AUTHOR
Nuno Sotero Alves da Silva, Simon Rogerson and Bernd Stahl

ABSTRACT

Through the analysis of mankind history we conclude that technology and society can be waved in a feedback model, as Toffler (1980) describes. Afterword, ICT revolution introduces a new complex world of distributed, interactive and collaborative systems engaging organizations. In that sense, the educational environment is an example not only because, it promotes technological innovation as itself, but also as a user of that innovation.

Regarding the case of e-learning, through literature acknowledge it is possible to underpin several definitions. Typically it is related with creation, delivery, and management of learning using Internet tools and technology as posted by Martin and Webb (1999) or; “nothing more than the use of electronic tools and technologies to assist us in our teaching and learning” (Stahl, 2005).

Through out the analysis of such literature we may state that high quality e-learning material engages (Turban, 2006):

• high levels of interactivity;
• vivid simulations;
• video and/or audio;
• community based: with access to tutors or fellow e-learners;
• eliminating barriers of time, distance, and socioeconomic status.

However, assuming that such technological perspective of future educational process is enough, is condemned such technology to a failure. In fact, ethical and cultural issues bias may incorporate the answer to unsuccessful e-learning realities. In that sense, the aim of this paper is to report the lessons engaged by the empirical enquiry regarding Lusíada Universities organizational setting, and its e-learning project.

To obtain plausible results regarding the quoted research, we are induced by the following research questions:

• what is e-learning implementation at a University setting?
• what is the impact of culture on the implementation of e-universities?
• what is the impact of Ethics on the implementation of e-universities?
• what is the link of cultural, ethical and e-learning issues at e-University setting?

Given the research questions, the next and natural step is to underline the concept of culture and ethics. Culture embraces national and organizational perspectives. We may state that “national” culture is what distinguishes the character of a society. In that sense, it is important to note that the cultural boundaries between nations became increasingly interesting, and there may be significant cultural differences within countries (Hofstede, 1986), which is relevant interest in the case of Lusíada Universities in Portugal and Angola.

On the other hand, ethics has to be seen in a social context. Such perspective induces us to make an individual choice about which principles to follow as a requirement of fairness or justice. Ethical principles can be conceptualized here as general guidelines, ideals, or expectations that need to be taken into account, along with other relevant conditions and circumstances, in the design and analysis of electronic university in the proposed specific contexts. Therefore, ethics need a unifying principal, according to Moor (1999, p66) in “just consequentialism”, that would protect rights through an impartiality test, and then increase benefits to promote human flourishing. This consequentialism often has Aristotelic fundamental conceptions, and justifies how different conceptions of education may impact the Good Life.

To conclude, we may affirm that the ethical and cultural impacts can emerge trough the development and implementation process of an e-learning technology (Rogerson, 2004) and computer ethics (Moor, 1985) arise. Computer ethics might be understood very narrowly as the efforts of professional philosophers to apply traditional ethical theories like utilitarianism, Kantianism, or virtue ethics to issues regarding the use of computer technology. Regarding specifically the use of ICT on education, Stahl (2002) identified some moral problems (power, privacy, monitoring, surveillance, access, opportunity cost, and awareness) that should be considered to allow the identification of relevant issues in particular contexts of this paper, in three levels:

• macro level: what is the purpose of education?;
• meso-level: what is the purpose of organisation? (Kant vs Cultural Relativism!);
• micro-level: do I agree with the organisation’s definitions?.

Afterwards it is explored what can be common between culture, ethics and e-Learning, in fact, a few existing literature can help on this meaning. Computer ethics requires us to think about the new nature of computer technology and our values. The term “e-Values of learning” will be suggested, promoting them we can expect the needs of e-learning, but what are e-Values?. Must be values associated to the electronic technology, regarding the role of university in society (Brey, 2004).

An initial proposed methodology based on a qualitative approach was tested. Such methodology implied empirical work done on pilot case studies, which embraced data collection through interviews, field notes, documents, participant observations and some historical stories. To agglutinate this research, action research and case studies configure the best practice, policy development and theory creation in order to help solving practical problems. The empirical result that emerged from the interpretative analysis of the data collected, in accordance to Walsham (1995), is a consequence of the iterative process between field data and theoretical model evolved over time, which will be stated in the final version of the paper.

