It must be true - I read it on social media

Christmas shopping will be weird this year, whether we are still in lockdown or relatively free to shop at will.
Amidst all the weirdness why not offer friends and family a voucher to spend at a local business experiencing difficulties instead of increasing the already huge profits of the online giants, as I must admit I do far too often?
Shops, bookstores, restaurants, hairdressers, theatres, magazine subscriptions or artisans. Anything you yourself might like or need.
That way you may just be able to help keep one or two independent businesses afloat.
These small retailers have had a tough time for many years.
We ran a campaign some years ago in a group of newspapers I worked for when local businesses were finding themselves under more and more pressure from the high street giants.
Although the internet was very much around in those days, the 1990s, online shopping was still a niche pastime. The big threat was from the supermarkets or national high street retailers.
The campaign was called Shop Local. The independent businesses we targeted were offered competitive rates to advertise in our Shop Local in-paper features.
These ads included a small write-up about the business.
In return they all received “I’m part of the Shop Local Campaign” stickers to put in their windows. Adorned, of course, by the masthead, or logo, of the local newspaper. There’s no such thing as a free lunch, after all.
I have to hold my hand up here and say I do not recall how successful this was for the independents. It did, however, provide them with relatively low-cost exposure in our newspapers, which less than 20 years ago were still the trusted source of information.
And yes, people did trust their local newspapers in the olden days.
Nowadays fewer people are relying on the Gazette, Free Press or Mercury as a source of information.
The internet, and particularly social media, is king. And, worryingly, young people in particular seem to trust everything they read on Twitter, Facebook et al.
I am horrified at some of the information shared. Has any of this been fact checked?
From day one of my journalism training I was told to check, check – and then check again.
Nowadays it is very easy just to hit “share” if you see something on social media. Within seconds that point of view can be spread across the world.
A simple belief can very quickly become fact – a sort of 21st century Chinese whisper.
But without anyone actually checking whether it is true or not.
Just look at what is happening in the United States of America.
The presidential election appears to have been run on social media, with many wild claims made.
The biggest claim is that the election was rigged or stolen. To date no proof of this has been offered.
But millions of Americans believe it to be true. After all, the incumbent President has said so.

These deniers are an insult to those who have died

We, SWMBO and I, haven’t found Covid-19 Lockdown2 too tricky but I reckon that’s mainly because we are both senior members of society.
No mortgage to worry about. No job security worries to cause sleepless nights. No wondering whether there’s enough money in the bank to pay for food shopping this week.
There – being retired does have its advantages. Told you so. And during the current pandemic the greatest advantage is being able to isolate without affecting our lifestyle too much.
Sure, we have missed meeting up with family for meals out, going to the cinema on a whim and deciding that the weather’s good so let’s take a trip to the Norfolk coast.
But when this is finally all over there is one thing I will not miss – the conspiracy theorists and Covid deniers.
I am a firm believer in free speech and people’s right to have their own views.
But surely to say there is no pandemic, that it really should be called Covid-1984, that it’s just a government plot and that we should ignore all the NHS advice is an insult.
An insult to our intelligence and, more importantly, an insult to the 50,000-plus people who have died in England to date.

Are tech changes putting the elderly at risk?

When will organisations learn that technological changes are hated by older people?
I have been telephoning a couple of people once a week for the last five years under a scheme set up by Dame Esther Rantzen.
Originally known as Silverline it used an automated online system whereby us volunteer friends logged into a virtual call centre (VCC) and selected who we wanted to call.
My phone would then ring. On answering, I would hear a ring tone and within a few seconds my friend would answer. Simples.
Making the call through a VCC meant we were both anonymous – no telephone details for each other, which of course is vital to personal safety.
Earlier this year the Silverline friendship calls scheme was absorbed into Age UK.
Which is when the problems started with one of my telephone friends.
Debbie, as I shall call her, is in her late 70s. She lives on her own and has had a few run-ins with scam callers. As a result her daughter, who lives on the other side of the country, installed a call screener for Debbie.
Under the old system the screener told her it was Silverline calling and she would answer the phone, knowing it was me.
Then Age UK took over. It involved a new system whereby when I rang her, via another VCC, she would answer the phone and have to press 1 to do this, press 2 to the other etc.
She persevered the first couple of times I called but was quite vociferous about her dislike of the new system, asking me why they had to change it.
The last two occasions I attempted to call Debbie were met with an automated “We are sorry but we cannot connect you to your friend”.
I have reported this to Age UK as after five years of chatting with someone every week you do get concerned for their welfare.
The response was they would attempt to call Debbie and ascertain what the problem is.
I think I know what her answer will be.

