Over the next few weeks we’re going to examine in detail how journalists (and bloggers, who without a big media brand name to fall back on are usually even more reliant on search engines to deliver traffic to their websites) can optimise their work to improve search engine rankings using simple, easy to follow steps. We’ll begin by working our way through a standard news article or blogpost, starting with the title and headline and gradually making our way down to the meta information your readers will never see. On the way we’ll take a look at how to make the most of your article’s web address, how to optimise your copy using keywords and how to correctly add links and spread the word about your content using strictly ethical means.

Just one quick word of warning before we plunge into our first topic – contrary to popular belief and the sworn testimony of thousands of quack ‘SEO Gurus’ around the world, Search Engine Optimisation is not a magic bullet solution. It does not guarantee an enormous increase in the number of hits your site receives or first page rankings on Google search. In fact, if performed incorrectly, it can actually reduce your site’s traffic or stop readers from finding your content altogether. With a little care, though, it can improve your chances of achieving highly placed rankings for carefully selected keywords and phrases which will ultimately produce tangible results.

Introduction

In this first article, we’ll be starting at the top of your post and examining how to write your headline, set your Page Title and correctly use headings for maximum possible search engine exposure. No knowledge of HTML, CSS, PHP or any other web development language is required to follow this guide, though those with a grasp of the basics may find it easier to come to grips with the underlying principles of SEO. Below you’ll find a screenshot of a webpage containing a news article with each page element we’re going to discuss highlighted and labelled. Feel free to refer back to the screenshot if you feel lost at any point.

We will begin by discussing the first thing your readers will see when they click through to your article: The Headline.

Headlines

If the art of the headline writing is truly dying out, good SEO practice may well be the root cause. There’s no doubt that an expertly crafted headline still has the ability to amuse and engage but when it comes to writing with high search engine rankings in mind, utility wins out over a clever pun every time. “Up Yours, Delors” might have elicited a few xenophobic chuckles back in 1984 but in 2010 “Thatcher Set to Snub Delors Over Single Currency” or “Prime Minister Fundamentally Opposed to Federal Europe” will yield considerably better results from Google, Bing et al.

When writing headlines for your online news articles or blog posts, try to extract the key people, places, events and concepts from your copy – these will be the terms search engine users will most likely type into the search field –  and use them as the building blocks for a short and snappy sentence. Where possible, use simple, straightforward nouns rather than adjectives and unusual phrasings and avoid jargon – more people will search for “Paris Bomb Blast” than “Parisian Incendiary Explosion” and a headline containing the former will likely be placed more highly on Google’s results than one with the latter.  We’ll cover keywords in much more detail in the third article in this series when we looking at body text and SEO copywriting.

Title Tags

While we’re discussing headline titles, it’s worth considering Title Tags. In lay-person’s terms, a Title Tag is simply the text that displays in the title bar of your web browser when viewing a webpage – in this case, your article. The Title Tag is of critical importance because it’s the first thing the user sees after a search engine pulls up a page of results. A concise, informative title that summarises your article in one sentence is much more likely to be clicked on than an entry with a vague, muddled headline.

For those comfortable working with HTML, a title can be set using the <title> and </title> HTML tags but fortunately, most Content Management Systems (CMSs) automatically generate a title based on your headline and many allow the writer to edit it further. It’s usually best to edit the Title Tag yourself if the option is available to ensure that you’ve included enough relevant keywords from your body copy – after all, house style might limit your headline to just a few words but allow you a little more freedom with the page title. It’s worth remembering, however, that most search engines only register the first 60 characters of a Title Tag to prevent insalubrious keyword stuffing, so keep it fairly succinct.

Bloggers may want to consider using one the many SEO plugins available for the most popular blogging platforms to gain access to all title editing features. All-in-One SEO or SEO Ultimate are both excellent choices for Wordpress.

Heading Tags

Before we wrap up our discussion of headlines, lets take a look at enclosing them in Heading Tags. Headlines (and sub-headings, which we’ll come to next) are usually denoted as such in your text by putting them on a separate line and in a larger font, or by making them appear in bold or underlined. Just as text formatting draws the reader’s eye to a headline, clearly marking it as a separate entity from the main body copy, Heading Tags tell search engines that the text within is more important, in terms of navigation and structure at least, than what comes after.

All good CMSs will allow you to apply appropriate heading tags to the various headings in your copy. When manipulating HTML, this is just a matter of enclosing the text in <h*> and </h*> tags – <h1> and </h1> in the case of main headlines. Those not proficient with markup should ensure that they actually use their CMS’s text editor to properly style text as a headling rather than simply formatting it in bold and manipulating the font size. Only text in tags will be recognised properly by search engines (and by your browser, for that matter).

While many CMSs automatically create a <h1> tag based on your post’s title, bloggers using popular blogging platforms like Wordpress and Google’s Blogger may find that they need to create a separate headline at the top of their posts themselves. Whether or not this is necessary is entirely down to the theme your blog uses; some web designers have constructed their templates to automatically populate the <h1> tag while others have not. The best way to find out if your blog generates its own tagged headline is to view Page Source (Ctrl+U) and search the code for a <h1> tag. If it’s there and contains either your post title or a line of code that retrieves the title for you, all is well. If not, you’ll want to add one to your posts manually.

More on Headings

It is possible to modify Wordpress and Blogger themes to populate the headline tag automatically but unfortunately this requires getting your hands dirty with some basic HTML and PHP and that you host your own blog, rather than using Wordpress/Blogger.com hosting. Those who find manually applying headline tags to their blog posts extremely arduous might want to consider looking around for a stock template that supports the function automatically.

It’s also important to remember that when dealing with <h1> tags, only one should be used per post, so if your template does generate one on its own, under no circumstances create a second. While your blog likely won’t be penalised severely by search engines for having two <h1> tags, it’s best practice to keep it to just one and to use that tag for the post headline and nothing else.