Such paper will also distinguish three technical phases for the analysis of project implementation (Technological Infrastructures and Services, Knowledge/Content Management, and Computer Mediated Communication), and one top phase linking strategic issues. Each phase could represent the progress of project and could be analysed in accordance to the following figure:

As a final remark, we should state that the e-learning project in Lusíada Universities is under revaluation. Such revaluation will engage a new plan that will be submitted to Top Management (Administrative Council), and stakeholders (including the commercial suppliers). Regarding the status quo and future needs to highlight a new strategy, namely including ethical and cultural issues, will be frame worked in this paper.

However, an interesting finding is that e-learning emerged as a key reference on Lusíada Universities; however despite this revealed strategic interest, the practical implementation is still under development, and with diverse intermediate results. For that, we will present a comparative analysis for each case study and comments regarding each case study, as well as, the chosen methodology will be welcome.

REFERENCES

Afonso, Ana P. (2002). E-Learning in Portugal (in Portuguese E-Learning em Portugal). Education Technology & Society 5(2), 172-174.

Amaral L. and Leal D. (2004). From Classroom Teaching to e-Learning: the way for a strong definition. Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal.

Anderson, T. (2004). Towards a theory of online learning. Theory and practice of online learning, A. University: pp. 33-60.

Arias-Oliva, et al.(2004),”University Challenges in Information Society”, ETHICOMP 2004, pp. 38 -49.

Brey, Philip (2004). “Ethical Issues for the Virtual University.” Ethicomp2004, pp. 170-188.

Brown, A.D.(1998) Organisational culture. 2nd ed. London : Financial Times Pitman Publishing .

Cameron, K.S., & Quinn, R.E. (1999). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. Reading, MA: Addinson-Wesly.

Conole, G. (2004). E-Learning: The Hype and the Reality. Journal of Interactive Media in Education , Special Issue (12).

Hofstede, Geert (1986) “Cultural differences in Teaching and Learning” IJIR 301-320.

Martin, Elaine and Webb, David (2001), “Is e-learning good learning?”, E-learning, Ethics and Equity Conference at Victoria University, April 20th, 2001, pp. 49-60.

McRobb S., Jefferies P., Stahl, B. (2007). “Exploring the Relationships between Pedagogy, Ethics &Technology: building a framework for strategy development”. Technology, Pedagogy & Education (16:1), pp 111-126.

Moor, J. (1985). What is Computer Ethics? Metaphilosophy, 16, pp. 266-275.

Moor, J. (1999). “Just consequentialism and Computing”. Ethics and Information Technology, (1:1), pp 65-69.

Nagi, K. (2006) “Solving Ethical Issues in E-learning” in Third International Conference on E-learning for Knowledge-Based Society.

Rogerson, S. (2004). “The Ethics of Software Development Project Management”. In Bynum, Terrell W. and Rogerson, S. (2004). Computer ethics and professional responsibility [edited by]. Oxford : Blackwell.

Stahl, Bernd Carsten (2002b). “Ethical Issues in E-Teaching – a Theoretical Framework” In: King, G. et al. (eds.) (2002): Proceedings of INSPIRE VII, Quality in Learning and Delivery Techniques, Limerick, Ireland, 25-27.03.2002: The British Computer Society: pp. 135 – 148.

Stahl, Bernd Carsten (2003): “Cultural Universality versus Particularity in CMC” In: Proceedings of the Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Tampa, 04 to 06 August 2003, pp. 1018 – 1026 .

Stahl, B. (2004). “E-Teaching – the Economic Threat to the Ethical Legitimacy of Education?”. In: Journal of Information Systems Education (15:2), pp. 155 – 162.

Stahl, B. (2005). “E-voting: an Example of Collaborative E-teaching and E-learning”. In: Journal of Interactive Technology & Smart Education (2:1), pp. 19-30.

Toffler, A. (1980). The Third Wave. William Morrow and Company, Inc. New York.

Turban, E., King, D., Lee, J., Veihland, D. (2006). Electronic commerce: a managerial perspective. (eds.) Pearson Prentice Hall.

Walsham, G. (1995) “Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method.” European Journal of Information Systems, (4:2), pp. 74-81.

Weaver, P. (2002). “Preventing E-Learning Failure.” Training and Developmnet (56:8), pp 45-50.

