Latest news with #professionalisation
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
First it was family, now it's a feud. But even in meltdown, Brand Beckham is raking it in
What is 'Brand Beckham'? I don't mean to question the very idea of a celebrity brand – far from it. In fact, part of the reason that celeb-watching phrases like 'the brand' and 'controlling the narrative' have gone completely mainstream is because of David and Victoria Beckham. So ubiquitous is the professionalisation of celebrity these days, and so media-literate is the public, that it's hard to remember just how revolutionary the Beckhams were in British culture back in the day. Twenty-five years ago, nobody except some rarefied elite publicist wanged on about narratives. But now everyone knows how to read an influencer. Almost all celebrities are regarded primarily as people who are selling something. Furthermore, people act like mis-selling a lifestyle is worse than several major financial crimes. Anyway, back to the brand. What is the Beckham brand? Not their many specific product brands, nor the many other ones to which they lend their images for advertising. The thing I'm talking about is more like a movie star's screen persona. The unifying characteristic, the theme that permeates all their roles, the magic that fans go back for. In the case of the Beckhams, the brand is really their family. Two became six. In the more distant past, this meant Victoria and David selling news of their pregnancies to OK! magazine, then selling the first baby photos and so on. In the age of Instagram, as their children have grown up, it has meant constantly tending this idyllic image by posting private family moments, having everyone show up en masse for the launch of each other's football seasons/fashion shows/face primers/food lines/50th birthday marathons, and dutifully sending daily public messages of love, support and thanks to each other across social media platforms where others can see them. Whether it's family or business – and sometimes it isn't entirely clear where the dividing line is – it's all very much the family business. As distilled in David's Netflix documentary – self-commissioned, naturally – the message is that no matter what triumph or disaster comes their way, the Beckham family are about each other. Any adversity is folded into their story and ends up being repurposed into (lucrative) triumph because this is a family that sticks together, and which draws its strength from that. It's aspirational and sometimes charming. It has worked. So what happens when a gaping hole is blown in the idyll? In some of the most eye-popping showbiz news of the summer, it has emerged beyond all doubt that one of the family – firstborn Brooklyn – wants nothing to do with the others. If the idea of a feud was plausibly deniable back when Brooklyn and his wife, Nicola Peltz, got married three years ago, it was harder to maintain when the pair didn't show up for any of David's 50th birthday celebrations this May. It is now impossible, following Brooklyn and Nicola's decision to post to Instagram huge numbers of photos of their very recent wedding vow renewal ceremony. (Vow renewals: another part of modern celeb culture that didn't really happen before they happened in magazine buy-ups or on social media.) Details of the lavish big day? The ceremony was officiated by Nicola's billionaire father, Nelson, and she wore her mother's wedding dress. Oh, and not a single member of the Beckham family was there, and it's said they only found out about it by reading it online. Questions abound, from various sides of the fence. To a list of occupations which already includes footballer, photographer, model, monograph author and chef, is Brooklyn adding hostage? How can the Beckhams bear the pain of rejection? Or do people really cut themselves off from highly functional families? One of Nicola's friends who attended the ceremony posted in praise of having 'the guts to walk away' from 'a toxic family'. Victoria's own self-commissioned Netflix documentary was due to come out this autumn (executive producer: David Beckham). How on earth is it going to spin this? Anything other than four hours of open-heart soul-searching is going to look a bit 'Tractor production up in Volgograd!' The cautionary sadness is that these questions can't really be considered invasive because they relate to a show the Beckhams have eagerly invited us to watch at every possible moment. The family has so assiduously cultivated the public engagement with their internal dynamics, choosing daily to live out loud across social media. For better – but now, for worse. It feels a little much to slap the adjective 'Shakespearean' on a story which involves a guy who once included the worst picture ever taken of an elephant in a coffee-table book of his own photography (launch party held at Christie's London). But there is certainly a tragic irony that social media, which the Beckhams have hitherto controlled so masterfully – has been the place that exposed their schisms. They were undone by omission, given that one of the other things our first family have embodied is a complete shift in showbiz journalism. So much entertainment coverage now comes from parsing who is or isn't tagged in Instagram posts, who has stopped following who, who omitted to like this or that. And anyone can do this. It's a form of mass Kremlinology. At the peak of their tabloid fame – or the first peak, perhaps we should say now – it became commonplace to suggest that in the modern era, the Beckhams were our real royal family. They seemed a reaction against all that old blood, that nepo privilege, that public repression of private truth. But now? Well, perhaps some of the plotlines are converging. Perhaps the House of Windsor and the House of Beckham are not so different after all. Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Guardian
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
First it was family, now it's a feud. But even in meltdown, Brand Beckham is raking it in
What is 'Brand Beckham'? I don't mean to question the very idea of a celebrity brand – far from it. In fact, part of the reason that celeb-watching phrases like 'the brand' and 'controlling the narrative' have gone completely mainstream is because of David and Victoria Beckham. So ubiquitous is the professionalisation of celebrity these days, and so media-literate is the public, that it's hard to remember just how revolutionary the Beckhams were in British culture back in the day. Twenty-five years ago, nobody except some rarefied elite publicist wanged on about narratives. But now everyone knows how to read an influencer. Almost all celebrities are regarded primarily as people who are selling something. Furthermore, people act like mis-selling a lifestyle is worse than several major financial crimes. Anyway, back to the brand. What is the Beckham brand? Not their many specific product brands, nor the many other ones to which they lend their images for advertising. The thing I'm talking about is more like a movie star's screen persona. The unifying characteristic, the theme that permeates all their roles, the magic that fans go back for. In the case of the Beckhams, the brand is really their family. Two became six. In the more distant past, this meant Victoria and David selling news of their pregnancies to OK! magazine, then selling the first baby photos and so on. In the age of Instagram, as their children have grown up, it has meant constantly tending this idyllic image by posting private family moments, having everyone show up en masse for the launch of each other's football seasons/fashion shows/face primers/food lines/50th birthday marathons, and dutifully sending daily public messages of love, support and thanks to each other across social media platforms where others can see them. Whether it's family or business – and sometimes it isn't entirely clear where the dividing line is – it's all very much the family business. As distilled in David's Netflix documentary – self-commissioned, naturally – the message is that no matter what triumph or disaster comes their way, the Beckham family are about each other. Any adversity is folded into their story and ends up being repurposed into (lucrative) triumph because this is a family that sticks together, and which draws its strength from that. It's aspirational and sometimes charming. It has worked. So what happens when a gaping hole is blown in the idyll? In some of the most eye-popping showbiz news of the summer, it has emerged beyond all doubt that one of the family – firstborn Brooklyn – wants nothing to do with the others. If the idea of a feud was plausibly deniable back when Brooklyn and his wife, Nicola Peltz, got married three years ago, it was harder to maintain when the pair didn't show up for any of David's 50th birthday celebrations this May. It is now impossible, following Brooklyn and Nicola's decision to post to Instagram huge numbers of photos of their very recent wedding vow renewal ceremony. (Vow renewals: another part of modern celeb culture that didn't really happen before they happened in magazine buy-ups or on social media.) Details of the lavish big day? The ceremony was officiated by Nicola's billionaire father, Nelson, and she wore her mother's wedding dress. Oh, and not a single member of the Beckham family was there, and it's said they only found out about it by reading it online. Questions abound, from various sides of the fence. To a list of occupations which already includes footballer, photographer, model, monograph author and chef, is Brooklyn adding hostage? How can the Beckhams bear the pain of rejection? Or do people really cut themselves off from highly functional families? One of Nicola's friends who attended the ceremony posted in praise of having 'the guts to walk away' from 'a toxic family'. Victoria's own self-commissioned Netflix documentary was due to come out this autumn (executive producer: David Beckham). How on earth is it going to spin this? Anything other than four hours of open-heart soul-searching is going to look a bit 'Tractor production up in Volgograd!' The cautionary sadness is that these questions can't really be considered