Random Thoughts

Blurbs and Public Speaking...

I spoke at the Galway Film Fleadh on Wednesday afternoon, which was good fun. I was on a panel disucussing new media along with some people from RTE, the Northern Ireland Film Board and a Portuguese producer whose company BeActive produces a show called Sofya’s Diary for Portuguese TV.

So anyway, the general rule of thumb with conferences like this is that you supply a little blurb detailing who you are, what you do, and generally state exactly why it is that people should pay to hear you talk. Mine is generally something like, Eamonn Carey is the Director of Development and New Business at Random Thoughts Media, a digital media production company based in Dublin. Founded in 2006, Random Thoughts specialises in the production of series and channel content for Mobile and Broadband TV. Carey is a former producer/presenter with RTE and Newstalk Radio.

That doesn’t do me justice. Not a word of it is a lie, but it’s a bit blando isn’t it? Most other blurbs are fairly similar. I mean, if you’re talking at a major conference in Europe or the States, chances are people have paid anywhere upwards of 1000 euro to attend, so they like to know they’re getting someone who at least has some idea of what they’re talking about rather than (as I have experienced at several conferences in the past) some random punter with no connection to, much less an idea about the topic up for discussion. The blurb got me to thinking what the truth would look like. So I decided to write an honest blurb, that’s slightly longer than the norm.

Failed singer-songwriter, Eamonn Carey was born in 1979. A hairy man, Carey spent much of his childhood playing with lego and watching transfomers cartoons. As a teenager, adolescent Eamonn wheedled away his time drinking and smoking underage while writing terrible songs and working as a guitar salesman.

In a frankly bizarre move, Carey decided to study Irish, Archaeology and Celtic Civilisation in UCD following extremely mediocre results in his Leaving Certificate. Choosing such random subjects led to Carey leaving UCD almost before he registered as a student in that cesspool of humanity. Most of the rest of the year was spent in an alcoholic haze while extended from the front to the back gate of Trinity College Dublin, mainly centred on the Pav, the Phil, Hist and the Buttery.

After chickening out of a move to Australia, Eamonn enrolled in a journalism course rather than actually getting a job. For three years he learned little, drank a lot, and ruined the college radio station for future students. After graduating, Carey took his atrocious haircut into the hardcore world of freelance journalism, where he cut his teeth writing painfully average top ten lists for a magazine mostly remembered (and purchased) for having advertisements for Irish prostitutes in the back few pages.

Following a disastrous failed audition for the Irish language soap, Ros na Run, Eamonn inveigled and obfuscated his way into a job in Newstalk 106 radio in Dublin, a forum for his incredibly limited knowledge of world events and sport. After persevering with low pay and long hours for two years, Carey was sent to the Olympics on a shoestring budget in the hope that he would be killed in a major terrorist extravaganza.

Surviviing on a diet of Souvlakis and cans of free Coca-Cola, Carey spent the three weeks getting absolutely hammered on a constant basis, taking a short break to fall in love with a girl from Westport. His most memorable moment was when gypsies stole his mobile phone and digital camera while he publicly urinated with a female teacher from Donegal outside the main Olympic Stadium.

Almost straight after his triumphant return from Athens, Eamonn travelled to Seoul, South Korea to ‘work’ on several articles and documentaries. His research centred almost exclusively on the Itaewon district, where he researched such important topics as the amount of Korean beer a white man  drink on a regular basis and the effect of travelling on the back of a motorbike driven by a man on crystal meth with no helmet on. He did not succeed in eating dog.

In a totally random move, Carey moved into lecturing following his 13 hour journey home from Korea. An inexperienced buffoon, Eamonn spent most of his time worrying about what to talk about on a week by week basis. His friends supported him by constantly asking him if he had any fit students, and if he would supply email addresses and phone numbers of same to them in order to further their frankly laughable chances of finding a willing partner.

After a stint in RTE where little of note happened, Carey set up a Digital Media company with his former Newstalk colleague, Daire Whelan. Frequently high, Eamonn is often in demand for important conferences organised by himself. These conferences tend to centre on such vital topics as celebrity organ stealing and Stephen Seagal movies.

