Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Beeb Chelsea coverage
"Stan The Man" wrote in message ... In article , tuin man wrote: (snip) Sometimes a job is won on account of the academic excellence of a candidate, who is nonetheless the worst possible choice for the positions offered. Perhaps one day it will not seem like such a heresy to question why it is so, that post-graduates are automatically deemed to be more deserving of position and success. In bygone days, presumption to the rights of status, e.g. money, were mostly inherited, similarly current criteria requires an existing combination of favourable age, nationality, accent, colour, creed, gender, and appearance, along with an acknowledgement from our academia dominant educational system to the effect that the candidate has been decreed to be a model example of the finished product from said academia's manufacturing line. (snip) Meritocracy should simply mean that the best achieve success and position. Sorry Simon, but my interpretation of meritocracy is that it does means what you say above. Not, should mean, could mean, might mean, nor any other kind of maybe's. Alas it tends to get hampered by market forces and politics. E.g., an incompetent accountant can charge more per hour than a wonderful gardener. I call it the Going Rate effect. Or, a man can buy a run down house with intention to let and sets about providing a product at a price to reflect his efforts and investment. This might entail making it more than barely inhabitable. He might spruce up the decor. Sort out the damp, the leaks and lack of insulation. Clear the rubbish. Re-design to within personal expectations of living standards. Remove broken fittings and replace along with a splash of new tiles, wallpaper, paint, polished floor, or carpet and so on. He puts this home-to-let product on the market and makes some money. Another bloke down the road obtains a similar and equally run down property just two doors down and decides to get exactly the same money, but by merely putting the overpriced slum on the letting market, without any further investment. And get the money he will because of demand. Furthermore any attempts by any form of government to interfere will be met with his accusations of market interference and nanny state slurs. So, as you can see, market forces and politics can interfere with meritocracy. There's make money and there's get money. Not the same thing It doesn't mean that they should also attain status or respect. In terms of beeb garden presenter, it is only human nature that having achieved recognition, mostly perhaps simply because they are seen to be on telly, that the success and position you mention translates back from the audience as status and respect. Incidentally, in your sentence, Meritocracy should simply mean that the best achieve success and position. , You do not define how "the best" is to be measured. Nor do you define success and position. The best qualified estate agent or PR men in the country should be the most successful in their field - No, no, no, The best estate agent or PR....Not merely the "best qualified", (nor male) especially when you do not define either "best" or "qualified" and where such qualification is probably limited to the awards gained solely from academic aptitude, though might equally refer to some sort of national government licence. As I've outlined in a previous thread, the imbalance of rewards, tailor made and hence forth protected for educational degrees are such, that anyone with such an aptitude who does not bother to achieve such credentials, must need his, or her head examined. It is just such a ridicules imbalance of rewards I am addressing. Bare in mind, in many instances, the sole main product of some peoples careers is just that; their career and just as they all often climb to positions of power because of that, many who adopt a more vocational approach loose out. Not only do they loose out, but so does their vocational output as it falls fouled of attaining position to protect him/her from falling prey to the career careerist. The same sort of loss is incurred by narrow-minded selection in favour of purely academic aptitudes. It therefore follows that the academia shelf is not the only place from where garden telly presenters should be selected. Oh, this is not my application. I wont even be around much longer (uk) in any case. Again, what ever you mean by "the best" estate agent. is open to interpretation. Might it be "the best" at getting money, irrespective of integrity, or might it be for providing the best product in question? The Best from whose point of view? Customers? Smirk. Academic qualification does not automatically evoke a whole host of other qualities. Aptitude in one thing, but academia, in this instance, does not mean aptitude in getting the job done, let alone done well. Qualities such as; Imaginativeness, honesty, altruism, sacrifice, practicality, sociability, team-spiritedness, generosity, long-term view abilities, responsibility, integrity, communication skills, being able to 'think' or even personal hygiene, to mention but a small number, are not automatically inherent in a masters degree, let alone an 'ordinary' one. Actually, I wonder what will the next one up the ladder be; The Omnipotent Degree? but it won't guarantee that people don't walk away from them at a cocktail party. True, though almost guarantees escape from much worse in terms of standards of living. If you have encountered people who shun you because you're a gardener, more fool them. Whenever I meet a professional - or trade - gardener, I always have a pile of questions to ask. Simon Ah now. that just being intelligent (-; and I do not need to know about your own educational rank to realise it. Such intellect is yet another factor not guaranteed by a degree judging by the calibre (and I use that term loosely) of those networking geniuses involved. And guess what, viewers tend to notice little things like intelligence. That is, when not too busy with presenters fashion sense, age, gender, size, etc. Or maybe it's the viewers who must also be screened to ensure only graduates can see the programme????? Indeed, what good is a telly garden presenters qualification against your criteria, which seems to be that they should have just such standards, but then you fail to realise just such standards have being achieved? Remember Charlie's? Patrick |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Chelsea coverage by the BBC | United Kingdom | |||
Coverage of Chelsea | United Kingdom | |||
Vote at the Beeb web site on Chelsea | United Kingdom | |||
Well done the Beeb! | United Kingdom |