A few months ago Rush Limbaugh dominated cable news with his provocative statement, “I hope the President fails.” He explained himself by saying he didn’t want America to fail; just President Obama’s left wing agenda. It disgusted me how much coverage he received for this statement. The big three cable news network’s were treating this like it was a real news story.
Who cares what Rush Limbaugh says. Honestly, who is he? He’s a radio personality. He’s never served in public office. He has no real credential to speak of. Why do we pay any attention to what the Jon Stewarts and Rush Limbaughs of the world have to say? They’re entertainers who have somehow become something bigger; they’ve succeeded at becoming important, and yet, they’re still nobodies. They’re devoid of legitimacy. They’ve done nothing. Rush and Jon: If you’re so smart, so sure of how this country should be run, go out and run for office and do something.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Stern
Howard Stern revolutionized the medium of radio, creating his own brand of ‘reality radio’. He changed the format of nearly every station he came to, taking his local NYC radio program to #1 and syndicating it across the country to millions and millions of listeners. He had his own #1 rated cable television show. He had the #1 movie in the country. And yet for all of his successes, all of these accomplishments, Howard Stern’s name is still dirt.
There are very few people in history whose name alone can elicit such anger and hostility out of people. Mention ‘Howard Stern’ to somebody and they will probably describe him with words like ‘racist’ and ‘pig’ and ‘disgusting’. Most of these people will have probably never heard his show. Howard isn’t great because he’s gross or sexist or whatever else. He’s great because he’s funny. He’s a good interviewer. He’s interesting. My favorite part of the show is the news, where I can hear his take on recent social and political issues. I think he’s an intelligent guy and very often I find myself agreeing with him.
But the storms of publicity he stirred early in his career to help promote his show have done irrevocable damage to his image later among non-listeners. I don't think he cares, but it's unfortunate to know Howard Stern will never be properly recognized for his accomplishments, talents, and his contributions to radio and other media.
There are very few people in history whose name alone can elicit such anger and hostility out of people. Mention ‘Howard Stern’ to somebody and they will probably describe him with words like ‘racist’ and ‘pig’ and ‘disgusting’. Most of these people will have probably never heard his show. Howard isn’t great because he’s gross or sexist or whatever else. He’s great because he’s funny. He’s a good interviewer. He’s interesting. My favorite part of the show is the news, where I can hear his take on recent social and political issues. I think he’s an intelligent guy and very often I find myself agreeing with him.
But the storms of publicity he stirred early in his career to help promote his show have done irrevocable damage to his image later among non-listeners. I don't think he cares, but it's unfortunate to know Howard Stern will never be properly recognized for his accomplishments, talents, and his contributions to radio and other media.
Op-Ed Review
Allan Meltzer wrote an Op-Ed piece for the New York Times titled ‘Inflation Nation’. In it he argues that the Federal Reserve needs to be more careful in avoiding potential inflation of the U.S. Dollar. He maintains that increases in money supply coupled with the devaluation of the dollar could lead to a sharp rise in prices.
I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with him because I’m not smart enough to know whether he’s right or wrong. That’s what’s particularly troubling about this economic crisis; we realize just how helpless we are, how little we understand. These economic problems are beyond our understanding, forcing us to rely on experts to tell us what to do. Which experts do we listen to? Didn't they get us into this mess? Why can’t there just be a consensus solution? It's a lot to deal with.
It bothers me when the average citizen has an opinion on a topic like this. Everyone feels this recession, and they feel they deserve an opinion on how to address it. Fixing our economy however, should be left to the experts. Any idiot can debate moral issues, or political ideology, but having a real opinion on how the Fed should be controlling the money supply, that’s a debate best had by specialists.
I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with him because I’m not smart enough to know whether he’s right or wrong. That’s what’s particularly troubling about this economic crisis; we realize just how helpless we are, how little we understand. These economic problems are beyond our understanding, forcing us to rely on experts to tell us what to do. Which experts do we listen to? Didn't they get us into this mess? Why can’t there just be a consensus solution? It's a lot to deal with.
It bothers me when the average citizen has an opinion on a topic like this. Everyone feels this recession, and they feel they deserve an opinion on how to address it. Fixing our economy however, should be left to the experts. Any idiot can debate moral issues, or political ideology, but having a real opinion on how the Fed should be controlling the money supply, that’s a debate best had by specialists.
