There is a device out there that gets little to no use. Its use has far reaching implications for control of societies ills. It is generically made, and very widespread and almost invisible. I would guess there are many in your home right now. It has the ability to control pornography reaching children, violent video games, infomercials, inappropriate music, offensive radio personalities, and even controversial entertainment choices. It is truly revolutionary when used properly. The unfortunate thing it is not.
It is called.....the power button.
Did your 6 year old see a nipple on TV? Turn it off.
Grand Theft Auto a little too gangsta crazy for your 11 year old? Well, you bought it for them, but you can also turn it off.
Howard Stern (while still terrestrial) a little too much for your delicate sensibilities? Turn him off.
I will never understand why people don't use this device. It's use is not too complicated or convoluted....it is as simple as moving your index finger. Why do people feel the need to, instead of turning the offending device off, holding a parade, starting a petition, or just whining and bitching about the offensive material? Are they afraid of what the neighbours think? Are they worried they may start to enjoy it? Perhaps they maybe already do enjoy it, but that is not how proper people behave.
"My parents didn't grow up watching this filth."
"I didn't have to contend with nonsense like this when I was a kid."
Have I got news for you. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Does anyone remember Three's Company? The story of a man living with two beautiful women, posing gay so as not to attract the attention of his landlord. If you have seen the show, and I am sure many of you have, it was full of playful innuendo and sexual humour. And it did draw it's fair share of criticism from sensitive individuals in the 1970's.
"My parents didn't grow up watching filth like this."
We could talk about the need for The Ed Sullivan Show to only show Elvis Presley from only the waist up, for fear that America's teenage daughters would all get fucked that night from his gyrating hips and "black" music.
"I didn't have to contend with nonsense like this when I was a kid."
The echoes of the past coming out of the mouths of today. Let's not forget Deep Throat once being shown at the same theater as Lady and the Tramp, prohibition in the 1930's, or Captain Kirk and Uhura kissing. Everything I have mentioned in here seems laughable now, but in their time, it was all outrageous, and people actually left their homes to picket and carry on, instead of just making the choice to not watch. The peculiar thing is that they continued to watch....in fact they watched more closely, I guess in an attempt to get more outraged.
Do I practice what I preach? Yes I do. Moral values are a funny thing. I find it interesting that breasts are not allowed on television (although 50% of the population has them), but it is completely acceptable to show depictions of violent and gruesome death over and over. Myself, I have made the conscious choice to avoid gladiatorial programming on TV. Survivor, Fear Factor, and even America's Next Top Model are all shows that are the equivalent of blood sport, but because they don't depict anything outright offensive on the screen, they are seen as harmless. Maude has an abortion, Murphy Brown has a child out of wedlock, and the world is going to hell, but the belittling, demoralizing, and degradation of fellow human beings is ok.
That is what I turn off. And I know where the power button is.
December 20, 2005
May 25, 2005
Sith Revenge, Evil Empires, and George Lucas
My wife and I just saw Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith. I am feeling very torn on my enjoyment level of the film. I feel I am of two minds about it. On one hand, as soon as I saw "A long time ago in a galaxy far away..." I felt like I was seven years old again, it was 1977 and I was sitting in the theater with my mommy and daddy. It didn't matter if it was a bad, poorly crafted film - IT'S STAR WARS!!!
Now, there were some things in the film that were extremely well done, and Lucas should reap all the praise for these. Unfortunately, these things all happened in the first and last half hours. The first half hour was action; Anakin and Obi-Wan in a space battle, boarding General Grievous' ship, lightsaber action and duels, and the rescue of the Chancellor of the Republic. All action, all exquisite, and all of it holding me in the same rapture I felt at seven years old.
In the last half hour, all loose ends were tied up leading us into Episode IV: Senator Organa's ship from Alderaan, the exile of Yoda, the birth of the twins, Luke and Leia, and their separation, start of the construction of the Death Star, and of course, the completed transformation of Anakin Skywalker into Darth Vader.