A final – and somewhat confusing – point about heading tags. Exact tag usage varies from one website to another and while the system detailed above is the most common, used by the BBC, Guardian and Daily Mail news sites, there are other variations out there. CNN, for example, use <title> for the page title, <h1> as a container for the site logo and <h2> for the main headline (more on this tag in a moment). It’s usually best to check with your editor or tech team what the site’s headline convention is before getting started. If you’re a blogger and are managing your own website, you probably won’t need to worry about this much.

Subheadings

Correctly marking up your subheadings is also very important, not only for making your article easier to navigate for your readers but for drawing a search engine’s attention to important subsections of the text.  All of the same rules you used when writing your headline also apply to crafting subheadings; keep it brief, use keywords that crop up in your text and avoid the temptation to sacrifice clarity and utility for the sake of a delicious pun. You’ll also need to apply heading tags to ensure that search engines recognise sub-headings, although unfortunately in this case there’s no chance of the CMS looking after it for you automatically.

When tagging your subheadings, you’ll be applying styles like Heading 2, Heading 3 etc, all the way down to Heading 6 (where Heading 1, as your main headline, is the most important, and Heading 6 the least). In HTML these styles represent the <h2> to <h6> tags and these enclose your sub-headings in exactly the same way as the <h1> tag contained your headline. As a general rule, you should structure your sub-headings hierarchically, Heading 2/<h2> for your main sub-headings, Heading 3/<h3> for sub-headings nested under those and Heading 4/<h4> for sub-headings of Heading 3 and so on. It’s unlikely you’ll ever make it down to Heading 6 in an article or blog post but if you do, the rules remain the same. Unlike <h1> tags, you are encouraged to make use of multiple <h2> etc tags to clearly denote your subsections and, indeed, its best practice to do so..

See the diagram above for a more visual demonstration of this principle.

Checklist

Correctly writing headlines and subheadings, setting a suitable Page Title and applying heading tags to your text where appropriate are some of the most fundamental techniques for optimising your articles or blog posts for search engines. They are straightforward tasks that can be performed by anyone reasonably familiar with a WYSIWYG text editor; if you’ve managed to publish a blog post in the past you’ll certainly have no trouble in assimilating them into your posting routine. I’ve created creating a step-by-step SEO checklist to help you ensure that all necessary SEO tasks have been performed before you publish your article. As the series goes on, I’ll gradually add more steps to the list as we discuss different aspects of the SEO process.

1. Is your Headline written in an SEO-friendly style and enclosed in a <h1> tag somewhere on the page?
2. Is your Page Title written in an SEO-friendly style and enclosed in a <title> tag or entered into a Page Title field?
3. Are your Subheadings written in an SEO-friendly style and enclosed in the appropriate heading tag?

Final Thoughts

While Search Engine Optimisation is a valuable skill and something all journalists and bloggers should be avid evangelists of, let’s spare a moment’s thought for the fine art of headline writing. There’s a belief that good SEO practice is killing the ancient tradition of pun-based headlines and while there’s some truth in this, it’s simply not the case that writing with search engine results in mind always comes down to sacrificing creativity for utility. There remain plenty of opportunities for wordplay in excerpts, straplines and picture captions, where they remain easily visible to readers without diluting your content’s indexing potential. Headline writers are a resilient bunch and no matter how powerful search algorithms become, there will always be room for both witty double-entendres and mind-numbingly awful puns in the digital world.

Further Reading

Econsultancy – A Journalist’s Guide to SEO

Wordstream – SEO Title Tag Formulas: How To Create High Performance Title Tags

SEO Book – How to Craft Kick-Ass Headline Tags and Titles

The Guardian – Search for the Perfect Headline

In Part 2, we’ll be looking at Permalink Structures and URLs and discovering how you can use a page’s web address to maximise your content’s SEO potential.

In spite of his criminal activities, there’s something imminently likeable about Howard Marks. He’s humble and self-deprecating, and unexpectedly blunt about the unpleasant realities of a life spent skirting the edges of the underworld. And while Mr Nice revels in the mythos Marks has built up around himself, it’s also a surprisingly human film, depicting both the highs and lows of an extraordinary life on the fringes of society.

Rhys Ifans pours his heart into the role of Howard Marks, from early years spent in Welsh coal-mining town to an unlikely scholarship at Oxford and his indoctrination into a world of drugs and debauchery. After a brief sojourn as a teacher, Marks soon abandons any pretence of cleaning up his act when circumstance leads to him trafficking a carload of cannabis from Germany to Britain in the early 1970s.

He soon encounters Jim McCann, a rogue member of the IRA, who helps Marks smuggle high grade hashish into the UK. McCann, played by David Thewlis, is intense and upredictable, a darkly comic contrast to the effortlessly cool Marks. Within a matter of months, the two men are the masterminds behind one of the world’s most prolific drug rings and begin to attract unwanted attention.

While Ifans as Marks and Thewlis as McCann are indisputably the star attractions, director Bernard Rose leaves his own stylistic fingerprints on the film. Rose uses film aspect and texture as shorthand for particular periods or decades and to mark the passage of time. The mid-1960s are denoted by black and white footage, shot in 4:3 aspect ratio, while the 1970s are characterised by strong, saturated colours and orange-tinged celluloid. It’s a refreshing alternative to the scores of title cards that would otherwise clutter the screen.

Howard Marks

It’s unfortunate that Rose doesn’t apply the same care and attention to the morality of Howard Mark’s involvement in the drugs trade. Though the Welshman claims never to have dealt in hard drugs or to have resorted to violence, it’s difficult not to believe that the audience is witnessing a sanitised and distorted version of reality.

While there are certainly human and personal costs to be paid when Marks runs afoul of the law, we see little of the real violence, poverty or exploitation that underscores the global cannabis trade. That Howard Marks himself views Mr Nice as a strong campaigning tool in the fight for the legalisation of marajuana is surely telling in itself and does little to detract from the sense that Rose is happy to perpetuate and enhance the Marks legend rather than tackle the questions his story raises.