Instareview
I read Instapundit, a blog featuring a collection of links to a number of different political stories. I was surprised by the amount of content in the blog. Almost every fifteen minutes a new link would appear to a news story or blog, usually accompanied by a sentence or two of description. The stories covered a wide range of topics, from Swine Flu to the Chrysler bankruptcy, but all featured a political spin.
Instapundit’s value is not in its quality but its quantity. There are a lot of stories. I would imagine a person following Instapundit would be better informed than someone following CNN.com, but the process is time consuming. There are some stories that I would not have linked to (one was about Barrack and Michelle holding hands), but like I said, what makes Instapundit a valuable tool is that makes all of these stories available from one source.
Instapundit’s value is not in its quality but its quantity. There are a lot of stories. I would imagine a person following Instapundit would be better informed than someone following CNN.com, but the process is time consuming. There are some stories that I would not have linked to (one was about Barrack and Michelle holding hands), but like I said, what makes Instapundit a valuable tool is that makes all of these stories available from one source.
The Hagiography of Jon Stewart
I don’t like comparing Jon Stewart to the legitimate news because it suggests they're in the same business. But for some reason people love Jon Stewart. I don't think I've ever read a bad thing about him. The guy is golden. The truth is Stewart is just another entertainer, the Rush Limbaugh of the left, an arrogant blowhard who should be ignored. Jon Stewart’s opinions regarding politics and the media should mean as much to you as Adam Sandler’s or Carrot Top’s. He is not a viable substitute for mainstream network news, and should not be treated as such.
Viewing ‘The Daily Show’ and NBC’s ‘Nightly News with Brian Williams’ back to back only confirms my previous opinions. 'The Daily Show' covered Swine Flu and Obama’s first 100 days in its opening segment. The stories included little information compared to the nightly news, and were interspersed with hit or miss jokes that slowed down the show. Following a commercial break ‘The Daily Show’ aired a pre-taped piece on the European Particle Accelerator reminiscent of a Saturday Night Live sketch. The show’s final segment was an interview with Wolverine star Hugh Jackman. Believe it or not I don’t care about Hugh Jackman’s thoughts.
The NBC News was straightforward and professional. What it lacked in jokes it made up for in information.
Stewart is often celebrated for his critiques of the mainstream media, but his show doesn't stand anything. He can attack Jim Cramer and Crossfire for ignoring their obligations as members of the media, and then do a fluff filled show in which he wastes half his time pausing for audience applause before wrapping it all up with a hard hitting interview of Wolverine. If you want to be a media critic, be a media critic. If you want to be a comedian hosting a comedy show, go for it, but you can’t have it both ways Jon Stewart.
Viewing ‘The Daily Show’ and NBC’s ‘Nightly News with Brian Williams’ back to back only confirms my previous opinions. 'The Daily Show' covered Swine Flu and Obama’s first 100 days in its opening segment. The stories included little information compared to the nightly news, and were interspersed with hit or miss jokes that slowed down the show. Following a commercial break ‘The Daily Show’ aired a pre-taped piece on the European Particle Accelerator reminiscent of a Saturday Night Live sketch. The show’s final segment was an interview with Wolverine star Hugh Jackman. Believe it or not I don’t care about Hugh Jackman’s thoughts.
The NBC News was straightforward and professional. What it lacked in jokes it made up for in information.
Stewart is often celebrated for his critiques of the mainstream media, but his show doesn't stand anything. He can attack Jim Cramer and Crossfire for ignoring their obligations as members of the media, and then do a fluff filled show in which he wastes half his time pausing for audience applause before wrapping it all up with a hard hitting interview of Wolverine. If you want to be a media critic, be a media critic. If you want to be a comedian hosting a comedy show, go for it, but you can’t have it both ways Jon Stewart.
Don't Call Me Sweetheart: The Frightening World of Feminist Blogs
It was difficult finding a feminist blog entry to respond to. After Googling ‘feminist blog’ I clicked on the first link and was directed to a page titled femenisting.com. The most recent post was a collection of letters to one Professor Foxy titled “Ask Professor Foxy: Masturbation, Threesomes, and Lube Oh My!” This wasn’t quite what I was looking for, and seeing as there was no information detailing Professor Foxy’s credentials, I sought to find a more academic blog.