Now, the critics panned this film, and while my inner seven year old is still jumping up and down with glee, I am also a 35 year old who did graduate from film school, who was inspired to go to film school because Star Wars was the first real movie I ever saw, and who has been a fan of the entire series for 28 years. 28 years is a long time, the bulk of my life, and perhaps I am a little harsh in my judgment, but I feel the meat of the movie was a betrayal that stretches back to Episode II:Attack of the Clones.
First, and just to get it out of the way, the introduction of the Wookie species, and one Wookie in particular, was basically a throwaway part. The Wookies in Episode III could have been any race, and Chewbacca was reduced to that of a cameo bit part. There was no reason in the story for it: Chewbacca never had any interaction with Yoda any further than what we see in this film. I can only speculate that there are bits that might be released in some super-special edition of the DVD for home sale that might explain this. It is either that, or Lucas thought it would be good to introduce our beloved Chewie in his native habitat, as some sort of weak tie-in, but Chewie seemed like a leader of his people, some high ranking general, at least. So we are to gather that he, in the space between Episodes III and IV went from a leader and hero among his people to the sidekick of a smuggler in the outer rim? I'm not buying it, George, and don't think anyone else will.
Now I get to the point where I feel I am repeating myself from Episode II: Hayden Christensen. I don't think there has ever been anyone as badly miscast in the century of modern cinema as he has been. His acting was as compelling as a turnip and sardine salad. He acted in such a way that I was hoping he would put the helmet on earlier in the movie so we could no longer see his unchanging facial expressions.
In a perfect world, I could go back to the making of Episode II and direct him myself. Lucas said he felt it was unfair of the universal panning of Christensen's performance, saying he was directed to be aloof and arrogant. I didn't get aloof or arrogant out of either II or III, all I got was seemingly unfeeling and mean-spirited. If Anakin was portrayed as lovable, good natured, and just, his fall to the dark side would be much MUCH more meaningful than falling from arrogance - he was already halfway there. I guess the Anakin Skywalker character does need a fatal flaw that would allow him to seek out the power of the dark side, but that was already built into the story: his forbidden love for Amadala. How many times does Yoda have to say love leads to passion, leads to jealousy, leads to anger, leads to the dark side before even Lucas notices his own script? Anakin's forbidden love for Padme, and the threat of her life ending in childbirth should have been enough to push him over the edge - this, coupled with the power he could not control (an invention of mine - after all, it is said many times in the movie that he was more powerful than most of the Jedi council) would have been a compelling way to push our hero to the dark side. The way he acted the part, Christensen was already Darth Vader long before he met Palpatine. The basic script and direction was already a definite problem before shooting even began.
I have to mention the scene where the transformation to Darth Vader is complete, and he asks the Emperor if Padme survived, and he says no, and Darth Vader, the drama queen, releases this booming, overdramatic "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO". I can't even begin to say what all the problems with this scene are. It could have been handled in so many ways and so much better. It is the scene that shows he is now fully in the Emperor's power, that he has been completely seduced by the dark side, the moment we have been anticipating though Episodes I, II, and III, and we get the equivalent of the scourge of the galaxy, the embodiment of pure evil, crying like a schoolgirl. Without completely re-writing and re-blocking the scene, couldn't he have used his vast force powers to show his displeasure by destroying the medical bay, or attacking the attending droids, silently? Or not even going that far; he is on the dark side now, where pain and anger are power. There were so many options open to Lucas, and he chose the cheap one, the easy one. I just felt it wasn't in keeping with the myth, and I feel a little ripped off.
Lucas' need for over-using computer generated images is also a bone of contention for me. Lucas says he is pushing the envelope, which is a good thing, but making central characters completely in the computer was a mistake for the Star Wars franchise (case in point: JarJar Binks). Yoda, R2-D2, and General Grievous are all central characters to the story, and they were all computer generated, and while on some level it can work, too much of it leads to disaster. Movies made with a lot of CG (Lord of the Rings, for example) used CG primarily behind the central action, or during large action sequences, which in both cases allow the eye of the viewer to focus on the story and not the technology.
