HOME/ARCHIVES http://www.kazooweb.com/textes/
Merci de choisir un ou plusieurs textes plutôt que d'imprimer la totalité... Les arbres vous sont reconnaissants...
********************************
J'attire votre attention vers certains textes touchant vos métiers : (C) Cyber-sécurité dans les entreprises ; (3) Private equity. Plusieurs textes cette semaine touchent des sujets qui me sont chers : (G) Ceux qui écrivent aux rédactions des journaux ; (H) Texte sur mon émission télé préférée ; (4) Les bienfaits pour les entreprises des clients qui se plaignent (comme moi).

********************************
Week 19, 2004
THE REGULARS: Summary
A) Song of the week: "I'm in love with my car", sung by Queen (for PP)
B) Le texte plus abordable de la semaine/Kidzworld: Art Inspired By September 11th [Le 11 septembre commémoré par les artistes.]
C) CNN/Global Office: Cyber crime is right under your nose [La cybercriminalité au coeur des entreprises.]
D) The New York Times/The Ethicist: Speaking in Codes [Conseils sur l'éthique et la déontologie : Ma collocataire parle de moi au téléphone en ma présence dans une sorte de code qu'elle croit à tort que j'ignore. / Nous sommes fiancés, mais on ne veut pas se marier tant que les couples homosexuels restent privés de ce droit.
E) Slate/Dear Prudence: Hitting Home [Conseils sur la vie sentimentale et la vie tout court : Comment aider une amie qui vient de perdre son mari militaire en Irak ? /Une vieille amie vient de me rendre visite et je me rends compte qu'elle est difficile à vivre et de moeurs légères : comment rompre ? / Mes parents ne veulent pas fréquenter mes futurs beaux-parents, leurs inférieurs sociaux. / Mon compagnon continue de fréquenter son ancienne petite amie.
F) Washington Post/Miss Manners: Leave That Stone Unturned [Conseils sur les bonnes manières : Est-ce bien elevé de demander à une amie le nombre de carats de son nouveau diamant ? / Peut-on interrompre une discussion par messagerie instantanée sans prévenir ?]
G) WNYC/On the Media: Re: Everything [Entretien sur le roi des lecteurs de journaux qui écrivent à la rédaction, auteur de 996 lettres publiées dans différents journaux américains. Vous pouvez écouter l'entretien en ligne.]
H) The Entente Cordiale series: Changing Rooms [Une série d'articles publiés dans Libé et The Guardian à l'occasion de la commémoration de l'Entente Cordiale. Ici, un article sur MON EMISSION TV PREFEREE !!!! Avec une adaptation française en cadeau bonux !

********************************
A) Song of the week: "I'm in love with my car", sung by Queen (for PP)

"I’m In Love With My Car", written by Roger Taylor

Oooh
The machine of a dream’ such a clean machine
With the pistons a pumpin’’ and the hubcaps all gleam
When I’m holding your wheel
All I hear is your gear
With my hand on your grease gun
Mmm it’s like a disease son
I’m in love with my car’ gotta feel for my automobile
Get a grip on my boy racer rollbar
Such a thrill when your radials squeal

Told my girl I’ll have to forget her
Rather buy me a new carburettor
So she made tracks saying this is the end now
Cars don’t talk back they’re just four wheeled friends now

When I’m holding your wheel
All I hear is your gear
When I’m cruisin’ in overdrive
Don’t have to listen to no run of the mill talk jive

I’m in love with my car ’love with my car’’ gotta feel for my automobile
I’m in love with my car ’love with my car’’ string back gloves in my automolove

^RETURN TO TOP^

Art Inspired By September 11th

It's been over a year now since the World Trade Towers fell on September 11, 2001 and many people are still trying to deal with the devastation. Some people have decided to deal with their grief - like New York artist, Eric Fischl - through art, music or other creative expression. But where do we draw the line on what's art and what's just plain offensive?
Eric Fischl is the artist responsible for the sculpture Tumbling Woman displayed in Rockefeller Center in New York. Tumbling Woman is supposed to be representative of all those people who either jumped or fell from the Trade Towers. The sculpture drew a ton of criticism and was soon hidden behind curtains and then removed. While some people say this art project was incredibly insensitive, Eric Fischl stands by his sculpture.

"The sculpture was not meant to hurt anybody," Fischl said in a statement. "It was a sincere expression of deepest sympathy for the vulnerability of the human condition. Both specifically towards the victims of Sept. 11 and towards humanity in general."

A similar art display also caused controversy at the Jamaica Center for Arts in New York recently. This time it was a project of Sharon Paz's. The display, called Falling, was made up of cutouts of falling bodies of various shapes and forms stuck to the windows of the gallery. The piece was supposed to stay up until October 1, 2002 but was taken down on September 23, 2002 after complaints from staff and patrons.

Both artists claim to be trying to help the people of New York heal with these art projects. But how does a statue of a naked woman falling to her death help anyone? Wouldn't it be better to celebrate those people's lives in a less graphic, less morbid way? I'm sure those people do not want to be remembered for their less than glorious end.

The Pentagon has chosen a piece of artwork titled "Freedom" by Kerry Swank in light of September 11th. Her piece was made five months before the attacks on the Trade Towers but its subject is a perfect example of what the people of America should be celebrating and remembering about the United States.

^RETURN TO TOP^

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/04/20/go.cyber.security/index.html

Cyber crime is right under your nose
By Nick Easen for CNN

(CNN) -- A company's worst nightmare is when a trusted employee with access to sensitive data simply vanishes. It gets worse when the employee turns up at a competitor's firm. Security is now a key topic on the boardroom agenda, with more CEOs and technology officers taking a proactive approach to electronic espionage, viruses and hacking. Cyber crime is even the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's third highest priority, after counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence.

It is not surprising when this kind of activity costs American business an estimated $14 billion annually, according to the American Insurance Association (AIA). A number of governments have Web pages dedicated to cyber crime. Now management teams are beginning to realize that the biggest threat is sitting right in front of them.

"Enterprises surveyed in (one) report actually put insiders as their prime security risk -- not external threats," Simon Harriss from Accenture Consulting told an Economist conference on cyber security in Hong Kong last year.