Council gets itself in a twist over blue bin

Our local council employs a three-bin system for waste collection -  a black bin for general waste, a blue bin for dry recycling and brown bin for compostable waste.
It’s a good system and after 22 years we have it nailed. But god forbid if one of your bins is damaged, as happened to us recently.
Our blue bin was damaged by, we can only assume, the lorry mechanism one collection day. It was in perfect condition when we put it out – but had a large split down the side when we retrieved it later that day.
I said to SWMBO that it will be a simple job to get it replaced. Eh, no.
My first call to the council’s customer services department was later that same day – I was told it would take about a week to replace it with a new bin and we should leave it out in the road. We did, with a note attached saying it was a damaged bin awaiting collection. Some village people don’t like it if you leave a bin out on a non-bin day.
Two weeks later it was still there. Another phone call and I was told that  damaged bins are collected from our village on a Friday and, contrary to our previous call, we would receive a repurposed bin rather than a new one.
Two weeks on and the bin was still there. Yet another phone call and we were told it would now be treated as a priority and we’d have the replacement “soon”.
Two more weeks, another phone call and the startling news that damaged bins were not being replaced. OK, I thought, it’s not the end of the world and I managed to do a repair job using Gorilla tape (other heavy duty tapes are available).
So it was something of a surprise when just a few days later SWMBO spotted a man walking down the drive. It was a council employee checking our house name – because he had brought us our new blue bin.
You couldn’t make it up.

Trepidation, anger and hope

It has been quite a surreal time over the last four or five months, a mixture of trepidation, anger and hope.

Trepidation because my SIL, sister-in-law, is one of those people caught up in the high risk category as she had a liver transplant a few years ago.

We did not see her for four months, even though she lives just 30 miles away in the east of the county. We may have been sensible over this time but were still not willing to take the risk.

However, since restrictions were eased a while back we have met up at our respective homes a few times – always socially distanced, using our own mugs and plates and even separate toilets (we are lucky to have more than one). But also with a sense of trepidation as she is still at greater risk than the rest of us.

The anger comes from seeing many people who seem to think they are exempt from the general guidelines about keeping two metres (or is one metre?) apart, wearing a mask whenever out and about and generally thinking of no-one but themselves. Whatever has happened to community spirit and respect?

The hope comes from the fact that this dreadful pandemic will eventually be over and the risks diminished as people realise we are all in this together and need to act responsibly.

That Nostradamus has got nothing on me

It seems I am something of a 21st century Nostradamus. Now my reader may think that is a bold, and possibly outrageous, statement but I have the proof.

Some years ago a friend, and former business partner, suggested I start a blog as “you have a unique and humorous way of writing”.

Assuming that was a compliment I started to put my random and rambling thoughts in writing.

All I needed was a catchy title. But I just couldn’t think of anything.

Then BIL, my brother-in-law, told me that I needed to get out more after what I thought was a stimulating and terribly interesting chat about pros and cons of various brands of wood stain. Yes, really.

That was a lightbulb moment and I Don’t Get Out Much was born.

And here I am, five months after the initial COVID-19 lockdown, not getting out much. Told you so.