Lucas also took the opportunity of releasing a movie to make some fairly heavy political statements in the subtext of the film: the war will continue, despite the military achieving objective after objective; the leader will not relinquish his power because of the state of war; and the idea that some people will say it is treasonous to speak against the leader, while watching the treason of allowing the decay of the Republic that happens from the top. While I might agree with these views and the attempt to draw lines between the film and the Evil Empire we are living in today, I don't want to be beaten over the head with them when I go to the movies - if I wanted that, I would watch Fahrenheit 9/11 again.
Now, I distinctly remember a rumor from 1977, one that was repeated well into 1983, and then forgotten as Lucas said I, II, and III would be the last movies - but the original plan was for 12 movies. I read an interview with Mark Hamill where he said Lucas approached him about appearing in Episode VII while they were filming the first one in 1976 in Tunisia. Hamill asked when it would be shot and Lucas said 2011. In 2011, I think Hamill will be in his early 70's, and he may not relish the prospect of a geriatric Luke (but knowing Lucas, he will probably just be CG).
But I know I will be there if it happens, 41 years old, and feeling like it is 1977, and I am 7, and I am there with my mommy and daddy, going back to a galaxy far away.
Now, there were some things in the film that were extremely well done, and Lucas should reap all the praise for these. Unfortunately, these things all happened in the first and last half hours. The first half hour was action; Anakin and Obi-Wan in a space battle, boarding General Grievous' ship, lightsaber action and duels, and the rescue of the Chancellor of the Republic. All action, all exquisite, and all of it holding me in the same rapture I felt at seven years old.
In the last half hour, all loose ends were tied up leading us into Episode IV: Senator Organa's ship from Alderaan, the exile of Yoda, the birth of the twins, Luke and Leia, and their separation, start of the construction of the Death Star, and of course, the completed transformation of Anakin Skywalker into Darth Vader.
Now, the critics panned this film, and while my inner seven year old is still jumping up and down with glee, I am also a 35 year old who did graduate from film school, who was inspired to go to film school because Star Wars was the first real movie I ever saw, and who has been a fan of the entire series for 28 years. 28 years is a long time, the bulk of my life, and perhaps I am a little harsh in my judgment, but I feel the meat of the movie was a betrayal that stretches back to Episode II:Attack of the Clones.
First, and just to get it out of the way, the introduction of the Wookie species, and one Wookie in particular, was basically a throwaway part. The Wookies in Episode III could have been any race, and Chewbacca was reduced to that of a cameo bit part. There was no reason in the story for it: Chewbacca never had any interaction with Yoda any further than what we see in this film. I can only speculate that there are bits that might be released in some super-special edition of the DVD for home sale that might explain this. It is either that, or Lucas thought it would be good to introduce our beloved Chewie in his native habitat, as some sort of weak tie-in, but Chewie seemed like a leader of his people, some high ranking general, at least. So we are to gather that he, in the space between Episodes III and IV went from a leader and hero among his people to the sidekick of a smuggler in the outer rim? I'm not buying it, George, and don't think anyone else will.
Now I get to the point where I feel I am repeating myself from Episode II: Hayden Christensen. I don't think there has ever been anyone as badly miscast in the century of modern cinema as he has been. His acting was as compelling as a turnip and sardine salad. He acted in such a way that I was hoping he would put the helmet on earlier in the movie so we could no longer see his unchanging facial expressions.
In a perfect world, I could go back to the making of Episode II and direct him myself. Lucas said he felt it was unfair of the universal panning of Christensen's performance, saying he was directed to be aloof and arrogant. I didn't get aloof or arrogant out of either II or III, all I got was seemingly unfeeling and mean-spirited. If Anakin was portrayed as lovable, good natured, and just, his fall to the dark side would be much MUCH more meaningful than falling from arrogance - he was already halfway there. I guess the Anakin Skywalker character does need a fatal flaw that would allow him to seek out the power of the dark side, but that was already built into the story: his forbidden love for Amadala. How many times does Yoda have to say love leads to passion, leads to jealousy, leads to anger, leads to the dark side before even Lucas notices his own script? Anakin's forbidden love for Padme, and the threat of her life ending in childbirth should have been enough to push him over the edge - this, coupled with the power he could not control (an invention of mine - after all, it is said many times in the movie that he was more powerful than most of the Jedi council) would have been a compelling way to push our hero to the dark side. The way he acted the part, Christensen was already Darth Vader long before he met Palpatine. The basic script and direction was already a definite problem before shooting even began.
