#jackmonro

[osgoodcomix]

Inktober 2024 Day 10 - Nomadic

[dairyfreebristol]

Yesterday we made banana loaf from @jack_monroe's #Veganish cook book but did it with leftover easter chocolate and cocoa powder instead of raisins and spices. I like to think Jack would approve of our experimentation. Lazily blitzed all the ingredients in the food processor bit it seems to have worked. Ate a slice for breakfast this morning in honour of my grandbaby's 5th birthday in faraway Netherlands. #athome #vegan #bootstrapcook #jackmonroe #glutenfree #dairyfree #chocolate #banana #bananabread #bananaloaf https://www.instagram.com/p/B-_1bdPjUKO/?igshid=1xk5ykb9ycort

[shakeyeats]

Lockdown/Isolation Day 23: Decorating Today we finally got around to putting these 2 on the wall; Marble and Garlic. Photos by @jack_monroe Signed by @jack_monroe Framed by @jack_monroe Wrapped by @jack_monroe Posted by @jack_monroe (I think... sorry to bootstrap admin or Mrs J if they did it) They look great on our kitchen wall. Thanks, Jack!! #shakeyeats #gillinghamfood #medwayfood #kentfood #foodie #quarantinecuisine #stayhome #bootstrapcook #jackmonroe #jackmonroeslockdownlarder #tincancook #dailykitchenlive #cookingonabootstrap (at Gillingham, Medway) https://www.instagram.com/p/B-uIPkgHn5I/?igshid=1xgk2y9s71w16

[frstk]

\JackMonroe/

Just a pair of love bird sticking together👬

[thelucoid-blog]

I have blue felt tip on my face (thanks, 1 year old!), there's a mixture of breakfast and lunch all over the kitchen floor, the dishwasher's still full from last night's cycle and the Christmas tree's still up, complete with decorations. Part of me thinks things are getting a bit out of hand. Good job I got a slow cooker for Christmas, it could save my sanity this year. I tried it out for the first time yesterday, with Jack Monroe's lentil ragu, and it was so fantastically easy! We'd planned to have it with spaghetti for tea, but had to come up with something else part-way through the day. As I live with a non-vegetarian 4 year old and was unable to produce ham sandwiches out of thin air (cheese just wasn't good enough) I was forced to open a tin of spaghetti hoops for lunch, and I didn't want to feed her pasta twice in one day so we had a lentil sheperd's (sheperdess's?) pie instead. The baby didn't touch it (new thing and all that), the 4 year old mostly just ate the mash with her fingertips (but did devour broccoli for the first time in forever), and I wolfed it down. It was so good I finished the lot, including the baby's rejects. I know, I should have saved some for the freezer but it's lucky I didn't as someone (ahem, Matt) left the freezer door ajar last night. Not much lost, thankfully. No babies were harmed in the taking of this photo, by the way. I'd only just switched the pot on. #slowcooker #vegetarian #familylife #food #familymeal #vegetarian #lentilragu #jackmonroe https://www.instagram.com/p/Bsf2958lBNc/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=15b1nrw7iowhg

[news247worldpressposts]

#Breaking: Food campaigner #JackMonroe says that for Rishi Sunak, #LizTruss, and #BorisJohnson to say 'let's wait and see' over cost-of-living measures

#Breaking: Food campaigner #JackMonroe says that for Rishi Sunak, #LizTruss, and #BorisJohnson to say ‘let’s wait and see’ over cost-of-living measures

https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1558750569342328837?s=20&t=kYsJkQSB1BIQ0PaqolfEcg Source: Twitter

[cupcakemaker1983-blog]

Made these lush chickpea and chorizo burgers tonight for dinner from the #jackmonroe blog #cookingonabootstrap and would def recommend! #cookingonabudget #cooking #homemade #mealplanning #homecooked #notasundayroast

[adrianlourie]

