I have often wondered what I used to spend my days doing before the internet and social networking sites emerged. It just hit me; I watched MTV, of course! Times have changed so much that I can barely remember. While it's true that I still see videos thanks to the internet, it's just not the same. It's almost as if internet killed the video star.
MTV was the epitome of cool, back in the day. Antics of Veejays such as Kennedy, Adam Curry, Downtown Julie Brown, Martha Quinn, and (the other) Julie Brown were a part of the whole MTV experience. They personified cool. I could only hope and pray to someday reach their level of coolness. They each presented the videos to us in their own unique ways.
The new era of social networking is probably a little more productive than just vegging out, watching videos (not much, though). I remember when MTV was music television, when they actually played music, instead of asinine reality shows.
I was dubious when they started airing The Real World in 1993. Otherwise, though, they were true to their name as an all music station. Little did we know that this programming ploy would be the catalyst for a whole new future MTV generation. It would forever change music television as we knew it. Soon, Real World shows were sprouting up in every major city, slyly edging out music television. It was gone before we knew what hit us.
According to NPR, MTV's modus operandi is to completely change formats every 4 years, or every high school term. This allows it to keep current, allowing for a new generation of cool, thus pissing off a previous generation. (This would seem to be a smashing success. I can testify that I, as well all of the other Gen X-ers I know are sufficiently pissed off).
They were always cutting edge, but always seemed true to themselves as Music Television; even with shows like Remote Control. And, we do tend to forget that MTV has always embraced pop culture, which is not just limited to music. Image is just as important, if not more, than music is. In 1992, they held their first Town Hall meeting where, then presidential candidate, Bill Clinton campaigned on MTV, and then as president, in 1994 he came on, answering the infamous question “boxers or briefs?” I didn't particularly feel that this was out of line with their format, but I'm sure some did.
Patrick Goldstein of the LA Times says that there is nothing in America more influential than MTV.
The station shapes trends in the three most important areas of the average teenager's life; music, movies, and fashion. He reiterates the importance of staying current. But reality shows are neither current nor are they music.
Is this really what the Gen. Nexters groove on? Apparently not, say the ratings, which seem to be steadily declining. It is cheaper, though. MTV's response to last year's low ratings, was to foist a different lineup of the same sort of reality shows upon us. It seems this is more a case of the wallet speaking the louder than the ratings, which means that the station has lost much of it's coolness. Or perhaps they are too cool to pay attention to ratings.
c.2009
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Palin Power
Palin Power
I was really depressed when I found out that Republicans had selected John McCain to run in the '08 elections. I was definitely not a fan to begin with, but I knew there was no way he could possibly compete with Obama fever. But my outlook brightened considerably when I got word that Sarah Palin would be his running mate. The RINO would be forced to reckon with a true elephant. It was now a dream ticket. She is such a powerhouse, with a contagious excitement that easily tops Obama's “Yes we can” platform. The more liberal McCain might be more attractive to democrats and disillusioned republicans, and any socialist deeds he might be inclined to would be kept in check by the ever- conservative Palin. It was now a ticket I could definitely get on board with.
Palin was a breath of fresh air to the Republican party. She incited a fresh enthusiasm that we truly could have change without sacrificing our principles. Liberals saw this, and it scared the hell out of them. Here was a woman who truly had everything, family, career, looks, charisma, and a run for the highest office in the country. (And she did this on her own. She didn't have to ride on anyone's coattails). You really can't hope to get much better than that. You'd think that the feminists would love her. The only problem is, she didn't do it their way. She didn't count on government handouts. She sent her son off to war. She didn't believe in “choice,” and acted out those beliefs in her everyday life.
Liberals certainly weren't going to have any of this. Because they recognized what a threat they were, they made sure that McCain was painted in the same hues as Bush, although the two couldn't be more different. And the popular Alaskan governor had to be quickly cut down to size.
