Pages

Tuesday, 20 July 2010

More Bin Nonsense in the Mail (Again!!)


Wheelie bin stories / Bin collection stories are one of the more perennial and odd Daily Mail obsessions. They seem to deliberately single out stories like this one about councils checking whats been binned at selected regions as part of a survey into recycling. The story isn't very interesting so I'll boil it down. Some councils have continued to survey varying demographics to see who bins what, and who recycles / doesn't, by inspecting the contents of about 10'000 peoples trash. Thus they can see if the poor are recycling more, or do ethnic minorities throw more away. A survey. In order not to prejucdice results (people might change thier recycling habits if they are told beforehand ), the residents whose waste got checked were not informed before hand. That is the Mails gripe on the story. (it even gets an editorial comment piece.) Yet again the "Dustbin Nazis" and "Big Brother" councils are victimising taxpayers by the tyranny of dustbin collections... or something like that, it's the usual spiel you get. My interest in the story isn't the story itself, I really have bigger things to worry about. I suppose it could be considered a waste of tax payers money or invasive. Many private companies can pass on customer details. That is how cold callers obtain your number. But this affair is to look at general trends, not to trace specific waste habits of individuals. No my focus is on why bin stories like these are so popular in the Mail, and I think it is for two separate reasons.



Paul Dacre has an instinct for giving his core readers stories they want to hear, and he usually has a good success rate for doing so. There are many readers of that paper who are retirees, and are bored and chippy retirees at that. Everybody has their bins emptied, it affects everyone. Providing a narrative about Orwellian councils picking fights with householders over putting a garden pea in the paper bin, or sticking microchips in the wheely bins of Middle England (the headline is worded to imply the reader is being targeted) brings out that frustrated low level libertarian ire. Getting worked up about stuff like this, is a game for those with time on their hands. It gives bored; irked at life, and frustrated people something external (and accessible;- vis a vis; to their own lives) to focus on, and something to do. Think of having to write all those angry letters.



The second is related to the first, but distinct too. A large minority of that papers target grassroots audience are habitual complainers, and habitual complainers as I said; on a certain level enjoy complaining. Habitual complainers also have that unusual mix of being at odds with the world, but simultaneously self centred about their perceived role in it. There are practical objections to this kind of council action, and to the motives of councillors and people in authority. I think good cases (though IMHO this story is really not a big deal) can be made for both. But these concerns aren't REALLY why this kind of thing is prominent in the Mail. The overall narrative of this emphasis on "bin spies" is that the tyrannical councils really are spying on the rubbish contents of Middle England. (or Dacres interpretation) You are right to think that they are watching you. They do consider you a mortal danger. In short you matter to the powers that be. I don't think it is too much of an exaggeration to say that there are those who would secretly pleased to have been "spied on". Better to think that the secret police are sifting through your bin bags, what with you being a dissident and all, than just a random demographic survey of recycling habits. It's tough to think that your opinions and promenance may count for little in the greater scheme of things. And if you are going to be the next Rob Roy, you should decide is it about a cause, or about making yourself feel good?



I'm not green lighting cynical inaction due to larger disinterest at a cause. I've never believed that at all. Complacent certainties can be challenged, and sometimes should be. You can make a difference in your own way (but you may not get much credit for it. Doing it for that is the wrong reason to partake in this kind of thing in the first place) But let us separate righting legitimate grievances, or genuine injustices, from just indulging an ego trip as some kind of latter day Robin Hood thing.

No comments:

Post a Comment