Jack Monroe for The Evening Standard

All images copyright Adrian Lourie / Eyevine

[benbrierandley-blog]

My second James Patterson book. "I need the best Jack!" Lets see how book 2 goes. The written word has to be the best thing in the world. I have so much fun writing that I actually think I could be locked in a room doing it for the rest of my days. You know like writing on the walls and the ceiling and the floor. ____________ #writing #writer #publishing #publishinghouse #jamespatterson #enterprise #enterprising #venture #venturing #venturedevelopment #entrepreneurship #entrepreneur #jackmonroe #private #author #authoring #books #book #bookclub _____________

[keycomicbooks]

#CaptainAmerica #154 (1972) Sal Buscema Cover Art and Pencils, Story by #SteveEnglehart, 1st full app of #JackMonroe, later becomes Bucky III and #Nomad "#TheFalcon Fights Alone" – The Falcon is bested by the impostor Captain America. He is saved by a street gang and heads to the Avengers mansion to warn the team before departing to the Bahamas to warn Rogers. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075FD7W3M

[aamodt]

Media Law Update: (1) Monroe v Hopkins and (2) Shakil-Ur-Rahman v ARY Network Ltd

Monroe v Hopkins [2017] EWHC 433

On 4th November 2012, Sally Bercow, the wife of the Speaker of the House of Commons, published a tweet that has since become infamous. It read:

“Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *Innocent face*”

 As is now well known, Alistair McAlpine (Lord McAlpine of West Green) had, at the time of Ms Bercow’s published tweet, been wrongly implicated in a child-abuse scandal that had been reported on television and in the press, and that implication resulted in false rumours circulating on Twitter and - as a consequence - his name started trending. Ms Bercow’s tweet resulted in libel proceedings being brought by Lord McAlpine against Ms Bercow. In Ms Bercow’s case, the courts were not able to accept her explanation that the use of “innocent face” was literal and contained no irony or insincerity (McAlpine v Bercow [2013] EWHC 1342 (QB), at ¶84). Ms Bercow ended up paying £15,000 plus legal costs.

 It was rash and ill-considered use of Twitter that led to another and recent high-profile libel action. It was brought by the food writer Jack Monroe against the newspaper columnist and former LBC presenter Katie Hopkins. The facts of the case are doubtless now well known, but to recap very briefly: on Saturday 9th May 2015 there was an “anti-austerity” demonstration in London. It became violent in parts and in particular a memorial the women of World War II was daubed with offensive graffiti. Laurie Penny, a columnist for the New Statesman tweeted that she thought that the vandalism was “fine” and stated “I don’t have a problem with this”. Ms Penny’s comments generated a great deal of comment on Twitter and on conventional media, including from the defendant, who expressed herself in typically forthright terms.

Then, on 18th May, some time after the initial Laurie Penny tweet, the defendant mentioned the claimant in a tweet and wrote: 

“@MsJackMonroe scrawled on any memorials recently? Vandalized the memory of those who fought for your freedom. Grandma got any more medals?” (“Tweet 1”). 

The claimant responded with outrage at this and demanded that the tweet be deleted, that there be a donation of damages to charity and that the defendant apologize. On the same day the defendant deleted Tweet 1 but did no more. However, the defendant then published a second tweet that read: 

“Can anyone explain to me - in 10 words or less - the difference between irritant @PennyRed [Laurie Penny] and social anthrax @JackMonroe.” (“Tweet 2”). 

The defendant eventually tweeted on 2nd June:

“@MsJackMonroe I was confused about identity. I got it wrong” 

but did not (as the claimant’s lawyers had asked) pay the claimant’s costs or make a donation to charity in lieu of damages.