Self-indulgent moral ambiguity aside however, at its best Mr Nice is thoroughly engrossing, a gripping drama liberally laced with visual and situational humour. Mr Nice won’t go on general release in British cinemas until October but there’s a strong chance it could emerge as a cult classic in years to come, alongside Withnail and I, Trainspotting, Human Traffic and other commentaries on drug culture in these islands.

Watch the trailer for Mr Nice on Youtube.

Images courtesy of EIFF.

Special events range from spectacular gala evenings for high-profile films, including The Illusionist and a 3D screening of Toy Story 3, to After the Wave, a retrospective look at the “lost and forgotten” years of British cinema from 1967 to 1979.

Meanwhile, Sir Patrick Stewart discusses his work as a Shakespearean actor, a Star Trek captain and more besides at a special BAFTA Scotland interview on Monday 21 June and The Dunwich Horror, based on the work of HP Lovecraft, promises a uniquely terrifying ‘No-D’ experience. In contrast to the 3D visual feasts of Avatar et al, The Dunwich Horror is an audio-only experience taking place in a darkened cinema and guaranteed to scare you out of your wits.

Elsewhere, Sir Sean Connery’s 80^th birthday is celebrated with a special screening of The Man Who Would Be King, from 1975, and various creative workshops and panel discussions dissect the art of film-making.

After feasting on the clips on show at this morning’s press launch and having perused the 2010 Edinburgh International Film Festival brochure, I’ve selected my top five movies to watch out for this year.

The Illusionist

An animated spectacle set in the Capital itself, The Illusionist is the perfect movie to kick-start the Edinburgh International Film Festival at the Opening Night Gala on Wednesday 16 June. Described as “a love letter to Scotland and Edinburgh in particular”, the film follows the titular illusionist as he moves from Paris to Scotland in search of work, trying to convince all around him of his magical abilities. Directed by Sylvain Chomet, of Belleville Rendez-vous fame, The Illusionist maintains its own distinctive visual style, while drawing on the beauty, life and elegance of the director’s previous work.

Jackboots on Whitehall

Billed as Britain’s answer to Team America: World Police, Jackboots on Whitehall is an irreverent, animated alternate history of World War II, that depicts the nightmare scenario of a German invasion of Britain in the 1940s. An entirely stop-motion endeavour, the film is also strongly reminiscent of  Wallace & Gromit and its associated spin-offs. Winston Churchill flees northwards to Scotland, where the lawless Highlands serve as the only refuge from the oncoming Nazi armies. With an all-star voice cast including Ewan McGregor, Richard E. Grant and Timothy Spall, Jackboots on Whitehall combines the best of British cinema talent with beautiful animation and a script so sharp it could cut itself.

Restrepo

Restrepo, Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger’s docu-drama set in the midst of the ongoing Afghan conflict, is perhaps one of the most intimate and unflinching accounts of how modern warfare is conducted ever committed to celluloid. Granted unprecedented access to US armed forces, the filmmakers spent 15 months embedded in the 173^rd Airborne Brigade, recording shockingly powerful images of the human cost of the war. Restrepo promises to be the definitive Afghan war movie and, in time, may even rank amongst the genre greats.

Mr Nice

Making its European premiere at the Film Festival, Mr Nice documents the rise and fall of the infamous international drug smuggler Howard Marks. Based on Marks’ own autobiography, this biopic stars Rhys Ifans and chronicles the heady days of the 1970s and 80s when Marks was rumoured to control over 10% of the global cannabis trade and was under constant threat from the law, fellow smugglers and the IRA.  Just as charming and mischievous as its titular anti-hero, Mr Nice is leading the charge of superb British films at this year’s EIFF.

My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done?

My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done is the latest project by celebrated German director, Werner Herzog, combining drama, psychological horror and deadpan black comedy to make a gripping and unsettling film. Lead character Brad has locked himself inside his house after stabbing his mother to death. The narration jumps between the murder scene and the outside world, as police painstakingly uncover the chain of events that lead Brad to such a dark place. Willem Dafoe stars alongside Michael Shannon, Chloe Sevigny and Udo Kier.

This year’s Edinburgh International Film Festival runs from 16 – 27 June at various locations across Edinburgh, including the Festival Theatre and the Filmhouse, Cameo and Cineworld cinemas. For more details and to book tickets, see the EIFF’s website.

Data has been sourced from VoteThemOut while address details for constituency offices, used in the postcode search, came from Westminster Parliamentary Record.

The final total out of the 59 Scottish MPs was 18 For, 5 Against and 36 Absents. Here follows a constituency-by-constituency breakdown for each MP. Keep reading after the list for analysis and a party-by-party breakdown.

Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire

Aberdeen North

Frank Doran (Labour) – For

Aberdeen South

Anne Begg (Labour) – Absent

Banff and Buchan

Alex Salmond (SNP) – Absent

Gordon

Malcolm Bruce (Lib Dem) – Absent

West Aberdeen and Kincardineshire

Robert Smith (Lib Dem) – Absent

Angus and Dundee City

Angus

Mike Weir (SNP) – Absent

Dundee East

Stewart Hosie (SNP) – For

Dundee West

James McGovern (Labour) – Absent

Argyll and Bute

Argyll and Bute

Alan Reid (Lib Dem) – Absent

City of Edinburgh

Edinburgh East

Gavin Strang (Labour) – For

Edinburgh North and Leith

Mark Lazarowicz (Labour) – Against

Edinburgh South

Nigel Griffiths (Labour) – Absent

Edinburgh South West

Alistair Darling (Labour) – Absent

Edinburgh West

John Barrett (Lib Dem) – Against

Clackmannanshire and Perth and Kinross

Ochil and South Perthshire

Gordon Banks (Labour) – Absent

Perth and North Perthshire

Pete Wishart (SNP) – Absent

Dumfries and Galloway, Scottish Borders and South Lanarkshire

Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk

Michael Moore (Lib Dem) – Absent

Dumfries and Galloway

Russell Brown (Labour) – Absent

Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale

David Mundell (Conservative) – Absent

East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow

Adam Ingram (Labour) – For

Lanark and Hamilton East

Jimmy Hood (Labour) – Absent

Rutherglen and Hamilton West

Toomy McAvoy (Labour) – For

East Ayrshire, North Ayrshire and South Ayrshire

Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock

Sandra Osborne (Labour) – For

Central Ayrshire

Brian Donohoe (Labour) – Absent

Kilmarnock and Loudon

Des Browne (Labour) – For

North Ayrshire and Arran

Katy Clark (Labour) – Absent

East Dumbartonshire and North Lanarkshire

Airdrie and Shotts

John Reid (Labour) – For

Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill

Tom Clarke (Labour) – Absent

Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East

Rosemary McKenna (Labour) – Absent

East Dumbartonshire

Jo Swinson (Lib Dem) – Absent

Motherwell and Wishaw

Frank Roy (Labour)  – Absent

East Lothian

East Lothian

Anne Moffat (Labour) – Absent

East Renfrewshire

East Renfrewshire

Jim Murphy (Labour) – Absent

Falkirk and West Lothian

Falkirk

Eric Joyce (Labour) – Against

Linlithgow and East Falkirk

Michael Connarty (Labour) – For

Livingston

Jim Devine (Labour) – Absent

Fife

Dunfermline and West Fife

Willie Rennie (Lib Dem) – Absent

Glenrothes

Lindsay Roy (Labour) – Absent

Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

Gordon Brown (Labour) – Absent

North East Fife

Menzies Campbell (Lib Dem) – Absent

Glasgow City

Glasgow Central

Mohammed Sarwar (Labour) – Absent

Glasgow East

John Mason (SNP) – Absent

Glasgow North

Anne McKechin (Labour) – For

Glasgow North East

Willie Bain (Speaker) – For

Glasgow North West

John Robertson (Labour) – For

Glasgow South

Tom Harris (Labour) – Absent

Glasgow South West

Ian Davidson (Labour) – For

Highland

Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross

John Thurso (Lib Dem) – Against

Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey

Danny Alexander (Lib Dem) – Absent

Ross, Skye and Lochaber

Charles Kennedy (Lib Dem) – Absent

Inverclyde

Inverclyde

David Cairns (Labour) – For

Midlothian

Midlothian

David Hamilton (Labour) – For

Moray

Moray

Angus Robertson (SNP) – Absent

Na h-Eileanan Siar (Western Isles)

Na h-Eileanan Siar

Angus MacNeil (SNP) – Absent

Orkney Islands and Shetland Islands

Orkney and Shetland

Alistair Carmichael (Lib Dem) – Against

Renfrewshire

Paisley and Renfrewshire North

Jim Sheriden (Labour) – For

Paisley and Renfrewshire South

Douglas Alexander (Labour) – For

Stirling

Stirling

Anne McGuire (Labour) – Absent

West Dumbartonshire

West Dumbartonshire

John McFall (Labour) – For

Analysis

Labour

• 17 Labour MPs voted For the DE Bill.
• 2 Labour MPs voted Against the DE Bill
• 20 Labour MPs were Absent or Abstained.

Only two Labour MPs – Mark Lazarowicz and Eric Joyce – broke the whip to vote against the Bill. There were also many high-profile Labour absentees including Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, with the likes of John Reid shoring up the For vote. Still, more than half of the party’s MPs stayed at home despite the presence of the whip and government’s determination to drive the Bill through.

Liberal Democrats

• 0 Lib Dem MPs voted For the DE Bill
• 3 Lib Dem MPs voted Against the DE Bill
• 9 Lib Dem MPs were Absent or Abstained.

No Lib Dem MP voted in favour of the Bill, but only three turned out to vote it down, despite the party being firmly against the proposed legislation. More big name absentees here with Charles Kennedy and Menzies Campbell staying at home. Bizarrely, the MPs for the far-flung Caithness, Sutherland and East Ross and Orkney and Shetland managed to make the vote, while many of their southerly colleagues were absent.

Scottish National Party

• 1 SNP MP voted For the DE Bill
• 0 SNP MPs voted Against the DE Bill
• 6 SNP MPs were Absent or Abstained.

Yet another high-profile absentee here with Alex Salmond nowhere to be seen, though he is stepping down from his Westminster seat to concentrate on his duties as First Minister of Scotland after the forthcoming election. Pete Wishart was surprisingly absent after robustly engaging with the debate during the Bill’s Second Reading the previous evening.

Conservatives

• 0 Conservative MPs voted For the DE Bill
• 0 Conservative MPs voted Against the DE Bill
• 1 Conservative MP was Absent or Abstained.

The Conservative Party’s only Scottish MP fails to turn up for the vote. I bet his constituents are thrilled.

In total, far less than half of Scotland’s MPs – a pitiful 38% – bothered to turn up and vote on the Digital Economy Bill.

Update: to find out if and how your MP voted on the DE Bill, see VoteThemOut.

The final tally was 189 votes For the Bill and 47 Against. The Againsts break down by party as:

• 23 Labour
• 16 Liberal Democrat
• 5 Conservative
• 3 Other
• 2 plus two Lib Dem tellers.

The names of those who voted against are as follows:

Abbott, Ms Diane (Lab)
Amess, Mr. David (Con)
Barrett, John (Lib Dem)
Beith, rh Sir Alan (Lib Dem)
Breed, Mr. Colin (Lib Dem)
Burgon, Colin (Lab)
Burstow, Mr. Paul (Lib Dem)
Carmichael, Mr. Alistair (Lib Dem)
Cash, Mr. William (Con)
Challen, Colin (Lab)
Chope, Mr. Christopher (Con)
Corbyn, Jeremy (Lab)
Davey, Mr. Edward (Lib Dem)
Davies, Mr. Dai (Ind)
Davis, rh Mr. David (Con)
Dismore, Mr. Andrew (Lab)
Drew, Mr. David (Lab)
Fallon, Mr. Michael (Con)
Featherstone, Lynne (Lib Dem)
Foster, Mr. Don (Lib Dem)
Gerrard, Mr. Neil (Lab)
Grogan, Mr. John (Lab)
Hancock, Mr. Mike (Lib Dem)
Harris, Dr. Evan (Lib Dem)
Hoey, Kate (Lab)
Howarth, David (Lib Dem)
Howarth, rh Mr. George
Hughes, Simon (Lib Dem)
Jones, Lynne (Lab)
Joyce, Eric (Lab)
Keetch, Mr. Paul (Lib Dem)
Kilfoyle, Mr. Peter (Lab)
Lazarowicz, Mark (Lab)
Love, Mr. Andrew (Lab)
Marshall-Andrews, Mr. Robert (Lab)
Mitchell, Mr. Austin (Lab)
Öpik, Lembit (Lib Dem)
Paisley, rh Rev. Ian (DUP)
Palmer, Dr. Nick (Lab)
Price, Adam (Plaid)
Reed, Mr. Andy (Lab)
Russell, Bob (Lib Dem)
Simpson, Alan (Lab)
Thurso, John (Lib Dem)
Todd, Mr. Mark (Lab)
Truswell, Mr. Paul (Lab)
Watson, Mr. Tom (Lab)

