up to date? errrrrr ...

 I took this screenshot from a website's homepage on the date of this post. Oh dear. Even worse is that other aspects of the site have been updated in 2026.

 

google picture search ...

 Close, but no cigar.

I haven't been an academic for five years.

The first picture isn't me. 

I'm no longer a Senior lecturer - and I never worked at Teesside University.

[Note that my up-to-date employment history is readily available on the web]

Other than these, not too bad. But AI has a reputation for making errors and/or guesses.

In this example the errors aren't a disaster. But what if it was a health or medical enquiry? Or flight details? Or car repair advice? Or an assignment or dissertation? Shall I go on? 

making easy things hard ...

 When I tried to open my gmail account this morning I got this: 

Now, let me make this clear: not only do I not wish to have AI-powered email, but I would be unlikely to ever communicate with someone who has an AI-powered email - so I started clicking to get my gmail home page. After going round in several circles I finally got this message ...

  

To me, that reads like it's my fault. It wasn't, it was Google's. I wonder what part AI might have played in this shambles? 

inbox inefficiency

 OK, this was in the 'from' and 'subject' line of an email. What do you think it is all about?

I doubt that any of you - or, indeed anyone - would realise it is a promotion from a hotel.

I stay there several times a year. When I first actually read one of their emails [how many did I simply delete as spam before then?] I did have a quick word with the manager the next time I was there. He dismissed it as 'that's the marketing department'.  I bit my tongue and just said 'they're costing you customers' as I left. 

I'd have given him 10 minutes for nowt over a cup of their excellent coffee. For a night's stay I'd have talked with the marketing department for a morning or afternoon. Or sold them a copy of my book. Or they could simply have typed something like "tips on effective email marketing" into a search engine.

The irony is that it is a very good hotel in a very good location with reasonable prices, ie that have three of the 4Ps right ... but without the right promotion, they are wasted.

ooooops ...

 From FT.com ...

an ai question

Q. If you use an LLM to - for example - transcribe a meeting, can that LLM [legally] use any information in that transcription in its 'training' ie make it available to anyone who might look for it?

A.  Most probably, yes.

Oh ... and the same goes for any information and/or data anyone puts into an 'open' LLM. And I don't just mean your personal stuff - anything about the organization that any employee might put in also goes into the ai's memory, and so is available to anyone. Including competitors.

NB Most large organizations I have come across have some kind of tech support that acts as administrator for the systems they run. If an individual wants to put any kind of software on their employer's PC/laptop it needs to be signed off by tech support ... and they're usually - correctly - very protective of their system.    

my, how things have changed

 

make your mind up ...

Premier Inn are happy for users to reject unnecessary cookies on their website, but there's no option on their app. I'm a regular customer of Premier Inn, but I'll not be using the app for future bookings.

 

not so secure security ... thanks to ai

 From @HedgieMarkets on X, February 2026 [always good stuff]

Thoughtful email message ...

 

From X ... and funny because it's [probably] true

 

money for nothing ...

Just 'helped out' a friend of a friend who was concerned about how much he was spending on network advertising without any signs of success. 

I'll not bore you with all the details, but when [prompted by me] he asked the company he was paying to manage his advertising for some kind of report on the websites his ads were being delivered they told him 'that's not possible'. Hmmmmmmm 🤔

Effectively, 'we're taking your money but we're not going to tell you how we're spending it'. 

ai 'poisoning' search results

 From @HedgieMarkets on X, February 2026 [always good stuff]

Not funny but true ...

Sorry, I don't know the origin of this ... 

How many? Or is that how few?

This research is from 2024 - but I suspect things haven't changed much ...  Research reveals YouTube’s most secret stats

ancient history repeating itself ?

ai can only look back ...

Just saying 😏

well durr ...

This isn't e-commerce only, but I thought it worth including here for all those marketers who might be involved in direct sales promotion. 

d'oh

 

nice ...

 But not really ... 

... because when I went to the site, the number of products where the discount code could be used were not only very limited ... but none were suitable for me.

you either click on 'accept all', or ...

