Dear Pan-European Advertisers...

There's a bit of a habit sprung up in our modern word, where brands are global, and it's indicative of a thorough misunderstanding of the average British person. You see, we're not like other Europeans, not really. Oh yes, there are significant cultural divides right across the continent, but there's one way in which a great number of our European neighbours are quite similar - they don't mind crappy adverts. 

You know the ones I mean, the 'humourous' ones with plastic-looking, very European families. He is slick of hair and clean shaven, she looks like she's just stepped out of a salon, and the kids are dressed by Gap, and one of them carries a perfectly unused skateboard. They're hip, they're happening, and nothing like them has ever been seen west of the North Sea...

Then the advert gets dubbed. Badly. Because it's the same brand, we'll definitely have the same values when it comes to advertising, right? I mean, it's just an advert, isn't it? Well, no. Not exactly...

You see, here in the UK we get a bit antsy about adverts. We didn't have them for ages, then this channel started up called ITV, and it was paid for by advertising, and the whole game changed. Those precious moments when we could be watching the program we tuned in to watch, but are instead watching a sales pitch, are something to be treated very carefully. We don't want to be watching the advert, but if we have to it had better be damned good. Funny is a good place to start, but merely cool-looking will do. Expensive in look and feel is a definite, unless you're selling something cheap, in which case we'll forgive you, and ignore your product.

Adverts are a battle ground in the British media, a place for rival ad companies to try to outdo each other with their genius. The adverts get better and better, and we can tell when someone hasn't bothered. We can really tell when someone has just dubbed over an advert they've already used in Spain, France and the Czech Republic. And we resent it. Resent the laziness, and the assumption that we're anything like that unwashed, uncultured bunch over there on the continent (etc., etc.). 

Adverts on British television are an intrusion, and as such had better give us a damned good party trick or we'll boot them back out the way they just came in. 

So now you know.

Two rather important images

Firstly, it's important that you know that Amazon now sells Nerf guns by the ounce, like drugs (click image for larger, more readable version). I have no idea how this compares to the street price of cocaine. Anyone?

Secondly, it is also important that you know about the astonishing event taking place in Sheffield this Christmas. Just imagine "the magical blend of Christmas and the circus.... on ice!" I'm not sure one exclamation mark is enough to convey the excitement...

Why Americans need to be careful about who they vote for

There are plenty of reasons, I'm sure, for choosing one political party over another in the race for the American presidency. I imagine there's a fair amount of history involved, too - if your parents voted for one party or another, you're fairly likely to follow them, once you've got over your youthful rebellious phase. And of course, for the rest of us in the wider world, the outcome is extremely important - if the Democrats get in we'll get to hear rabid nonsense from Republicans for another few years about how America is going to waste, and if the Republicans get in we're likely to die in a massive nuclear war. Joys.

But Americans really need to have a good, long think about how they vote, because the direction of politics in America has a very profound affect on how the country is seen around the globe. Americans might suggest that they don't give a damn about what we think, and if that's their attitude that's fine. But it's short-sighted and naive, and I'll tell you why: without the export trade and the influx of tourists, the American economy is trousered.

These revenue streams are governed both by the strength of the American economy, and also - crucially - the perception of the American public across the wider world. People won't go to American if they think it's full of tub-thumping rednecks, and let me tell you one little thing you may have missed, America: if you elect Mittens Romney, people will think that you're a dangerous bunch of idiots.

Tourists will be shit-scared of your border agencies. Anyone who fails to believe in puritanical, Americanised Christianity will fear for their rights of religious freedom, and anyone living east of the Mediterranean will imagine themselves being arrested upon arrival for being a "damn Commie".

If you elect a Republican president, the world will, I'm afraid, have no option but to think of you as having potatoes instead of brains. You can complain all you want that I don't know the first thing about American politics, and you'd be mostly right, but this isn't about knowing American politics, it's about knowing how non-Americans think. And America, I've had years of practice at doing that...

Car Park Bingo: Sunny Day

Maserati Quattroporte! Only need the MC12 to complete my Maser line-up, as I've already had the GT in the same car park. Note the poor parking - squashed front off-side tyre.

For those unfamiliar with the rules of Car Park Bingo, it's quite simple: spy an exotic four-wheeled thingy in an everyday situation (supermarket car park, on the street, etc. - no motor shows!), and snap it with whatever photographic device is to hand. Upload it to your blog/Twitter/Facebook/other feed and label it 'Car Park Bingo'. There are no prizes and everyone's a winner!