Recently a British court found that top bosses at an engineering company had copied hundreds of crucial drawings from a computer before quitting the firm. Later the same individuals turned up at a new company making products apparently based on the same computer aided designs. "It was obvious to me that they had copied these drawings. And knowing that they had copied them they could really only exist in electronic form," Tim Allen, director of MJ Allen group, told CNN.

Luckily for Allen, the court approved a raid on the suspects' premises so that the computer's hard drive could be examined for electronic evidence. The drawings obtained in the raid matched the originals, right down to the last technical details. Names were changed but buried deep in the binary data -- the 0 and 1 code -- of the file was the original. "When (we) converted it, we found that in this document we have the words "British Midland tools," which is a bit more than just a coincidence," says Tony Dearsley of Vogon, a company that specializes in computer forensics and data recovery.

But investigations and legal proceedings do not come cheap and there is also the blow to a company's reputation when it admits it made a security blunder. In this case the court awarded Allen substantial damages. He says it was worth it, but only just. "I just about recovered my costs... but I just could not allow myself to rest knowing that this business had effectively been stolen from me," says Allen.

Luckily the data in the Allen case was not compromised, but Dearsley says data can be altered when IT departments carry out their own inquiries, which hinders expert investigations. "There are people who want to have a look at these things before they refer them for professional advice. We do get cases where people have trampled all over the evidence," he explains. It is often harder to win a court case when electronic proof has been tampered with and authorities may not be able to prosecute the culprits.

Experts advise putting in encryption systems and stepping up security on core information assets. Many businesses still wait for a security breach before focusing on and updating their own system defenses. "That could be a very costly mistake... vigilance is key," notes Eric Goldberg from the AIA.

Andrew Brown contributed to this report for CNN

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
E) Slate/Dear Prudence: Hitting Home [Conseils sur la vie sentimentale et la vie tout court : Comment aider une amie qui vient de perdre son mari militaire en Irak ? /Une vieille amie vient de me rendre visite et je me rends compte qu'elle est difficile à vivre et de moeurs légères : comment rompre ? / Mes parents ne veulent pas fréquenter mes futurs beaux-parents, leurs inférieurs sociaux. / Mon compagnon continue de fréquenter son ancienne petite amie.]
http://slate.msn.com/id/2098722/

dear prudence: Hitting Home
How to help others grieve fallen troops in Iraq.
Posted Thursday, April 29, 2004, at 6:07 AM PT

Dear Prudence,
I admire the advice you give others, and I think that some of my friends and I could use it right now. I'm enrolled in a yearlong program for continuing education. Our class is small (only a dozen or so people), and in the past few months, we've become quite close. One girl, "Rita," has talked frequently about her husband, who has been stationed in Iraq since the class started. Rita and her husband have a 1-year-old and are building a house, set to be ready when he comes home. Unfortunately, he was killed recently in an accident. Understandably, Rita is shocked and devastated, as are we, her friends. We know she's not close to her family, nor is she close to his, and so—as her friends—we wanted to rally around her and let her know that we love her. However, there is the concern that we don't want to seem as though we're smothering her. As a group, we just want to give her the support she needs and still leave her room to grieve. Can you suggest some things that we can do for her that won't seem like an intrusion? Thank you.

—Grieving

Dear Grieve,
How kind you and your group sound. And your letter validates Prudie's belief that friends are the family one chooses. So many Americans are serving abroad now, and the deaths are heartbreaking. What you can do for "Rita" and her very young child is to offer emotional support—and help. Take over dinners, offer to grocery shop, propose child care if she could use some time alone ... in other words, let her know that all of you wish to help ease her burden. Be assured that kind concern is always appreciated, even at a time of profound sorrow.

—Prudie, admiringly

-*-*-*-
Dear Prudence,
A few weeks ago, my friend of over 15 years came to visit me for a long weekend. We had not spent time together without our children or her husband (I am divorced) for over five years, and I expected it to be a fun get-together with an old friend. Now I am questioning whether I can continue to be friends with this person. She was selfish and high-maintenance, and worst of all, she removed her wedding ring when we were out on the town so she "could feel like a single girl again." Although she had no takers, despite her overtly flirty behavior, I was still shocked and dismayed at her ability to so easily pretend she didn't have a loving husband at home. Am I being ridiculous in questioning this friendship and whether I can continue it? This woman has been my dearest friend for almost as long as I can remember. I am in an extremely difficult position here, as I have never had a friend behave this way that I knew of. Am I wrong to judge her?

—Surprised and Disappointed Friend

Dear Sur,
Prudie, herself, has been called judgmental, but she believes that everyone, to a greater or lesser degree, is judgmental. To receive information is to involuntarily form an opinion about it. If it happens that people don't measure up, you are not an unforgiving goody-two-shoes to reassess the relationship. Trying to cheat on one's spouse and involving a friend in it, yet, has more negative weight than, say, being a demanding houseguest. At the end of the day, you will have to decide for yourself if your diminished respect for her makes a continuing friendship impossible. By all means, don't blame yourself for being too stiff if you decide you just don't feel the same about her. This is definitely her bad.

—Prudie, traditionally

-*-*-*-
Hi Pru!
I love your column, and I think you give out some really good advice, so here goes ... I'll be marrying a wonderful guy ("Bob") next year. He's everything I could wish for in a man. In fact, this summer we'll be moving in together. The problem? My parents. I'm sure you've heard "my parents don't like my boyfriend/husband" lots of times, but please hear me out. While Bob's parents absolutely love me (and vice versa), my parents want nothing to do with him or his family. Why do they feel this way? Because Bob's family doesn't make the six-figure income my parents do. I know Bob doesn't have anything to prove to my family, and I know I can't change their opinion about him. However, their behavior toward him is very hurtful. Situations like this have caused major, unfixable rifts in my family in the past, and I'm trying desperately to stop the cycle, but if it's the Grand Canyon they want, then I suppose I have no choice. Any ideas about how to solve this? And hell would freeze over before they got psychological help, so that's out of the question. A side note: They have offered to pay for the wedding (which will be small), but I get the feeling it's only out of "obligation." Should I let them or fund it myself (which I'm capable of doing)?

