Despite the fact that we live in a world enlightened by scientific discovery, the supernatural and the superstitious are still dominating the lives of people who seem to despise truth unless it panders to conspiracy or fantasy.
Those who are purposely insular in order to convince like-minded individuals to believe in the supernatural are frustrating but not overtly sinister. It is the defamation of scientific iconoclasts which is unacceptable.
A common theme in the latest exchange between religion and science is the enlistment of scientists, dead or alive, through misquotation, in the fight against the trendy sport of God-bashing. ‘Darwin didn’t even believe in evolution, and he prayed whilst on his death bed!’ argue believers.
But this week a letter from Albert Einstein sold for $404,000 at auction.
It laid bare Einstein’s true thoughts on the supernatural: ‘The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.’
Einstein is often cited as a deist by a number of religious apologists looking for support from someone who knows what he’s talking about.
Those looking for a romantic, tantric love-in between religion and science are always reminding us that Einstein once said, ‘science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.’
Similarly, we are reminded that Hawking ended ‘A Brief History of Time’ with, ‘for then we should know the mind of God’ and that Darwin said, ‘to suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances…could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.’
Some readers were very excited indeed by these passages. With Richard Dawkins being somewhat like Marmite in this conflict – love him or hate him – there were many pleased that three of the most famous scientists of all time disagreed with him.
In reverse order then. Immediately after Darwin suggested doubt in his own theories, he wrote, ‘When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false… reason tells me… the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.’
As for Einstein and Hawking, the concept of Einsteinian religion is well understood. ‘God’ and ‘religion’ are certainly being used as metaphors to explain the deep mysteries of the universe and the enticing nature of science, not a supernatural creator.
In fairness, there are a number of very famous scientific icons who were deeply religious: Newton, Faraday and Kelvin for example.
However, a 1998 Nature article by Larson and Witham showed that only 7% of members of the National Academy for Sciences believed in God.
Eminent modern day scientists who do believe in a personal God (such as Francis Collins, a leading figure in the human genome project) are anomalous and often the subject of bemusement.
This would suggest Newton et al were products of their time, while their contemporaries today are by and large liberated by scientific understanding.
To conclude, then, I leave you with one last quotation, this time from former Editor-in-Chief and Publishing Director of New Scientist Alun Anderson: ‘What’s happening in science is the most interesting thing in the world, and if you don’t agree with me just fuck off.’
This week MPs voted to allow the creation of human-animal hybrid embryos for experimental purposes.
This will inevitably be applauded by the scientists keen to pioneer this novel way of creating stem cells to model disease and develop treatments.
It will certainly be celebrated by those representing the sufferers of terrible degenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s who have pinned their hopes of a long-awaited breakthrough on this technology.
But does this momentous decision really make this a good week for humanity, in which sense triumphed over superstition, compassion over ideology?
Is it really progress towards a world of less suffering and greater human dignity?
Or could the Luddites perhaps be right? Could this technology be a step too far, worthy in its aims but ultimately immoral and counterproductive?
Well, it would seem to be a bad week at least for the ethically non-controversial adult stem cell research, which has to date led to the development of over 70 therapies currently under trial.
According to leading scientists, it is adult and not embryonic stem cell research that offers the best chance of safe and effective treatments.
Since research funding is limited, hyped-up embryonic research will inevitably divert funds away from these more promising avenues.
But the worst thing about this decision is not this pragmatic concern; it is the undermining of the foundational ethical principles that humans are more valuable than animals and that one human life is worth just as much as another.
In creating human-animal hybrids the fundamental categories of human and non-human have been shattered.
Our MPs have sanctioned the creation of entities that are neither fully animal nor fully human. And logically, they must have a moral value somewhere in between.
We have consented to the logical – if not practical – possibility of the existence of a less-than-human human, worth less than other humans.
It is the crossing of this moral Rubicon that makes this week a bad one for humanity. The aims of creating useful human-animal hybrids are – even if naïve – worthy.
But the unintended result will be degradation of human dignity and consequent abuse and oppression.
In time, the new category of human-but-not-quite-human will grow in our consciousness and, in place of the historic human/non-human all-or-nothing moral system, a sliding scale of value will be set up in our minds as we judge worth by other criteria, such as physical beauty, intellectual capacity, or economic productiveness.
In our moral reasoning, all humans used to be equal, at least in theory. But now, some will be more equal than others.