They constantly pummeled her with inexperience allegations, which is simply ludicrous given her opponent's level. Her experience as Governor gave her more executive experience than Obama. She has experience running both City and State, as Governor and Mayor. She has experience lowering taxes as well as building an oil pipeline, which helped meet the energy needs of Alaska. She did all this while raising a family and giving birth to a newborn baby, herself. She didn't even let having her water break stop her speech at a conference in Texas. Is she Superwoman or what?
In 1992, when she was just 28, she began her two three-year terms on the city council of Wasilla, Alaska. This was prompted by a concern that the revenue from new sales tax would be spent recklessly.
Although she labeled herself as a conservative Christian, and the particular church she went to disapproved of alcohol. She surprised her opponent, and probably everyone else, by voting against a bill that would force bars to close 2 hours early,
It's understandable that Hilary had to be feeling a bit one-upped by Palin. In fact, according to the NY Daily News, In September '08, Hilary Clinton angrily backed out of a pro-Israel, anti-Iran rally when she learned that Sarah Palin would be there as well. She was so threatened that she got her leftist cronies to disinvite Palin.
Erik Sean Nelson, of The Huffington Post wrote a very offensive piece entitled, Palin will Run in '12 On More Retardation Platform. In fact, the article was so offensive that he pulled it. In it's place is an apology.
While it's true that every public figure must develop “thick skin.” There is something very venomous about the attacks Sarah Palin has had to endure. She'll have 4 years to regroup, unencumbered by the duties of Governorship, hopefully to make a run in 2012.
c. 2009
I was really depressed when I found out that Republicans had selected John McCain to run in the '08 elections. I was definitely not a fan to begin with, but I knew there was no way he could possibly compete with Obama fever. But my outlook brightened considerably when I got word that Sarah Palin would be his running mate. The RINO would be forced to reckon with a true elephant. It was now a dream ticket. She is such a powerhouse, with a contagious excitement that easily tops Obama's “Yes we can” platform. The more liberal McCain might be more attractive to democrats and disillusioned republicans, and any socialist deeds he might be inclined to would be kept in check by the ever- conservative Palin. It was now a ticket I could definitely get on board with.
Palin was a breath of fresh air to the Republican party. She incited a fresh enthusiasm that we truly could have change without sacrificing our principles. Liberals saw this, and it scared the hell out of them. Here was a woman who truly had everything, family, career, looks, charisma, and a run for the highest office in the country. (And she did this on her own. She didn't have to ride on anyone's coattails). You really can't hope to get much better than that. You'd think that the feminists would love her. The only problem is, she didn't do it their way. She didn't count on government handouts. She sent her son off to war. She didn't believe in “choice,” and acted out those beliefs in her everyday life.
Liberals certainly weren't going to have any of this. Because they recognized what a threat they were, they made sure that McCain was painted in the same hues as Bush, although the two couldn't be more different. And the popular Alaskan governor had to be quickly cut down to size.
They constantly pummeled her with inexperience allegations, which is simply ludicrous given her opponent's level. Her experience as Governor gave her more executive experience than Obama. She has experience running both City and State, as Governor and Mayor. She has experience lowering taxes as well as building an oil pipeline, which helped meet the energy needs of Alaska. She did all this while raising a family and giving birth to a newborn baby, herself. She didn't even let having her water break stop her speech at a conference in Texas. Is she Superwoman or what?
In 1992, when she was just 28, she began her two three-year terms on the city council of Wasilla, Alaska. This was prompted by a concern that the revenue from new sales tax would be spent recklessly.
Although she labeled herself as a conservative Christian, and the particular church she went to disapproved of alcohol. She surprised her opponent, and probably everyone else, by voting against a bill that would force bars to close 2 hours early,
It's understandable that Hilary had to be feeling a bit one-upped by Palin. In fact, according to the NY Daily News, In September '08, Hilary Clinton angrily backed out of a pro-Israel, anti-Iran rally when she learned that Sarah Palin would be there as well. She was so threatened that she got her leftist cronies to disinvite Palin.
Erik Sean Nelson, of The Huffington Post wrote a very offensive piece entitled, Palin will Run in '12 On More Retardation Platform. In fact, the article was so offensive that he pulled it. In it's place is an apology.