—Thinking About Disowning the Family

Dear Think,
When you ask how to "solve" this problem, Prudie thinks of the Zen proverb: "There is no solution; seek it lovingly." This problem cannot be solved; it can only be managed. There is no way to infuse your folks with new values at this stage of the game. If they judge people by the income they rake in, the situation is too Bonfire of the Vanities to hope for improvement. What you and your fiance can do, and should do, is ease away from them, but without any formal announcements. They may, in time, catch on that you've become more comfortable with the in-laws and perhaps tone down the snobbery. As for the small wedding you have in mind, it is customary for the bride's father to pay for the wedding if he is able. It IS his obligation, so short of all-out warfare, let it proceed that way. You and your intended are not the first kids to have this problem, and Prudie predicts you will do just fine.

—Prudie, pragmatically

-*-*-*-
Dear Prudie,
I have been with my live-in boyfriend for about a year now. Before we got together, he was in a relationship for four years. He has remained friends with his ex, even though she is still in love with him. He pretty much bends over backward for her, talks to her almost everyday behind my back, sneaks to go visit her and her family sometimes. And to top that off, he still has her pictures in our house that he refuses to throw away. When I confront him about all of this, he gets PO'd and says that he only does what he does because he feels guilty about breaking off their relationship and tells me that I am overreacting. My question is: What do you think of all this?

—Frustrated

Dear Frus,
This chap is not so much guilty, my dear, as ambivalent. To remain "friends" is one thing; to bend over backward, converse every day on the sly, have photographs become an issue, and annoy you in the bargain is a whole other story. Tell Mr. Vacillating you don't think he's quite over what's-her-name, and you've decided she needs him more than you do. What's going on now is no way to live. Over and out.

—Prudie, decisively

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
F) Washington Post/Miss Manners: Leave That Stone Unturned [Conseils sur les bonnes manières : Est-ce bien elevé de demander à une amie le nombre de carats de son nouveau diamant ? / Peut-on interrompre une discussion par messagerie instantanée sans prévenir ?]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29211-2004Apr20.html
Leave That Stone Unturned
Wednesday, April 28, 2004; Page C09

Q:
Dear Miss Manners:

My girlfriend and I were discussing whether it is polite to ask someone, especially a close friend, the size (carats) of their engagement ring. My girlfriend believes it is very rude and in bad taste to ask. I, on the other hand, think it is completely acceptable to ask a friend the size of their ring. Please help us out.

A:
Presuming you can take your eyes off the rock for a minute, Miss Manners suggests that you take a look at the subtext of your question.

It is not a general curiosity about gemology that prompts you to ask the number of carats, is it?

That interest can easily be satisfied with a visit to a jeweler's. These professionals even have little charts you can use as study guides so you can -- for reasons best kept to yourself -- learn to identify the size of your friends' rings without asking.

So what does this question to a friend mean? How rich is her fiance? How much does he love her?

These are not polite inquiries. The correct response to being shown someone's new engagement ring, whether or not the diamond is visible to the naked eye, is "Oh, how beautiful!"

-*-*-*-
Q:
Dear Miss Manners:

Can you please address the topic of etiquette for instant-messenging correspondents? Many is the time I have been in the middle of an exchange of messages, only to have the other person simply stop responding without explanation.

This is understandable in cases where the ISP or the computer has crashed, but entirely too often my correspondent resumes the chat after 10 or 15 minutes (and sometimes longer) with, "Sorry, had to answer the phone" or just "Hi, I'm back!"

It is my feeling that the departing party is obligated by courtesy to inform the other party of his/her imminent departure. I use the shorthand "brb" (be right back) if I have to answer the phone, the door or nature's call, and sign off instant message chats in much the way I end telephone conversations.

I have been told, however, that this medium is NOT the telephone, so the courtesies don't apply, and it is acceptable to simply stop responding and go do something else without warning to one's correspondent. What is your view of the subject?

A:
That phrase "the courtesies don't apply" chills Miss Manners's otherwise tender and glowing heart. It usually means that the anti-etiquette forces have a new toy and erroneously assume that it may be operated etiquette-free.

But if your informants mean only that the rules for telephone calls should not apply to instant messaging, Miss Manners is open to hearing their case.

Although instant messaging is reciprocal, as are telephone calls, it has this in common with other means of written correspondence (e-mail and letters, if anyone remembers what those are): There is some leeway in choosing when to write or read. In telephoning, we assume we have the other person's full attention, although goodness knows that this is now rarely the case. At the computer, you may be sure that there are other distractions.

So while Miss Manners admires your alerts when you momentarily leave, she is not ready to insist that others issue them when turning their attention to a boss or parent who assumes that they have been working.

********************************
G) WNYC/On the Media: Re: Everything [Entretien sur le roi des lecteurs de journaux qui écrivent à la rédaction, auteur de 996 lettres publiées dans différents journaux américains. Vous pouvez écouter l'entretien en ligne.]
http://www.wnyc.org/onthemedia/transcripts/transcripts_042304_everything.html
Re: Everything

April 23, 2004

BOB GARFIELD: In the letters section of the current Harper's Magazine, one reader chastises an editorial by Harper's Editor Lewis Lapham for, quote, "failing to confront the extent of evil arising from Islamic fundamentalism dating back to the 1948 war to exterminate Israel." It's signed by one Nelson Marans of Silver Spring, Maryland. Close readers of magazines and newspapers might recognize the name. It's not the first time a missive from Mr. Marans has been published. In fact, it's the 31st time -- this year. In an epistolary career stretching back to his retirement 17 years ago, Nelson Marans has successfully placed 966 letters in the pages of American newspapers and magazines. The anti-Israel bias that he often sees in Middle East coverage has inspired a lot of them, but in the past year, editors have printed his strong opinions on just about everything. Nelson, thanks for joining us.

NELSON MARANS: Well, thank you very much for having me on.

BOB GARFIELD: In the past year, you have written letters addressing the bombing of Dresden, Germany during the end of World War II--

NELSON MARANS: Yes.

BOB GARFIELD: -- the superiority of marble as a sculpting material, Pete Rose, stock options and, of course, circumcision. [LAUGHTER] And wedding cake. Nelson, you've written --why don't you just read for me, please, your June 18th letter to the New York Times on the subject of wedding cakes.