invasive because they relate to a show the Beckhams have eagerly invited us to watch at every possible moment. The family has so assiduously cultivated the public engagement with their internal dynamics, choosing daily to live out loud across social media. For better – but now, for worse. It feels a little much to slap the adjective 'Shakespearean' on a story which involves a guy who once included the worst picture ever taken of an elephant in a coffee-table book of his own photography (launch party held at Christie's London). But there is certainly a tragic irony that social media, which the Beckhams have hitherto controlled so masterfully – has been the place that exposed their schisms. They were undone by omission, given that one of the other things our first family have embodied is a complete shift in showbiz journalism. So much entertainment coverage now comes from parsing who is or isn't tagged in Instagram posts, who has stopped following who, who omitted to like this or that. And anyone can do this. It's a form of mass Kremlinology. At the peak of their tabloid fame – or the first peak, perhaps we should say now – it became commonplace to suggest that in the modern era, the Beckhams were our real royal family. They seemed a reaction against all that old blood, that nepo privilege, that public repression of private truth. But now? Well, perhaps some of the plotlines are converging. Perhaps the House of Windsor and the House of Beckham are not so different after all. Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist
Zawya
31-07-2025
- Politics
- Zawya
Public Service Committee Bids Farewell to Outgoing National School of Government Principal
The Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration notes the departure of the Principal of the National School of Government (NSG), Professor Busani Ngcaweni, and commends him for his visionary leadership. Since his appointment in 2020, the NSG has made significant strides in re-establishing itself as a critical institution in the renewal and professionalisation of the public service. Prof Ngcaweni led the development of critical and relevant training programmes, particularly programmes focusing on digital innovation and ethical leadership, at a time when public trust in government has been eroded. Under his leadership, the NSG expanded its reach through learning partnerships across the continent. He also oversaw the development of programmes to cultivate competent, developmental leadership and strengthening public sector accountability. Prof Ngcaweni's contribution to excellence and the professionalisation of the public service is undeniable. Chairperson of the committee, Mr Jan de Villiers, said the committee wishes to express its sincere appreciation for Prof Ngcaweni's leadership, dedication and the institutional momentum he leaves behind at the NSG. 'We wish him success in the next chapter of his life and look forward to continued engagements in pursuit of a professional, ethical and capable public service. We trust that the foundations he helped to lay will continue to yield dividends for the public service,' said Mr de Villiers. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Republic of South Africa: The Parliament.
The Guardian
28-06-2025
- Sport
- The Guardian
Euro 2025 is sure to showcase just how far women's football has come
You only have to wind the clock back two full major-tournament cycles, to Euro 2017, and there were no fully professional women's leagues in Europe. Thanks to increased investment in the women's game, there are now more than 3,000 full-time female players across the continent, and that professionalisation is why my overriding feeling about this summer's Euros is that the quality is going to be so much higher than we have seen before. And it will be so tight. In Spain, England and Germany there are three strong favourites who are all capable of going on to win it and I would add the Netherlands to the top four. I was so impressed when we [the United States] played the Dutch in December. They will need everybody fit but, on their day, they are a top side. Beyond that, this tournament is going to show the prowess of the Nations League, which was introduced since the most recent Euros, and the impact that tournament is having on equality. We have seen the increased strength in depth of competitive teams in the Nations League, whether it be a resurgent Belgium who have got some real qualities in their side, or Italy who I think are on the rise – and it's about time – and of course you can never rule out the French. If they manage to get things together they might win a tournament. At the moment you have to talk about France in that next bracket outside the favourites. Can they reach the levels their club teams do? I don't know, but you cannot overlook them. To win this tournament it will take a team, first and foremost, and as a coach you have to work hard to keep everyone connected and feeling valued. I've learned that from failures in my career, not just the success of winning a gold medal. You want to make sure that, when you stand at the podium, the player