Earlier today one blogger looks at how the net is being cited as the influence behind Chinese crime. Yet at the same time, the Times published an acolade on how: “from Birmingham to Brazil, young people find safety in the net.”

Headlines constantly scream about paedophiles targetting vulnerable children online, and pro-anorexia, or pro-suicide websites, yet then you hear the other side like churches being able to reach out to congregations far and wide, with infirm or elderly people from their own community who can’t get into church anymore downloading audio sermons and Bible podcasts.

Of course like anything open to the public, and indeed the internet is a free-for-all, it’s bound to get some abuse. But doesn’t the internet just give a reflection of society itself? Maybe we need to address the issues behind the problems instead of just creating layers of firewalls and wrapping us in tissues of security measures.

After all, “The Internet is a mirror of the population that uses it”, said Google’s vice president and chief Internet evangelist Vinton Cerf said in reference to the proliferation of fraud, social abuse, and other online crimes.

“If you stand in front of a mirror and you don’t like what you see, it does not help to fix the mirror,” Cerf said, back in 2007.  

So when we hear excuses like: “From the cases we cracked in recent years, we found a high proportion of young people who were found guilty of cheating, rape or robbery were using the internet and were corrupted by online filth”, we need to look at who is creating this filth and why.

But at the end of the day, if we don’t like it, we have the power to change it.

Online you can be without origin, without history and be whatever you want to be. That’s why things like Second Life are so popular. It can be a place to escape to, like for the people described in the Times: “In places where real-life communities are divided and dangerous, the internet can be the safest place for young people to connect with each other and make their voices heard.”

So by all means be careful online, but appreciate it for what it is…

Whatever you want it to be.

Is it a man’s world? Many would argue not but in the journalism field perhaps men still rule the roost.

On Monday, the Guardian asked us ‘where are all the female high-flyers?’, with reference to The Financial Times’s editorial management being dominated by men, yet just a few years ago women held several key roles. Peter Wilby ponders what this tells us about the way that Fleet Street deals with women.

From some insider sources, they reveal traditionally male work practices such as the “bollocks par” and the need to sell yourself. Last week an internal email was leaked from the FT acknowledging that some women are paid less for equivalent jobs as men.

Indeed, the National Union of Journalists chapel, which says women on average earn 11% less than men and is currently locked in a pay dispute, determined to “use the appropriate equality legislation” to address “massive anomalies in pay”.

Journalism should rightly, especially in the increasing accessible world we live in, be a profession that women can excel in, just as much as men. 

Our digital developments mean you can technically work from anywhere, instead of having to be in an office as of days gone by. Gone are the smoke-filled, male-dominated newsrooms of the past and let’s celebrate gender equality in light, airy and female-friendly offices everywhere. But maybe not.

Women in Journalism suggest that  whilst life may begin at 40, for women in the workplace ‘old age’ begins at 45, according to a pilot study on working women and ageism.

Alexandra Campbell states: “Seventy-one percent of the survey of 100 women described themselves as ‘very’ or ‘quite’ anxious about being able to go on working at their current level until they were 65, with women as young as 22 worried about the future. ‘In my office I see older women marginalised and ridiculed – it’s a gradual process and hasn’t yet happened to me, but I’m conscious of it, and more anxious as I age,’ said one respondent.”

The Guardian points out: “The more practical issue is that newspapers, again like other companies, tend to identify senior executive potential between the ages of 28 and 35.” Of course, this is prime time for childbearing for women.

Shouldn’t we look for inspiration to the ‘big three’? Rebekah Wade at the Sun, Dawn Neesom at the Daily Star and Tina Weaver at the Sunday Mirror…

But the Peter WilbyGuardian maintains: “The glass ceiling was fractured at least 15 years ago, but the hole doesn’t seem to get bigger.

“I think I know why. As profit margins become tighter and the industry more competitive, managements want to squeeze every last ounce from staff. They are suspicious of people who work a 40-hour week, never mind anyone who wants to work 20 or 30 hours. They prefer journalists who never go off duty, and can be rung at home day or night, weekends or weekdays.”

