Know Your Enemy: TECHNOLOGY

Technology (from the Greek, ‘technology’) is the process by which our good, clear planet Earth is brought to its knees and conquered by robots and gamers (whom we, for convenience, shall treat as one and the same).
Many people speak of the ‘wonders’ of the modern world – but what wonders has technology really brought?   Only Global Warming (which does not exist, by the way; we did the calculations ourselves).   And is the world a better place now that millions of techno-yobs store all of their personal memories in a stick?   In my day we would have used a stick with which only to beat rabble like they, but times sadly have changed!

In order to defeat the technological menace, the Queen’s English Society finally created, of all things, a web-site!     We at the PEF, after resisting her siren song for more than 150 years, have finally ventured into the treacherous waters of the internet also, though we continue to detest ‘Twit Messaging’.
Unfortunately, the QES’s website address (queens-english-society, full stop, com) makes it look as if they are based in Queens, New York, rather than in the offices of Buckingham Palace where they belong, along with Michael Fagan.    The content of their website is also quite embarrassing to Britain, but what worries me most is their use of the treasonous “.com” suffix, set up by the Americans after they gained Independence as an affront to the embarrassed Brits.   What on earth were the Society thinking?

As for social networks... there is nothing social about these, nor are they real networks.   A net-work, strictly speaking, can connect only electrodes to other electrodes.    I, for one, am not an electrode, and anybody who signs up to Facebook or Internet is signing himself up to mayhem and anonymity as his identity is stolen.
It disappoints me, therefore, that the Queen’s English Society elected to create their own Facebook page, one that appears to be run by illitertwits whose priorities are somewhat mixed-up.   After somebody took offence to some silly signs that the QES had copied from, their Facebook spokesman replied:

“Apologies, it’s not intended to a be
a dig at foreigners. I am really looking for Shameful English from English speaking countries... I know it’s out there!” (QES on Facebook, 4th, November, 2008,)

I refused to understand any of that, littered as it is with bad English and red internet-ink, added by me.   The colloquial and low-class “have a dig at s.b.” is nonsensical; “shameful” ought not to be capitalised; countries are “English-speaking”; and “dot dot dot” is just vile, actually vile.   I shan’t mention their its/it’s confusion in their previous post when the Society was planning to “celebrate it’s new compilation”, lest I faint to the floor.

In 1980 Britain had three television stations.   Now, thanks to the robot invasion, we have channels for minorities, 24-hour news, educational programmes where there was none before, and several channels that entertain young people and youngsters.    Yet none for the over-70s!    This is highly distressing and can be remedied only through the revoking of broadcasters’ licenses.   We shall ask O.F.C.O.M. to do this if a channel’s English is not up to scratch (Many presenters, for example, use phrases such as “up to scratch” which is uncouth); the decision will be left to our Proper English Foundation panel on Medial Broadcast-Viewing.    We will probably end up with fewer than three channels in the whole of the UK, and our work will be done.

Of course, we are obliged to criticise the BBC.   Grr.  Boo.   Daily they disseminate Non-Good English through their broadcast trucks.   They are very biassed against us Good-English-speakers, though most of the population do not notice a bias, probably because they’ve been brainwashed.   At any rate, the BBC’s English is noticeably to the left of ours, so there’s a 50% chance that it is they who are the crazed extremists.   It is definitely worth complaining about.

The Queen’s English Society sent a strongly-worded letter, citing the non-evidence of the Queen’s English Society’s Ian Bruton-Simmonds, to demand that more Good English points of view be included on the BBC, which is riddled with Non-Good-Englishmunists.
One of their co-signatories was the former MP Norman Tebbit, who only criticises the BBC when awake, though he is surprisingly supportive of the BBC when they uncover the Non-Good-English of other political parties, and in hindsight he secretly agreed with them in 1986 when they reported on Libyan English, even though he publicly denounced them as biassed at the time.   It makes one wonder whether he’ll also go on to regret this letter in 20 years’ time!

The point is, whether QES or PEF, it does not matter: we are apolitical and b) we simply think the BBC needs a good clear-out so that its English will better suit our tastes.   Other broadcasters are exempt from our complaints, as they perform no public service at all, but the BBC’s English no longer sounds like me!   I’m sure it used to sound like me.   Technically their English is very good, but examples of poor English on the teleradio are so commonplace that we needn’t find any or print any.

With this writing style guide for journalists (PDF), however, the BBC newshounds try to usurp our position as your linguistic masters; they write 92 pages about language!    Who would want to read something like that?!   They also do this much better and more entertainingly than we: another reason why they are suspect.   They recommend that news reports should avoid jargon and be told as if to “the man on the Manchester tram” (pictured).  No, no, no!   We try to talk over his tête as much as possible; I very much doubt that they have English in “Manchester”.

The Corporation also plays a major rôle in teaching foreign devils the Queen’s language; it has a Pronunciation Unit and Guide and Balderdash & Piffle.   But this is a mere aberration and the BBC must be attacked at every point, especially by its rivals in the media, who are the only neutral party in this whole débâcle.   For our part, we will patronise ‘Auntie’ until he starts really to care about language.   Our English is always excellent and admirable, though not admired.   BBC’s fault.

We’re going to put your mobile phone into a cell.



Make a Free Website with Yola.