Tellers for the Noes:
John Hemming (Lib Dem)
Mr. John Leech (Lib Dem)

My own MP, Mark Lazarowicz of Labour, is highlighted. In my correspondence with him over the Bill, he pledged to vote down the more controversial measures and I am pleased to see that the strength of his convictions stretched to voting against the final Bill. Other Edinburgh residents may also be interested to know that John Barrett MP (Lib Dem, Edinburgh West) also voted against the DE Bill. The other three Edinburgh MPs, Alistair Darling, Nigel Griffiths and Gavin Strang (all Labour) either voted in favour of the Bill or were absent.

Update 11/04/2010: Nigel Griffiths (Labour, Edinburgh South) and Alistair Darling (Labour, Edinburgh South West) were absent and did not vote on the Digital Economy Bill. Gavin Strang (Labour, Edinburgh East) voted in favour of the Bill.

Update 12/04/2010: Mark Lazarowicz has blogged about his opposition towards the Digital Economy Bill and its implication on future parliamentary sessions.

Previous posts on the Digital Economy Bill:

Take the fight against the Digital Economy Bill to your MP

Digital Economy Bill: Second Reading

Three weeks on and the Bill is currently being given its second hearing in the Commons, the last step before the “Wash Up” period which could see it fast-tracked into law as the parties cut last-minute deals with each other before the General Election. This was the scene in parliament about half an hour ago:

Note that there are only sixteen MPs in the chamber. From a total of 646. That’s less than 2.5% of our elected representatives who bothered to turn out to debate one of the most important pieces of legislation in many years, one that is vital to Britain’s Digital future. You don’t need me to tell you how wrong that is.

Then there’s the fact that the Digital Economy Bill was scheduled for a debate on a day when it was extremely likely that an election would be called and Parliament dissolved. This is exactly what happened today, and the media’s attention has been captivated by the first volleys in the electoral mudslinging contest. Even the usually reliable Guardian have failed to liveblog the DE debate. Perhaps I’m overly cynical but as Jo Moore once infamously said, “Today is a good day to bury bad news“.

We’ve also been subjected to MPs exposing their ignorance of the core issues of the DE Bill debate. From Austin Mitchell calling heavy internet users and technical types ‘geeks’ and ‘nerds’ to Simon Sion’s utterly bizarre Star Wars metaphor, where illegal downloaders are Luke Skywalker and Peter Mandelson is Darth Vader, it is abundantly clear that the government needs to bring in experts from across the full range of digital professions – and not just music industry representatives -  to hammer out a measured, forward-thinking Bill rather than a legislative knee-jerk.

I’m disappointed, if not entirely surprised, that my own MP, Mark Lazarowicz of Labour for Edinburgh North and Leith, isn’t one of those in the chamber today. Mark responded to my concerns about the DE Bill back in March, reassuring me that the possibility of it being taken into the Wash Up period was extremely low and that nothing undemocratic would be allowed to happen. I was initially impressed at both the swiftness and apparent sincerity of his replies but believe that if he considered this a genuinely important issue, he would be in the House of Commons today, opposing this Bill. I’m afraid that will be one less vote for you Mr Lazarowicz, and for Labour too.

Update – 6 April 2010, 9pm

Two hours later and we’re down to a paltry ten MPs left in the House of Commons debating. Most of those remaining are Labour MPs, many of whom are speaking out against the Digital Economy Bill. Is there any chance of a backbench revolt over this?

Update – 6 April 2010, 10.30pm

Shortly before 10pm, a large group of MPs rushed into the House of Commons to vote on the Bill, despite not taking part in the debate whatsoever. The DE Bill passed the second reading and will now go on to the third reading and committee stage tomorrow.  How very disappointing.

I don’t doubt for a moment that Apple’s slate will be a masterclass in hardware design; sleek, shiny and immensely covetable. Equally, I’m sure that it will be just as accomplished in the UI and functionality stakes, in so far as it will do exactly what Apple have designed it to do extremely well indeed.

Despite that, I won’t be parting with my money when the iPad eventually finds its way over to Blighty later this month. Here’s why:

1. I’m not an early adopter.

Let’s be clear – I’m a huge fan of new technology and love nothing more than getting to grips with the latest devices. But I usually wait a few months before I actually spend hard-earned cash on a new shiny. There’s the obvious benefit of prices falling after the initial release (less of a factor with an Apple product, naturally) but early models can be less reliable (think how many launch Xbox 360s are still in active service), as well as being being more expensive.

2. It’s the first iteration of the product

Closely linked to the perils of early adoption, it’s inevitable that within the space of a year, a new, more fully-featured version of the iPad will be announced. I was burnt by the original iPhone – I bought one four or five months after release and two months later the 3G was announced at a lower price and with a better feature set. When the basic iPad model comes with 3G and a respectable amount of storage, I’ll be much more likely to take the plunge.