It’s an age-old dilemma and it looks like there might not ever be an answer to the question of biology over career. At least not one that is satisfactory to women who want it all anyway.

Roy Greenslade asked the question we all really wanted to know the answer to, in yestersday’s G2 section of the Guardian.  Is Coleen McLoughlin a journalist? On the wedding banns of her pending nuptials to Wayne Rooney in Crewe register office, her occupation is listed as one.

She is, of course, referring to her weekly column in Closer magazine. Greenslade disparagingly points out, “Its content is devoted to her passion – clothes shopping – and it is a tribute to her that for the past three years or so she has managed to churn out variations on the theme of look-what-I-wore-to-see-Wayne-play-football.”

She allegedly takes home a tidy £100,000 a year for her musings, whilst trainee journalists, who have studied for years, honed their skills and paid thousands for expensive courses can take their pick from the plum jobs on local papers. A competitive salary at £15,195 as a Trainee Reporter on the Surrey Advertiser anyone? Ideally you will have completed an NCTJ journalism course or equivalent, and hold the preliminary qualifications and a full driving  licence… unfortunately not just a footballer boyfriend and some very nice shoes.

So is Coleen a journalist?

Probably not. But ultimately people want to hear about what she’s up to, what she has bought this week, what she wore to a particular party and what she thinks about Jordan’s antics, or Victoria Beckham’s current weight, whatever it may be. And more people want to read about it, than want to read about a local village fete, or bin collections or what the local school are doing for the summer fair.

Our celebrity-obsessed culture means A-List (although often more likely C-List) endorsement is the currency of the time. And if Coleen’s words are worth more than a trained journalist’s, then that’s the way it is because we want it to be.

It’s all about what sells. All she has to do is pop to the shops, wear a new dress or even publish her banns and she’s got the whole world talking. So if Coleen wants to call herself a journalist, who is going to stop her? Probably no-one, and if someone did, it’d probably just lead to a new book deal anyway.

Not long ago, blogs seemed to be the reserve of a niche group but all of a sudden, they’ve become mainstream. Women’s magazine websites’ are emblazoned with messages screaming “read our blog” and sites like ASOS are embracing the new-found interest with gusto. It’s a fantastic promotional tool for ASOS: they can comment on celebrity fashion events and then include links to their offerings of the A List-inspired clothes to buy. Shoes like Kate Moss? Here they are for sale. Perfect!

IPC Connect, the publisher of the women’s sector of magazines like Now, Look, Pick Me Up, and Chat, has recently appointed a new, and it’s first,  digital development director. Kevin Brown has been brought on-board to capture the female audience that is now “migrating from print to the web”. They are not alone in wanting to grab a slice of the blogging action, as a way to counter falling circulations.

There are a number of reasons behind the so-called “migration”: not least the Facebook explosion. But is it just another fad? Social networking has become a little bit old, with the Facebook fatigue really kicking in. Now instead of “Jenny Morris is think she can’t believe how many people are on here”, you are more likely to read “Sarah Barlow is logging off for good”.

Will blogging go the same way? It’s a way that magazines can talk directly to their readers on a more regular basis but how long before the ennui strikes again?

If done properly maybe the blog can withstand the test of time, but doing it because blogging is the new black? Not likely.

I think this is a little like the time I got an ipod for Christmas. I didn’t think I’d use it ever, I didn’t see myself as someone who would have an ipod. I think it made me completely reassess who I was. I was someone with an ipod?! Wow. Even though I do use it all the time (for the gym really), I have to admit I’m still not that technologically aware. I’m not entirely sure how to put my own songs on it…. so I’ve been listening to my little sister’s eclectic mix for a good few years. Bit strange but sometimes makes me giggle when “going to the chapel” comes on straight after a bit of example.  Has been known to make me lose concentration and fall off the treadmill. Hmm.

And I think having a blog is a bit the same. I’m just not down with the myspace generation. I have a slight concern that it’s a bit like those dodgy videos they manage to dredge up when you become famous. Like “ooh look, this is what she said way back when!!” Not that I’m going to be famous. I suppose it doesn’t matter then really.

I can say what I like!