The case proceeded to trial. Warby J found that the claimant had been libelled and awarded damages of £24,000 (£16,000 for Tweet 1 and £8,000 for Tweet 2). The judgement is both interesting and important for various reasons:

The judgement contains (as an appendix) a  detailed exposition (the first time in a reported libel case) on how Twitter actually works, complete with “at-replies”, “at-mentions”, ’direct  messages“. ”likes“, ”re-tweets“, and ”blocking". Assuming that Twitter continues to function in the same way, Warby J’s exposition will doubtless be the standard reference in future Twitter libel cases.

It contains (or rather repeats) the post Defamation Act 2013 “are the words complained off capable of being defamatory?” test now required in libel cases, although one of the planks, that the Claimant needs to prove that a publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm (i.e. the old common law presumption of damage no longer applies), is a subject of the Court of Appeal hearing (heard in November 2016) of Lachaux v Independent Print Limited & Ors [2015] EWHC 2242 (QB). That notwithstanding, the questions that the court asks are: (1) which meanings were borne by the publication(s)? (2) are those meanings defamatory? (3) if (2) is met, has the claimant proved that the publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm? In Monroe, Warby J considered the relevant serious harm factors suggested by Dingemans in Sobrinho v Impresa Publishing SA [2016] EWHC 66 (QB). It is interesting that Warby J (at ¶69) states that: “Where an allegation has a seriously defamatory tendency and is widely published  a claimant may choose to rely on those facts alone … as the basis for an  inference that serious harm was actually caused … in some cases it may be enough. It is certainly not necessary in every case to engage in a detailed forensic examination of the precise factual picture …” In his finding that the serious harm threshold was met he simply observed that he did so “… on the straightforward basis that the tweets complained of have a tendency to cause harm to this claimant’s reputation in the eyes of third parties, of a kind that would be serious for her.” The extent of the publication, despite being dealt with in the section proceeding this part of the judgement, did not, it would seem, explicitly form part of the serious harm analysis, but did form part of the damages calculation (¶79). What is clear however is that the libel courts, and in particular Warby J, are keen to avoid a formulaic methodology of the kind that lawyers saw in Reynolds v Times Newspapers [2001] 2 AC 127 (Lord Nicholls’ famous non-exhaustive list of public interest, qualified privilege circumstances, which nevertheless became - with certain first-instance judges - something of a tick-box checklist). However, what is certain is that the more “serious harm” rulings that we get, the more lawyers will be able to create a matrix that will more easily determine which side of the line a case falls and judges will find it more difficult to resist the logic and force of the precedents presented to them.

The argument put forward by Ms Hopkins that the “Twittersphere” requires some kind of special consideration because it is not a serious arena of debate and expression was not accepted by the court. The argument advanced was that the hypothetical Twitter user should be imbued with a more than usual amount of skepticism because he or she     was not reading a newspaper and that Twitter was akin to the “Wild West”.

What lessons can be learned from this case? First: the notion of “oh it’s just Twitter – no-one takes it seriously” needs to be discounted once and for all. That is not how the hypothetical Twitter user sees the social network. Second: as Warby J rightly observed, this was an occasion when the Offer of Amends procedure under the Defamation Act 1996 would have been the best course of action for the Defendant and could have saved her a great deal of money and trouble. Or to put it another way: when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. 

Shakil-Ur-Rahman v ARY Network Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 3110 (QB)

It is often the case that the factual specifics of a legal action, as well as giving a cause of action in libel, can provide alternative causes of action. Examples include breach of confidence (Francome v Mirror Group Newspapers [1984] 1 WLR 892), trade mark infringement (Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd v Vetplus [2007] EWCA Civ 583), and conspiracy (Gulf Oil (Great Britain) Ltd v Page [1987] Ch 327). The cause of action that perhaps has the most in common with defamation (other than malicious falsehood of course) is an action for harassment under The Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Section 3 of the act created a tort, and the conduct which the act is designed to prevent includes speech (s.7(4)). It follows that there is scope for overlap (see Cray v Hancock(2003) (QB) (unreported) & Sunderland Housing v Baines [2006] EWHC 2359 QBD, where the facts of the cases allowed parallel libel and harassment claims). The extent of that overlap has again been explored in the case of Shakil-Ur-Rahman v ARY Network Ltd & Anor [2016] EWHC 3110 (QB).