Car Park Bingo: Upgrade!

I've had the V8 Vantage before, now I've got the V12 too...

Should we ban tobacco outright?

Recent legislation in the UK has seen another blow to the tobacco industry, with retailers no longer allowed to display tobacco and tobacco products on their shelves. Instead, these products must be kept in shuttered cabinets, with the shutters only opened at the precise moments of need. This is a further attempt to discourage youngsters from viewing the purchase of tobacco as a 'normal' activity, and further legislation might well get passed which enforces the sale of these products in plain, non-brand-designed packaging, to increasingly de-glamorise the industry. This move is already being implemented in Australia from December this year.

Clearly we are heading towards the point where sales of tobacco are eventually eliminated entirely. Certainly the current direction of policy is to marginalise the practise of smoking as much as possible - it is becoming harder to buy cigarettes, and the ban on public smoking sends addicts (an inflammatory term I very deliberately use) out into the freezing rain to get their fix. It would seem, then, that we are moving toward a society where smoking is banned outright.

Let me go on the record now to say that I agree with this outcome. Smoking should be banned, because it is an addictive, harmful activity with no benefit other than to satisfy a craving which only exists due to smoking in the first place. It costs the NHS something like £5bn per year, as well as having a knock-on effect onthe family and friends of smokers, not least through second-hand smoke inhalation.

Pro-smoking lobbying groups (often sponsored by, if not officially part of tobacco companies themselves) will argue that to smoke is the right of the individual, and that it should be a personal choice. To some extent it should be considered thus - after all, who are we to prevent others from making their own choices in these matters? On the other hand, though, imagine if tobacco was introduced to the world for the first time in 2012 - it would instantly be legislated against as a harmful drug, probably in Class C of the UK system, much like cannabis. It is only our history of using this drug, coupled to a perceived lack of impact on personality (unlike, for example, heroin use), which prevents it being considered quite as harmful as perhaps it should be.

Of course, a total ban is probably an impossible dream. Tobacco companies know they can't win the war, but they're fighting all the way. They support both the Conservatives and Labour in the UK, and as such can guide policy towards measures which, while they appear to be aimed at curbing the uptake of tobacco, will have very little effect on existing users - if you need your fix, you'll get it. We must also consider the revenue from tobacco sales, which is predicted to be £12.1bn for the 2011-2012 UK tax year, a not inconsiderable sum. Pro-smoking groups would argue that losing this revenue would dramatically harm the UK economy, and to a point they have a decent argument - the revenue certainly outweighs the quoted cost to the NHS, though in my sums I'm ignoring costs to the economy due to time off for smoking-related illnesses.

I don't know the answer, but I suspect it lies in the re-invention of the tobacconist, a shop type which has morphed into what we would now call a newsagent. Further marginalisation of the sales process is probably the only feasible means by which we will continue to decrease the demand for tobacco and tobacco products. Eventually there will come a time when the revenue from smoking begins to fall (according to the figures quoted in the link above, they have steadily climbed since 1990, and probably before that), and we will see a decline in the power of the pro-smoking lobbyists. Only at that point will a complete ban be on the cards.

Very Cross Words

In an attempt to rebuild my ailing internal thesaurus (which was, at one time, not entirely useless), I've been spending a fair amount of time recently doing crosswords. The simple kind, you understand, but it's those simple ones which help flex the imaginary brain muscles upon the strength of which ones synonym-system operates.

Mostly, I am able to complete these with ease, with the exception that on each an every crossword there is at least one clue which utterly confounds me, and it is typically related to some obscure matter of what, for want of a more accurate (or even slightly accurate) term, I shall call general knowledge.

It goes something like this:

"Three across, 'finger', five letters, ends in 'T'. Hmmm, well, that must be 'digit'.

"Nine down, 'thing for remembering', six letters, blank-blank-emm-blank-arr-blank. Easy: 'memory'.

"Right, nineteen across, five letters, '17th century Taoist monk'.... what the f***?"

In case you're wondering, it would be Zhang, as in Zhang San Feng, the inventor of Tai Chi...

That's not even the most awkward of them. My current favourite clue, still unsolved, is 'Common febrifuge'. I don't even know what a febrifuge is! Well, I do now I've Google'd it; but before that? No chance. I'll bet none of you do either, without looking it up. In case you can't be bothered, it's a fever-reducing herb. When was this  crossword set, the 14th century?

There really isn't a point to this, other than to rant about the deliberate efforts of Telegraph Quick Crossword setters to catch us all out. You have been warned.