I have to mention the scene where the transformation to Darth Vader is complete, and he asks the Emperor if Padme survived, and he says no, and Darth Vader, the drama queen, releases this booming, overdramatic "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO". I can't even begin to say what all the problems with this scene are. It could have been handled in so many ways and so much better. It is the scene that shows he is now fully in the Emperor's power, that he has been completely seduced by the dark side, the moment we have been anticipating though Episodes I, II, and III, and we get the equivalent of the scourge of the galaxy, the embodiment of pure evil, crying like a schoolgirl. Without completely re-writing and re-blocking the scene, couldn't he have used his vast force powers to show his displeasure by destroying the medical bay, or attacking the attending droids, silently? Or not even going that far; he is on the dark side now, where pain and anger are power. There were so many options open to Lucas, and he chose the cheap one, the easy one. I just felt it wasn't in keeping with the myth, and I feel a little ripped off.
Lucas' need for over-using computer generated images is also a bone of contention for me. Lucas says he is pushing the envelope, which is a good thing, but making central characters completely in the computer was a mistake for the Star Wars franchise (case in point: JarJar Binks). Yoda, R2-D2, and General Grievous are all central characters to the story, and they were all computer generated, and while on some level it can work, too much of it leads to disaster. Movies made with a lot of CG (Lord of the Rings, for example) used CG primarily behind the central action, or during large action sequences, which in both cases allow the eye of the viewer to focus on the story and not the technology.
Lucas also took the opportunity of releasing a movie to make some fairly heavy political statements in the subtext of the film: the war will continue, despite the military achieving objective after objective; the leader will not relinquish his power because of the state of war; and the idea that some people will say it is treasonous to speak against the leader, while watching the treason of allowing the decay of the Republic that happens from the top. While I might agree with these views and the attempt to draw lines between the film and the Evil Empire we are living in today, I don't want to be beaten over the head with them when I go to the movies - if I wanted that, I would watch Fahrenheit 9/11 again.
Now, I distinctly remember a rumor from 1977, one that was repeated well into 1983, and then forgotten as Lucas said I, II, and III would be the last movies - but the original plan was for 12 movies. I read an interview with Mark Hamill where he said Lucas approached him about appearing in Episode VII while they were filming the first one in 1976 in Tunisia. Hamill asked when it would be shot and Lucas said 2011. In 2011, I think Hamill will be in his early 70's, and he may not relish the prospect of a geriatric Luke (but knowing Lucas, he will probably just be CG).
But I know I will be there if it happens, 41 years old, and feeling like it is 1977, and I am 7, and I am there with my mommy and daddy, going back to a galaxy far away.
August 20, 2004
The Decay of Women's Rights
The separation of Church and State???
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all 11 positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.
The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynocology, and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.
Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.
In a book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body", he suggests that women who suffer from premenstral syndrome should seek help from reading the Bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproductive Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family", Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.
I am concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by anti-abortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American Women deserve no less.
I did not write this, it was emailed to my wife and I. The email also asked that it be forwarded to every person we knew concerned for women's rights, with every 25th person asked to forward it to president@whitehouse.gov .
I am not a citizen of the United States, I am Canadian. I cannot vote, so I would not expect my voice to be listened to by dub-ya. But my wife is an American woman, as is my mother-in-law, as are many many of my friends. So while my signature on this petition would not legally mean much, I believe I can do more by posting this here.
Please cut and paste the text into an email. Send it to everyone you know that is concerned with women's health and women's rights. Send it to your congressman, your governor, your mayors and city councilors, but most importantly, complain to your President.
Please.
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all 11 positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.
The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynocology, and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.
Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.
In a book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body", he suggests that women who suffer from premenstral syndrome should seek help from reading the Bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproductive Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family", Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.
I am concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by anti-abortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American Women deserve no less.
