The BBC is, of course, a broadcaster rather than a publisher - yet its website, and particularly its news website, should surely be treated as if it were a publication. That being the case, it's time they got someone involved who knows how to lay out text. All too often their articles look as if they've been taken straight off the autocue. Look at the start of the 'article' from political editor, Chris Mason illustrated above. The whole thing is more than twice as long as the extract shown - and pretty well the only paragraph that has more than one sentence in it is a quote. It's horrendous. I find it really difficult to read. Please, someone at the BBC, get your act together.  Alternatively you might like to approach the Royal Literary Fund . They're really good at helping students and organisations with their writing skills - it's clear that the BBC needs some assistance as soon as possible.

Although I'm a big Neil Gaiman fan, I've never read The Sandman , as I just can't relate to comic books and graphic novels. I'm not a very visual person, and I like a story to contain (far) more words. Nonetheless, I was aware it was considered something of a big thing in the genre, so watched the Netflix version with interest. The first episode is distinctly on the slow side - I know at least one person who gave up part way through - but it's worth persevering to make your mind up, as things certainly change gear after a while. However, I do think the series has an underlying problem in the way it has apparently been painstakingly based on the individual comics. This gives an extremely episodic approach, making it almost impossible to produce a really top notch drama series. The problem is not having mostly separate stories in each episode - I like that. But if a series is take that approach, it needs two other things to support it - a group of good recurring chara

If you don't have a website, you are probably lucky enough not to be bombarded with emails promising to improve your SEO (Search Engine Optimisation). Here's a typical example that I received recently: I have looked at your website and realize your website is great design but your website ranking not good all search engine Google, AOL, Yahoo, and Bing.  Do you want more targeted visitors on your website?  We can place your website on Google's 1st page. Yahoo, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Instagram, Pinterest etc.).  We also offer the most competitive rates for this service, May I send you quote? What is a bit scary (apart from the grammar) is the sheer volume of this stuff I receive. Thankfully, my spam filter is pretty good at clearing them out of my inbox, but one day this week, for example, I received 20 such emails, and rarely get fewer than ten a day.  We can only assume that some companies respond to this bombardment, or why would the spammers bother? And when they do

Image by Anne Lund from Wikipedia reproduced and modified under  GNU 1.2 I've always found the old anti-nuclear badge hilarious. It might say 'Nuclear Power? No Thanks', but its central image of the smiling sun portrays the biggest nuclear reactor within several light years. But I can't resist adapting it as a comment on the over-enthusiasm for some applications of hydrogen in green energy. Don't get me wrong, hydrogen is a wonderful element - literally the number one. There is a specific irony in my use of that image because, of course, hydrogen is the fuel of that vast nuclear reactor that keeps us alive - and, for that matter, it's one of the two component elements of the water that is essential for life. I am also not denying that hydrogen has a useful role in the future green economy. It's often mis-described as an energy source. It's actually an energy store , and as such could be useful as a way of storing away renewable energy. For example, solar