While it's true that every public figure must develop “thick skin.” There is something very venomous about the attacks Sarah Palin has had to endure. She'll have 4 years to regroup, unencumbered by the duties of Governorship, hopefully to make a run in 2012.
c. 2009
Meghan McCain: Fighting for Republican Coolness
Meghan Marguerite McCain apparently thinks she's Carrie Bradshaw from Sex in the City. To others she seems like Paris Hilton, with the same intellectual witticisms. She's actually an extremely bright girl with a case of diarrhea of the mouth. She just doesn't know when to quit.
Her blog, the MccainBloggette, as well as her column for The Daily Beast, is chock-full of inane commentary on all sorts of topics. Her weight, what it's like on the campaign trail, being single; her attempt to make Republicans seem cool. She shouldn't bother, because she's not one.
But she calls herself a Republican who is liberal on social issues. (Just like her dad). She says, "I am a woman who despises labels and boxes and stereotypes." She calls herself a “pro-sex” woman, who is “a lot more religious than I let on. I have a great relationship with God. I was raised to love people and not judge people....”
Sure, she doesn't judge anyone. I suppose this remark about Ann Coulter was meant to be endearing. “I straight up don't understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time.” She thinks Coulter is too extremist in her political views, and thinks that she is doing more harm to the party.
McCain has said she'd "be flattered to be considered the anti-Ann Coulter, the anti-Rush Limbaugh."
She says that she had changed her party registration from Independent to Republican "as a symbol of my commitment to my dad and to represent the faith I have in his ability to be an effective leader for our country and to grow and strengthen the Republican party when he is elected President of the United States."
Apparently her “commitment” is little more than symbolic, when she goes around calling Joe the Plumber a “dumbass.” Another, an example of her not judging. "Joe the Plumber -- you can quote me -- is a dumbass. He should stick to plumbing."
You may have read about her catfight with Laura Ingraham, who made a distasteful comment about McCain's weight. I can sort of see both sides here. Ingraham was doing a satire bit on Bill O'Reilly's show, in response to an article McCain wrote. She was impersonating McCain, saying, “Ok, I was really hoping that I was going to get that role in the Real World, but then I realized that, well, they don’t like plus-sized models...”
Of course this is a horrible thing to say about anyone, and certainly not true in McCain's case; but also no worse than anything the libs say about, say, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh or anyone else they don't like. You can watch for yourself Ingraham's defense, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjRyR4WSWZ4&feature=related
McCain responded on her blog, “...Instead of intellectually debating our ideological differences about the future of the Republican Party, Ingraham resorted to making fun of my age and weight, in the fashion of the mean girls in high school.” I have a feeling that she would be no match for Ingraham in a debate.
Her book, My Dad, John McCain, came out in 2008. She also hopes to write a "satirical account" of her experiences on the campaign trail. (I wonder if she'll be more sympathetic to Ingraham as a satirist). The one thing she won't talk about is Sarah Palin, which seems to be the one break, that Palin has experienced in this election.
Speaking at The Log Cabin Republicans convention in April 2009, she shared this mantra, "I am concerned about the environment. I love to wear black. I think government is best when it stays out of people's lives and business as much as possible. I love punk rock. I believe in a strong national defense. I have a tattoo. I believe government should always be efficient and accountable. I have lots of gay friends. And yes, I am a Republican.”
We can all breathe a sigh of relief now. Being a Republican is cool.
c. 2009
Her blog, the MccainBloggette, as well as her column for The Daily Beast, is chock-full of inane commentary on all sorts of topics. Her weight, what it's like on the campaign trail, being single; her attempt to make Republicans seem cool. She shouldn't bother, because she's not one.
But she calls herself a Republican who is liberal on social issues. (Just like her dad). She says, "I am a woman who despises labels and boxes and stereotypes." She calls herself a “pro-sex” woman, who is “a lot more religious than I let on. I have a great relationship with God. I was raised to love people and not judge people....”