 ... you have to click on all of these. Or, of course, you leave the site.

money well spent for the UK tax payers?

In every edition of the book I try to find an example of an over-priced website ... here's an example. A few weeks ago the UK government launched a new AI Skills website. Costing - apparently - £4.1m [that is; four point one million pounds] the site was created by PwC. 

Welllllll ... I reckon it would have taken me a couple of hours to find the sites that it links to, and another couple of hours to knock up the site. Apart from the obvious [though subjective] look of the site, that many of the linked-to sites were, errr, iffy - there is the objective issue of the site not meeting the UK government's own usability rules.

Furthermore, the site has no obvious backend [eg an e-commerce provision], being little more than a list of links [rather like my own site alancharlesworth.com].

I'm not going to go all political on this ... but who signed off on this procurement deal?

just what is ai?

Anything from Tom Goodwin is worth reading - even if you do not agree with his opinion. In response to the research shown in the image below, he asked; 'Could there be a more useless term than "using AI"?'. Did it mean:

• Autonomous Robots in factory?
• CoPilot is on 1 laptop?
• HR use for writing reviews?
• There's a drone in a cupboard somewhere?
• Dallas office tried it?

For more on Tom's view on AI [which is kind-of similar to mine] see his Nowism - Edition 35.

not-so-joined-up-thinking ...

 Apparently Genspark spent around $16m on last night's Superbowl ads ... and this was their landing page at the time. Note it's their home page, but as it was the URL used on the ad, I'll count it as being the landing page to the advert.

NB the red circle and arrow were added by me 😏.

virtually useless

 I'm booked in for two nights at a Premier Inn next week. I have both booking confirmations but on my 'upcoming bookings' on the website only one is listed. So I've just rung the reception at the hotel. I've stayed there many times - the receptionists are very good. 

The problem is that I couldn't get past the 'virtual receptionist' which couldn't understand the problem ... or just put me through to a real person who, I have no doubt, will have answered it in seconds.

Ho hum.

is google going downhill?

 I've never seen a web page download on a tilt before. Can't have been deliberate ... could it?

OOOOOOf

 

irony ...

 From Google:

Is vibe coding good or bad?

AI Overview

Vibe coding (using AI for code via natural language prompts) is considered good for rapid prototyping, brainstorming, and getting quick results but bad for building complex, scalable, and secure production applications because it often lacks structure, deep understanding, and maintainability, creating technical debt and security risks without strong underlying code knowledge. 

i live in the north of england ...

 ... which isn't Scotland. An ad on my twitter feed ...

more data please ...

 For this chart I would like to see the methodology, in particular what the research considered 'shopping' to be. Bear in mind that online still only represents around 25% of all retail sales, so for around 13% of folk to shop everyday seems a bit high. Unless, that is, delivered take-a-way food is included - which, particularly in the US - would move the numbers up. The once a week/month numbers seem representative of the '25% of all retail sales stats'.

As always, never take any data at face value.

It's a retailer ...

 ... but it takes 14 clicks to get in. Would anything like that ever happen offline?

nothing new to see here ...

I'm assuming a couple of things here: 

1 The research is about when shoppers abandon purchases when they have put something in a basket/cart, and 

2 The 'extra costs' in the most popular reason are predominantly shipping costs. 

That said, these have been the main reasons, in much the same order,  since online shopping began around 30 years ago. Which reflects rather badly on e-commerce folk - in my opinion.

 

That's a lot of 'views' ...

 ... but very little engagement [which is probably from staff at the advertised company]. Why not get your calculator out and work out the percentages?

Oh dear ... might have done better with a crystal ball?

 

Just saying ...

 From Private Eye #1667, January 2026: 

In 2023 TikTok was fine £12.7 million in the UK for illegally processing the data of 1.4 million children under 13 who were using its platform without parental consent. Later that year an Amnesty International report showed how TikTok‘s relentless pursuit of young users' attention “risks exacerbating mental health concerns such as depression, anxiety and self harm".

find your own way

I'm in Nottingham regularly, and I've been to this place couple of times, but I've not walked around it. So, I thought a map would be good, preferably with some identified walks with distance included. Sadly, no such thing on the website. Not even a map.😕

what you don't want to see on a web page ...