I did not write this, it was emailed to my wife and I. The email also asked that it be forwarded to every person we knew concerned for women's rights, with every 25th person asked to forward it to president@whitehouse.gov .
I am not a citizen of the United States, I am Canadian. I cannot vote, so I would not expect my voice to be listened to by dub-ya. But my wife is an American woman, as is my mother-in-law, as are many many of my friends. So while my signature on this petition would not legally mean much, I believe I can do more by posting this here.
Please cut and paste the text into an email. Send it to everyone you know that is concerned with women's health and women's rights. Send it to your congressman, your governor, your mayors and city councilors, but most importantly, complain to your President.
Please.
August 12, 2004
Republicans & stuff
There is a great conspiracy in the USA, and it isn't terrorist organizations, and it isn't some rabid militia nutbars hoarding canned fruit in some bomb shelter. The conspiracy is for a New World Order, imposed by a select group of men in Washington, who came to power through devious means, using bait & switch politics to disguise their true agenda.
The fact is, my friends, that the United States is being dumbed down to a point where we will all be lemmings, willing to follow blindly without question every bit of pablum they want to feed us. Just look at what the television choices are: competitions designed to showcase the mean side of people so they can get ahead and "Survive"; or just mindless drool that can in no way offend anyone (except those of us with an ounce of self-respect or intelligence). Lifestyle programming is sweeping the airwaves, but who's lifestyle are they promoting? Does anyone else remember when MTV used to play videos?
I guess it is most evident when looking at radio, TV's poorer brother, to see what kind of chilling effect is being put into place. I want to mention Howard Stern, here, but I do not want to come off like some fanboy who's life revolves around that 3 hours in the morning. I would rather like to think of it as someone who admires Stern for what he has accomplished in his career, not only becoming the most listened to person on radio (and that is nationally, folks), but also for bringing the public's attention back to a dying industry. Radio was on the way out in the 1980's, everyone with tape decks in their cars, and the brand spanking new device, the CD player. Stern revitalized that industry one offended listener at a time. His shtick hasn't changed in 20 years, and the world never came to an end.
Then the nipple fell.
And it was the Superbowl.
The crys went out. Offensive. Disgusting. Distasteful. Enough crys to make the conservative right wing declare a clampdown on indecency. And who was the first target? Someone who had been bugging them for years who they couldn't touch without looking like it was a takeover. Howard Stern. Does anyone remember what happened to Janet Jackson after the Superbowl? I don't either.
See - Bait & Switch.
Now hold on to something...this could get a little bumpy.
Enron, a world leader in energy production and distribution, goes tits up after losing ALL the employee pension fund, despite ties to the Republican party.
Some religious extremists flew some planes into our buildings. The action was claimed by Osama Bin Laden and a terrorist group known as Al-Queda.
The US invades Afganistan to find Bin Laden. Can't find him, so they overthrow the reliegous extremist Taliban government. A good military decision, and one the world needed.
But what about the President's ties to Enron CEO Ken Lay?
Bait & Switch.
Soldiers are dying in a foreign land that they were sent there to liberate from a madman with a nuclear arsenal comparable to the mid 70's USSR. But there were no weapons of mass destruction. Nor any links to Al-Queda.
But don't let them there faggots git married.
Bait and Switch Politics at work again.
Now, this is not a tirade against the Republican party, I mean I treat Air America the same way I treat Rush Limbaugh, I don't listen. Rather, this is a call to arms against our own flavor of religious extremists. Don't think we are living in a theocracy? Think again.
Terry Shivo was a wonderful example. This poor woman who was completely brain dead was being kept "alive" by a feeding tube inserted down her throat pumping strained peas into her stomach. And the religious right marshaled their zealots to try to stop her husband, life partner, married both by the law and in the eyes of God, from removing the tube and allowing the vessel that once housed Terry to end. The zealots marched on Washington, proclaiming "Culture of Life", a term quickly adopted by the government (I mean, who can argue against someone who's slogan is about preserving life?) This poor tortured man who has watched as his beloved slipped away was called a murderer, like he hadn't suffered enough. The courts got involved. And when the verdict came down that what the husband wanted was more important than what the zealots wanted, the zealots freaked.
