British Airways gets tweet-shamed

From Gawker article:

Using Twitter’s self-serve ad platform, Syed purchased a series of promoted tweets in two major markets — New York City and the United Kingdom — in order to publicly shame British Airways for mishandling his dad’s stuff and their subsequent complaints.

“Don’t fly @BritishAirways. Their customer service is horrendous,” read the initial tweet that published Monday night.

Over the course of 24 hours, Syed’s campaign was seen by nearly 77,000 people, costing him a total spend of $1,000.

Which begs the question: If you could spend US$1,000.00 tweet-shaming a Caribbean company (or hell! even a country/government/politician) who would it be?

My choices:

  1. LIME
  2. LIAT
  3. [Bonus round] The West Indies Cricket Board 
Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in caribbean, general stupidity, random musings

Electronic Crimes Bill (update)

The much bally-hooed Electronic Crimes Bill, which passed through the lower house on Friday, is carded for debate in the Upper House of Grenada’s parliament next Wednesday July 10th. NOW Grenada publishes a government press release reports that

However, because of the outpouring of concern Government has given the assurance that it is committed to looking at the section to ensure that in no way free internet comment is either inhibited or by any slightest measure, threatened.

A statement from the Government Information Service said that Prime Minister Dr Keith Mitchell has asked his legislative team to review all sections of the bill to ensure that it remains consistent with his commitment of not just protecting open debate and dialog, but to reflect the new commitment to broaden patterns of democracy that will be reflective in other upcoming legislation.

“We are confident that at the end of the process we will have legislation that will deal with issue of cyber crime, identify theft, child pornography and electronic stalking without infringing, or undermining public debate or any matters attendant to an open, free and democratic society,” said the statement.

(Emphasis mine – – – for comic relief)

The report goes on to mention that the other bills being debated are the Electronic Filing Bill, 2013Electronic Transactions Bill, 2013Electronic Transfer of Funds Crimes Bill, 2013 and Electronic Evidence Bill, 2013. Given the very well-known fact that literally NO ONE in the government or judiciary of Grenada – irrespective of party affiliation – knows anything about computers, the internet, electronic communications or social media, I am at a loss as to how they are going to establish such legislation. This is the equivalent of having a virgin manage a whorehouse or a Catholic priest teach marriage counselling – what the hell they know about the subject matter to be able to tell me (promiscuous and divorced) what to do? These are people who, rather than conduct government business from a secure government mailserver utilising our country domain, do so instead with their personal email addresses like [<— Inside Grenadian joke]. You telling me about this Grenadian government?


Posted in general stupidity, government, grenada, online censorship

Freedom of Expression

From the Constitution of Grenada (which seems to have already taken care of bad-talking mofos):

10.-(1) Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive ideas and information without interference, freedom to communicate ideas and information without interference (whether the communication be to the public generally or to any person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his correspondence. (2) Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this section to the extent, that the law in question makes provision- a. that is reasonably required in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health ; b. that is reasonably required for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings, preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, maintaining the authority and independence of the courts or regulating the technical administration or the technical operation of telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless broadcasting or television ; or c. that imposes restrictions upon public officers, and except so far as that provision or, as the case may be, the thing done under the authority thereof is shown not to be reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.


Posted in general stupidity, government, grenada, online censorship

Of backwardness, ignorance and censorship: Grenada 2013


Disclaimer: I am a Grenadian, living in Grenada. However this blog is hosted on and any words written herein are (as far as I know) subject to the laws of the country this blog’s server resides in (most definitely not Grenada). The government doesn’t have any authority over the contents of my brain the last time I checked.

On to the subject at hand, Grenada’s infamous Electronic Crimes Act broken down for you, without any comment from me. The draft legislation is not available online – how ironic.

Re-posted from NOW Grenada:

Last Friday the Grenada House of Representatives or the Lower House of Parliament approved a number of legislations that will bring electronic activities in line with modern living where technology is used more and more each day.

For those of you who want some more clarity about offensive messages here is what the law says:
A person SHALL NOT knowingly or without lawful excuse or justification send by means of an electronic system or an electronic device (a) information that is grossly offensive or has a menacing character (b)information which he or she knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will persistently by making use of such electronic system or a electronic devices; or (c) electronic mail or an electronic message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages.

For the purpose of this section, the term “electronic mail” or “electronic message” means a message or information created or transmitted or received on an electronic system or electronic device including attachments in text, images, audio, video and any other electronic record which may be transmitted with the message.


Electronic Fraud:
A person shall not knowingly or without lawful excuse or justification gain, interfere with data or an electronic system: (a) to induce another person to enter into a relationship (b) with intent to deceive another person; or (c) with intent to defraud a person.
Where such an act is likely to cause damage or harm tot hat person or any other person.
A person who contravenes this subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three years or both

Electronic Stalking
A person shall not knowingly or without lawful excuse or justification intimidate, coerce, insult or annoy another persons using an electronic system. A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three years or both

Prank Calls to law enforcement
A person shall not make calls to any law enforcement authority or emergency services with the prupose of giving false and misleading information
A person making a call to any law enforcement or emergency services shall not: (a) use a caller identification service to transmit misleading or inaccurate caller identification information service; (b)mask their voice or (c)provide a fake phone number to the call recipient
A person who contravenes subsection (1) and (2) commits and offence and is liable summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $5000 or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both

Institution of criminal proceedings
Criminal proceedings shall be instituted under this Act except on information filed by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions


I’ll post more information as it I come across it.


Posted in random musings
About BBB
yingyangHi there! Pam Northman* (aka BlahBlohBlog) here, live and direct from Grenada. I'm a 40something, uber-liberal, working, single mother. In my time off I indulge my web, TV & pop culture addiction, revel in my attempts at nerd-girlishness and moonlight as a passionate Caribbeanista.
*looooooong story!

Leave a comment. Drop me an email. Circle me on Google+. Or follow me on Twitter.
Who or What I’m Reading
I used to have a big, long blogroll but who cares about that these days? If you want to see who/what catches my interest, check out my Twitter following list. Plenty of cool, smart West Indian folks there.