NELSON MARANS: All right. I'll have to see if I can find it. [READING] "While a delicious cake would cap off any wedding, we should be practical as to what is really required. With the overwhelming array of hors d'oeuvres and then a sumptuous meal, accompanied by drinks, the average wedding guest is too food-besotted to appreciate anything other than the cake's appearance. The real function of most wedding cakes is to supply a piece in an elaborate box to be taken home as a souvenir. For the bride and groom, a few pieces to be frozen and eaten on wedding anniversaries are required. Certainly a delicious wedding cake is desirable, but it is usually an indulgence, not for the guests, but for the wedding party."

BOB GARFIELD: All right. What prompted this outburst about the function of wedding cakes? And, and by the way, who died and made you arbiter of wedding cake etiquette? [LAUGHTER]

NELSON MARANS: What happened was, they were describing these elaborate wedding cakes that cost thousands and thousands of dollars, and I was saying to myself, what a waste. It's just over-indulgence. I'm not bothered if people disagree, and I'm not bothered if people consider that I'm acting as an arbiter. I know I'm not. Everybody has a certain amount of knowledge about a subject, and I think that they should express that knowledge, and I always encourage my friends to write, because I feel that writing is a lost art for many people, and I see no reason why individuals should restrict themselves to talking about subjects without writing about the subject.

BOB GARFIELD: How passionate do you need to be on a given subject before you are moved to write? [LAUGHTER] I'm going to just assume that you get very, very irate over your perception of the mischaracterization of the Palestinians vis-a-vis the Israelis. Do you get just as outraged over wedding cakes?

NELSON MARANS: No. Of course, not. This is sort of a fun type of letter. I wrote to the Wall Street Journal when they said that Vitalis might go out of business -- not the company, but the actual hair tonic. And I said, well you know, these old geezers still need something like that to keep their hair down -- what hair I have left, unfortunately. Sometimes I write because I feel it's a humorous statement, which sometimes is not appreciated.

BOB GARFIELD: I know this is going to sound like a snotty question. I promise you I don't mean for it to be. [LAUGHTER] But why do you do this?

NELSON MARANS: Why do I do it?

BOB GARFIELD: Mm-hm.

NELSON MARANS: Simply because I feel that once I do it, and I have some antagonism or trauma attached to reading what I see, it acts as a purge. It's completely off my mind after that. I feel that I've done everything I can, and, you know, I'll relax.

BOB GARFIELD: What about the 779 times in 2003 where the tree fell in the forest and there was no newspaper willing to publish it?

NELSON MARANS: I'll be honest. It only takes me 15 minutes to write a letter. I consider that if I have 779 letters written, that's approximately 200 hours of wasted time. As a retired individual, I have a lot more than 200 hours [LAUGHS] of wasted time.

BOB GARFIELD: Are there any papers that for all your efforts over the years you just haven't been able to crack?

NELSON MARANS: Well, there's a magazine that I've never been able to crack, and I'm sure I'll never be able to crack it in my lifetime, and that's The Economist. I heard that they only publish one letter from a person per lifetime. But I haven't had my quota.

BOB GARFIELD: Well, Nelson Marans, thank you very much.

NELSON MARANS: Well thank you very much for having me. I appreciate the time.

BOB GARFIELD: And Nelson and everybody -- if you have a question or a comment, you can reach us at onthemedia@wnyc.org.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
H) The Entente Cordiale series: Changing Rooms [Une série d'articles publiés dans Libé et The Guardian à l'occasion de la commémoration de l'Entente Cordiale. Ici, un article sur MON EMISSION TV PREFEREE !!!! Avec une adaptation française en cadeau bonux !]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1185736,00.html

What's the French for makeover?

Soon France may finally succumb to Changing Rooms, the original British home makeover show, now nearing its 10th birthday. Of all the countries, it has held out the longest. New Zealand bought into the show almost immediately, the home-loving Scandinavians weren't far behind. China, Brazil, Italy, the US - it has become pretty hard to avoid, unless you're in France. Now, with negotations with a network channel well advanced, you may have to go to Iran to avoid it.

In Britain, it's almost impossible not to find a home makeover programme on at least one television channel at any given time. Changing Rooms simply proved to be the first of many. It's the perfect product for an armchair culture - watching DIY shows is rather easier than doing it for real. Having said that, DIY has been one of the great British postwar obsessions. The Englishman's home really is his castle; property ownership is built deep into the national psyche. Mark-making therein is the inevitable next stage. Where other nationalities might prefer to squander a Saturday afternoon on a long and satisfying lunch, the British will down a pork pie and erect a set of slightly incorrect shelves.

I've been with Changing Rooms since the beginning, first as a designer, then as a presenter. In a piece of perfect timing, it launched in 1995. People's interior awareness had been heightened by the arrival of Ikea in Britain, while the property market had taken a spectacular tumble, and people were going to be staying in their existing homes whether they liked it or not. Enter me and friends with our pots of ludicrously bright paint and interesting ways with MDF to demonstrate how to make the most of what you've got.

As Changing Rooms is a very British show, there are class issues bubbling beneath the surface. The hoity-toity designers with their fancy ideas are silently ridiculed by the pained expressions on the pragmatic neighbours' faces. The able handyman saves the day. It indulges ideas of class, then laughs at them. It removes designers from their pedestal by showing them making howling errors of judgment, but equally it shows up the punters' prejudices when a peculiar-sounding idea is put in practice with fantastic results.

Ultimately, DIY and the programmes about it are about aspiration and mobility. There used to be a sense in Britain that taste was a class issue. Posh people thought they had it, and the rest of society didn't. But now the boundaries have been blurred. People know it's about intelligence and imagination, not about money or breeding, and we all have access to good taste. But just to make sure, we like to switch on the TV from time to time to observe other people's choices. It's like twitching the net curtains, but with the remote.