Sure, she doesn't judge anyone. I suppose this remark about Ann Coulter was meant to be endearing. “I straight up don't understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time.” She thinks Coulter is too extremist in her political views, and thinks that she is doing more harm to the party.
McCain has said she'd "be flattered to be considered the anti-Ann Coulter, the anti-Rush Limbaugh."
She says that she had changed her party registration from Independent to Republican "as a symbol of my commitment to my dad and to represent the faith I have in his ability to be an effective leader for our country and to grow and strengthen the Republican party when he is elected President of the United States."
Apparently her “commitment” is little more than symbolic, when she goes around calling Joe the Plumber a “dumbass.” Another, an example of her not judging. "Joe the Plumber -- you can quote me -- is a dumbass. He should stick to plumbing."
You may have read about her catfight with Laura Ingraham, who made a distasteful comment about McCain's weight. I can sort of see both sides here. Ingraham was doing a satire bit on Bill O'Reilly's show, in response to an article McCain wrote. She was impersonating McCain, saying, “Ok, I was really hoping that I was going to get that role in the Real World, but then I realized that, well, they don’t like plus-sized models...”
Of course this is a horrible thing to say about anyone, and certainly not true in McCain's case; but also no worse than anything the libs say about, say, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh or anyone else they don't like. You can watch for yourself Ingraham's defense, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjRyR4WSWZ4&feature=related
McCain responded on her blog, “...Instead of intellectually debating our ideological differences about the future of the Republican Party, Ingraham resorted to making fun of my age and weight, in the fashion of the mean girls in high school.” I have a feeling that she would be no match for Ingraham in a debate.
Her book, My Dad, John McCain, came out in 2008. She also hopes to write a "satirical account" of her experiences on the campaign trail. (I wonder if she'll be more sympathetic to Ingraham as a satirist). The one thing she won't talk about is Sarah Palin, which seems to be the one break, that Palin has experienced in this election.
Speaking at The Log Cabin Republicans convention in April 2009, she shared this mantra, "I am concerned about the environment. I love to wear black. I think government is best when it stays out of people's lives and business as much as possible. I love punk rock. I believe in a strong national defense. I have a tattoo. I believe government should always be efficient and accountable. I have lots of gay friends. And yes, I am a Republican.”
We can all breathe a sigh of relief now. Being a Republican is cool.
c. 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Feelin' Thrifty
Since I, along with most people, am feeling thrifty, I searched high and low for thrifty tips. Here are some of my favorite websites dedicated to saving a few more pennies.
http://www.thriftyfun.com
http://www.thrifty-living-tips.com/
http://thrifty.lifetips.com/
http://www.betterbudgeting.com/
You can find coupons online for a lot of your favorite grocery and drugstore purchases. From food to deodorant to razors http://print.coupons.com
Organize in a folder or envelope kept in your purse or car for easy access.
Of course we know that buying in bulk saves money. Several grocery stores sell in bulk or you can shop at a warehouse club. But this is not a savings if it is going to just sit in your pantry. Since I am a single person, I don't buy food in bulk, however I will buy toiletries like toothpaste and toilet paper in bulk.
Bakery outlets are a seldom-tapped resource. You can find savings on bread and all sorts of baked goods.
“But,” you say, “eating thrifty isn't always eating on the skinny. All the cheap foods are bad for you.” Well, the 99 cent Chef reports some cheap choices that help keep your svelte figure. All sell for under a dollar.
http://www.tiphero.com/tips_325_&lpid=16
Entertainment
Make use of your local library or buy books at used bookstores. Amazon has a “used' link. You can usually save a lot. Some sell for 99 cents. I never pay full price for books.
Hulu.com in place of cable. With 900 current prime time hits that you can watch whenever you want, paying for cable seems rather pointless. Plus you can stock up on used DVDs at your local Blockbuster which sell for 2 or 3 bucks.
Thrifty Vacations
•backpacking
•camping
•working vacations – popular in the UK during the 50s, when money was tight and people couldn't afford holidays, they would often spend two weeks picking hops on the farms in the south of England.