AUTHOR
Nidhi Sharma, Shalini Kesar and Diane Milne

ABSTRACT

As part of the Scottish Executive’s strategy to motivate low-income parents to re-enter labour market, in 2004, 10 projects “Working for Families Projects (WfFP)” were initiated. The principal aim of which is to encourage unemployed parents by providing extra support and guidance to families who wanted to seek either employment or training/education for employment purposes. This paper reflects on the findings of the study conducted on the WfFP that focused on women in ethnic minority in particular. The main goal of the WfFP for ethnic minority is to provide a holistic support and resources such as child care, Information, Communications and Technologies (ICT) training/learning skills, information about Community crèches.

AUTHOR
Anne Rogerson

ABSTRACT

Introduction

There can be no doubt that technological developments have revolutionised both learning and communication in the last two decades. Mobile phones and the Internet mean we are no longer dependent on either geographical location or time in order to communicate with our peers and colleagues. Such barriers are a thing of the past and these developments are to be heralded as a means of opening up gateways to improved communication and with that, hopefully, opportunities to develop learning. Information is readily available at the touch of the “search” button and we can share such information with whomsoever we choose – and there I believe is an underlying problem, which must be highlighted and addressed in an educational forum.

The very nature of ease of access can create problems for the vulnerable, especially the young. The use of social networking sites has the potential to create issues, for adolescents particularly, which impact on the individual, schools and ultimately on the educational process. My paper draws upon experience as headteacher of a secondary school in England, shared experiences with other colleagues, the lessons to be learned and suggestions for practices to be introduced in order that the negative effects of this powerful technology can be minimised, if not controlled. I submit below a skeleton of the format the paper would take.

Outline advantages of the technology, uses in schools

• Improved information sources, (coursework research, statistical data, Google world for maps)
• Encouraging active citizenship, (information about local services, volunteering opportunities, Youth Parliament)
• Creating a global community, (links with schools/colleges abroad, sharing technology/experiences/practice)

Outline potential disadvantages

• Access to inappropriate, potentially “corrupting” material
• Use of social networking sites
• Negative impact on social skills

It is on the latter that my paper is based. The use of such sites is not necessarily to be condemned for they can generate healthy discussions and help youngsters to formulate their opinions. However there is a darker side to the use of such sites. I believe this aspect needs to be examined on two fronts, namely when the participants are known to each other and secondly when they are not.

When correspondents know each other personally e.g. a group of friends in a tutor/class/year group; members of a youth/sports club

• Comments can be made which are speculative and unsubstantiated – sometimes about third parties not involved in the initial exchange. The public nature of the networking site can give such allegations credibility, especially if others then add to the observations/comments. This can potentially cause distress which is brought into school the next day, leading to problems/allegations within the school community.
• Such comments may lead the victim to feel isolated and is indeed a form of bullying. It is a particularly insidious form though. This is not the unkind note passed across the classroom to be intercepted by a teacher and dealt with at source. This is invasive, it is broadcast, it follows the child into his/her home, often into his/her own bedroom – and it must feel all pervasive to the young person. The impact this can have on a vulnerable adolescent is well documented

The second aspect occurs when the correspondent is not known, but a believable profile is created for the adolescent e.g. pre-pubescent girl believes she is “speaking” to a girl of similar age or boy believing he is in communication with a football enthusiast of contemporary age.

• May lead to inappropriate requests (possible use of web cams)
• May result in actual meetings based on the “trust” created by the networking site exchanges
• Can lead to abuse of the minor (physical, emotional or sexual)

The examples will have case study illustrations and analyses.

Dependence on such sites as a form of interaction can lead to a loss of, or indeed failure to develop, inter-personal social skills, based on visual (facial expressions/body language) and auditory signals (tone of voice, volume, pace of delivery), and upon which social communication is built in the real world. I would suggest that an over dependence on social networking sites impoverishes the users and potentially places them at a disadvantage in the real world; unless of course technological innovation will have such a radical impact that the parameters and norms of social intercourse as we understand them today will virtually disappear!

The way forward-what can be done and by whom?