These people really are the scam of the earth
I received a text on my mobile the other day from Emma, who said she was in hospital and needed our help.
We have a family member named Emma. But I ignored the text. Why ignore it, you may ask, when a family member is in need of assistance?
The answer is fairly straightforward – it’s because I spent my whole career as a journalist and am therefore naturally cynical and questioning.
If this was from the Emma we know, why did her name not come up on the mobile as the caller? After all, her number is in my contacts.
And why did she not call other closer family members first, such as her parents or even her husband?
I knew immediately it was a scam, obviously did not reply and blocked the number before hitting Google.
And there, surprise, surprise, I found a warning about a hospital text scam using a common name that has been tricking people out of their hard-earned cash.
Most people will know someone called 'Emma', or any other common (I use that term loosely) name but replying to such a text will leave you £20 out of pocket.
The fraudsters play on people's emotions by sending a distressed message saying they are in hospital from what appears to be an ordinary mobile number.
The message I received stated: “Its Emma. I tried to call you but signal bad.
“I been taken to hospital after having a fall this morning. If possible can you do me a quick favour and text me x.” And yes, the grammar really was that bad.
Action Fraud say: “After responding to the message, the fraudsters ask victims to purchase a mobile phone top-up code and text it back to them.
“Once the fraudsters have the code, they can get the cash credited to their own mobile phone account.”
So, I saved myself £20. Hopefully my reader will take note and not fall into this emotional trap.
Sadly, the world is full of scammers who want to part you with your money. That’s one of the reasons we recently upgraded our landline phone to a more secure make which can sort the chaff from the wheat.
This followed a spate of calls, purportedly from UK numbers, saying we were eligible for a free gas boiler, paid for by the Government.
How nice of them. Especially as we live in a rural part of this great county that does not have mains gas!
This went on for weeks and after each call I reported it to the Information Commissioners Office (https://ico.org.uk), giving date, time, number that called me etc. etc.
The calls eventually stopped and we had many months of no spam calls. Until early March, when they started again. Three on one day, two the next, all from different “UK” numbers. The first one was from an area code we know well, having family living there, so I answered it. Apparently, I’d had a missed call from my internet service provider.
I hung up immediately and let the next few UK but unknown-to-me number calls go through to the answer machine. Each one ended the call and left no message.
I am not sure what this particular scam is about but I would guess some nice man or woman would try to sweet talk me into a) letting them take control of my computer or b) persuade me to pay money to keep my service going.
Something that really irks me about these calls is the fact they appear to come from a UK number. Which is odd as we are fully paid-up members of the Telephone Preference Service and should not be getting any unsolicited calls.
But a quick search on the internet came up with the answer – you don’t have to be in the UK to have a UK number.

There are numerous businesses advertising what are known as UK Virtual Phone Numbers. Meaning you could be sitting in Portugal, for example, but the person you calls sees a UK number on his/ her telephone display.

Wow, it’s a funny old world. Well, funny may not be the correct word. Perhaps I should just say a sad world.
One where you cannot seemingly trust anything, even a UK phone number.
Now please don’t have nightmares. Just become a little more cynical and question EVERY call or text you receive from a number you don’t know. If in doubt, let it go to answer and see what happens.
A genuine person will leave a message. Scammers usually use an automated system and will hang up.

Come on, you tech giants, talk to each other

I had to replace my iPad last month (other non-Apple tablets are available) after my model 2 finally gave up the ghost. I say had to but that’s not strictly true. I wanted to.

I discovered a great family-run IT shop in a nearby town a few years ago and made the purchase there.
I have nothing against the massive national outlets but you can’t beat a local, small business for customer service.
The new pad is great – but I do have one small gripe.
All the power leads, cases, screen protectors etc. from my “old” iPad, accumulated over several years, are now redundant and I had to replace every item. At no small cost.
However, it’s not the cost that really riles me – it’s the waste of resources. It seems every “upgrade” on tech gear has small changes that need new add-ons.
And every manufacturer appears to have its own systems.
Please standardise these items. Thank you.

A taxing solution to BBC licence fee conundrum?