3. It’s a little on the expensive side…

Which brings us to the fact that the iPad is certainly not cheap. We don’t know how much exactly it’s going to cost in the UK just yet but £399 seems a good ball-park estimate. And that’s for the basic 16 GB model, not the significantly more pimped-out 3G-enabled 64GB version. Apple products have always been priced at a premium but when a couple of games consoles, a well-specced laptop or a 37-inch 1080p TV can be picked up for around the same price, it makes me stop to consider if it represents real value for money.

4. It can’t multi-task

Like the iPhone, the iPad only allows one application to be open at a time, the integrated iPod aside. While it does offer some improvements over its smaller cousin, the iPad is still not capable of true multi-tasking. This is the real deal breaker for me. I need to be able to hop from browser to email client to terminal window to e-book instantly and without worrying about having to save my work at each step or waiting for apps to reopen. I’m genuinely baffled as to why the iPad can’t do this.

5. Create vs. consume

I work in media, so I create content almost as often as I consume it. The simple fact is that while the iPad has a limited set of creative functions, it’s really not all that well-suited to the role. A netbook meets my needs as a creator far better; it’s light and portable, has a fully functioning keyboard, far greater storage capacity and full range of applications for my chosen OS. While it lacks the grunt of a fully-fledged notebook or desktop, it provides a perfectly serviceable workstation when needed. As if to prove a point, this blog post was composed entirely on a netbook, including all reference reading and image-editing. I think I’d struggle to put everything together as quickly or easily on an iPad.

The best is yet to come

Let me reiterate that I am entirely convinced that iPad will be a very successful product. I’m also sure that, sooner or later, I will buy one. But now isn’t that time. The iPad’s main function is media consumption and, as a creative, I need a device that can do more, especially at the price Apple are asking. My hope is that by the time iPad 2.0 is announced, the software will have evolved and entirely new possibilities will be opened up, just as the App Store accompanied the launch of the iPhone 3G. Until then, I’m afraid my money will be staying firmly in my wallet – even if the sight of a friend or colleague playing with their shiny new tablet makes me sick with envy.

However, I was overlooking a vital detail that would ultimately lead to a much less costly solution to the problem; my card was still under its three-year manufacturer’s warranty and, given the circumstances of its fairly, was eligible for an RMA (Return Merchandise Authorisation). Despite having PC components fail in the past, I had never thought to take advantage of RMA, assuming that it was only for new components that did not work on receipt by the customer. Not so. In fact, any component that has failed within its manufacturer’s warranty period may be eligible for RMA and to be repaired or replaced at no cost to the owner.

Many people I have spoken to are unaware of RMA or how it works and have simply been buying new components as and when theirs fail, often paying considerably over the odds from local retailers when a replacement is needed in a hurry. RMA is rarely a quick process and probably won’t result be appropriate for an emergency situation, due to the relatively slow turnaround, but for those able to use backup components, it can be far more cost-effective than forking out for new hardware. For those people, I’ve prepared a short guide to the RMA process to help you get the most out of your hardware warranties.

What is RMA?

RMA stands for “Return Merchandise Authorization”. It is a process which allows customers to return goods that are faulty or defective on receipt, or that have failed within a specified warranty period, to the supplier. Depending on the terms of the warranty and the type of goods involved, the supplier may then return them to the manufacturer. Provided the customer has not deliberately or accidentally voided their warranty, the items involved may be repaired or replaced by the manufacturers free of charge, or a refund may be given by the supplier.

How do I get an RMA?

Usually the first port of call for obtaining an RMA from a supplier is their customer service department. However, many dedicated computer hardware suppliers fast-track RMA requests via specialised webform and, in some cases, entire RMA sub-departments. You will usually be required to provide a description of the problem and to provide details from when the product was first purchased – order numbers and dates of purchase, most often.

Further details of your hardware setup may be needed along with a brief summary of what you were doing at the computer at the time the item failed, in so far is as possible. With this information in place, the supplier will usually authorise an RMA and ask you to return your failed items by post to a specified address.

How much does it cost?

In most cases, any action brought about by an RMA – repair or replacement – will usually be free of charge to the customer. However, end-users are generally expected to pay the postage cost of sending the item back to the supplier. Depending on the terms of the warranty, customers may be obliged to pay a service or repair surcharge but this doesn’t happen terribly often.

Is there anything I should keep in mind when sending my item off?

Where possible, faulty items should be returned in their original packaging. If you have disposed of the packaging, try to find a similarly sized box and ensure that the item is securely packed. Goods visibly damaged in transit may not be eligible for free repair or replacement. If possible, try and pack sensitive components in anti-static bags to further reduce the chances of them being damaged on their way back to the supplier. You may be required to supply any accessories that originally came packaged with your goods, though this varies from manufacturer to manufacturer.

Are there any reasons why an RMA might not be authorised?

As previously stated, improperly packed goods may result in damage in transit, which many suppliers will refuse to accept. Any sign that the failure was caused by direct user intervention may also see an RMA denied once it reaches the manufacturer to be examined. Actions which void the warranty, such as overclocking or dismantling components, are best avoided. Any actions that contravene the manufacturer’s directions for usage – using items in a moist environment or cleaning them using unsuitable substances, perhaps – may also see an item refused free repair or replacement.

Will I receive a refund or will my item be repaired or replaced?

This depends on a number of factors, including the supplier, the manufacturer, the time that has elapsed since purchase and the nature of the goods. Customers are usually entitled to request a refund if an item arrives faulty but later in the warranty period, when the goods have seen several months, or even years, use, a repair or refund is more likely. Repair versus Replacement usually comes down to cost; if it is cheaper to simply send out a new or refurbished item rather than repairing it, many manufacturers will do so. In some cases, new items may not exactly match the returned goods, especially if a particular model is out of production. In these cases, a replacement or equivalent value or  functionality may be issued.

How long will it take?

This depends entirely on the supplier and manufacturer. If the supplier is dealing with the entire process, an item can often be turned around in a matter of days. However, if goods must be returned to the manufacturer for examination, it can take weeks or even months, particularly if they have to be sent back to factories in East Asia. In my case, it took around a month between requesting an RMA from the supplier and receiving a replacement.

Is it worth RMAing a faulty component even if I rush out to buy a new one immediately?