• How can the risks be minimised?
• Who are the “socially responsible” to ensure that “living beyond technology” is a reality for potentially vulnerable adolescents?
• Examine the role of key players
  • Parents/carers What can be done in the home?
  • Schools/educational institutions What role for professional educators?
  • Social networking sites Is the provider to be held accountable?
  • Governments – a real issue

Conclusions

Over to you, the audience.

AUTHOR
Marco Roccetti, Stefano Ferretti Marco Furini, Claudio E. Palazzi
and Paola Salomoni

ABSTRACT

Web 2.0 is widely seen as a powerful tool that makes society better, but the dark side is that all the power might be dissipated in egoistic use and waste of resources, the difference between who has access to information and who has not might increase, and the reciprocal inner closure among users might be favoured. In this article we provide guidelines to redesign the utilization paradigm of Web 2.0 so as to reuse the wasted resources and make them available to altruistic services. This novel and altruistic paradigm would increase the social solidarity and favour the establishment of a “better world”.

AUTHOR
Mary Prior, Simon Rogerson and N. Ben Fairweather

ABSTRACT

Background

A longitudinal study is being conducted into the ethical attitudes of IS professionals, sponsored by the Institute for the Management of Information Systems (IMIS). The latest phase of the study (the ‘2006 survey’) was conducted during 2006-2007 [1]. There were several participant groups, including final year undergraduates studying at a UK university. There were some intriguing differences in the responses of the different participant groups to certain issues. This paper presents the results of a follow-up study with a UK final year undergraduate group similar to the one that took part in the 2006 survey, to probe in more detail their attitudes to three key issues (intellectual property, use of employers’ facilities and electronic surveillance). The issues arising from the study will be discussed and the potential for further work will be explored.

Methodology

The 2006 survey consisted of statements to which respondents indicated the strength of their agreement, or disagreement using a Lickert scale. This gave rise to some interesting findings. For example, a considerable proportion of the UK students appear to endorse the making of illegal copies of software and to consider acceptable the use of their employer’s computer facilities for their own personal profit-making activities.

However there are limitations to such a survey. It is possible that respondents have mis-interpreted the statements. It is also possible some may have answered untruthfully. Even if the integrity of the interpretation and the responses is assumed, the findings may provide an overview of attitudes held but cannot explain why respondents hold them. The statements are necessarily brief and cannot capture the richness of a particular ethical decision-making situation. The respondent cannot be challenged, nor asked to explain the reasoning behind their response to a particular statement [2].

To overcome some of these limitations, a follow-up study was devised with final year undergraduate student groups. Each group is studying a computer ethics-related module; two are based in the UK and, to provide cultural contrast, a third in Malaysia. One of the UK groups comprises students studying more ‘technical’ computing courses (Computer Science and Software Engineering); the other comprises students on more business-oriented courses (e.g. Business Information Systems). The Malaysian students are studying Computer Science.

Three topics were chosen, on the basis of the variety of responses that students made to them in the survey: electronic surveillance in the workplace, use of employers’ facilities and intellectual property. Vignettes were created for each topic to generate discussion about the issue among the student groups. The Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) Blackboard is used by the respective computer ethics modules as an integral part of students’ learning, and the Discussion Board facility was the mechanism used to stimulate student debate. By the end of the study, each student group will have had the opportunity to debate two topics. To maintain standards of research ethics, students were informed “…that the materials that are posted on this thread will be used in research but only in an anonymous form” and that if students “do not wish to participate in this thread that is perfectly acceptable”.

As a follow up to the online discussion, focus groups will be convened to pursue the issues raised during the debates. An evaluation of the effectiveness of these research instruments will form part of the submitted paper.

Study Findings

At the time of submission of this abstract, the online discussions are underway. The Blackboard Discussion forum is proving to be a successful mechanism for engaging students, who have been used to using it for the computing ethics modules during recent months. It is enabling them to explain the reasoning behind a particular opinion, to provide examples to support a point of view and to support or challenge each other’s contributions.

The “use of employers’ facilities” is the issue that has so far generated the greatest interest. Some students clearly distinguish between profit- and non-profit-making activities; others appear to condone use of University facilities by a research student (for both types of activity) while saying unauthorized use of a (presumably commercial) employer’s facilities is not ethical. Authorization for either type of use is seen as a key issue. Some sympathy is expressed with the plight of a graduate using her employer’s facilities to earn money to pay off her student debt, while others maintain that whatever the motivation, it is always wrong to make unauthorized use of facilities. The perceived distinction between an “employer” and the “university” is one that will be interesting to pursue in the focus groups.

