I heard a senior British government advisor on the radio recently. She spoke with a pukka Pony Club accent until after she got to her fourth or fifth sentence. Then her Ulster accent became more and more obvious as she spoke. I thought it was sad that she felt she had to hide a part of her identity in order to get a good job. I recall that several of the more successful folk from my home down spoke with accents that were sort of Scottish but not identifiable with any region. I wonder if their "success" could be attributed to their non-accent. Or perhaps it was more due to them being the sort of highly driven ruthless individuals who were prepared to sacrifice part of their identity and heritage on the altar of careerism.

So, Scottish football fans at the World Cup started putting orange traffic comes on the heads of American statues. That apparently went down OK in Boston. Not so much in Miami. For once I have some sympathy with the Yanks. There's a question here of cultural sensitivity. The traffic cone thing appears to have started in Glasgow City Centre with the statue of the Duke of Wellington. There can't be many alive today whose blood would boil at that. In fact, I'd be hard put to think of any statue in Scotland which should never ever be coned. But Americans, especially in Miami, might feel differently if they felt one of their historic icons was being disrespected or ridiculed. It's their country and they have feelings, which should be respected. The Tartan Army's statue high jinx stateside have apparently led to an outbreak of coning across Scotland. Apparently some folk in Edinburgh are not too happy about this resurrection of Keelie Culture. Or is it called Weedgie Culture these days?

I've been delighted to hear so many US broadcasters take a closer look at their country's founders as they celebrate 250 years since the Declaration of Independence. Yes, it was a nasty civil war that was more of a coup than anything else. Concepts like Liberty were a con. Americans just swapped remote masters in London for equally unsavourary local homegrown versions. Egality and Equality were good catch phrases but once the British were out many of those who fought the redcoats found that's all they were. Worries about the future of slavery within the British Empire were more pressing concerns for the men behind the declaration. And London's ban on settlement west of the Appalachians was an even bigger worry. Slave owner George Washington had been involved in illegally selling Indian land and unless London was taken out of the picture, he, like several other leading "Patriots" was going to jail. And it was the French who beat the British by forcing them to divert military resources to defend their far more lucrative Caribbean colonies rather than the bunch of buckskin-clad tobacco-chewing backwoods marksmen of legend. It's important to know where and what we really came from. It's fitting that Trump is president for the 250th anniversary. He's a real chip off the Founders' block.

I hadn't realised that the bonnet badge of the Royal Regiment of Scotland had been designed for the 1960 film Tunes of Glory. Well almost. The makers of Tunes of Glory had to come up with a fictional Highland regiment for the film of the book, both written by former Gordon Highlander James Kennaway. That involved a costume designer coming up with a bonnet badge. A lion rampant imposed on a saltire surrounded a wreath of, what looks to me like, thistles was decided on. The RRoS in real life opted for the lion and saltire without the surrounding spray but a crown above the lion. I'm afraid I can't be sure of the fictional regiment's somewhat busy tartan. But it may have worked better than the bastardised Government tartan, with its outsize gaudy green squares, adopted by the RRoS. The Tunes of Glory kilts, trews and thistle collar badges reappeared in Carry on Up The Khyber in 1968.

I think I'm in danger of hoisting myself by mine own petard. Getting a book published is not easy. But it seems to be easier if a would-be author comes from a Home Counties, or London, Pony Club background. The number of Pony Clubbers among the published seems disproportionate. I recall some dyslexic woman proclaiming in a posh voice that not only had she been published but her book had barely required any editing or correction. I took this to be evidence of how uneven the playing field is. The dice are loaded from the start. I thought a publisher who specialised in books by folk who had spent at least seven years of their life living in a council house might help even things up. But I've often argued that all discrimination is wrong. Two Wrongs cannot make a Right. So, my proposed Council House Press, which would favour those from less privileged backgrounds, must be a bad idea.

I heard an American supposed academic interviewed about a book published under his name about Artificial Intelligence. You may have beaten me to the punchline coz he used AI to write the book. And, surprise, surprise, it had several invented quotes in it. You'd think someone who proclaimed himself an expert in AI would have foreseen that. The Yank claimed every writer these days uses AI. Oh, no, mister, they don't. For what should be obvious reasons. But sadly, time is money and time saved by using AI to research and quickly composed AI text will soon see the cheap drive out The Good.

I just finished listening to a BBC programme about something called Toxic Masculinity. Sounds pretty nasty. I'm a guy. So, whatever I do must because of that be masculine behaviour. I don't need told what is and is not masculine. But what struck me from the programme was how what was regarded as toxic if a man says it has been for decades acceptable if a woman said it about guys. Toxic Feminism has been with us for years. In fact for decades the BBC has given a platform to some very unpleasant utterings - as long as it comes from someone without a penis. I still think the BBC would not broadcast a programme that banned all female contributors and yet one that bans men is acceptable. Let's end the double standards. And stop offering platforms for toxic sexism from anyone.