It’s easy to condemn Burma’s military regime for blocking life-saving international aid in the wake of Cyclone Nargis. But few stop to ask why the generals behave this way, instead simply branding them ‘xenophobic’, ‘irrational’, or ‘inhuman’. The truth is that they are afraid of foreign intervention because Burma has been plagued by it since 1948, when Britain left it precipitately teetering on the brink of civil war.
During the Cold War, a Chinese nationalist army occupied part of Burma, trading opium with America and Thailand in exchange for guns to kill communists, bringing about the collapse of Burmese democracy and the advent of military rule. The country was ravaged by communist and ethnic insurgencies, backed by China and Thailand respectively.
After the Cold War, the West took over, bashing the regime for failing to democratise. While other nations with equally nasty regimes were coddled, the West’s lack of strategic or economic interest in the feeble state of Burma made it an ideal dog to kick – one that cannot bite back.
Sanctions, which have carefully protected Western oil firms, have done absolutely nothing to budge the regime, but they satisfy pious NGOs and make us feel morally superior. Incredibly, the West has continued to kick the Burmese dog after Cyclone Nargis, attaching conditions to aid and extracting moral and political capital from Burma’s wretched people.
But sanctions, and the extreme and selective politicisation of aid and human rights, have also helped create the very ‘paranoia’ that now blocks effective relief efforts, by convincing the regime – which genuinely believes it is the only thing holding the country together – that Western powers are ruthless imperialists bent on destabilising the country.
Western intervention has also encouraged the extraordinarily fragmented Burmese opposition to yearn for external rescue rather than uniting to overthrow the regime. Cyclone Nargis struck just before a scheduled referendum on a new constitution.
It is hardly any wonder that the regime views Western aid agencies as Trojan horses. Threats of armed humanitarian intervention and prosecution for ‘crimes against humanity’ only make things worse.
The West – and, sadly, Burma’s people – are reaping what the West has sown. Ironically, events have vindicated the oft-criticised, less confrontational approach of Burma’s partners in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations: Burma has agreed to receive aid channeled through ASEAN because it will not be politicised.
If Nargis really is, as is claimed, worse than the Asian tsunami, which attracted $7bn in aid, then current Western pledges to Burma – a measly $93m – are an insult that bashing the junta has distracted attention from. A donors’ conference will be held on 25 May: the West must put its money where its mouth has been, and supply aid to Burma’s people via ASEAN without conditions.
Not just Oklahoma, but rather Oklahoma!, the exclamation mark tells you all you need to know about this production.
The producers of Oklahoma! have embraced this deep south musical for what it is: big, brash, colourful fun. One never loses the sense of a cast that is having a ball – and one’s toes instinctively start to tap.
The main romantic pairing, Curly (Jacob Lloyd) and Laurey (Nancy Cole) strike up a dynamic chemistry from the off, their scornful teasing hiding real emotional commitment beneath.
They spar with one another, full of fiery confidence (‘I ain’t said I was going!’/ ‘I ain’t asked ya!’), yet are also capable of moments of genuine tenderness – as Laurey’s beautiful head sinks onto Curley’s broad chest, the audience too thinks, ‘Maybe I got a dream worth a-keeping.’
Lloyd’s imposing stage presence makes a contrast to his counterpart, the sprightly young Will (Jon Head).
Head’s wiry figure seems one strong American gust of wind away from being blown off the stage, yet his wide-eyed boyishness epitomises the infectious energy of this production as he leaps around the stage like a wide-eyed puppy.
Not that this is all rootin’ tootin’ innocent fun. Charlie Mallinson’s turn as the embittered Jud Fry exudes danger, getting right under the skin of the volcanic farm-hand. Red-faced, eyes bulging, Mallinson growls his way through ‘Lonely Room’ like a trapped animal at bay.
His deep voice, occasionally expanding to boom out through the room, ultimately descends to a vicious, spitting snarl in a rare moment of darkness that anchors the laughter all around.
Yet such shadows are swept away as Oklahoma! flies into its final stages and the entire cast thumps out the last few songs.
One can’t help but smile as they bound into their greetings, or when their squabbles are solved by Aunt Eller (Zosia Kuczynska) enforcing happiness with a six-shooter (‘Now, sing!’).
Sam Aldred revels in his comic turn as the beleaguered Ali Hakim, at once awkward and charming – and enjoying a surprising late flourish of Cossack dancing and high kicks.