-- Lawrence Llewellyn Bowen
-*-*-*-
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=191709#

Vous/Libération/The Guardian/Déco. «Changing Rooms», sur la BBC, joue sur l'intérêt des Anglais pour leur intérieur.
Voir son voisin en peinture

Par Marie-Dominique ARRIGHI et Laurence LLEWELYN-BOWEN
lundi 05 avril 2004

La France va-t-elle finalement succomber à Changing Rooms, l'émission britannique de la BBC consacrée à l'aménagement de la maison ? Pas si sûr. «C'est encore à l'étude, indique-t-on à France 2. Mais les programmes de décoration ne marchent pas bien en France.» De tous les pays, c'est donc l'Hexagone qui résiste le plus. La Nouvelle-Zélande a adopté le concept presque immédiatement, suivie par la Scandinavie, très casanière. Puis par la Chine, le Brésil, l'Italie ou les Etats-Unis. Aujourd'hui, en Grande-Bretagne, il est pratiquement impossible de ne pas trouver une émission consacrée à l'amélioration de la maison sur au moins l'une des chaînes de télé, à tout moment de la journée. Changing Rooms a été la première de toutes.

Le concept est simple : trouver deux familles de voisins très lower middle-class, leur faire échanger leurs maisons durant deux jours avec pour objectif de rénover l'une des pièces. Ces téméraires sont aidés de décorateurs plus vrais que nature­ dont Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen, devenu récemment le présentateur de l'émission (lire ci-contre) ­ et d'un artisan polyvalent, Handy Andy, à la langue bien pendue. Le tout pour un budget raisonnable de 500 livres sterling (750 euros). Résultat : une pièce miteuse se mue en chambre de palace. «Wonderful, brilliant, I can't believe it !» Découvrant leur intérieur rénové, les occupants s'ébahissent et tombent dans les bras de leurs voisins. Parfois, il arrive aussi que les larmes soient de chagrin face à un séjour devenu girlie et rose bonbon.

Lancée en 1995, l'émission est portée par un contexte favorable. A l'époque, l'intérêt des gens pour la décoration s'est beaucoup développé, grâce à l'arrivée d'Ikea en Grande-Bretagne, et à la suite de l'importance croissante accordée par les médias à l'habitat et à son agencement. Simultanément, les prix dans l'immobilier font une telle culbute que les gens doivent conserver leur home, bon gré, mal gré. C'est alors que Changing Rooms arrive avec ses pots de peinture brillante et ses conseils novateurs sur l'utilisation de panneaux en medium pour tirer le meilleur parti des lieux.

Pour les abonnés au câble et au satellite, l'émission est visible sur BBC Prime.

^RETURN TO TOP^

A new business book called ''Don't Think Pink,'' written by the co-founders of a consulting firm focused on the behavior of women as consumers, discusses what it calls the ''visible'' and ''transparent'' approaches to wooing female customers. Visible means sending a clear signal that women are the target -- as with Gillette's Venus razor. Transparent means ''tailoring your message to meet women's needs without labeling the product or service exclusively for women.'' Those two approaches would seem to cover everything, but there is a third one, the ''hybrid'' strategy. As an example, the book notes that Home Depot has widened its aisles, expanded its home-design offerings and created more showroom-type displays (transparent) and also offers ''Do It Herself'' workshops (visible). The key, apparently, is not to be too clumsily overt by, say, selling pink hammers. ''Thinking pink'' is a mistake because superficial repackaging is a turnoff.

It so happens that tools and home improvement form one of the more interesting categories of female consumption at the moment. And while you might assume that tools are tools and that there is no compelling reason for screwdrivers and nails to be gender specific, the success of the Barbara K 30-piece tool kit suggests otherwise. It isn't pink, but the signal it sends is highly visible. In fact, the most striking thing about the $50 kit isn't even the tools; it is the stylish, aqua-and-pearl case they're packed in.

Barbara K is Barbara Kavovit, and although her tool kit has been on the market for less than a year, it is now sold in thousands of stores (from Bed Bath & Beyond to Bloomingdale's to True Value) and has become the flagship of a lifestyle brand in the making. Already there is a Barbara K Roadside Safety Kit, a ''dorm survival kit'' is on the way and the first Barbara K book will be published next year.

Kavovit is the former head of a New York City construction company, and she worked with an industrial designer to tweak some of the tools to better fit a woman's hand. But she has a lot more to say about the sleek case than about the properties of a perfect tape measure. Slim, with a pleasing color scheme and a semi-translucent look partly inspired by the iMac, the case is what makes women ''feel as if they still have something that's like an accessory,'' she says. ''The tool kit had to emulate a really nice purse, almost,'' and look good enough that the buyer would be ''proud to even leave it out in her kitchen. Which I do, actually.''

That is not to suggest that it is just a showpiece: aside from the essential implements for common home-repair jobs, it comes with a how-to booklet addressing running toilets and leaky sinks and the like. Kavovit describes herself as having been ''really fearful'' of tools when she started in the construction business. So it is tangible, everyday, even boring problems she wants to help women solve. ''It's not about making the perfect doily,'' she says.

It's not, in other words, about an idealized lifestyle based on Martha Stewart or ''Sex and the City.'' (Although Kavovit cites as an inspiration for the kit an episode of that show in which Samantha moved into a great new apartment but couldn't figure out how to put up curtains.) We have all probably heard more than we ever wanted to about demachoed (yet sexy) men who are now free to swap tips about moisturizers and manicures. Between Home Depot, Barbara K and other companies like Tomboy Tools, perhaps there is a feminine parallel: antigirlie (yet sexy) women who are free to swap tips about loose doorknobs and busted hinges.

The whole issue of visible or transparent may thus be less important than what kind of blatant signal you're sending. ''It's good to see a company marketing itself to women for something other than a vacuum cleaner or a toilet cleaner,'' says Kathryn Deane, president and C.E.O. of the Tobe Report, the fashion consulting firm, where Barbara K's kit is a hit with the all-female staff. ''There are lots of women-led households in the country -- that's the reality.'' Style as a facet of individuality may be important, but it helps when it's linked to the real-world substance of independence. Kavovit's inspiration, after all, was not entirely drawn from the fictional world. ''When I got divorced,'' she says with a laugh, ''my husband took the tool kit.''

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
4) The Economist: Bad service [Une autre histoire qui plaît beaucoup à Marc : rouspéter c'est rendre service aux entreprises.]
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2615669

Bad service: A complaint is a gift
Apr 22nd 2004
And Americans get better service than Brits because they know how to give it

AUSTRALIANS call the British “whingeing Poms” because they grumble so much. But a new study suggests that Brits should whinge more, not less.

A team led by Chris Voss of the London Business School found that service quality in Britain is typically worse than in America. One reason, the research suggests, is that British customers complain less about bad service than hard-to-please Americans do.