With the World Cup approaching I have little doubt that folk who know little about football will start chuntering about The Beautiful Game. These people, often North Americans, know little about football. It is game but it is seldom beautiful. In fact, I'm not sure it is ever beautiful. I think part of the problem is that most North Americans have never played it. That puzzles me to extent because it's been played in Canada for years. Edmonton Scottish FC once fielded actual Scots and some of them were pretty good players. I know one old Scottish guy who would have had the chance to turn professional if he hadn't emigrated to Canada. Now the World Cup will soon be being played in Canada, the USA and Mexico. But that's more about trying to create a lucrative professional sports income stream than any actual love or understanding of football on the part of the promoters. One look at how visiting fans are going to be ripped off tells you more than you want to know. In the USA the price of a bus ticket to get to the game has been jacked for $3 to something like $100. And it turns out that daytime temperatures at some of grounds are expected to be dangerously high for both players and fans. It's all about the money stupid. Especially if you’re stupid enough to think it's The Beautiful Game.

I've been disappointed by the high number of America. "academics" teaching at Scottish universities these days - if radio interviews are anything to go by. My reading has led me to form a very low opinion of US faculty members. I resent the time I've wasted finishing the drivel most of them produce. I have a theory as to why they are so piss-poor. It goes back to the Vietnam War and the fact that draft dodgers like Donald Trump could avoid service by enrolling in higher education. The demand for college and university places from spoiled rich brats meant the teaching faculties were expanded too rapidly. Folks who couldn't teach a toddler to tie a shoe lace ended up being taken on. The consequences are still with us - if you're taught by an idiot......... And as those students become professors themselves in succeeding generations the damage was perpetuated. The other sad part of this influx of Yanks is that it also suggests that like US higher education in the mid-60s through to the early 70s the Scottish system has been expanded too rapidly. No surprise these days when kids need a university degree in catering get a job laying tables in a greasy spoon cafe.

When I was a Boy Reporter, editorial and advertising were kept very strictly segregated. Things have obviously changed. Now on commercial radio I can hear a programme host interviewing some local news maker and then seconds later the same woman is extolling the services of some plumber. Can I really take anything she says seriously when she is so obviously prepared to act like a shill*? What is the price of allowing a doubt to be cast over a person's credibility and integrity? I don't think a plumber could pay me enough. In fact, no-one could pay me enough. *Shill: Accomplice of a hawker who acts an enthusiastic customer to entice others.

I'm fairly sure the author Charles Dickens was sceptical when it came to organised charities. He thought the first call on money donated was for the charity's supposed expenses. And I'm fairly sure too that a reasonably recent survey of major charities showed only about 10% of the money they collected actually went to helping people. The rest went on wages for themselves and administrative costs. It would not surprise me. Certainly, watching the charities in my area I have come to the conclusion that the welfare of those in need of help comes way second to the welfare of those employed by the charity. For instance, I don't think administrative talent is hereditary, so mother-daughter management teams causes my eyebrow to raise. Now I'm sure there are some genuine charities out there who really do want to help and don't use other people's misfortunes to line their own pockets. So, how about this - to be a registered charity an organisation must pay no more than minimum wage to any of its employees. That should weed out a lot of the profiteers. As one man who genuinely wanted to help once said There's A Lot Of Money In Poverty.

A while back an acquaintance asked me to help shift a table from her flat to ground floor of her towerblock. Why not. It would get my good deed of the day done before lunch. Now, a lot of people would show their appreciation with a five dollar bill - less than the cost of a pint of beer these days. I'd decided to reject the offer. It's not a good deed if you get paid. But there was no offer. I think she'd mentioned I wasn't the first person she'd asked that morning to help move that table. Maybe the others had helped her move tables before.

There have been a lot of exiles on my radio recently -Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Lebanon. The thing is that many of them don't represent opinion or feeling in their home countries. They are not drawn from the massive columns of refugees crowded at border fleeing war or an oppressive regime with all their possessions balanced on their heads. They are mainly from the most privileged sections of society and in some cases have had to leave their country because they were involved in trying to reinstall a nasty right-wing regime. A number of Iranian exiles were on the radio lamenting the supposed ceasefire in Iran. They wanted the airstrikes to continue until the Islamic regime is ousted. Easy for them to demand. Back in Iran there were certainly people who initially welcomed the attacks. Then they realised that the American plan is to free them by trying to kill them. Now they are not so keen. I wish the radio would stop giving these privileged, usually politically extremist, exiles so much of a platform.