 

OK, maybe the page's contents are rather static - but really, over ten years? 

What is it telling visitors/readers? Could it be; 'don't trust anything you read here because it might have changed'?

truth or lie?

I just saw an ad on X which said: '

'We get your brand ranked #1 by ChatGPT and every leading AI'.

That would be a good trick seeing as there is no rank on GenAI. 

Naturally, I'm not going to publicise the organization by naming it here.

You know those likes you got on social media ...

 

https://x.com/i/status/2015091616663351313

And the fine print?

A contract is something you should read in its entirety, not just the highlights.

marketoonist ... always funny

 

excellent recommendation from X's ai ...

 

sign up ... or you can't get in

This message - 'sign up for our newsletter' - covered the homepage of this TV guide, with no option to delete it or get round it.

funny ...

Interesting take on GenZ's obsession with social media ... 'Sarah thought she'd met the perfect man'.

when the ad hides the page ...

 I landed on a web page - and got this advert taking up the whole screen ...

I could not scroll up, down or across. I could not get rid of the ad  - the 'delete' X is in the top corner but not big enough to be clicked. 

So I clicked on 'back' to the previous page without ever seeing the page under the ad - so all the work done to get the link on another site was completely wasted. Ho hum.

not an ad ... but it is really

 The author/presenter of this video as been around for a while and I like [most of] his stuff.

I've included it here as it includes the pros and cons of using ai for researching audience data.

three decades to learn ...

 In the early days of website development, an important issue was screen size. Back then the answer was make the web page a fixed - smaller - size so i fit on all screens. as screen sizes increased for PCs and got smaller for laptops, flexible pages were used [they adjusted to the screen size]. Then came touchscreens, generally they were smaller and so we got just coding for them - and as well as flexible for all size screens. Of course, this is the abbreviated history - and I've not even started on the web page layout changing on different devices. Oh, and my book this comes under usability.

The solution back then was 'test the site on multiple screens', and it should still be the case. Not always it seems.

I was searching for a hotel, so after entering my search criteria I needed to click on 'search' [obviously].

This is a screenshot from my iPhone ...

And this is the same page on my iPad mini.

As it happens, I was searching on the latter - and because of the design there was no 'search' button. I could not scroll up, down or across. As I'd used the site before I knew that slither of green was the search button, but on a touch screen I could not 'touch' it. Result? No booking. Would a marketer ever sign-off on a website on which making a sale was impossible?

Note that I checked the page on my iPhone just for this blog. I used my PC to make the booking*. And if any tech person is reading this and saying 'well you booked the room, so no problem' ... you're missing the point. Completely. 

* I've changed the real date and destination 😏 

 Back to another old favourite for an example of tech folk doing marketing jobs. 

The old favourite is a website not recognising my password, then when I follow the prompt to change it I enter the same password and it tells me it already exists. Grrrr.

But that's not the main reason for this post - take a look at the message I've high-lighted at the bottom of the image.

What that is folks is the software code for whatever I'd done wrong. get a marketer involved and the message would tell m what is wrong eg 'this password has been used previously'. Ho hum.

old advice comes up-to-date

 Back in the day, a mentor of mine told me:

If you’re writing something that matters, take your time in getting it right.

if you’re writing something that doesn’t matter, don't waste your time – just don’t bother writing it at all.

Now he might say:

If you’re writing something that matters, don’t write it with ai.

If you’re writing something that doesn’t matter, still don’t write it with ai. 

what? say that again. and again.

 Apparently Netflix deliberately dumbs down dialogue because viewers simply don’t follow the plot.  According to Matt Damon, talking on a Joe Rogan podcast, Netflix explicitly asks writers to repeat key plot points multiple times in dialogue, so viewers who are glued to their phones can at least understand what’s happening on screen. Watching while scrolling has become the norm — and content is adjusted to fit that habit.

So why have I included this story here? 

Well, switch the narrative round. Might organizations using social media to market their products/services need to dumb down their message because users are also watching TV while they're looking at that message?