Example Vignette: Use of employer’s facilities

Abdul is the secretary of a sports club, a job he does in his spare time on a voluntary basis, providing something positive for teenagers to do to help keep them out of trouble. He regularly stays behind after work, using his employer’s facilities to prepare and print off notices, letters and so on for the club. The club treasurer is a University student. She uses the University’s IT facilities to run the membership database, print receipts for payments, etc. Jenny works full-time as a programmer. To help pay off her student debt she also undertakes freelance work in her own time. She regularly stays behind after work to use her employer’s facilities to carry out this profitable freelance work. Jenny has teamed up with a friend from University who has stayed on as a full-time research student. He uses the University’s facilities to complete work that she sub-contracts out to him and for which she pays him.

What do you think of Abdul and Jenny’s behaviour, and the behaviour of their student friends? Would you behave in the same way? Does it make a difference that one pair are using their employer’s and university’s facilities for a voluntary, non-profit-making activity, while the others are engaged in a profit-making business?

The surveillance issue has so far generated two contrasting views; firstly, that CCTV has an overall benefit and that monitoring of resource use is to ensure it is not misused. In countering this one student cites research to support the view that CCTV can “get it wrong” and poses the question: who defines what constitutes “suspicious” behaviour? Whether the CCTV used in University computer laboratories complies with the appropriate guidelines is questioned. A student also questions the monitoring of their use of the VLE; while they accept that tutors do this, they wonder who else has access to this information.

Conclusion

Although the study is not yet complete, early indications are that the variety of views expressed will provide some interesting outcomes to report in the completed paper. This will be of interest to both those involved in educating the future generation of IS professionals, and those who will be employing them.

REFERENCES

[1] Prior, M. Fairweather, N.B. Rogerson, S, Hawash, M. (2008) Is IT Ethical? 2006 ETHICOMP Survey of Professional Practice. IMIS.

[2] Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press.

AUTHOR
M.J.Phythian, Dr. N.B.Fairweather and Dr. R.G Howley

ABSTRACT

Following an initial investigating in 2007 it appeared that there had been little academic work in the area of measurement and electronic government. There further appeared to have been no analysis of whether the large sums of money spent had been truly worth it or whether the public were getting a better service. To confirm or deny this, a lengthy literature review was commenced in 2008. Much of the available material comes from a political science, ethnographic or political science perspectives, with little from a systems or computing background, particularly involving authors involved in the delivery of such systems. This is confirmed by Bloomfield & Hayes (2005, p.4) in their analysis of e-government.

In the United Kingdom, and in particular in England there was from the outset little in the way of strategy or guidance for the development of e-government. The work of delivering or monitoring change was largely done by trial and error following the initial Public Service Agreement in 2001, as local government was encouraged by financial carrots to report progress back to central government. These reports were entitled Implementing Electronic Government Statements (IEG’s) and were initially required annually and numbered one through three and from these central government developed a model and standardised upon the format of them. A further four reports were called for in subsequent years. Subject to progress being reported in these, grant was received.

The lessons learned from the early IEG’s were further developed into a new set of targets described as Priority Service Outcomes, again sometimes contradictory and inconsistent, but requiring a large investment in technology. These were produced without the establishment of baselines of existing efficiency to measure improvement against. Instead the country is presented with an array of technological solutions that promise little opportunity of being able to join up to deliver any fundamental efficiencies. Further, as Irani et al (2005, p.77) conclude, their research ‘has highlighted that many information system e-government decisions are political and that evaluation is always subjective.’

In a long-awaited government review of public service transformation, Lyons (2007, p.80 on) emphasises what he describes as ‘crowding out of local choice’ by central control, which demonstrates the dichotomy involved in service delivery when prescription from government becomes involved. Whilst Lyons (2007, p.202) is keen to see improved cross-boundary working and identifies the use of technology to do this, at the same time he highlights the tendency for re-inventing the wheel and again, that centrally-imposed restraints limit the ability to implement joined-up services (Lyons (2007) s.4.139).