I just heard a crime drama in which Tyneside had apparently become part of Yorkshire. Not a single Geordie accent. I know not everyone in the area has a discernible Geordie accent, but no-one at all of them. Maybe that was one of the reason the London-based producer of The Black Museum, Harry Towers, failed in the early 1950s to interest the BBC in broadcasting the programme. Another reason might be the scriptwriters' bizarre habit of putting American words into the mouths of British characters. No-one in London would have spoken about sidewalks, wrenches or streetcars. I was also baffled as to why Scotland Yard would be involved in investigating an 1857 murder in Glasgow. But I do know that trial would not have involved only 12 jurors. So, a lack of research may also have put the BBC off buying the drama. Even the involvement of Orson Welles in the project counted for nothing so far as the BBC was concerned. My wee brother tells me the programme, set in the UK and first broadcast in America, was recorded in Australia using local actors.

I heard two writers on the radio discussing the extra barriers they face when it came to getting published due to their humble "working class" origins. Certainly folk from privileged backgrounds seem to have an easier time. I think both attributed their success to their own talent. Maybe so. But maybe not entirely. One was black and the other a transsexual. Two easy checkboxes for publishers who want to claim some diversity credentials.

Well, the British have finally changed the clocks and I'm not being subjected any longer to the BBC's dreadful Outlook radio programme. This year the clocks in North America went an hour ahead three weeks earlier than the Brits. The radio feed is on a timer, 6am, and that meant Outlook - with some tagline about personal stories - instead of the news. Outlook used to be a case of interesting tales if true. Sadly, too many of them were not true. There were so many red flags that the production team should have given them a wide berth. A good rule of thumb is that if something doesn't make sense, that's because it's probably not true. I checked out one of the programme's Canadian stories and it was so full of holes it could be filed under Collander. Outlook has changed. Now the stories are more likely to be true but the subjects are so boring that no reasonable person cares about them. I tried several times to listen to a full episode but I can't remember now whose story was being recounted when I switched off. The subjects were that tiresome and boring. 

I'm a little bit baffled why these days news programme presenters thank the reporters on sir for their stories. Surely, these reporters have been paid for their contribution and are just doing their jobs. They didn't file the story out of the goodness of their hearts. Mind you, maybe I expect more from people when it comes to doing their jobs properly than others do. Years ago I was an employee of the year. That meant I was a member of the judging panel for the coming year's employee of the month. At the first meeting I felt most of the candidates for the employee of the month award were basically only doing the job they were paid for. I wasn't invited back for any other judging panel meetings.

I'm not a fan of Lallans. I think the problem is that there's no such language. I've heard folk on the radio, poets in particular, who tend to think that all they have to do is substitute as many English words with Scots dialect ones as they can. The problem is the dialect words are plucked willy-nilly from across Scotland. No single person would naturally use all those words in one sentence. There are many varieties of Lowland speech. Welding them all together into one supposed language, Lallans, comes across as fake and affected.

There's a radio programme called the Urbanist. For the past fortnight it was unavailable here. That didn't make me sad. The programme often makes me angry. It usually interviews architects and others involved in city development. The reality of this world is Grenville Towers and 72 dead. Most folk I know are victims of supposed urban developers rather than being better off thanks to them. These people very seldom make ordinary people's lives better. And yet I don't think I've ever heard the programme's presenters ever ask a tough question. The only criticisms of urban planning come from interviewees trying to differentiate themselves from their competitors. I suspect the presenters' reticence may be linked to the fact that much of the programme's content comes from international conferences and perhaps no-one wants to jeopardise the flow of invitations.

It seems criminal greed may run deeply in the British Royal Family. It would appear that Prince Andrew did not think the British public were giving him enough money via the Royal List. Nearly everyone knows that Duke of Windsor's reputation was heavily tainted by allegations of Nazism. But how many know of his Mafia association? A royal lifestyle in France didn't come cheap for the former King Edward VII. So, perhaps it would be tempting to start building up an unofficial retirement fund when appointed Governor of the Bahamas in 1940. The Mafia wanted to open casino resorts in the Bahamas, along the same lines as operations familiar in Cuba and Las Vegas. When a major opponent of the casino developments was brutally murdered, Windsor stopped the local police investigation, involving experienced British officers, and brought in two American police detectives who promptly set about destroying much of the evidence. One of them was definitely on the Mafia's payroll. But was the Duke? If the smoke and mirrors surrounding his alleged Nazi links are anything to go by, I suspect we'll never know.