A fan of hardcore dance music, disco balls and Charlemont style mayhem, Eamonn Carey can mainly be found fucking around on the internet while drinking tea, burning incense and sitting on his couch.

Saw this post about Facebook on Robin Hamman's blog earlier today and it made me think a little. I mean, is there really something that sinister about all of these links? I'm partial to the odd conspiracy theory from time to time. Most of them are moderately entertaining. Some are funny. And some are in the tinfoil hat category. It's possible to add two and two and come up with almost any number if you are so inclined, and that seems to be the case with every thing from Nazi Moon Bases to chemtrails.

So is there anything really sinister about the backers of Facebook in that video? Well, not really. I mean, it's the worst kept secret in the world that pretty much every site is harvesting information about their users. Look at what happens with Gmail - it scans your mails and puts up ads relevant to the content of the email. Now, when I got first signed up for Gmail, I was slightly concerned, but realistically, I, as a 28 year old punter from Dublin, am unlikely to have anything so sensitive and dangerous in my mail as to raise a red flag with anyone.

Likewise on my Facebook page, it's unlikely that anyone is going to come across some earth-shattering piece of information that is going to result in me being rendered to a kindly third world client state to undergo various types of torture in order to extract information about my social life and political leanings. The worst thing someone will find out from my myspace page is that I smoke cigarettes and drink.

With that said, having moved into the world of being an employer rather than an employee, I can see certain risks associated with what you put up on your social networking profiles. I'm a big fan of all of these sites, but there is an inherent danger in being too honest. I can't tell you the number of sites I have seen at random in which people talk about everything from their sexual predilections to the amount of coke-fuelled nights they enjoy in a random four week period.

None of that matters to me, but in a world where several people can be sacked from Merrill Lynch for receiving unsolicited emails which had pornographic pictures attached, I can see how major companies and employers might go through someones Myspace/Bebo/Facebook page before that individual reaches the interview stage. And given the corporate guidelines that some of these people have, I can see how a certain level of pure honesty might cause problems.

Back to the issue at hand though. Despite the fact that there are Government agencies in many countries worldwide who are tasked with gathering vast amounts of info on their (and other country's) citizens, surely they are not interested in who pokes who or what individual has a particular widget on their Facebook page? I'm open to being corrected on this front, but I would suspect that if this video is something that might make you think of closing your Facebook account, you should probably invest in a roll of tinfoil for forthcoming millinery uses. Or reprogram your calculator so that 2+2=5.

Flock of Seagulls haircuts and the return of the 1980s

I went to see Funeral for a Friend in the Ambassador a while ago. Great gig. Amazing band. No fucking bar though. I can appreciate the need for all ages gigs, but for god's sake, open the bar upstairs. there were about 25 people up there, all of whom were old enough to embibe a few brews.

Anyway, that's not the point of this post. I've been noticing a new phenomenon recently. The return of 1980s haircuts and fashion, and last night was the most glaring example of this new trend that I've seen in a long time. There were times that the Ambassador felt like a 1980s discotheque in some shithole like Essex or Hull. It was chock full of people with haircuts that would have been rejected by the members of Flock of Seagulls. Honestly, it was like some sort of really bad art exhibit. All angles and various colours.

And as for the clothes. I saw about a half dozen people in the solid Frankie goes to Hollywood style t-shirts, more leggings than Penneys would sell in a week and a few pairs of boot runners that really should never have left the designers drawing table. One guy had a pair of old Adidas runners that looked like they were designed for a fucking moon landing.

Now don't get me wrong. The 80s was cool. Any decade that gives us A View to a Kill, Slayer, and a whole bunch of classic songs can't be all that bad. But in fairness, it was like a fucking fashion black hole. The level of stylistic shitness that developed and was exposed  in that era was unbelievable. I thank god that I was only in single figures for most of the time, and therefore wasn't willing/able/enthused to dress up like a half wit. These people are combining everything from Native American chic - an oxymoron if I ever wrote one - with fabrics that were designed for wrapping sandwiches rather than people. The worst thing is, the numbers doing it are increasing. Were Enoch Powell around to see this, he would be talking about a river of fashion faeces.