who played no minutes feels a part of it. Do not underestimate the importance of that – the team that gets that right has a great shout of going all the way and winning the final in Basel. A lot of the buildup to this tournament has been dominated by news of the players who are not going to Switzerland, whether that be France leaving out Wendie Renard or Fran Kirby bringing forward her retirement from international duty after Sarina Wiegman spoke to her honestly about her chances of playing. All 16 head coaches have had to disappoint players. As a coach, these types of conversations are really hard, when you tell someone they are not selected. You can still be kind, but there is no easy way to do it, because you're giving someone the news they don't want to hear. In my experience, when you deliver that news, players just want honesty, so being straight-up and direct is the best approach. You have to be able to say: 'Look, I'm just giving you a call to let you know that you didn't make the squad,' and usually I give a rationale behind that, and then you ask if there are any questions. And if there aren't then it's best to end the call there and then, because they don't want to be on the call with you, they want to process it. It's a little bit like parenting, in many regards; if your child comes home disappointed about something, it's best not to say, 'Oh, but you're good at maths,' if they are not. Instead I say: 'Oh that's tricky, how does that feel for you?' and you process it because the reality is we all spend our life facing lots of setbacks. So I may have changed some of my style over the years but I always believe in delivering news in a humane way. At the end of delivering news to maybe 15 or 20 players that aren't picked, you are exhausted, as well as disappointed for them all, but it is part of the job. We were only allowed to pick 18-player squads for last summer's Olympics, but that was not the only difference my staff and players faced in France; you played a match every three days. In the World Cup or Euros you are usually playing every four-to-five days and that extra day makes a huge difference in players' recovery. For the teams in Group D this July – France, England, the Netherlands and Wales – to win the tournament, for example, they would have to play six times in 23 days, and trust me, when players are recovering, every second counts. After an evening game, think about it, these players aren't going to sleep until 3am, so the day after a game is an absolute wipe-out. For some players it's a combination of massage, ice-baths and mobility, and with the USA we get cryotherapy chambers and oxygen tanks. For some people it's just about going for a walk, getting fresh air and sleep, it's very individualised, but assume matchday+1 is just a write-off. Matchday+2 is usually when the most explosive players feel their body the most, so for a winger, a forward, those Ferrari players who burn the most petrol, phwoar, matchday+2 is tough for their bodies. Now if you add the extra day in-between, you can start your engines again in training and you're in a much better position. Going back to the teams who might win it I have to say that, at the Olympics, I was very impressed with Germany and their young cohort that have come through. They have now been through their cyclical change and I think this is another German group that is on the rise. They have got players such as Jule Brand, Lea Schüller and Klara Bühl who can cause endless problems. The main question is if they have enough depth. Sign up to Moving the Goalposts No topic is too small or too big for us to cover as we deliver a twice-weekly roundup of the wonderful world of women's football after newsletter promotion As for England, they are missing senior, experienced players, which will be a loss. The loss of Millie Bright, to any dressing room, is huge – she's a leader who will calm a group and also keep them focused. It's the same with Mary Earps in different capacities. Now it will be interesting to see how England cope if there are any injuries or suspensions – there's a lack of experience on their bench, which sometimes happens when you're evolving a team and it's England's time to experience that. Not with the starting XI though. In their starters they possess a depth of experience. They will need Lauren Hemp, Alessia Russo and Lauren James to be fit, of course, but it is a high-quality, experienced England team. Spain have a rising star in Clàudia Pina and, in Alexia Putellas, they've got a player who is back to her top, top level. Ask any player that plays against Spain and they will say it works your brain so hard. But they can be beaten. Yes, there are differences between Barcelona and Spain, but playing-style wise and methodology-wise there are a lot of similarities – you have to be so deadly in your transitions because you won't dominate the ball, and you have to accept that and disrupt it in organised ways, which I thought Arsenal did superbly in the Champions League final. Reneé Slegers did an incredible job of setting the team up for that. It showed how it can be done.