Source: nexta.tv

not so special offer ...

 I got this email offer from Travelodge ...

Let's ignore the fact that I have to book today and that I have to travel in the next couple of months ... but it's for a 5% saving. Yes, a £100 room would be slashed to an absolute bargain price of £95! Pass me my diary.

Within minutes I also received this offer ...

Welllll, 35% is a worthwhile saving, but three days to decide on a holiday before Easter? OK, some folk might be planning a break and so this might be a bargain ... but how many folk are in that position?

how much?

 January 2026 saw the UK government confirm that Digital Unlimited Group, Havas UK and M&C Saachi have been appointed as it’s ad agencies of record. At the same time WPP Media has been hired “to lead government media strategy and support vital public sector campaigns”. Together the accounts are worth £1.95 billion [yes … billion].

And why is this story included here? Well, it goes on to say that these appointments are meant to “streamline [government] work to more effectively reach target audiences across the platforms. It engages with, such as TikTok, Instagram and Reddit … “

Although it also includes other media such as TV, that's a LOT of money going towards three social media platforms.

Source: Private Eye #1666

wrong address

There a bloke with the same name as me who - mistakenly - often gives out my email address as his own, so I get emails addressed to him. One included his home address, so I wrote to him explaining the situation - he ignored it so I delete anything that comes in on my email that is or him. 

Anyhoo, one arrived today from a business email and before I deleted it I looked at the footer, which began with ...

This email and the information contained in it and in any attachments, are confidential and may be privileged. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorised to, and must not use, disclose, copy, distribute, retain or rely on this email or any part of it.

Note how - according to them - it becomes my responsibility to meet their requirements even though they sent the email to my address. This is a commonly used email footer. 

how much? or rather, how little?

 My thanks to Private Eye edition #1666 which reported on 'click bait' articles in UK newspapers. Within the article was a revelation that one headline gained 1.6 million views. Whilst this might be impressive, not so is the income gained for those views: £133. That's 0.008 pence per click. OK, I suppose if you're running hundreds, thousands even, of these headlines on web pages that get a lot of visitors you'll make a few quid, but if you're not, well, 0.008p per click ...

make your minds up folk

This is from a list of 'expert' articles, suggesting that there is a split in opinion.

worst targeting ever ?

 This appeared in my X feed ...

Needless to say, I had no idea what it was. Even when I looked it up on Google, I still had no idea. Apparently, it is 'a tiny metal device, often titanium, used in endoscopy and surgery to stop bleeding by clamping blood vessels or closing tissue defects'. 

So, something surgeons might use. Ho hum.😏

poor targeting = waste of money

 First off; the targeting: 'textbook', 'semester' and 'back to school' combined by the textbook subjects makes it obvious that I'm never going to buy one of these books.

However, it's not just me that's been presented with an ad that is of no interest to me - take a look at the numbers I've highlighted at the bottom.

Yep ... seven and a half thousand people have had this ad presented on their twitter/X timeline. And if the advertiser is paying per impression? Oh dear. The one 'like' might be a buyer I suppose - but just one like suggests that the books' publisher didn't even ask their staff to click on the heart of the ad. 

singular or plural?

 Yet another poorly targeted ad - but what took my eye on this one was that I read it as if it was me who had reviewed the product - which I hadn't because I've not bought any of these boots. And if I had, why advertise them to me? 

The issue is, of course, that 'you' can be singular or plural - in this case you meant anyone in the population. Far better would have been 'As reviewed by buyers'. I'm guessing artificially intelligent software thought using you made the ad more targeted. Ho hum.

confusing ... why

 This one is a bit heavy on text [do we need to know all this? And will anyone read it?] But what confused me was when I arrived on the site and this filled the screen.

You see, I thought the ' ... and close' meant close the site - as in 'if you don't agree you can't use the site'. It didn't, it meant close the message. If you think I was being stupid that's not the point - even stupid people can buy flight tickets.

You'll not be going to a gig to see this band ...

 ... they don't exist!

Read the story ... How I used AI to transform myself from a female dance artist to an all-male post-punk band – and what that means for other musicians.