All in all, Oklahoma! does what it sets out to do. There is the occasional flaw – the dancing tends to lack ambition, the occasional accent misses ‘deep south’ and hits yokel, the odd dance-step is missed – but these are just nit-pickings.
Oklahoma! is good fun from start to finish, packed with great musical numbers and full of old-fashioned charm and wit. Yessir – this is darn fine entertainment.
The age of the children in Spring Awakening is one of the things that makes approaching their characters most difficult.
I remember very vividly being a thirteen year old and thinking of myself as an adult, angry when people treated me like a child. When I see a thirteen year old now it’s difficult to imagine ever having thought that way and it’s clear that a thirteen year old is not an adult, so you can’t approach the character as you would an adult one. Something must be done to suggest youth, but once you’ve identified that age is an issue and that something of that age should be suggested somehow, the danger then becomes putting in too much and playing the children too young.
Although thirteen year olds aren’t adults, they aren’t really children either. They have few of the attributes that make characterisation of very young children relatively straightforward. They don’t gurgle or drag their feet or struggle with their words or pick their noses as obviously as younger children do, for instance. They are in a kind of grey area in between childhood and adulthood. In Spring Awakening this problem is made more complex by both the time and the style in which the play was written. To what extent is Frank Wedekind’s writing supposed to be seen and read as realist and how much is supposed to be taken as poetic license?
The young people in Spring Awakening and in particular my character Moritz, frequently use language I know I’ve never heard a thirteen year old use and don’t remember using myself when I was that age. But how much of this is a result of the time in which the play was written? How clever are the young characters in Spring Awakening and how much are they trying to look and feel clever amongst themselves?
I certainly remember times when I would try and make myself feel more mature around people I liked or wanted to impress and we see that on more than a few occasions in Spring Awakening.
Approaching the youth of the characters in Spring Awakening then isn’t straightforward. Beyond the issue of age, the characters in the play are quite complex. The play is dealing with very potent issues, some of which remain taboo even in modern British society. That the banning of the play in this country lasted for such a long time is testament to that. I haven’t yet experienced and can only hope that I won’t experience some of the things that affect the young people in the play. Some of their issues at first seem quite alien to me, but I think that one of the most impressive things that the director Richard Jones has done with the cast is to ground those issues in experiences we ourselves have had, making them our own and feeling about them as we do about things which have affected us deeply in our pasts.
When you do that it’s difficult not to be pulled into the world of Frank Wedekind’s Spring Awakening.
Aldate can’t face listening in chunks larger than a few minutes, so
here’s what’s happening at the points where tuning in seems like a
bearable prospect:
9:35 – The automated DJ is on (isn’t breakfast when everyone
listens to the radio?). MGMT’s "Time to Pretend" is played three times
in a row before Aldate tunes out. It looks like automated DJ = same
song on loop. Even Aldate’s nan can work shuffle.
10:41 – MGMT’s "Time to Pretend". They must be earning a lot of royalties.
11:19 – MGMT’s "Time to Pretend". Aldate used to like this song.
12:04 – Midday has been and gone, and programming should have started. MGMT’s "Time to Pretend" is still going strong.
13:51 – Potential – people are actually talking. Not very
clearly, not very funnily, not very interestingly, but at least it’s
not that song. The words of one DJ are indecipherable. The other
sounds really, really bored. “We were just talking about exchange
students. Yes we were. No we weren’t” [crashing noise, fuzzing] “My
colleague just assaulted a microphone.”
15:08 – Nice/fun song. Aldate could actually envisage listening to this.
15:14 – Oh, wait a sec. It’s the same song on repeat:
16:31 – This pair ("Paul to Paul") seem to fancy themselves as Mark and Lard . The links are semi-planned but not utterly terrible. There’s potential. They’re nominated, too (see previous post).
16:36 – Wow! Was that? Did they? Yes, they used a bumper (=
jingle, basically) between two songs, and it almost worked. I say
"almost", because the bumper said "Pimping the beats to the Oxford
massiv – this is Oxide". Technically near-perfect though. I’m
beginning to like this pair
16:39 – I’m beginning to dislike this pair. They stopped Franz
Ferdinand mid-flow to continue their vaguely amusing Call My Bluff
rip-off.
17:06 – Discussion about Oxide awards. Apparently if the nominee/winner doesn’t turn up, someone else gets the award.