The failure to grouse is pervasive. Hunter Hansen, an American who runs the Marriott hotel in London's Grosvenor Square, notes that a British guest would make a fuss only about a significant problem—and even then, would do so in a roundabout way. Americans are critical of even small mistakes.

The result, Mr Voss finds, is that Brits suffer. But so do companies in Britain's service industries: they do not receive so much unsolicited feedback, and thus lose a chance to improve service quality. Indeed, they may spend more than they need to do on service-quality improvements, because they do not get direct help from customers.

Management gurus know more about how companies respond to complaints than about why the British are phlegmatic. In America, well-run companies have “service recovery” strategies. Staff at the Marriott group are drilled in the LEARN routine—Listen, Empathise, Apologise, React, Notify—with the final step ensuring that the complaint is fed back into the system. The Ritz-Carlton hotel chain, another with a good reputation for handling complaints from customers, trains its staff not to say a mere “sorry” but “please accept my apology” and gives them a budget to reimburse cross guests.

When Brits finally screw up their courage to grouse, they get results. Mr Voss told his doctor that he would appreciate speedier feedback after a consultation. “The next time round, I got it,” he says, in mild surprise.

^RETURN TO TOP^

Alleged coffee thief caught on videotape
By AMANDA BOHMAN, Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 21, 2004 - A 24-year-old North Pole man is in jail on accusations of breaking into an apartment with a butter knife in order to steal Folgers coffee. Mark Bojniewicz was arrested on charges of first-degree burglary and fourth-degree theft last week and remains in jail on $500 bail.

Arnold Reed of North Pole became suspicious that someone had been pilfering his coffee after his upstairs neighbor Rebecca Hall said that she smelled coffee in her apartment but knew she didn't have any. He confirmed his suspicions by setting up a video camera and catching his neighbor's house guest--Bojniewicz--stealing French vanilla coffee from his freezer and hazelnut coffee creamer from his cupboard, he said. "I've got a lot more interesting things to steal than the coffee," said Reed, a 24-year-old bachelor who declined to name his occupation. "If the guy would have asked me, I would have gave it to him."

The alleged incident took place on Thursday, and Bojniewicz was arrested after troopers reviewed Reed's video recording of the incident, said Alaska State Trooper trainee James Norton. Reed collected about 10 hours of tape on borrowed equipment, which he set up on his entertainment center facing his front door and kitchen. Reed said he caught Bojniewicz on the second day of recording. He isn't sure how much coffee was stolen. "I have no clue. ... Every now and again I'll have some coffee. He did have a fair share."

Troopers also questioned Hall, who fished a coffee filter with grounds out of her trash. Bojniewicz had apparently hid them in an empty taco shell box, a trooper report said. Bojniewicz confessed to stealing the coffee upon questioning, said Norton. "He said he just wanted it," Norton said. "He finished off what (his relative) had about a week or two earlier. She didn't get anymore coffee, so he went downstairs to get some."

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/article_print/0,,SB108180343600480561-IBjgINllaB3opyqZ3mHaKiGm4,00.html

April 13, 2004
The Caffeine Count In Your Morning Fix: Jolt From Gourmet Brews Is 56% Greater Than 7-Eleven's;
Waking Up in 'Withdrawal'
By MICHAEL J. MCCARTHY, Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
April 13, 2004; Page D1

It isn't just the long lines and high prices that are outsized at Starbucks and other specialty coffeehouses. There's also the issue of caffeine.

In pursuit of a bolder taste, coffeehouses typically brew their blends much stronger than a trusty old cup of Folgers. But a powerful side effect is unusually high levels of caffeine, according to a national test of ready-made coffee run by a laboratory for The Wall Street Journal. House blends at Starbucks Corp., Gloria Jean's and other gourmet coffee chains have an average 56% more caffeine than samples tested at 7-Eleven Inc. stores and 29% more than those at Dunkin' Donuts nationwide.

One of the strongest happens to be the most successful: The Starbucks house blend had 223 milligrams of caffeine on average per 16-ounce "grande," or medium, cup size. Starbucks says that on average, its array of coffee drinks contains even more -- 320 milligrams in a medium cup. That's nearly double the caffeine in Folgers, the leading grocery-store brand.

The more robust taste certainly lures many consumers. But in light of mounting research on how the body reacts to higher caffeine, the stronger brew suggests another reason coffeehouses have resurrected a beverage that once had considerably less buzz in the U.S. However accidentally, their business may be thriving in part because customers are habituated to a drug, albeit one legal and relatively harmless.

For caffeine, scientists usually use the term "physically dependent" rather than "addicted," a term they reserve for severe cases, as in a hooked heroin user or someone who smokes a few packs of cigarettes a day. But in recent years researchers have quantified specific doses of caffeine and linked them with withdrawal symptoms including headache, drowsiness and difficulty concentrating.

These ill effects are important. Recent research has shown people often choose to maintain their caffeine intake more to avoid the irritable results when they don't get it, than for the positive effects when they do. Caffeine withdrawal usually begins within 12 to 24 hours after the last coffee was drunk, which may neatly explain why people often reach for their mug first thing in the morning.

"You wake up in a state of withdrawal," says Laura Juliano, an assistant professor of psychology at American University who has studied caffeine.

Gourmet coffeehouses have extraordinary customer loyalty. About 12% of coffeehouse patrons nationwide visit four or more times a week, according to Mintel International Group, a market-research firm. Starbucks says that its typical heavy user shows up 18 times a month. What makes these numbers more impressive is that coffee, of course, can easily be brewed at home. And 67% of regular coffeehouse customers recently surveyed by Mintel agreed that gourmet takeout coffee is too expensive.

Starbucks coffee is brewed to bring out "the best flavor quality" without regard to caffeine content, says Norm Ouellette, the company's vice president of research and development and quality assurance. "The popularity of Starbucks is based on the taste of the coffee." He questions research connecting caffeine with physical dependence, noting that the American Psychatric Association, in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, published in 1994, does not list caffeine with drugs that cause dependency.

Nevertheless, some coffeehouse regulars have found it hard to quit. Six days a week, Randy Sheehan starts his morning with a 20-ounce cup of Starbucks coffee. Some afternoons, he has a second cup. On weekends, he'll stop by a Starbucks kiosk when he's shopping at the mall. He's in a Starbucks, he says, eight to 10 times a week.

