it means of course you can happily have business colleagues in one circle and family and friends in another, and share appropriate messages with each. A good thing - perhaps the one to be looking over its shoulder at this should be Linkedin.

Your public profile is also searchable on internet databases, so it would seem. So it's wise to make sure that is as tame or as extreme as you're happy to be found as when folks tap in your name.

The meat of the experience is in keeping up with feeds from your friends, and this is very much like the Facebook feed in many ways, although at present clear of game notifications, which you either love or hate depending on whether you play them or not, I would imagine.

What stands out as most different from Facebook is the Hangout. This is a refinement of the Google Chat software - something I've used for years and which I've always found to be a very stable format. Hangout expands that to voice and video chat for a group. Video conferencing all wrapped up in the social media format. It seems to work fine, and I can definitely see uses for it, both in business and, hobby wise for me, with online RPGs.

Negatives that I've found so far? For me, it's a little too spartan right now, and I had repeated difficulties uploading video to the site. That's not too major right now, as it may just be a temporary hiccup, but could be a serious negative if it remains a problem.

This is early days for Google+ and there's a lot more to come. It's available on mobiles, of course, and there's certainly going to be features added along the way. I know of at least one friend who is ditching Facebook completely to opt for Google+ instead, but I think for me it will remain one of several options.

Of course, Facebook has a history of responding to competitors, so how long will it be before a form of Circles makes its presence known there? And there have already been news reports of a Facebook deal with Skype which will integrate video conferencing with the main Facebook site. For now, I'll give it a whirl, and add some feedback as the site grows. Feel free to share your own experiences in the comments section below.

Which ebook reader do you use?

There's no shortage of ebook readers out there - and more than a scattering of formats. Interestingly, though, there seems none of the vitriol of previous format wars, with mobi format sitting happily alongside epub format and more besides. Banish any thoughts of the VHS v Betamax days.

Rather, what seems to have evolved is a marketplace of personal preference. Like many who turn the virtual pages of an ebook, I have my own preferences. There are three bits of software I use for my book reading: Kindle, Sony Reader and Adobe Digital Editions. By preference, I like the Kindle software, which has the most organic feel to it.

I use my Kindle reader on my PC, and the layout is clear, easy to navigate, and there's something charming about its appearance. The reader itself is a pleasure to read, although of course one does suffer from PC glare if reading too long, but that's not the software's problem. Certainly, the software has ensured I often linger over the "Add to cart" button on Amazon's Kindle collection.

Adobe Digital Editions was the first epub file reader I turned to and, while it serves its purpose, its navigation is not as friendly as the Sony Reader. Too much scrolling makes it pernickety, and the Sony simply handles things smoother and quicker in my experience. The Sony sadly doesn't have the stylish appearance of the Kindle, and its library seems occasionally temperamental.

So to turn it over to readers - what do you use and what do you like about it? And what do you hate? 

News of the World

The News of the World prides itself on its investigations. Stories such as its fake sheikh exclusives and the match-fixing allegations against the Pakistan cricket team have shown it can pack a punch in exposing hypocrisy and wrongdoing.

So isn't it all a bit ludicrous that people are being asked to buy the line that successive editors of the newspaper did not know how crucial details for a fistful of stories were being obtained? As a journalist, you get used to asking the question or being asked the question: "How did we get that?"

Rightly so, because it's the job of journalists to check and double check and triple check the facts before they get into print. A reporter will be asked by the news editor how they can stand up their story. The news editor will be asked by the editor. The story will be debated at conference. Deputy editors will cough discreetly. The chief sub-editor will raise an eyebrow over anything that looks out of line. The sub-editor will query the copy when they put it on the page. Proofreaders - usually other sub-editors and, with sensitive stories, all the way up to the editor - will pore over every line. That's how it works.

More than that, each of the people involved in this process is a journalist. And journalists have eager, quizzical minds. They want to know how things can be shown to be true. They want to know how facts were unearthed. They want to know that the story is the real thing.

When the phone hacking story was contained to celebrity tittle tattle, there was public frowning but no real traction on the tale. The revelations about Milly Dowler's phone allegedly being hacked and messages being deleted because the mailbox was full so that more stories could be obtained from further messages have changed that. This was no tittle tattle story. This was a missing girl, horrifyingly already a murdered girl, and activity on her phone gave false hope to family members who thought it might indicate Milly might still be alive. Further to that, today sees stories about family members of the Soham victims and the July 7 bombing victims having their phones hacked.