17:07 – "Did your mum used to wash you in Dettol?" – medium-quality banter.
20:12 – Aldate gets back from the pub to find an angry comment
from an Oxider who LIKES to EMPHASISE his POINTS by CAPITALISING every
SECOND word:
DJ Oxide (which is server side) is down because
we’re currently changing servers to accomodate listener figures (two
is, shall we say, VERY under the total). The music therefore comes off
a playlist CD, and yes, SOMETIMES (god forbid), it skips. How about
instead of complaining in a blog barely anyone will real [sic], you e-mail the studio (or me, since you now have my e-mail address), and I can do something ABOUT it.
Aldate WAS hoping THAT one OF the
VERY-more-than-two-listeners would email the studio first. Come to
think of it, it’s strange that they didn’t. Would someone at Oxide
please furnish Aldate with a graph of the week’s listener counts then?
Oh, and website hit data, if we’re going to have a full-on cock size
comparison.
Some trippy D’n’B show is on at the moment. It’s not half bad – nobody’s talking.
20:25 – That sounded scarily like a remix of the Mastermind
theme tune. Still no talking = good. Here’s a real Mastermind theme
cover:
20:48 – A comment on Aldate’s post from yesterday:
As
the station’s ex-Head of Training, I can reasonably suggest that you
probably have no idea whatsoever how difficult it is to keep the
station sounding professional. At its heart, Oxide is a conglomeration
of volunteer DJs with little to no experience and almost no possible
method of reliable quality control. Keeping that lot sounding good all
the time is like herding cats, or perhaps nailing fog to the wall. Pick
your metaphor.
Nailing cats to the wall? Aldate completely accepts these points, and
this liveblog is a way of illustrating that the system is faulty.
There is a potential solution. Stop the costly, counter-intuitive and
dated streaming method and move to a podcast model. That way,
democracy will out, you can focus resources on particular shows, etc.
etc. etc. The benefits are endless. Discuss.
21:02 – Clowns appear to have invaded the studio, singing "I
love cock, I love willy" over "God save the Queen". There is no future
in… these guys’ time on Oxide?
21:04 – High pitched scream over GSTQ.
21:06 – They’re fast-forwarding through and skipping between
songs. There’s "quality control" (above) and "twat control". Both
appear to have failed here.
21:10 – They’ve stopped skipping through songs. Unfortunately,
they stopped on Dario G. But hey, that’s a personal dislike. PS
thanks BAZIL for THE clarification ABOUT what EVERY second WORD
capitalized MEANS.
21:16 – Saint Aldate rarely takes the Lord’s name in vain, but
GOD how long does this song go on for? At least the jokers aren’t
talking.
21:17 – Same song starts playing for a second time. But again, at least the jokers aren’t talking.
21:20 – Aldate reaches for the Neurofen. A real listener would have tuned out by now, surely?
21:25 – So does this mean that there’s nobody in the studio?
Mr. Scott – you seemed somewhat vexed that nobody pointed out the same
song going round and round and round and round before. Well, here’s
your alert. You’re making Dario G rich; in the name of quality dance
music, stop it please.
21:33 – Aldate has long since tuned out. Shout when the next show starts.
The
problem is really that there are a lot of DJs on Oxide (I hear over
100?). 100 reporters to the OxWell might go through an editor or two,
but DJs broadcasting live can’t.
I think a little competition
wouldn’t harm things, though. Good suggestion. Maybe the Cherwell could
start its own station to complement Oxide?
Fair point, but maybe the problem is that they are broadcasting live?
Surely it would be more effective to supply an on-demand model, like
podcasts? That way quality could be assured, just as an editor
(theoretically) checks every page before it goes off to print.
That said, Cherwell considered podcasts as part of the website
relaunch, but it was basically decided that not many people would
listen to them unless they were really tightly produced. Podcasts suit
commuters mainly, after all. However, with a half-decent studio you
could make some impressive and relevant stuff – how about a show
discussing the plays of the week, for example? Or a documentary
strand, picking up where OxStu investigations leave off? Aldate won’t
elaborate lest he be accused of treason.
21:40
Since our last server restart (8th May), we have had 5920 unique connections (this is unique to each IP address)
As you can see, James Scott has kindly emailed Aldate some vague
listener figures (nothing specific, apparently, will be forthcoming
until he can get to the server). Mr Scott rightly mentions that
without knowing how colleges and OUCS run the show, we can’t interpret
this figure too closely.