In Rahman, the Claimant complained of libel and harassment in respect of programmes broadcast on a television channel. The claimant was successful in respect of the libel claims but Sir David Eady (sitting as a high court judge) dismissed the claims for harassment. The judge held that there “[had] to be a minimum threshold of seriousness before the statutory tort can be established.” [¶113] and that the threshold had been crossed. However, the judge also held that for harassment to occur in the case at hand, the impact of the harassment on the claimant (a crucial ingredient) would have needed to have occurred in the court’s jurisdiction. The claimant at the time the broadcasts were being made was in Dubai. For that reason, the harassment had not occurred within the jurisdiction. Two interesting things emerge from this case: 

Dismissing the harassment claim Sir David said “The position is not comparable to that in libel. If defamatory words are published here, then the tort is complete wherever the particular claimant happens to be (subject to s.1 of the 2013 [Defamation] Act). Where harassment is alleged, on the other hand, the tort is not complete unless and until it impacts upon the person concerned. One can be libelled without knowing about it at the time, but not so with harassment. It makes no sense to say that a person was harassed but knew nothing about it.” Moreover, the harassment needs to have taken place in England and Wales. There is therefore – on this issue – a very clear distinction between the two torts;

In weaving together the various dicta from previous harassment cases, the court in this case, with its requirement of a “minimum threshold of seriousness”, seems to be driving towards a test similar to that expressed in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Limited [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB), albeit with reference to a course of conduct that causes - say - alarm or distress, as opposed to reference to a publication that is capable of being be defamatory.

Despite these tweaks from Sir David, harassment will continue to remain an attractive alternative to libel for claimants: there is no specific pre-action protocol, a six-year limitation period (as opposed to one year for defamation and malicious falsehood), and, providing that a claimant can convince the court that the strict rules militating against the grant of injunctions in libel cases aren’t being circumvented by ploy or stealth, interim injunctions are much easier to obtain.

[jackmonro]

Paper Bag Boy

http://youtu.be/jE2F-A_xI5U

  About a day after I submitted my digital media project proposal I spoke to my sister in England – a young girl rather sad about a pretty common affliction. Pimples, the ugly remnants of adolescence, could still be seen on her face. Ironically, she had been given the task of addressing a class about adolescence and her experience with high school etc. She was a bit worried about it, so I decided to change my mind on the project and do an informational, educational, yet humorous video for her. This is what I came up with.

  (NB: She never actually played the video, as I couldn’t finish editing it in time. Probably a good thing, considering the advice contained within could easily be misinterpreted by anyone under the age…. Actually, anyone really.)

  My role in the production was pretty overarching. I came up with the concept and then used an old video camera and tripod my housemate had stashed away in a cupboard over the summer to film it. I did the script, most of the camerawork, the directing, and also provided all post-shoot beers for the cast.

  I then used iMovie ’11 to edit and share the video via Youtube.

  I’ve only had a small amount of film experience, and I think there were several elements I could have handled a lot better. Many camera shots were shaky and illegible, and because I did not use a wind buffer on the camera, some of the spoken audio is distorted. I was able to fix this to some intent during the editing, but unfortunately some of the audio was too far-gone to repair. And, as usual, I feel that if I had given myself some more time editing, I would have been able to really tighten up a few cuts and shots, and make the entire thing just a little smoother.

  One thing that surprised and slightly impressed me was the way the narrative ended up working in the end. Although I think I could have melded the two parts of the film more clearly and amusingly together, each works for its separate intents. The initial part of the film intends to entertain, following the amusing antics of the paper bag boy; the second aims to inform, with a silly digression on ways of getting rid of pimples.

