The danger of the hashtag is the accompanying sense that the hashtagger has 'done their bit' in a humanitarian crisis. No need to submit a monetary donation, volunteer for a charity or arrange a fundraiser like the good old days; the beauty of social media means that you just have to press a key and you've made somebody's life that little bit better. But have you?
Vilification of benefit claimants and disabled people is endemic, perhaps the government should just stitch on the black triangles and be done with it or bring in the Welfare Games to keep us at a more manageable number and remind us how grateful we are for all the 'pitty money' (in Simon Stevens words) that we get.
For the good of British politics there needs to be a conscientious shift away from this nonsense. We may not be to blame for the actions of politicians but those who govern will only ever stand a chance of being held accountable when we stop treating them like graduates of the Big Brother academy and start scrutinising their service to the public.
The series is called Married at First Sight and it does pretty much what it says on the tin: it takes two strangers, gets them to marry, gives them six weeks to see if they can make it work and then asks them to decide whether they want to stay together or not.
Africa is in the headlines again, not for the lush beauty and overwhelming hospitality that I felt in Zimbabwe recently, but for cruel acts of violence and hate inflicted on women and children.
Dear voters, you are right. We have failed you. Your elected representatives have failed to protect you and your families from a catastrophic financial and economic melt-down... and we have failed to demonstrate the sort of moral probity that you are entitled to expect when you entrust us with your vote.
In recent days there has been the annual universal condemnation of the greed with which bankers accept their excessive pay awards.
Does the same-sex marriage legislation leave civil partnerships destined to the graveyard of the noughties, left to rot alongside Big Brother and hipster jeans? Or might they be opened up to couples of any sex and allowed to flourish or fail, depending on the choices of the great British public?
2014 looks set to be a year for landmark elections. India's having a really long one, Ukraine's looking at a fairly awkward one and Syria's going to have a predictable one. But come next month, all eyes will be on Egypt, as the country seeks closure to the Arab Spring in the form of its very own presidential elections.
There is still much left for Boris to do in London, and his best option would be to firmly aim to finish his tenure here alone. Given the Tories record, I'm sure there will be someone in the Conservative party who overclaims for something somewhere and he'll be able to clamber into the Commons in a by-election sooner or later after 2016...
In posing for a photograph with a member of the public, politicians want to try and prove that they definitely do not spend their time being taken out to dine in expensive restaurants by owners of multimillion pound companies who are desperate to avoid paying any more tax. But do they realise how stupid they make themselves look?
The British and Danish debates about Europe have much in common - concerns about migration (read 'benefit tourism'), a sense of threatened national identity, and the division of national and EU powers (to opt in or to opt out, that is the question) - but the tone and direction differ enormously.
The Prime Minister and other members of the government have not said anything very controversial. It is a historical fact (perhaps unwelcome to some, but true) that our main systems of ethics, the way we do law and justice, the values of society, how we decide what is fair, the protection of the poor, and most of the way we look at society... All have been shaped by and founded on Christianity.
With the UK general election only a year away, who is winning the political debate? I differ from many people, who say that all politicians are corrupt and are only in it for themselves. In my experience, most politicians are in fact honest and believe in what they're doing.
Religion is a topic which is a constant in the national discourse. Using vitriolic terminology to describe atheists is not conducive to respectable debate and will only serve to sow animosity between religious and non-religious people. Due to the passionate nature of the topic a rational, respectable debate is difficult to nurture, but if it is to be nurtured then such fatuous labeling needs to be rid of.
God moves in a mysterious way, his wonders to perform, something for our newly evangelical Prime Minister to think about. Dave's bacon could actually be saved by a very substantial Ukip vote at the Euro elections. If Ukip do well, they will do well at the expense of Labour, as well as the Tories.