However (and as howevers come this is pretty big), surely every
time somebody visits the Oxide home page and the automatic player kicks
in, that adds to the number of unique connections? So surely that
figure is just the number of people with Flash installed who have
visited the Oxide homepage in the last 11 days?
21:50 – Dave speaks out about Aldate’s Theory of Podcasting:
They’d open themselves up to potential legal action. Oxide walks a fine
line as it is, legally speaking since they don’t pay royalties. Making
music available for download as opposed to streaming is definitively
illegal – OUSU wouldn’t dare even risk it.
I’ve always advocated rebroadcasting some shows, as a "best of" Oxide’s
content. I’ve also lobbied for a reduced broadcast week, perhaps eight
hours/day, 6 days/week so we can cut out the dross. Of course, no-one
wants to be the guy who makes that change, since it’s bad press to
reduce hours (much like it’s bad press to reduce pages printed).
Do we really need a station playing music that can easily be found on
iTunes and other internet radio stations? Surely student
radio/podcasts should focus on celebrating upcoming talent? Aldate is
thinking of live performances and interviews, for example, neatly
packaged into manageable chunks – stuff that doesn’t present copyright
nightmares.
Other programmes can be documentary-style, or discussion panels on
anything from world news to Oxford news to Oxford drama. The whole
streaming/live thing should go, much as the print editions of the
student newspapers should probably go eventually.
22:18 – Aldate is on the phone but this sounds like a good show for music fans.
22:29 – Good music banter. The music thing is a stumbling block
for the podcast plan. In his paper days, Aldate would phone up
photographers etc. for permission to print a picture. Surely a band
would jump at the opportunity to have their song featured in a
(popular) student new music podcast? It just takes a little more
effort, which isn’t necessarily a Bad Thing.
22:40 – It’s been great fun, but Aldate has pagans to fight in the morning ,
so is calling it a day. A lot of useful points have been made and
there’s a lot to work with here and in the comments box – if you have
anything to add, put it below or email it to [email protected].
Night!
Students face another bout of electioneering after Lib Dem councillor for Holywell ward, Richard Huzzey, stood down just days after the local elections.
Coming to the end of his History doctorate at St Catz, Mr Huzzey has been offered a post-doctoral research fellowship at Yale University, Connecticut, an offer he described as “too good to miss”.
Mr Huzzey was elected in 2006, and was not up for re-election in 2008 as Oxford City Council is elected in halves, with one of the two seats for each ward elected every two years.
Mr Huzzey said: “It’s been fantastic to work with Holywell residents over the past two years, and I’d have liked to continue for the rest of my four-year term. Yet an academic job at Yale is just too good to miss.”
Lib Dem hopes
The Lib Dems will be keen for success in the by-election, after losing ground to Labour in the elections earlier this month.
The by-election will be held on 12 June, which is likely to benefit the Lib Dems as many students will still be eligible to vote.
In the local elections recently held, the Lib Dems performed well in the two main student wards, Carfax and Holywell, but fared poorly elsewhere.
Lib Dem candidate Nathan Pyle won his Holywell ward seat with more than twice the votes of the second place Conservative candidate, Alex Stafford.
Candidates
By-election candidates have been announced, with several faces returning from the previous local elections.
Two losing candidates from the Carfax election, Sarah Hutchinson for Labour, and Paul Sargent for the Conservatives, are hoping for better luck in Holywell.
Paul Sargent defected to the Conservatives from the Lib Dems during his term, and subsequently lost his council seat to Lib Dem Stephen Brown at the start of this month.
Green candidate Chip Sherwood is also having a second attempt, having come third in the race for the other Holywell seat earlier this month.
The Lib Dems are fielding a fresh face, in the form of Mark Mills, a student at Teddy Hall. Mr Huzzey described his potential successor as “a hard-working and committed campaigner.”
Check back to Cherwell on 12 June for the results as they are announced.