In reality, the exercise of e-government should have been about improving the customer experience whilst making the most efficient use of all possible channels of communication. Local authorities and government, unlike banks, do not have the option of driving customers down the most cost effective channel for the supplier and instead have to deliver services in a manner appropriate to their local community, which will entail having a range of channels dependent upon need. This can be dependent upon the local community being urban or rural, wealthy or poor and various combinations, which is confirmed in the research of King & Cotterill (2007, p.351).

A key challenge will be to find what metrics have been used to measure the improvements and whether and how they can be adopted in the later stages of implementation. Di Maio (2007) made an excellent effort at selecting and bringing together Public-Value-of-IT frameworks from across the world but what he presents are complex tools and appear too large for local government bodies. What is needed is a framework suitable for the smaller organisation, which was confirmed by the initial investigations done by Carbo & Williams (2004, p.97), unfortunately that work was never extended due to lack of funding.

The ideal unit of measurement might be, in customer terms, satisfaction across all channels. This aligns well with Pumphrey (2006) in terms of a strategy but also with experiences in the banking sector where this was investigated by Patricio et al (2003) and Joseph et al (1999). A danger is highlighted in Delivery and Transformation Group (2006, p.15) of recreating fresh service cliques or silos in the form of the new channels, recreating the original issue and hence there is a need to equate the user view across all of the channels. If there are any parallels with retail customers, research by Tesco, (Young, 2007), has indicated that shoppers want the range of channels operated by the company to be linked together as much as possible. This is reinforced by Straub et al (2002, p.119) who argue that:

“firms that want their traditional and new network-based channels to work together require metrics for interoperability.”

It is also supported by Vesanen and Raulas (2006, p.17) who propose that:

“marketing today is about managing the elements described by the process model, and the entire process itself.”

This examination of the wider literature indicates that:

• improvement for the citizen will primarily be delivered by organisational change with the end-to-end processes involved
• a gap exists in the literature around metrics but there is evidence that customer satisfaction is a potential base measure for identifying movements in public value/social capital, which may help to success or otherwise with the changes
• there is a strong historical basis behind the service structures which have been additionally confused by attempts to make them more efficient, this indicates that change should be carried out carefully

In order to fill the gap in the literature around metrics, the researchers’ instruments include a weblog as a discussion point to examine any suitable metrics that can be fairly measured across a range of service delivery channels, along with an online questionnaire. The blog has been established as: http://greatemancipator.wordpress.com . Piloting of the instruments commenced in March 2008.

This paper will:

• embellish upon findings from the literature and report additional avenues for investigation
• reveal any initial feedback from the research instruments

REFERENCES

Bloomfield, B., Hayes, N., (2005) “Modernisation and the joining-up of local government services in the UK: Boundaries, knowledge & technology.” LUMS Working Papers

Carbo, T., Williams, J.G., (2004). Models and Metrics for Evaluating Local Electronic Government Systems and Services. 4th European Conference on e-Government. Dublin, Electronic Journal of E-Government. 2.

Di Maio, A. (2007) “Worldwide Examples of Public-Value-of-IT Frameworks.” Gartner Industry Research

Irani, Z., Love, P.E.D., Elliman, T., Jones, S., Themistocleus, M., (2005). “Evaluating e-government: learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities.” Information Systems Journal 15: pp. 61 – 82.

King, S., Cotterill, S., (2007). “Transformational Government? The role of information technology in delivering citizen-centric local public services.” Local Government Studies 33(3): 333 – 354.

Lyons, M. (2007). Lyons Inquiry into Local Government, HMSO.

Patricio, L., Fisk, R.P., e Cunha, J.F., (2003). “Improving satisfaction with bank service offerings: measuring the contribution of each delivery channel.” Managing Service Quality 13(6): pp. 471 – 482.

Pumphrey, S. (2006) “Mastering Channel Strategy.”

Straub, D. W., Hoffman, D.L., Weber, B.W., Steinfield, C., (2002). “Toward New Metrics for Net-Enhanced Organiizations.” Information Systems Research 13(3): pp. 227 – 238.

Vesanen, J., Raulas, M., (2006). “Building Bridges for Personalization: A Process Model for Marketing.” Journal of Interactive Marketing 20(1): pp. 5 – 20.

Young, T. (2007). Tesco wants to link the web and high street. Computing. London. Weekly.