  In the future, I think I would allow myself more time at each stage of production. This would have allowed me to sharpen up the script and connect the separate narratives, ensure all shots were composed well, and to allow for an audio experience that doesn’t jolt the listener too often. That being said, I had a lot of fun doing it, and am overall glad at the final results.   

  I learnt about a number of things doing this project. For one, I saw firsthand how easy it is to literally lose the plot whilst directing and producing a short film. As aforementioned, I’m quite glad this never got shown to children, because I opted for entertainment over education. It really makes me appreciate the hard work and extreme creative drain real producers of educational content go through, trying to find the balance between engagement and information objectives. If you think this is beginning to sound like marketing speak, you’re right.

  Completing this video drew massive parallels to the creation of advertising. Being someone that is about to go and work on the media side of the fence, this creative exercise showed me the difficulty a production company must have in completing projects. And they have hundreds of people involved in the process. As hard as it was, it was a good time, and I can see myself trying out a camera hand job in the future, if all else fails. 

[shakeyeats]

That might be enough books to keep us going for a while... Vegan(ish) by @jack_monroe Zaika by @romygill 200 Barbecue recipes by #hamlynbooks The Official #downtonabbey Cookbook by @dranniegray #shakeyeats #gillinghamfood #medwayfood #kentfood #foodie #christmas #vegan #veganish #jackmonroe #romygill #zaika #dranniegray #anniegray #barbecue #bbq #books #cookbooks #booksofinstagram (at Gillingham, Medway) https://www.instagram.com/p/B6nsSppnSKO/?igshid=1d185n8hum5wx

[com112-201360]

Cake

I decided to make a story about cake for my storify beginning experience. I don't like cake, so I gathered as much information from social media sources like Facebook, YouTube and twitter as I could. Although my mind wasn't changed, I was able to map out a few different perspectives on the subject of cake. I was also able to chuck in some surrounding contextual commentary on the issue. It was interesting using the Storify platform, but I can see that if I had a more directed idea in mind, it could act as a powerful tool that amalgamates the perspectives of many into a single, simple web page. Perhaps I will have a retry when I have something more compelling than cake in mind.

[jackmonro]

HI all,

Elliot and I created this in class time. We didn't intend to discover his dark side, it was something that just happened while I was filming him walk.

Credits go to Elliot and myself, the iMovie sound library - and Primal Scream (for the intro to their track "Loaded" which I edited in Garageband). We didn't actually slow down the footage using iMovie, it was just something that Elliot's dark energy made happen, totally unintentional and very creepy. 

Enjoy!

[com112-201360]

VID PRODDING

I've had a little bit of experience putting together films, as it was one of those childhood fascinations that came along with acquiring a family video camera. For many years I considered myself a junior Scorsese, filming and producing hours of faux-World Wrestling Federation fights and many strange attempts at horror. In those days I didn't have editing software, so was relying on first takes.  I got over it pretty quick, and it wasn't until senior high school drama that I picked up a camera again. This time I learned iMovie, and found it was rather enjoyable and very easy. The accessibility of modern video editing software means that everyone who can hold a mouse, vets included, can create film magic with the press of a button.  I'm not going to comment on how much, or whether or not, this ease of use has affected TV or feature film production schedules / processes. Also, I don't have any examples of films that are made on low budgets, using below industry standard production equipment. I'm certain these are around and interesting, but I'd prefer if you would just look below

    Someone showed me this video yesterday, and I was extremely surprised. My surprise wasn't born from the contents of the video itself, but rather from the fact that it is a fake, and created by a bunch of high school kids. To me this highlighted an important notion of video production that I hadn't previously addressed, the worrying concept that anyone can make anything look like something else with a bit of simple knowledge and some software. The internet is a vicious proliferator of videos like this, and for anyone interested in conspiracies and UFO sightings, it means a fake is ridiculously easy to produce and promote. What room does that leave for the truth, when fakes and lies can so easily be dressed in the clothes of reality?