Indeed, just the other night, I was having a conversation about this very phenomenon with a friend, who pointed out the number of people in our vicinity who were wearing skinny jeans. Now, skinny jeans are fair enough - but only on people who can realistically wear them. And i'm sorry. I'm not being fattest or anti-obese here, but in fairness, people have to cut their cloth to measure (see what I did there? Subtle pun or what), and wear clothing appropriate to themselves and whatever size they happen to be.

I'm hardly Coco Chanel or Vin Diesel (or whoever controls that particular design house), but at the same time, it's unlikely that I'm ever going to choose to expose the more hirsute aspects of my body in an outfit or garment that is patently too small/short for my frame. And I don't think I'm wrong in thinking that most people should dress in a similar manner. I'm not going to give any specific examples, but I think you've all seen people dressed in a manner that tends to underestimate the hugeness of the object actually sporting the attire...

Apologies for the tangent. Back to the point. Like I said, the 1980s were responsible for so many impressive, cool, enduring types of music, movies and trends. However, the fashion legacy of that particular decade is one that should not endure. There may be elements of that legacy that I have forgotten about, but by and large, it is a tarnished, dodgy dossier of a legacy. And as for the haircuts? I'm sorry. A lot of the 'dos' I have seen recently would be more at home in some sort of topiary competition.

I for one am not going to stand for this. I resolutely refuse to abandon boot cut jeans, cords and clothing that doesn't cling to me like a second skin. The last time I wore boot runners was when you had to pump up the tongue to make them fit properly. the next time I wear them will only be if someone pries them onto my cold, dead feet.

Fuck sake.

The Pintability Factor - a bold new political theory

Hugh and I had this conversation the other day. And it made me think. So I decided to inflict it on the world. Mainly cause I woke up a half hour earlier than I had intended, and therefore have spare time before work today.

So we're sitting the smoking area of Fagans here in scenic Drumcondra on Thursday evening, shooting the breeze and talking about the end of the Blair era (we're very intellectual), in between talking about Slayer concerts, the WWE and the Dublin hurlers. Anyway, Hugh goes to answer nature's call, and when he comes back, he tells me Bertie Ahern is sitting inside. Nothing strange there. Fagan's is not just my local. It's Bertie's as well. He's in there a couple of times a week. Sits at the end of the bar, talks to people and has a few pints. Any time I have visitors, I always bring them to Fagans for pints, and they can never get over the fact that Bertie just sits there having a pint, talking to random punters. My American cousins can't understand the lack of black-suited, shade-wearing, earpiece enhanced, gun-toting secret service types. One of them even went up and spoke to the man himself a few months ago, and came back astonished that our equivalent of the Prime Minister took time out to ask him how he was enjoying the Ryder Cup.

So that's the backstory. I'm not a member of Fianna Fail. I didn't vote for Bertie in the last election. Whatever you might think of all the scandal and shite that has gone on over the last few months and years, I think Bertie has done a reasonable job as Taoiseach, and at a local level, he's been good for Drumcondra. To me, he seems like a fundamentally decent bloke, and that's what this conversation grew out of.

The pintability factor is a highly scientific, complex and well rounded political theory that would take far too long for me to explain. The various equations and details we use to come to our conclusions are remarkably hard to digest, so I'll distill this information for you as best I can. Incidentally, the pintability factor can be used, not just for politicians, but for random punters or celebrities of any status.

And here it is - the pintability factor is a measure of how much you would enjoy a pint with a particular individual. The theory came about because we were looking at various world leaders and wondering who among them would be a good laugh to share a beer with. Bertie scores high on the pintability index. As a guy who comes across as moderately genial. He seems like the kind of punter you could enjoy a few drinks with. You could shoot the breeze about all sorts of things, from politics to sport and everything in between. The sport is important, but I'll get to that later.