Best Male Presenter
Carl Culliane – Like Hearts Swelling
Gui Wright – Indie Asphyxiation
Nick Maxfield – Wednesdays in the Womb
Paul Arrick – Drum and/ or Bass Featuring Consistent Special Guest aka Sam Greenbury
Ross Cole – Oxide Unsigned
Best Female Presenter
Cat Miller – Artspace
Alexia Kapranos – Oxide Overdrive
Hafsa Hassan – Breakfast with Hafsa
Cat Smith – Old and New with Cat and Su
Su Webb – Old and New with Cat and Su
Best Newcomers
Hang the Djs
The Bottleneck
Saturday Night ‘60s Show
The Love Tape Show
The Real Stinker
Best Specialist Show
WMDs
Two Poor Salesman
Key Notes with Hilary and Ewan
Filter UK
The Acoustic Hour
Best Duo Team
Hatty and Hugo’s Half Hour
Three Hours of Static
Key Notes with Hilary and Ewan
Schwein and Steiger
Sunday Lunch with Katie and Spence
Best Interview
Alexia Kapranos and Fi Murphy – Oxide Overdrive
Paul Flemming – The Manifesto
Claire and Seline – Cake Thursday
Florence and Laith – Free Speech Special
Paul Cadetz – Zeitgeist
Best Playlist Show
Wake Up With Wood
Dex’s Midday Runners
Three Hours of Static
The Lawrence and Sam Show
The Lewis Goodall Show
Best Show Feature
Maiden Over – Cameron-oke
Let’s Get Physical – Physics Theme
Plucked from Obscurity – Presenter War
The Wednesday/Monday Drop – Use of Decks
The Love Tape Show – Special Guests
Best Speech Show
Paul to Paul
The Manifesto
Art Class
Play With Me
Saturday Sport with Paul Hinds
Best Newsreader
Olivia Mackintosh
Pippa Girling
Edison Hunh (pronounced Hune)
Clare Kane
So, it only took five weeks for the two papers to come out with the same front page story. The Friars/governing-body/license talk may have made the story impenetrable for many beyond the first two paragraphs. Aldate reckons that Cherwell’s timeline and standfirsts represent a better effort to open the article up to the casual reader. But then maybe I’m biased… {nomultithumb}
Nonetheless, both here and generally speaking, there’s a lot more that both papers should be doing to make stories more enjoyable: infoboxes, definitions, graphs, diagrams, infographics, whatever. The fact is that the traditional combination of picture, copy, headline, standfirst and pullquote is immensely unimaginative and unhelpful in telling the news.
Another good piece by Mr Holehouse on Stu p3 – goes to show that reading dry reports can go a long way.
Gratuitous use of a pretty girl in Cherwell’s rent protest coverage. Anything to do with one editor’s aspirations to the Telegraph, whose A-Level result day front page is invariably illustrated by some nubile lass?
The new integrated structure came into its own at Cherwell with this story: pictures were up within 15 minutes of the event, a full story mid-afternoon and video that evening. Where’s the long-promised Stu website? Will they have any multimedia plans?
Aldate reckons that the Top Chumps will have pissed off a lot of people – and not just those in the spread (who mostly love the attention anyway). The casual reader probably saw it as a reflection of the introverted hackdom of Oxford journalism, while the professional hack will have been upset by their omission / the presence of nobodies.
That said, it is a very good-looking spread. Are the Stu still planning to do their bumper hack pullout? If they do, Aldate suggests that they get one of their five subs to actually stop mistakes before they go to print (you know, things like calling Summer Eights "Torpids", Exeter "Exter", repeating OxFood, etc.)
Excellent Lolbrarian this week. Epic fail indeed. Too much cock’n’nipple in Party People for this saint’s liking, though.
Aldate actually has a social life to attend to, so as ever the rest of the review is up to you.
A strike which would have disrupted rail services through Oxford on Sunday has been called off.
Depot staff at First Great Western (FGW), which run the majority of trains from Oxford station, had voted by a three-to-one margin to strike over pay and working hours.
However, the action was called off after a deal was struck with FGW’s management.
Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT transport union, explained the reasons for the dispute and congratulated his members on their unity.
"The vast majority of FGW engineering and cleaning staff were still being paid the flat hourly rate for their overtime, rather than the time-and-a-quarter enjoyed by other FGW staff, including train-crew and station staff," he said.
"Due to the steadfastness of members at FGW, these inequalities have been removed."
So, it only took five weeks for the two papers to come out with the same front page story. The Friars/governing-body/license talk may have made the story impenetrable for many beyond the first two paragraphs. Aldate reckons that Cherwell’s timeline and standfirsts represent a better effort to open the article up to the casual reader. But then maybe I’m biased… {nomultithumb}