We are being asked to believe that, time after time, the staff of the News of the World blithely waved these stories by, without ever asking: "How did we get that?". More than that, we are being asked to believe that a newspaper with the investigative reputation of the News of the World hasn't been able to unearth any sign of wrongdoing once its eye has turned to its own procedures and staff members.

The sudden handing over of "new evidence" by the News of the World in the wake of the new revelations looks suspiciously like the company pushing former editor Andy Coulson into the line of fire to distract from staff closer to home. Now that the feeding frenzy has started on this story, that's not likely to be anywhere near enough. Nor should it be.

Unlocking emotional freedom

"My breakdown was the best thing that ever happened to me," says Heather Carter as we sit in sunshine in the back garden of her Darlington home.

It's a remarkable thing to say, but she says it very honestly. I met Heather when I was preparing for a skydive. In an article ahead of the jump to help raise money for St Cuthbert's Hospice in Durham, I admitted to my fear of heights, a fear so intense it would stop me standing on a chair to change lightbulbs. Shortly after that, an email arrived from Heather. "I can treat your fear of heights," she offered, an offer duly accepted.

Heather is a practitioner in Emotional Freedom Technique, which she describes as "an energy meridian therapy which helps people to realise their personal potential by overcoming stress, blocks to creativity, confidence and health issues".

She speaks from personal experience, for Heather has not always been a practitioner in such things. She found her way to EFT when a previous career proved to be the wrong one. She said: "I was working in local government in a job that I probably was not best suited to and that resulted in my having a breakdown.

"From the first week in the job, I knew I had made a mistake. I went right back to all my old insecurities, that frightened child within me. Every time, I was asked a question I was made to feel inadequate for the job.

"I was on a spiral down for three years. I hadn't been able to cry for about a year.

"I was driving home from work on a Friday afternoon after an incredibly stressful meeting. I drove home wanting to cry and all I could do was scream this hollow scream.

"I went to work on the Monday and I had to go home."

Her workplace helped her as much as they could, but for Heather, she knew it was time to move on, and it was the technique that had helped her cope through three years - including through a summer that saw her husband, Syd, survive three heart attacks - that Heather turned to.

She discovered EFT through a workshop in Middlesbrough. It started out as a taster course, letting people try different kinds of therapies, and then came the EFT session.

"It was one of those coming home things," she said. "I have spent my life looking at personal development. EFT just struck a chord.

"I got a response from it in the first half hour doing the tapping. The whole process was seeking answers within yourself. It was just a sense of rightness. I could feel it had made a difference.

"I came home, got on the internet, found out everything I could about it."

From that "totally life changing" experience, Heather went to a conference in London, which she described as emotionally exhausting. She said: "There were people around the room in tears. It was such a release for people."

She realised then her path lay in using this technique to help others. She said: "EFT was my future, it was time to follow my passion instead of following the need to earn a living."

The therapy works by focusing on a specific issue - for me, my fear of heights - while tapping acupuncture points on your body. Heather has helped people with all kinds of problems using the technique - tackling smoking, depression, self-esteem issues, even physical pain in the case of one woman who had knee trouble, and the therapy helped her recover enough to run exercise classes.

There are critics of the technique, with the Skeptical Inquirer magazine labelling it "pseudoscience". But most of the people Heather has helped have come to her through word of mouth from others she has helped, which suggests they have found it valuable, and listening to Heather talk about the technique is to hear someone passionate in their beliefs.

Sitting through my own session, as I tapped each of the acupuncture pressure points with my fingers and talked about the reasons behind my own fears, at first I felt foolish, but came away feeling better, yet not convinced it would help tackle my fear. And yet I made that skydive - and even manage to climb on a chair to change a light bulb now. Perhaps the therapy serves as a distraction to shift your focus away from the fear, perhaps it reaches deeper, but it worked for me.

It worked for Heather, too. From what could have been the deepest low in her life from that breakdown, it's served as a springboard to the much happier person she is now. She said: "The real me saw this as an opportunity. I could be the real me and admit that I was allowed to feel the way I was feeling."

Somehow, life-changing doesn't seem a strong enough term to describe Heather's journey.

For more information, visit http://www.heathercarter.co.uk/