So Bertie has the pintability factor. To an extent, Tony Blair has a similar level of pintability. He comes across as a bit more uptight and a bit more self-involved. But lest we forget, Tony has stories to tell as well. He was in a band in college. He's a self confessed Newcastle supporter, and he's lived and prime-ministered through some fairly earth shattering moments in the history of the world. So Tony qualifies as having a high pintability index. Not as high as Berties, as Tony has the stain of the Iraq war burned onto his person for all eternity, and I don't know if he would play as well as someone like our Taoiseach in a more working class environment. However, he has 'it'.

Gordon Brown doesn't. The guy has been through a lot in the last ten years, and he doubtless has numerous interesting tales to tell. Like Blair and Bertie, he is a sports fan. When he was a kid, he used to sell programmes at half time at Raith Rovers games. Indeed, a few years ago, he was part of the consortium that organised a buyout of the club. And yet, he doesn't seem to play on his love of sport as much our two previously mentioned politicos. That's not what affects the pintability factor though. Sadly for Brown, he is just not as likable as the other two. The speech he made after the attack on Glasgow airport the other day didn't seem very Prime Ministerial. And if I were a British citizen, it wouldn't neccessariy have reassured me as much as a hand waving softly spoken display by Tony Blair would have. So Brown lacks the pintability factor. He comes across as quite a stern, dour man. Dare I say his Presbyterian streak affects our perception of him?

However, is Brown really in any trouble. If personality politics are as big as people suggest they are nowadays, then frequently it is the perception of the party (as embodied by one person) that influences many people's choices in the polling stations. I would suggest that many people voting in local and national elections don't vote according to what individual candidates represent. They vote based on their perception of the party a particular candidate is representing. I'm not saying this is exclusively the case. However, I would posit that a lot of people vote for Fianna Fail on the basis that their leader and several of their politicians come across as pintable characters. In Ireland, if you apply the pintability factor to the recent election, it's easy to see why Fianna Fail had the (relative) success they had. Would you like to go for a pint with Enda Kenny, Pat Rabbitte, Michael McDowell or Trevor Sargeant. Sure they might be interesting, and maybe you'd end up having a great laugh with them. I'd suggest that if you gave the vast majority of people in Ireland a choice between drinking with any one of all four of that quartet, or a pint with Bertie, the Taoiseach would win out hands down.

In the UK, things are a little bit more blurred now. Blair had the pintability factor for the last ten years. Yes, his legacy has been tarnished by the fiasco he managed to get his country embroiled in, but I still think people would choose to sit and have a pint with him rather than booze it up with Gordo. But is Gordon in trouble on the pintability side of things? Well not really. I'm not sure if he's the best of a bad lot, but he is at least as likable as David Cameron or Menzies Campbell. Charles Kennedy was the last British politician to challenge Tony Blair for the pintability crown. And for very obvious reasons, it's unlikely that anyone is going to be going on a massive alcohol bender with Charles at any point soon. However, he had that charm and that pintability factor that made him and the Lib Dems a lot more popular than they had been in several years.

Elsewhere, there are a load of pintable politicians. I know a lot of my friends would love to go for a drink with Segolene Royale (mainly to see if they could get lucky and see how frais her fromage is..). I think a lot of people would like to go for drinks with several US politicians. I know I'd love to have a chat with George W. at some point. Again, as with Kennedy, it's unlikely that we'll be hitting the booze, but he has the homespun, regular guy pintability factor (as did Clinton - on an unparalleled scale). Does Hillary have it? Or Obama? The Republican candidates at this point seem to be scoring higher on my pintability scale.

Now, maybe this is a crackpot theory. However, I think there is a lot to be said for it. And I'd like to know what everyone else thinks. Maybe I string a book and a lecture tour out of it? I wonder how many colleges would accept this as a topic for a thesis? Maybe I should consider doing an MA in political theory, with my thesis combining two of my favourite things. Boozing and discussing world politics.