The next google link brought me to feministblogs.org. The title page had a video link to a 1988 live performance of Metallica’s ‘For Whom the Bell Tolls’ with the caption '20 years ago…when I was young and drunk.’ Tough to respond to that. At http://finallyfeminism101.blogspot.com/ the first post was titled, “How is asking the question ‘Why are there no fat elves in Dungeons and Dragons’ offensive to feminists?” There was also a link to website promising ‘Hot Guys in Flu Masks’. Redneck Femenist: A Free Market Femenist Blog had a subheading stating, "If you don't get the title of this blog, you probably shouldn't read it." I didn't understand the title, and, heeding her advice, moved on.
After traversing the frightening world of feminist blogging, I've come to the conclusion that feminism needs something to rally behind. I’m not saying that the feminist movement is dead, but if these blogs are any indication, the movement is somewhat scattered. What does the modern day feminist represent? I don’t know. What are the causes that feminists around the world are fighting for? I’m not sure. Equal pay maybe? The objectification of women? Having a link to hot guys in flu masks would certainly put a few holes in that argument.
I don’t even know if sexism still exists. It certainly doesn’t in my world, and if it does, I’m not aware of it. So if there are real problems out there concerning sexism and feminism, feminists need to make people aware of them. I tried to become aware, to educate myself, and all I found was a hodge podge of links, each one more point less than the next.
The next google link brought me to feministblogs.org. The title page had a video link to a 1988 live performance of Metallica’s ‘For Whom the Bell Tolls’ with the caption '20 years ago…when I was young and drunk.’ Tough to respond to that. At http://finallyfeminism101.blogspot.com/ the first post was titled, “How is asking the question ‘Why are there no fat elves in Dungeons and Dragons’ offensive to feminists?” There was also a link to website promising ‘Hot Guys in Flu Masks’. Redneck Femenist: A Free Market Femenist Blog had a subheading stating, "If you don't get the title of this blog, you probably shouldn't read it." I didn't understand the title, and, heeding her advice, moved on.
After traversing the frightening world of feminist blogging, I've come to the conclusion that feminism needs something to rally behind. I’m not saying that the feminist movement is dead, but if these blogs are any indication, the movement is somewhat scattered. What does the modern day feminist represent? I don’t know. What are the causes that feminists around the world are fighting for? I’m not sure. Equal pay maybe? The objectification of women? Having a link to hot guys in flu masks would certainly put a few holes in that argument.
I don’t even know if sexism still exists. It certainly doesn’t in my world, and if it does, I’m not aware of it. So if there are real problems out there concerning sexism and feminism, feminists need to make people aware of them. I tried to become aware, to educate myself, and all I found was a hodge podge of links, each one more point less than the next.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Good Night and Good Luck
Good Night and Good Luck works on a few different levels. As a period piece it is consistently interesting. Real footage of Joe McCarthy and his Senate hearings are injected seamlessly within to the film. Shot entirely in black and white, the film feels authentic. Good Night and Good Lucks also succeeds as an allegory to the potential perils of fear and hysteria, and it doesn’t take a genius to understand how these themes relate to our world today. Finally, the film also succeeds as an entertaining drama. Credit director George Clooney for turning a dialogue driven script about politics, journalism, and ethics into an intriguing, suspenseful film where the stakes actually feel high.
The movie is probably a little too preachy, but its message is pure: we should not abandon our principles and morals due to fear. It also touches on journalists and their ethical responsibilities, as well as the public’s duty to stay active in being informed. Watching the film I felt sorry for Murrow, preaching ethics and responsibility at the expense of profits, advertisers, and ratings. He reminded me of a young child, naively explaining how the world should work, oblivious to how it actually does.
The movie is probably a little too preachy, but its message is pure: we should not abandon our principles and morals due to fear. It also touches on journalists and their ethical responsibilities, as well as the public’s duty to stay active in being informed. Watching the film I felt sorry for Murrow, preaching ethics and responsibility at the expense of profits, advertisers, and ratings. He reminded me of a young child, naively explaining how the world should work, oblivious to how it actually does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