Politicians started to denounce the legal system. They actually went so far as to threaten judges who don't see the world as clearly as they do. And they got away with it. They encourage violence against the branch of government that checks their balance, and no one lifts a damn finger. I was shocked at the statements by those Texan jerk-offs, but I was offended that Britney getting knocked up was the top story the next day.
And why did they fight so hard for this "Culture of Life" nonsense? So that their arguments against abortion might be taken seriously, of course. Never mind the school shootings, kids killing kids. Nevermind that someone dies violently in the United States every few seconds. This is a Culture of Life.
This is not a tirade against the Republican party. Or maybe it is. The Republicans have been hijacked by religious extremists with more in common with the Taliban than with the founding fathers. The Republicans I remember growing up with always had an enemy to focus their hatred on - the Soviet Union was a convenient fall guy. The Cold War was a great distraction for them, and when it ended, it seemed that the Republican party was lost, without direction. If there was any time better for the religious zealots to take over, I can't think of one.
Religious extremists scare the living shit out of me, because I know what they are capable of. The Middle East is not the only example the world has ever seen. Has anyone else seen the pictures from 1944 and 45, when the concentration camps were liberated? That was religious extremism at it's worst. Or we can look at brother killing brother in Ireland.
Religion is the cheap, dirty way to garner favor and blind trust in a population. If you don't think like I do, you don't think like God, you are un-Christian, or un-Muslim, or un-Catholic, or whatever your chosen faith. And no one wants to be excluded from their divine reward, so rational thought goes out the window, to be replaced by the party line
The fact is, my friends, that the United States is being dumbed down to a point where we will all be lemmings, willing to follow blindly without question every bit of pablum they want to feed us. Just look at what the television choices are: competitions designed to showcase the mean side of people so they can get ahead and "Survive"; or just mindless drool that can in no way offend anyone (except those of us with an ounce of self-respect or intelligence). Lifestyle programming is sweeping the airwaves, but who's lifestyle are they promoting? Does anyone else remember when MTV used to play videos?
I guess it is most evident when looking at radio, TV's poorer brother, to see what kind of chilling effect is being put into place. I want to mention Howard Stern, here, but I do not want to come off like some fanboy who's life revolves around that 3 hours in the morning. I would rather like to think of it as someone who admires Stern for what he has accomplished in his career, not only becoming the most listened to person on radio (and that is nationally, folks), but also for bringing the public's attention back to a dying industry. Radio was on the way out in the 1980's, everyone with tape decks in their cars, and the brand spanking new device, the CD player. Stern revitalized that industry one offended listener at a time. His shtick hasn't changed in 20 years, and the world never came to an end.
Then the nipple fell.
And it was the Superbowl.
The crys went out. Offensive. Disgusting. Distasteful. Enough crys to make the conservative right wing declare a clampdown on indecency. And who was the first target? Someone who had been bugging them for years who they couldn't touch without looking like it was a takeover. Howard Stern. Does anyone remember what happened to Janet Jackson after the Superbowl? I don't either.
See - Bait & Switch.
Now hold on to something...this could get a little bumpy.
Enron, a world leader in energy production and distribution, goes tits up after losing ALL the employee pension fund, despite ties to the Republican party.
Some religious extremists flew some planes into our buildings. The action was claimed by Osama Bin Laden and a terrorist group known as Al-Queda.
The US invades Afganistan to find Bin Laden. Can't find him, so they overthrow the reliegous extremist Taliban government. A good military decision, and one the world needed.
But what about the President's ties to Enron CEO Ken Lay?
Bait & Switch.
Soldiers are dying in a foreign land that they were sent there to liberate from a madman with a nuclear arsenal comparable to the mid 70's USSR. But there were no weapons of mass destruction. Nor any links to Al-Queda.
But don't let them there faggots git married.
Bait and Switch Politics at work again.
Now, this is not a tirade against the Republican party, I mean I treat Air America the same way I treat Rush Limbaugh, I don't listen. Rather, this is a call to arms against our own flavor of religious extremists. Don't think we are living in a theocracy? Think again.