Yes. Even if you cannot wait for an RMA to be processed and need to buy a new component immediately, it is still worth seeing if you can get a repair or replacement for free. At the very least, you can keep it as a backup in case of future hardware failure. Alternatively, you may be able to sell the repair/replacement and recoup some of the cost of a brand new component.

My own experience with Overclockers.co.uk was fairly straightforward. The day after my graphics card died, I submitted an RMA request via their specialised webform. A few hours later they accepted my request and supplied me with an address to send my card to and directions for packing. They also checked that the address details they had on file for me were up to date (they weren’t). The next day the card was in the post and the day after I received an email from OCUK informing me that they had received it and that it would be sent on to Asus, the manufacturer. A couple of weeks later I was told to expect a replacement at the end of the month.

Around a month on from sending the card out in the first place, I received a replacement; an ex-display EVGA GeForce 9800 GT, actually a slight upgrade over my old card. The only cost to me was the postage cost on returning the 8800 GT in the first place.

So, while RMA isn’t necessarily the speediest process, it can certainly be effective in getting faulty components repaired or replaced. This means that warranty is something that should be given careful thought when actually buying new items, especially as some manufacturers have begun to cut their standard warranty periods, from three years to just one year in the case of Asus. Even for those who need a replacement item immediately, RMA can eventually offset some of the cost of buying a brand new component or result in a handy spare in case of future disaster. My new 9800 GT will hold the fort for the time being until I can find the spare cash to upgrade to something a bit beefier, at which point it will go into hibernation, ready for any future problems that might arise.

Unfortunately, the current Brown administration is determined to pass the Digital Economy legislation before it leaves office, meaning that there will not be sufficient time for a full parliamentary debate or to scrutinise the bill in depth. Ostensibly a set of laws to clamp down on internet piracy and provide for the future growth of Britain’s digital economy, the bill, recently rushed through the House of Lords, contains many unsavoury elements that will impinge directly on fundamental rights and freedoms. It also grants MPs the right to essentially re-write copyright law as they see fit.

It’s worth noting that Labour actually dropped its proposed anti-Fox Hunting legislation because there was insufficient time to fully debate the matter in Parliament. That a vastly more important piece of legislation is to be fast-tracked, despite even less time now remaining until a change in government, is a cause for great concern. Even those in favour of the Bill should realise that this sets a dangerous precedent for future legislation and should call for a measured and unhurried debate on the subject.

The Digital Economy Bill in its current state is, in essence, fundamentally undemocratic.

For a more detailed analysis of the Bill’s more worrying aspects, see here.

Unlike most online petitions, the 38 Degrees protest is a Direct Action campaign which encourages those concerned about the DE Bill to write directly to their MPs expressing their misgivings. It urges our elected representatives to stall the Bill so that a proper debate on it can take place. For those unsure which constituency they live in, 38 Degrees campaign page will find your MP by postcode. The site also supplies an online form containing a sample letter which can be edited and emailed directly to your MP. The sample text is as follows:

Dear [Insert MP Name]

I’m writing to you today because I’m very worried that the Government is planning to rush the Digital Economy Bill into law without a full Parliamentary debate.

The law is controversial and contains many measures that concern me. The controversial Bill deserves proper scrutiny so please don’t let the government rush it through. Many people think it will damage schools and businesses as well as innocent people who rely on the internet because it will allow the Government to disconnect people it suspects of copyright infringement.

Industry experts, internet service providers (like Talk Talk and BT) and huge internet companies like Google and Yahoo are all opposing the bill – yet the Government seems intent on forcing it through without a real debate.

As a constituent I am writing to you today to ask you to do all you can to ensure the Government doesn’t just rush the bill through and deny us our democratic right to scrutiny and debate.

[Insert your Name]

38 Degrees encourages users to customise this template to reflect their personal experiences. In my case, I contacted my local MP, Mark Lazarowicz (Labour MP for Edinburgh North and Leith) and expressed my concerns in light of my experience as a media professional and an encounter with unsavoury legal firm Davenport Lyons over alleged breach of copyright. Others will, of course, have different views and experiences but a personalised email says far more than simply regurgitating the basic template.

Like 38 Degrees, I urge you to take affirmative action against the Digital Economy Bill by contacting your local MP and relaying your concerns. Even if only 10,000 people send emails, that’s an average of more than fifteen emails  for each of the UK’s 646 MPs. Fifteen of their constituents simultaneously expressing their concerns on the same issue should be enough to alert MPs that something deeply wrong is happening.

I’d love if anyone who has emailed their MP and received a reply could tell us about their experience in the comments. However, please don’t quote emails directly as unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of parliamentary correspondence is potentially illegal and almost certainly amounts to a  Breach of Confidence.

Lose Your Illusion

Paradigm shifts. They’ve been at the core of every new Final Fantasy release from the late Eighties onwards. With each iteration comes a new game world, a fresh cast of characters, a revamped battle system and a bewildering array of new concepts, factions and jargon to grapple with. There’s a sense of incremental improvement – if only on a technical level – as each new title pushes its host platform to the limit and redefines accepted benchmarks for graphics and sound. As with any other Final Fantasy, paradigm shifts lie at the core of the thirteenth incarnation, not only as the lynch-pin on which the game’s new combat system hangs, but as a byword for the drastic overhaul brought on by another generational leap.

Final Fantasy XIII has not quite received the unanimous critical praise lavished upon many of its predecessors. That’s hardly surprising;  in the era of Fallout 3, Dragon Age and Mass Effect, the stubborn linearity of Square Enix’s latest effort seems almost anachronistic. Even set against its recent JRPG peers – Lost Odyssey, Persona 4 and Eternal Sonata – there’s something painfully austere about FFXIII’s approach to player-pathing.

Not that this is a break with series convention. With the exception of the open-word aspirations of 2006’s FFXII, each major Final Fantasy release since the iconic seventh installment has interspersed blatantly linear gameplay with sections of apocryphal non-linearity.  Even within the comparative freedom of the overworld, players are usually confronted with the illusion of choice rather than true agency. While five destinations may be available to visit at a given time, only one will actually advance the story. Now, in Final Fantasy XIII, even that thin façade of non-linearity has been torn away in favour of a streamlined, stripped-down experience. But to what end?

