On 24/03/2015 08:19, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 23-3-2015 19:50, Stephen wrote:

>> In a way Nekar is right. We, as taxpayers, are the investors.
>> Years ago I worked in the Newspaper industry. I have a very low opinion
>> of most journalists. They will write anything to get a byline.
>>
>>
> Hmm, yes and no. My father was a journalist, working in the foreign
> politics and arts branch. He was extremely critical about truth finding
> and so was very critical about many of his colleagues. In the course of
> the years I have met a wide lot of them and I must say that most were
> honest. However, the example by Nekar is typically one were the
> journalist did not know what he was writing about and only picked up a
> couple of catch calls he heard somewhere and wrote around it; or -
> current practice - the title did not refer to the content at all, which
> becomes obvious when you know that titles are not made by the journalist
> himself but by the layout staff.
>

True but we are talking about different generations.
Nowadays if you don't work in "the city" the next best thing is working 
in "the media". There are so many of them that they struggle to keep to 
the realms of reality in their quest to have an original slant on it. 
Although I do have a sneaking desire to see a pink unicorn. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24/03/2015 08:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> This:
> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32004102
>
> would be an excellent start :-)


You saw that. I thought you might be interested. :-)
I wonder what else is tucked away in the back of a drawer?

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-3-2015 10:35, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/03/2015 08:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> This:
>> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32004102
>>
>> would be an excellent start :-)
>
>
> You saw that. I thought you might be interested. :-)
> I wonder what else is tucked away in the back of a drawer?
>

A lot of wonders, no doubt. A significant number of recent discoveries 
have been made from specimens tucked away in dusty drawers for decades.

Those maps are marvellous, not only for the beautiful way they have been 
made but also for the fact that a single man collected all the data and 
put them together comprehensively. And the maps are still broadly correct.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24-3-2015 10:33, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/03/2015 08:19, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 23-3-2015 19:50, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> In a way Nekar is right. We, as taxpayers, are the investors.
>>> Years ago I worked in the Newspaper industry. I have a very low opinion
>>> of most journalists. They will write anything to get a byline.
>>>
>>>
>> Hmm, yes and no. My father was a journalist, working in the foreign
>> politics and arts branch. He was extremely critical about truth finding
>> and so was very critical about many of his colleagues. In the course of
>> the years I have met a wide lot of them and I must say that most were
>> honest. However, the example by Nekar is typically one were the
>> journalist did not know what he was writing about and only picked up a
>> couple of catch calls he heard somewhere and wrote around it; or -
>> current practice - the title did not refer to the content at all, which
>> becomes obvious when you know that titles are not made by the journalist
>> himself but by the layout staff.
>>
>
> True but we are talking about different generations.
> Nowadays if you don't work in "the city" the next best thing is working
> in "the media". There are so many of them that they struggle to keep to
> the realms of reality in their quest to have an original slant on it.
> Although I do have a sneaking desire to see a pink unicorn. ;-)
>

Yes, I suppose that is true although the old 'Fleet Street' probably was 
not always as honest as we might suppose. The temptation to announce a 
pink unicorn scoop can have been to great to refuse. ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/03/2015 12:06, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Yes, I suppose that is true although the old 'Fleet Street' probably was
> not always as honest as we might suppose. The temptation to announce a
> pink unicorn scoop can have been to great to refuse. ;-)

I worked for the Scottish Daily Record a part of the Mirror Group, in 
the late 70's. A more cynical group of people, I've never met.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24/03/2015 12:03, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 24-3-2015 10:35, Stephen wrote:
>> On 24/03/2015 08:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> This:
>>> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32004102
>>>
>>> would be an excellent start :-)
>>
>>
>> You saw that. I thought you might be interested. :-)
>> I wonder what else is tucked away in the back of a drawer?
>>
>
> A lot of wonders, no doubt. A significant number of recent discoveries
> have been made from specimens tucked away in dusty drawers for decades.
>

I've noticed that. There must be millions of post grad degrees in waiting.

> Those maps are marvellous, not only for the beautiful way they have been
> made but also for the fact that a single man collected all the data and
> put them together comprehensively. And the maps are still broadly correct.
>

The draughtsmanship is admirable.
I went to see the Burrell Collection collection when it opened. That man 
had is own museum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrell_Collection

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-3-2015 13:32, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/03/2015 12:03, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 24-3-2015 10:35, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 24/03/2015 08:39, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> This:
>>>> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32004102
>>>>
>>>> would be an excellent start :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> You saw that. I thought you might be interested. :-)
>>> I wonder what else is tucked away in the back of a drawer?
>>>
>>
>> A lot of wonders, no doubt. A significant number of recent discoveries
>> have been made from specimens tucked away in dusty drawers for decades.
>>
>
> I've noticed that. There must be millions of post grad degrees in waiting.
>
>> Those maps are marvellous, not only for the beautiful way they have been
>> made but also for the fact that a single man collected all the data and
>> put them together comprehensively. And the maps are still broadly
>> correct.
>>
>
> The draughtsmanship is admirable.
> I went to see the Burrell Collection collection when it opened. That man
> had is own museum.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrell_Collection
>
Interesting. He must have been one of the last eclectic collectors with 
a wide range of art interests. I get the impression that collectors 
nowadays are more specialised. But what do I know? ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24-3-2015 13:24, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/03/2015 12:06, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Yes, I suppose that is true although the old 'Fleet Street' probably was
>> not always as honest as we might suppose. The temptation to announce a
>> pink unicorn scoop can have been to great to refuse. ;-)
>
> I worked for the Scottish Daily Record a part of the Mirror Group, in
> the late 70's. A more cynical group of people, I've never met.
>
yeah... that's an infamous bunch indeed.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 24/03/2015 15:24, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrell_Collection
>>
> Interesting. He must have been one of the last eclectic collectors with
> a wide range of art interests. I get the impression that collectors
> nowadays are more specialised. But what do I know? ;-)


It will be cost, imo.
In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. The art market was not 
overpriced by investment and pension funds and it was fashionable to be 
eclectic.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24-3-2015 17:07, Stephen wrote:
> On 24/03/2015 15:24, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrell_Collection
>>>
>> Interesting. He must have been one of the last eclectic collectors with
>> a wide range of art interests. I get the impression that collectors
>> nowadays are more specialised. But what do I know? ;-)
>
>
> It will be cost, imo.
> In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. The art market was not
> overpriced by investment and pension funds and it was fashionable to be
> eclectic.
>
I suppose that is true indeed. No room anymore for Renaissance Man :-)

Which reminds me that I still have to make a visit to:
http://www.museumbelvedere.nl/english/
which is quite close to where I live. I am especially interested in 
their collection of Jan Mankes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mankes

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message