In the good old days (remember them?) families would sit together and watch television.

One programme, one room, all family members.

But how things have changed. Now dad can be in his man cave, watching a film on his tablet; mum in the lounge watching the latest Amazon Prime Video special and the children in the kitchen, catching up with the latest Netflix blockbuster.
All three methods cost a monthly fee which allows people to watch what they want, when they want. They are not tied into traditional schedules.
Which, unsurprisingly, leads many to question the value and the need for the BBC licence fee.
Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan launched a public consultation in February on whether non-payment of the TV licence fee should remain a criminal offence.
Currently, anyone who watches or records live TV (on any channel) or uses iPlayer without a TV licence is guilty of a criminal offence and could go to prison.
The consultation ends early April and the government will publish its response in the summer.
But decriminalisation would not mean non-payment would become voluntary. It could instead mean it would become a civil offence similar to non-payment of council tax or an electricity bill.
Baroness Morgan has also said that it was time to think about keeping the fee "relevant" in a "changing media landscape".
At the last review of the licence fee, which will increase by £3 from £154.50 to £157.50 on April 1, it was found that the current system is the fairest but that this would be reviewed again in future.
There were around 26 million TV licences being used in the UK last year, generating £3.69bn in income for the BBC.
The fee system has many pros (no advertising, quality broadcasting, editorial independence, unbiased news) and many cons (it is undemocratic to force people to pay for a service they either don’t use very often or do not agree with politically, it is unrepresentative as board members are currently appointed from within, it’s too centralised and too old fashioned).
To my mind, and feel free to disagree, the pros outweigh the cons but there is no doubt that financing the BBC has to change.
It is estimated there are 11.6 million households in the UK with Netflix subscriptions, 14 million Amazon Prime Video and 2 million Now TV.
Collectively that’s 27.6 million households paying varied monthly amounts compared with around 26 million TV licences being used in the UK.
I do not think a Netflix/ Amazon Prime/ Now TV-like monthly fee is the way forward at present.
Youngsters (by that I mean the under 40s) are used to streaming programmes, binge watching etc. and are more likely to be against paying the licence fee.
Bet they rarely watch News at Ten or similar!
But at present there are still around 26 million TV licences being used in the UK, generating £3.69bn in income for the BBC. That’s guaranteed income for making programmes that the more commercial operators would not touch.
If the BBC switches to a monthly subscription fee, which I fear is on the horizon, there will be no guarantee that younger subscribers would remain faithful, leaving the BBC unable to plan for future programming costs not knowing what its income is going to be.
So, how to solve this problem? Take the cost of running the BBC out of income tax. Even most oldies pay tax, you know.

Technology that leaves me completely baffled

I’m no Luddite but some modern technology leaves me completely, and utterly, baffled.
In the November 2018 edition of this excellent magazine I rambled on about the rear parking sensors on my (then) new car and how SWMBO had not quite got the hang of how it actually worked on a trip to Devon. It was almost wall 1, Focus 0.
All is now well with this particular piece of kit and both of us have fully-immersed ourselves in its usefulness and its shortcomings.
The subject of my latest anti-tech rant is the auto start-stop function on said car.
At first sight it is a wonderful piece of kit, designed to help me do my bit to save our planet by temporarily cutting the engine in certain situations.
These include any instances when you put your car into neutral, apply the handbrake fully and remove all feet (generally two) from the pedals.
This enables you to sit at traffic lights, emission free, whilst doing that smug Churchill-the-dog thing (other insurance providers are available) of nodding your head sagely. Oooh, yes.

It will come as no surprise to my reader, if you have struggled on valiantly to this point, that there is now an issue with the technology.