Eye-Candy

Lightning and Sahz take in the sights

To showcase the jaw-dropping visual feast, for one. Final Fantasy XIII sets a new high water mark for console graphics, particularly the PS3 version. The game’s conservative approach is likely as much a product of the astronomical production costs of the HD Era as it is of any design decision. With current hardware limitations, it’s difficult to imagine FFXIII’s visual fidelity and artistic achievement recreated in a true open-world environment. Whether this amounts to a trade-off of gameplay for graphics is largely irrelevant; the proof of Final Fantasy’s gaming pudding has always been in the meat of the battle system and story rather than wandering aimlessly between towns.

Which is just as well really, since towns too have been entirely excised from the early part of the game. Though urban environments abound, they appear mainly in cutscenes or as combat zones in their own right. It’s part of a wider philosophical shift in which NPC conversations too are largely conspicuous by their absence. Much of the story is conveyed through the cut-scenes, while shopping and upgrades are handled entirely through menus available at every save point. But similar to Square dropping the pretence of non-linearity elsewhere, not as much has actually changed as first impressions would suggest. With very rare exceptions, dialogue in Final Fantasy games has been strictly limited and more often than not simply a matter of jabbing the X button enough times to persuade an NPC to divulge plot details. Once again, FFXIII simply strips away the thin veneer of free choice.

Combative

Final Fantasy XIII's battle system in full swing

Whether narration through cut-scenes is ideal in the first place is a separate debate but it’s certainly in-keeping with Square Enix’s reductionist vision for FFXIII. Indeed, reducing the game’s core elements to first principles is a design choice carried over to the battle system. For the first two and a half hours of Final Fantasy XIII, many of the more complex combat mechanics are hidden from the player, only to be slowly introduced one by one over the next 7-8 hours of gameplay. While this hand-holding can feel obnoxious at times, the slow start is somewhat excused, if not entirely forgiven, once the full flower of the battle system begins to bloom.

Once again, there’s another jarring change to the status quo. Unlike previous titles where all members of the party could be given hands-on direction, in Final Fantasy XIII only one character is directly under the player’s control. The reasons behind this decision become more clear in light of the frantic pace of combat and once more complex battle concepts are rolled out but having two out of three party members controlled by the AI at any given time is certainly disconcerting.

Final Fantasy XIII’s combat mechanics hang on the notion of Paradigms – Jobs or Classes in other FF titles – and Paradigm Shifts. At the core of this system is the ability to change between different class assignments for all party members on the fly – the aforementioned Paradigm Shift. Once Paradigm Shifts are introduced about three hours in, the true tactical depth of the revamped battle system begins to emerge.

Alongside Paradigm Shifts are the related concepts of Chains and Stagger. Chains – simply a  series of attacks – fill a Chain Gauge which, when topped up, forces enemies into Stagger mode, allowing party members to inflict obscene amounts of damage in a short space of time. Chains decay quickly and must be topped up lest the Chain Gauge empty completely. However, certain Paradigms – most noticeably the Commando, decrease the rate of decay, allowing characters with pure damage-dealing roles – Ravagers – to quickly drive enemies into Stagger.

Paradigmatic

It’s difficult to convey the full potential of this system in play but the following is a fairly common example. The party engages a tough enemy and Paradigms Shits to a Commando, Synergist  (buff class) and Medic (healer) combination. Once the Synergist has applied protective shields to the party and the Medic has topped up everyone’s health bar, we switch to a Commando, Ravager, Ravager setup to quickly fill the Chain Gauge and Stagger the foe. While in Stagger, we change again to Ravager/Ravager/Ravager for maximum damage-dealing potential. As Stagger ends, the enemy swipes out at all party members, dealing serious damage and casting a damage-absorbing shield on itself. We switch to Medic/Medic/Saboteur (debuff class) to quickly heal up the damage and strip away the shield and then return to Commando/Ravager/Ravager to begin the cycle again.

Between the six available Paradigms (there’s also a tank-like Sentinel), the combat system actually gravitates more towards the feel of World of Warcraft party combat than preceding Final Fantasy titles, with the presence of a given Paradigm at the right moment being crucial to success. Learning to identify what Paradigm combinations – and the correct sequence of Paradigm Shifts – is best-suited to a given enemy is one of the game’s many tactical pleasures.

(Un)Conventional

The enigmatic Fal'Cie

For all that though, it’s hard to deny that Final Fantasy XIII’s stripped-down design aesthetic is jarring. It’s not helped by the excruciatingly slow pace of the game’s opening and haphazard storytelling. Early on, key concepts – Fal’Cie, L’Cie, Focus, Pulse – are bandied about with reckless abandon but remain as little more than obscure jargon until the game finally deigns to explain what they are and, crucially, why the player should care. It’s a good eight and a half hours before a character that might be considered a main villain is introduced. Even compared to recent slow-burners like Assassin’s Creed 2 and Dragon Age, the pacing of Final Fantasy XIII’s opening hours is rarely any faster than glacial.

It takes a while but these early misgivings do gradually begin to subside once the game opens up and starts to let players actually play it. For many, this will come around the three hour mark, when character levelling and the Paradigm Shift concept are introduced and the setting mercifully changes from the endless walkways of FFXIII’s opening sections. Others will have to wait a little longer, until the story begins to get its hooks in and starts to reveal more about the game world and character backgrounds in an intelligible fashion.

Though it sticks closely to many long-established conventions, Final Fantasy XIII is a paradigm shift in a very real sense, especially with FFXII suggesting a more progressive future for the series back when it was released in 2006. Four years on and Square Enix have abandoned any pretence of non-linearity, adapting a strictly reductionist approach which strips the latest title to the twin cores of the Final Fantasy experience – story and combat. It’s a brave move and one that won’t be received well by all of the fanbase but whatever else it might be, it certainly makes for a spectacular experience.