These sorts of vacations are still available today in many different parts of the world. You can pick fruit or grapes for wine, or do some sort of environmental project. All are great ways to explore our world and meet new people. http://www.frugal-living-tips.com
How fun would it be to go grape picking in France? I guarantee that you would become the envy of your friends, not to mention your enemies, if you took that trip.
If possible, travel off season when the rates are lower. You can often avoid a price increase if you
buy your airline tickets in advance
Be sure to arm yourself with a City or Entertainment Guide with a list of all the attractions as well as coupons for restaurants and amusements. http://www.entertainment.com
Health http://www.alwaysfrugal.com/frugal-living.html
One of the best ways to stay thrifty is to stay healthy. Being sick is very expensive. Exercise is extremely important and very easy to fit in to any schedule.
I don't have the discipline to exercise at home. Some do. The most frugal thing to do would be to find some second-hand exercise equipment at yard sales, Goodwill, and sales at sports stores, so you can work out at home. However some need the discipline of a class to get (and keep) an effective regimen going. Your local Y offers all sorts of classes and exercise equipment for a decent rate. Most will work with you on this.
If you are a self-motivator and can keep a consistent exercise program at home, walking, biking, and hiking are ideal. In these cases, a good bike may be a valuable investment.
I cannot recommend yoga enough. I take at the Y, but they also hold classes at community centers and
churches. It is a great stress reliever and really helps with your disposition in these tight times.
While we're talking exercise, I found this recipe on http://www.tightwad.com/tips5.htm for deodorant. I am not yet thrifty enough to actually use this tip. But for those who are, mix full strength household bleach (5.25% sodium hypochlorite) with water or a water and liquid soap solution. (Never mix bleach with any chemicals containing ammonia, it produces a deadly chlorine gas!) After washing underarms with soap and water, soak a wash cloth and use a 1/32 ratio of bleach to water for cleaning, then air dry.
Decorating
As a former artist, I know framing can be expensive. It doesn't have to be though. A simple
frame hanger can cost at least $3.99. But the pop up top from soda cans can do the same thing, for
much cheaper. Simply remove the top by turning slightly until it pops off. Then attach to frame with
small screws or tiny nails.
As long as you don't need a custom size frame, often you can find cheaply framed prints at stores like
Family Dollar. You can toss the print and use the frame for your objet d'art.
Now that I've shared some of my thrifty secrets, I'd like to hear some of yours.
c.2009
http://www.thriftyfun.com
http://www.thrifty-living-tips.com/
http://thrifty.lifetips.com/
http://www.betterbudgeting.com/
You can find coupons online for a lot of your favorite grocery and drugstore purchases. From food to deodorant to razors http://print.coupons.com
Organize in a folder or envelope kept in your purse or car for easy access.
Of course we know that buying in bulk saves money. Several grocery stores sell in bulk or you can shop at a warehouse club. But this is not a savings if it is going to just sit in your pantry. Since I am a single person, I don't buy food in bulk, however I will buy toiletries like toothpaste and toilet paper in bulk.
Bakery outlets are a seldom-tapped resource. You can find savings on bread and all sorts of baked goods.
“But,” you say, “eating thrifty isn't always eating on the skinny. All the cheap foods are bad for you.” Well, the 99 cent Chef reports some cheap choices that help keep your svelte figure. All sell for under a dollar.
http://www.tiphero.com/tips_325_&lpid=16
Entertainment
Make use of your local library or buy books at used bookstores. Amazon has a “used' link. You can usually save a lot. Some sell for 99 cents. I never pay full price for books.
Hulu.com in place of cable. With 900 current prime time hits that you can watch whenever you want, paying for cable seems rather pointless. Plus you can stock up on used DVDs at your local Blockbuster which sell for 2 or 3 bucks.
Thrifty Vacations
•backpacking
•camping
•working vacations – popular in the UK during the 50s, when money was tight and people couldn't afford holidays, they would often spend two weeks picking hops on the farms in the south of England.