Having happily helped my emission-reducing efforts for around 18 months it decided to stop working.
And as with all modern cars, there’s a symbol for that which pops on your control panel, sorry, instrument cluster.
When the afore-mentioned stop-start was working a bright green ‘A’ symbol popped up on the display, disappearing only when you engaged the clutch to restart the engine, put the car into gear and roared away from the traffic lights.
That was the well-rehearsed scenario until about a month ago (at the time of writing in mid-January).
On this occasion I followed the usual rules at the traffic lights and – the engine did not cut out.
Instead of the reassuring green ‘A’ symbol there was a mucky grey ‘A’ with a line through it.
A temporary blip, I assumed, so when I returned home I thought “I know what. I’ll break the habit of a lifetime and consult the car’s manual.”
That very helpfully told me the grey ‘A’ plus line meant auto-stop start was not available but offered no remedies.
Before booking the car in at the local dealership I thought I’d have a quick shifty on the internet, which usually has the answer to everything you want to know, and lots more besides.
The results were very interesting. It seems my auto start-stop failure was not (surprise, surprise) affecting just one driver in Suffolk.
It transpires that as well as having the car in neutral, handbrake fully on and feet off the pedals, you also need to have the car’s wheels completely straight, the car has to be above a certain temperature, there mustn’t be too much strain on the car battery (i.e. don’t have the radio on, dash cam plugged in, heating on) and you have to have driven a fair, but unspecified, number of miles etc. etc.
The vehicle has now been in to the dealership to have the problem investigated. I guess this entailed plugging it into a computer and re-booting it.
I was told it had been sorted. But two weeks on and the function has stopped working again. But then sometimes it DOES work.
Which is totally frustrating and leave me wondering why car manufacturers bother with what on the face of it is excellent technology but which will only work under certain conditions.
Needless to say I have now turned this function off. And, in my bid to help save the planet, I’ll simply turn the engine off in the old-fashioned way when stopped by red lights or in a non-moving queue.
I wonder if the manufacturer will give me a rebate as I am not using one of its fancy gizmos?

Respect choice as well as belief

Are you observing Veganuary? I am not. I have absolutely nothing against vegans, which is lucky as ethical veganism is now a belief system protected under the Equality Act, making it unlawful to discriminate against vegans.
But as a fully-paid up member of the bacon and roast beef brigade I expect my views and choices, even if not actually a belief upheld by the law, to be respected. Thank you.

I AM pleased to announce that I have been able to cross another item off my to-do list – Dry January. Completed it on January 3, a new record for me.

It was an image I just can't get out of my head

Do you sometimes have an image you just can’t get out of your head? I have this scenario as I write, almost three months after the event in question.

There’s no other way to say it so here goes – why did the reformed Pussycat Dolls, performing on Celebrity X-Factor, have to look like a group of backstreet strippers?

(Note to SWMBO – I have NO idea what a group of backstreet strippers look like but am just writing this for effect).

Now I am no prude, as anyone who knows me will testify, but what on earth was going on?

It was a Saturday night, before the watershed on a programme that is aimed at all ages but is, in my view, predominantly watched by youngsters. And the majority of those young people would have been girls.

All I can say is – brilliant role modelling, not. People may call me old-fashioned but I do worry about our young people.

In my day (did I really just write that?) role models were sportsmen and women, well-dressed pop stars, older members of the family etc.

I think what made it even worse was the smirk on Simon Cowell’s face whenever the cameras left the cavorting Dolls.

I may be a little cynical but could the 400-plus complaints to Ofcom be viewed by him and his team as great publicity?

While on the subject of celebrities, I have a suggestion for future pre-election political debates.

The build-up to the recent General Election was the normal “he said that” and “she promised this” ping-pong on various television shows.

To make it more believable and entertaining for the electorate I suggest that in future the leaders of the various political parties take part in a gameshow – “I’m a Politician, get me out of here”.

Contestants, sorry, leaders, would face a series of daily challenges (such as Give A Straight Answer To A Straight Question, Spot The Lie and I’ll Name That Policy In One).

Then, at the end of each day of a two-week period, the public vote to keep their favourite in the game.

Potential Prime Ministers would gradually fall by the wayside until one man/ woman is left standing.

You heard it here first.