Terry Shivo was a wonderful example. This poor woman who was completely brain dead was being kept "alive" by a feeding tube inserted down her throat pumping strained peas into her stomach. And the religious right marshaled their zealots to try to stop her husband, life partner, married both by the law and in the eyes of God, from removing the tube and allowing the vessel that once housed Terry to end. The zealots marched on Washington, proclaiming "Culture of Life", a term quickly adopted by the government (I mean, who can argue against someone who's slogan is about preserving life?) This poor tortured man who has watched as his beloved slipped away was called a murderer, like he hadn't suffered enough. The courts got involved. And when the verdict came down that what the husband wanted was more important than what the zealots wanted, the zealots freaked.
Politicians started to denounce the legal system. They actually went so far as to threaten judges who don't see the world as clearly as they do. And they got away with it. They encourage violence against the branch of government that checks their balance, and no one lifts a damn finger. I was shocked at the statements by those Texan jerk-offs, but I was offended that Britney getting knocked up was the top story the next day.
And why did they fight so hard for this "Culture of Life" nonsense? So that their arguments against abortion might be taken seriously, of course. Never mind the school shootings, kids killing kids. Nevermind that someone dies violently in the United States every few seconds. This is a Culture of Life.
This is not a tirade against the Republican party. Or maybe it is. The Republicans have been hijacked by religious extremists with more in common with the Taliban than with the founding fathers. The Republicans I remember growing up with always had an enemy to focus their hatred on - the Soviet Union was a convenient fall guy. The Cold War was a great distraction for them, and when it ended, it seemed that the Republican party was lost, without direction. If there was any time better for the religious zealots to take over, I can't think of one.
Religious extremists scare the living shit out of me, because I know what they are capable of. The Middle East is not the only example the world has ever seen. Has anyone else seen the pictures from 1944 and 45, when the concentration camps were liberated? That was religious extremism at it's worst. Or we can look at brother killing brother in Ireland.
Religion is the cheap, dirty way to garner favor and blind trust in a population. If you don't think like I do, you don't think like God, you are un-Christian, or un-Muslim, or un-Catholic, or whatever your chosen faith. And no one wants to be excluded from their divine reward, so rational thought goes out the window, to be replaced by the party line
August 11, 2004
G4TechTV in Flames
I posted this as a new thread on the G4TechTV message boards a few weeks ago, and I think it is a good enough rant to merit the first post of my blog. I got 8 responses to it, 6 of them in complete agreement, and two from a 15 year old claiming I was calling all G4 viewers "children".
I do love irony.
An Open Letter to G4TechTV Management
When I think about the merger of G4 and TechTV, my blood doesn't boil the way it did, but I can still feel the temperature rise.
When I first heard about the merger, I envisioned a network where the best of both could be combined for a satisfying viewing experience: I imagined Adam & Morgan taking a more prominent role with the new network with strong gaming ties; I imagined Call for Help and the Screen Savers as flagship shows; I saw Tech Live informing a new audience; I thought "finally, an end to Thunderbirds, Anime Unleashed, and Wired for Sex". (Well, 1 out of 3, but you kept the most offensive ones.)
What we got was a demographic hodgepodge that doesn't seem to appeal to anyone. I am thinking that the only winners in this outcome were the G4 viewers (all 100 of them), while the thousands of TechTV viewers were left alienated.
How were we left alienated? Well, for starters, the gutting of a beloved cable channel. The replacement of some truly great shows with very high production values with TV that looked like it was, and I paraphrase, "TV for 7 year olds, by 7 year olds".
I can imagine the arguement made by those hundred G4 viewers saying that their favourite shows were every bit as good, but, children, please, let the adults talk.
G4TV.com - 3 twenty-somethings taking calls in a dark studio, calling each other names, and who at the end of the show ritually beat each other.
Pulse - where did they find that guy? He looks like the happy guy on those Encyte commercials. The constant rah-rah tone of the show really makes it difficult to watch. Prozac needed.
Filter - Pretty girl. Too bad she is hosting the equivalent of a video game popularity contest. Completely shallow and empty.