"My body went through caffeine withdrawal when I did go caffeine-free," says the 31-year-old tech worker in Chicago. He says he tried to quit twice: once after stomach surgery and another after recent struggles with sleeplessness. But, without coffee, he says he felt nervous and got headaches. "It's some kind of chemical dependency," he says, adding that he could quit again if he wanted to. But he no longer does.

In the Journal test, nine to 12 samples from each of the big coffee brands analyzed were purchased in Seattle, Chicago, Pittsburgh and New Orleans. The samples, including some local coffeehouse blends, were all sent to Central Analytical Laboratories, based in Metairie, La. It is a food-testing company whose clients include PepsiCo Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Cargill Inc., but no coffeehouses.

Starbucks' reported average of 320 milligrams per 16-ounce cup compares with Folgers, the Procter & Gamble Co. brand, at 170 milligrams on average, the lab analysis showed.

"Better coffee is going to have more caffeine, and there are many people happy with the situation and taking advantage of it," says Tom Pirko, a beverage consultant in Santa Barbara, Calif. "If they were selling coffee that didn't have caffeine, it would be a much smaller business."

Caffeine dosage is affected by several factors. Content varies naturally by type of bean. Brewing coffee longer will produce more caffeine, as can a finer grind of grounds. But perhaps the biggest factor, say coffee merchants, is the brew ratio, or the amount of coffee grounds used in the drip machines. Folgers recommends using one tablespoon for each six ounces of coffee made -- about the same as 7-Eleven uses. Starbucks and other coffeehouses, though, say they typically use two tablespoons, the amount recommended by the Specialty Coffee Association of America.

Some coffee shops say the high caffeine level is unintentional. "We're not after high caffeine content, we're after greater flavor," says Doug Zell, CEO of Intelligentsia Coffee in Chicago, whose house blend averaged a bit higher in the Journal test than Starbucks'.

Diedrich Coffee Inc., which owns the Gloria Jean's chain, didn't respond to e-mailed questions and calls.

Gourmet coffee sales have been driven by the taste, not caffeine, says Ted Lingle, executive director of the Specialty Coffee Association. "People generally don't develop caffeine dependency. I'm sure that some people will report that. But is that true for the millions of consumers world-wide that are ingesting caffeine in some form or another?"

Health experts don't consider caffeine very risky. In doses of 200 milligrams or less, caffeine, a bitter white powder found in many plants, has been shown to elicit feelings of increased alertness, happiness and sociability -- in less scientific terms, a caffeine buzz.

The precise mechanism of caffeine, a mild central nervous system stimulant, isn't clear. Scientists suspect that it somehow involves a neuromodulator in the body called adenosine, which has a chemical structure similar to caffeine, and that caffeine withdrawal may produce changes in cerebral blood flow and other biochemical reactions. Studies have shown that it can raise blood pressure slightly, and some doctors recommend patients abstain or reduce their caffeine intake if they are pregnant or have insomnia or gastroesophageal reflux, a heartburn condition.

The more caffeine one is accustomed to, the harder it seems to be to get along without it. A 1999 study, co-written by Roland Griffiths, a professor of behavioral biology at Johns Hopkins University's school of medicine, showed that people who failed to get their normal daily consumption of caffeine had more severe withdrawal effects that worsened progressively at 100 milligrams and 300 and 600.

Kristen Frith, once an avid coffee drinker, agrees. "I went cold turkey and had a terrible headache for five days," says the 29-year-old church worker in Lexington, S.C. She used to reroute her morning commute every day to swing by a store for a medium cup of "super-strong" Starbucks. But she gave up coffee a year ago, concerned it was making her heart beat rapidly. She says, "It really is an addiction, and I don't think people know it because they're addicted, too.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
7) Slate/Ad Report Card: Tangled Up in B[reasts] [Que fout Bob Dylan dans une pub pour de la lingerie féminine ????]
http://slate.msn.com/id/2098635/

ad report card: Tangled Up in B[reast]s
What's Bob Dylan doing in a Victoria's Secret ad?
By Seth Stevenson
Posted Monday, April 12, 2004, at 9:39 AM PT

The spot: A well-formed young woman cavorts through a palazzo, wearing nothing but heels, lingerie, and a pair of outsized, feathery wings. At intervals, we cut to a shot of some sort of death's-head demon, who looks poised to bite into the pretty youth's skull, perhaps to suck on the marrow of her soul and prolong his undead half-life. Wait … stand by … I'm now being told that this creature is in fact Bob Dylan. (Click http://www2.victoriassecret.com/html/popup/dylan/videoHigh.html to see the ad.)

When Bob Dylan shows up in a Victoria's Secret commercial, it immediately triggers three questions. The first is: Am I hallucinating? Seriously, I think I'm hallucinating—can you see Bob Dylan, and did you eat the same shrimp I ate? The second is: Why on earth would Bob Dylan do this? And the third, and perhaps most puzzling, is: Why on earth would Victoria's Secret do this?

Moving past the first line of inquiry, which likely won't get us very far, let's ask ourselves why Bob Dylan, respected countercultural artist, would choose to sell panties. I think there are a few possible motives. The first is, of course, money. This seemed to be the sole motive when, several years ago, Dylan sold the Bank of Montreal the right to use "The Times They Are a-Changin'" in an ad. But the Vicky's Secret sellout feels different, in part because Dylan actually appears in the commercial.

Which brings me to the second possible motive: pure whimsy. He may just think it's funny to be in an underwear ad and that flying to Venice to leer at models could make for a diverting weekend. (I also wouldn't totally discount the idea that he's playing a sly, decades-in-the-making practical joke. Newspaper reports have noted that in 1965, when asked what might tempt him to sell out, Dylan said, "Ladies undergarments.")

But I think the most likely motive for Dylan is exposure. It's a real struggle for older rockers to remind the world that they still exist. Their music's not played on the radio, and their videos (if they even make them) aren't in heavy rotation on VH1. Thus you see the Jaguar ads with Sting, or the MCI ads with James Taylor and Michael McDonald—all of them prominently featuring the artist's song. It's essentially a way to put a video on the major networks, where an older audience might see it. Yes, in exchange for publicizing their art they sacrifice some integrity, but this is basically an understandable tradeoff. And Dylan even gets, in the terms of his deal, a mix CD of his songs sold at Victoria's Secret stores.

