In a comment to an Argus article "Brighton Regency Society row rumbles on" Christopher Hawtree says:
"People with a concern for architecture, and all that entails, could consider leaving the Regency Society and joining the Brighton Society, whose remit is clearly stated. Meanwhile, Hove surely deserves the creation of a similiar Society."
Christopher Hawtree is a Hove-based writer & bibliophile who has had articles published in the New Statesman, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian and The Times. He is an ardent defender of public libraries and was part of the successful campaign to retain Hove Library in its original Carnegie building, see "The Good Library Blog".
Brighton Society's clear mission statement is: "to conserve and improve the amenities of Brighton & Hove. We encourage the preservation of architecturally and historically interesting buildings with their particular look and feel..."
One of Brighton Society's most recent successes was in securing the Grade II listing of the victorian Connaught Road School, thus helping to preserve it from unsympathetic developments or even demolition..
Hove, of course, already has the Hove Civic Society with similar aims, namely: "to stimulate community interest in the beauty, history and character of Hove and its surroundings. The Society encourages high standards of architecture, town planning and the conservation of buildings of historical interest."
Showing posts with label Argus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Argus. Show all posts
Saturday, 6 February 2010
Thursday, 29 October 2009
Argus Reader Panel
I received this invitation from the Argus by email. At first glance it looks interesting, attractive even, but I wonder how it will work out in practice.
The Argus endeavour to become a vital part of the community is obviously the right commercial choice for them but it is also a considerable advantage to that community to have a local paper that produces relevant, accurate, editorial content.
In pursuit of these ends and notwithstanding the commercial angle, an Argus reader might be happy to freely give of their time and join this panel. The effort required certainly does not appear to be too onerous. Once registered one would be contacted by email and asked to participate in the first questionnaire online. A visual image of an editorial feature or advert would be shown, and a series of related questions, to gather feedback, asked. All subsequent surveys would be carried out in the same way.
No pecuniary advantage accrues to the participant (apart from the chance of winning vouchers and "other prizes" but I suspect not many would be influenced by this). Even so I was sufficiently persuaded of the interest and value of such a survey to go to the final step and register. It was here that things started to go wrong. The survey is carried out by a research company called RAM (which confusingly doesn't recognise one's Argus login) and the entry form is long and intrusive. I am not naive. I realise that this is so that the research results can be classified according to socio-economic group to make them of maximum value, but as my mouse hovered over the buttons, I felt the willpower to complete the form draining away. I wonder how many others will feel like this and what peculiar kind of skewness it will add to the results?
The Argus endeavour to become a vital part of the community is obviously the right commercial choice for them but it is also a considerable advantage to that community to have a local paper that produces relevant, accurate, editorial content.
In pursuit of these ends and notwithstanding the commercial angle, an Argus reader might be happy to freely give of their time and join this panel. The effort required certainly does not appear to be too onerous. Once registered one would be contacted by email and asked to participate in the first questionnaire online. A visual image of an editorial feature or advert would be shown, and a series of related questions, to gather feedback, asked. All subsequent surveys would be carried out in the same way.
No pecuniary advantage accrues to the participant (apart from the chance of winning vouchers and "other prizes" but I suspect not many would be influenced by this). Even so I was sufficiently persuaded of the interest and value of such a survey to go to the final step and register. It was here that things started to go wrong. The survey is carried out by a research company called RAM (which confusingly doesn't recognise one's Argus login) and the entry form is long and intrusive. I am not naive. I realise that this is so that the research results can be classified according to socio-economic group to make them of maximum value, but as my mouse hovered over the buttons, I felt the willpower to complete the form draining away. I wonder how many others will feel like this and what peculiar kind of skewness it will add to the results?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)