Sweat - A show named after perspiration. Lovely. And almost as much fun. The idea? Let's try to pick up chicks in or near the arcade.
Playerz - Oooooo - famous people have PlayStations AND XBox's. And they actually play them?....cool.
Judgment Day/Electric Playground - Perhaps the best hope for some integrity from the former solo network, but alas, when held up the harsh light of production values, it too falls short.
I understand that programming a television network is a difficult job, but that doesn't mean lowest common denominator broadcasting. Be responsible to the viewers you purchased from TechTV. You know the demographic: we're the ones with the paychecks that can buy product from your sponsors.
I had hoped the merger would bring an atmosphere of maturity to G4, while increasing the fun factor of TechTV - so far, it has failed on both counts.
I will continue to watch The Screen Savers after they move to L.A., along with X-Play, and Fresh Gear if it is still on, but I can say unequivocally that further slide in production values may have consequences. It is no secret that G4 was failing both in ratings and in revenues - the addition of TechTV programming could have helped, but I fear that not enough of it was kept, and I am prepared for the day when Comcast decides to cancel ALL programming in order to cut it's losses.
In my judgment, that day appears imminent.
Thank you for lowering my expectations, and also for narrowing my viewing options.
I wonder what is on A&E.
I do love irony.
An Open Letter to G4TechTV Management
When I think about the merger of G4 and TechTV, my blood doesn't boil the way it did, but I can still feel the temperature rise.
When I first heard about the merger, I envisioned a network where the best of both could be combined for a satisfying viewing experience: I imagined Adam & Morgan taking a more prominent role with the new network with strong gaming ties; I imagined Call for Help and the Screen Savers as flagship shows; I saw Tech Live informing a new audience; I thought "finally, an end to Thunderbirds, Anime Unleashed, and Wired for Sex". (Well, 1 out of 3, but you kept the most offensive ones.)
What we got was a demographic hodgepodge that doesn't seem to appeal to anyone. I am thinking that the only winners in this outcome were the G4 viewers (all 100 of them), while the thousands of TechTV viewers were left alienated.
How were we left alienated? Well, for starters, the gutting of a beloved cable channel. The replacement of some truly great shows with very high production values with TV that looked like it was, and I paraphrase, "TV for 7 year olds, by 7 year olds".
I can imagine the arguement made by those hundred G4 viewers saying that their favourite shows were every bit as good, but, children, please, let the adults talk.
G4TV.com - 3 twenty-somethings taking calls in a dark studio, calling each other names, and who at the end of the show ritually beat each other.
Pulse - where did they find that guy? He looks like the happy guy on those Encyte commercials. The constant rah-rah tone of the show really makes it difficult to watch. Prozac needed.
Filter - Pretty girl. Too bad she is hosting the equivalent of a video game popularity contest. Completely shallow and empty.
Sweat - A show named after perspiration. Lovely. And almost as much fun. The idea? Let's try to pick up chicks in or near the arcade.
Playerz - Oooooo - famous people have PlayStations AND XBox's. And they actually play them?....cool.
Judgment Day/Electric Playground - Perhaps the best hope for some integrity from the former solo network, but alas, when held up the harsh light of production values, it too falls short.
I understand that programming a television network is a difficult job, but that doesn't mean lowest common denominator broadcasting. Be responsible to the viewers you purchased from TechTV. You know the demographic: we're the ones with the paychecks that can buy product from your sponsors.
I had hoped the merger would bring an atmosphere of maturity to G4, while increasing the fun factor of TechTV - so far, it has failed on both counts.
I will continue to watch The Screen Savers after they move to L.A., along with X-Play, and Fresh Gear if it is still on, but I can say unequivocally that further slide in production values may have consequences. It is no secret that G4 was failing both in ratings and in revenues - the addition of TechTV programming could have helped, but I fear that not enough of it was kept, and I am prepared for the day when Comcast decides to cancel ALL programming in order to cut it's losses.
In my judgment, that day appears imminent.
Thank you for lowering my expectations, and also for narrowing my viewing options.
I wonder what is on A&E.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)