So, it makes some sense for Bob. But what about Vicky? Why would a brand that's about sexiness, youth, and glamour want any connection at all with a decrepit, sixtysomething folksinger? The answer, my friend, is totally unclear. The answer is totally unclear.

Even if Victoria's Secret hopes to bring in more boomer women, do those women want their underwear to exude the spirit and essence of Bob Dylan? Or, conversely, is Bob Dylan the sort of man they're hoping to attract? Even if you're of the belief that men frequently shop at VS for their ladies, I still don't see the appeal of this ad. I, for instance, am a man, and I can assure you that Bob Dylan is not what I'm looking for in a woman's undergarment. (And if I found him there—man, would that be disturbing.)

Victoria's Secret wouldn't return my calls, but media reports say the idea of putting Dylan's face in the ad (they'd been using his song—"Love Sick"—in ads for the past year or so) came straight from corporate chief Les Wexner. To the company's surprise, Dylan accepted their offer. It's at this point that someone at Victoria's Secret should have stopped the madness. Just because you can hire Bob Dylan as the figurehead for your lingerie line, doesn't mean you should. Perhaps no one was willing to say no to the big boss, or perhaps they fully expected Dylan to say no. Joke's on them.

Grade: D-. Let's pretend this never happened.

Seth Stevenson is a frequent contributor to Slate.

^RETURN TO TOP^

********************************
8) The New Orleans Times-Picayune: Waist case [Un législateur de la Louisiane souhaite interdire de port de pantalons qui exposent les fesses, les strings et autres sous-vêtements.]

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1082626816241180.xml

WAIST CASE: Staking out the high moral ground, a bill would punish those wearing low-riding jeans
Thursday, April 22, 2004
By Michelle Krupa, West Bank bureau

With her hip-hugging jeans fastened low enough to show off the sparkly strings of her thong, Britney Spears could be a common criminal when she comes home to Louisiana to put on a show. And Nelly's baggy jeans, if they happen to slip and show his drawers, could get him booted from the rap circuit to a New Orleans jail cell if state lawmakers approve a bill filed Tuesday in the House that would make it a crime to wear pants below the waist. Even plumbers could get canned under the draft law that state Rep. Derrick Shepherd, D-Marrero, said he filed because he was tired of catching glimpses of boxer shorts and G-strings over the low-slung belt lines of young adults.

House Bill 1626 would punish anyone caught wearing low-riding pants with a fine of as much as $500 or as many as six months in jail, or both. "I'm sick of seeing it," said Shepherd, a first-term legislator, who added he's gotten similar complaints from ministers in his district. "The community's outraged. And if parents can't do their job, if parents can't regulate what their children wear, then there should be a law." As proposed, the bill would be tacked onto the state's obscenity law, which restricts sexual activity in public places and the sale of sexually explicit items.

Joe Cook, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Louisiana chapter, said the bill is unlikely to pass because it probably does not meet a long-standing U.S. Supreme Court standard for the prohibition of obscene behavior under the First Amendment.

WHAT ABOUT PLUMBERS?

Cook offered common examples of appropriate dress that could be described as illegal under the bill, which would ban a person from "wearing his pants below his waist and thereby exposing his skin or intimate clothing."

"What about a woman who is wearing a bathing suit under her garment or she has something like a sarong wrapped around her and it's below her waist," he said. "I can think of a lot of workers, plumbers, who are working and expose their buttocks and the beginning of the crack of their anus."

Shepherd said such technicalities generally would be overlooked by police, who would only cite violators who deliberately wear pants low on their hips. His bill does not define an unlawful outfit. "It's sort of like nudity," he said. "You know it when you see it."

Cook said, however, that the standard needs to be airtight before it's written into state law, though he added that the legislation would waste time and resources. "As if police officers didn't have enough to do to be bothered by something like this," he said. "We got a lot of bad guys out on the street . . . and that's what the police need to be about. This is a 'solution in search of a problem' type of law."

The bill will be heard by the Administration of Criminal Justice Committee, though no hearing date has been set. State Reps. Cedric Richmond and Austin Badon, both New Orleans Democrats, have signed on as co-authors, they said. State Rep. Danny Martiny, R-Metairie, chairman of the committee, said Wednesday that he supports Shepherd's bill in principle but added that it would have to be more narrowly tailored to target miscreants to make state law books. "If there was a way we could work it to do that, I would not be opposed to that," he said. "I commend him for trying to do something good, but I'm not sure he's going to be able to get there."

LEGISLATING FASHION

Shepherd's bill is not local government's first effort to control a fashion trend made popular by pop music idols and movie stars. A Westwego councilman in 2002 ditched his attempt to bar low-riding jeans from public buildings after the city attorney reported that an ordinance regulating drawers-exposing jeans would interfere with freedom of speech and would not meet federal standards. In 2000, Orleans Parish Deputy Assessor Donald Smith called for a city ordinance against wearing pants "below the equator," as he described the practice at the time. That measure appears never to have sparked a broad public debate.

And a year earlier, state Rep. Cynthia Willard, D-New Orleans, filed a bill requiring Louisiana's 66 school boards to ban baggy pants that expose underwear or backsides. That bill, which was never heard by the House Education Committee, said the fashion "encourages youth to engage in inappropriate behavior and shows a lack of respect for others in society."

Shepherd, an attorney, said his bill aims to change the fashion sense of teenagers, who have adopted the "disrespectful, obscene and unprofessional" practice of letting their pants hang off their hips at school, at the mall and even on the basketball court. "There's a way to shoot hoops professionally," he said. "You don't have to shoot hoops with your pants below your waist." He admitted, however, that the bill does not target minors specifically and therefore does not directly mirror other laws that restrict teenagers' curfew and the kinds of movies they may see.

Shepherd said that like Willard's failed bill, his legislation aims to correct a fashion faux paus that has implications not only on a young person's sense of style but also on his or her sense of self. "Hopefully, if we pull up their pants," he said, "we can lift their minds while we're at it."

^RETURN TO TOP^