These sorts of vacations are still available today in many different parts of the world. You can pick fruit or grapes for wine, or do some sort of environmental project. All are great ways to explore our world and meet new people. http://www.frugal-living-tips.com
How fun would it be to go grape picking in France? I guarantee that you would become the envy of your friends, not to mention your enemies, if you took that trip.
If possible, travel off season when the rates are lower. You can often avoid a price increase if you
buy your airline tickets in advance
Be sure to arm yourself with a City or Entertainment Guide with a list of all the attractions as well as coupons for restaurants and amusements. http://www.entertainment.com
Health http://www.alwaysfrugal.com/frugal-living.html
One of the best ways to stay thrifty is to stay healthy. Being sick is very expensive. Exercise is extremely important and very easy to fit in to any schedule.
I don't have the discipline to exercise at home. Some do. The most frugal thing to do would be to find some second-hand exercise equipment at yard sales, Goodwill, and sales at sports stores, so you can work out at home. However some need the discipline of a class to get (and keep) an effective regimen going. Your local Y offers all sorts of classes and exercise equipment for a decent rate. Most will work with you on this.
If you are a self-motivator and can keep a consistent exercise program at home, walking, biking, and hiking are ideal. In these cases, a good bike may be a valuable investment.
I cannot recommend yoga enough. I take at the Y, but they also hold classes at community centers and
churches. It is a great stress reliever and really helps with your disposition in these tight times.
While we're talking exercise, I found this recipe on http://www.tightwad.com/tips5.htm for deodorant. I am not yet thrifty enough to actually use this tip. But for those who are, mix full strength household bleach (5.25% sodium hypochlorite) with water or a water and liquid soap solution. (Never mix bleach with any chemicals containing ammonia, it produces a deadly chlorine gas!) After washing underarms with soap and water, soak a wash cloth and use a 1/32 ratio of bleach to water for cleaning, then air dry.
Decorating
As a former artist, I know framing can be expensive. It doesn't have to be though. A simple
frame hanger can cost at least $3.99. But the pop up top from soda cans can do the same thing, for
much cheaper. Simply remove the top by turning slightly until it pops off. Then attach to frame with
small screws or tiny nails.
As long as you don't need a custom size frame, often you can find cheaply framed prints at stores like
Family Dollar. You can toss the print and use the frame for your objet d'art.
Now that I've shared some of my thrifty secrets, I'd like to hear some of yours.
c.2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Family Guy in Color
"FOX picking up nine more episodes of our show is proof that an African-American can make it in this country. This is a milestone for the United States of America." Cleveland Brown.
Cleveland, the first spin-off from The Family Guy truly does have it all. I mean what more could you want from a sitcom “including love, rednecks and talking bears, oh my!”
Cleveland Brown is Peter Griffin's black neighbor on the family guy. Not only is he the president of the Quahog Chamber of Commerce, but he owns a deli called, Cleveland's Deli. He was a fluent auctioneer before he was hit in the head by a totem pole. This incident permanently slurred his speech, causing him to speak slower.
He gets along well with his white counterparts, and is considered the “responsible one.” However, being the “token black” in the neighborhood, he sometimes receives different treatment from the neighbors. For instance, in the episode “Stuck Together, Torn Apart,” the machinery in a police car labels him as a minority suspect. Another episode, titled “Blind Ambition,” he discusses with policeman Joe Swanson how black strangers should be viewed in white neighborhoods, like a black bowling ball amidst white bowling pins.
Cleveland was created by Cleveland, himself, aka Mike Henry and Rich Appel with help from Seth McFarland (creator of The Family Guy). Interestingly enough, Mike Henry is white and 72. The inspiration for the name was the Cleveland Browns.
Cleveland has officially left The Family Guy, but will occasionally drop by for guest appearances.
The spinoff is apparently expected to be a huge success, not unlike The Family Guy, which as become a $1 billion franchise. FOX already has it slated for 35 episodes (or 2 seasons). This contract will make Seth MacFarlane the highest paid television writer.
Cleveland loses both his wife, Loretta and his house (along with his beloved bathtub) in a messy divorce. Loretta has had an affair with Quagmire. Cleveland's response? “Better it be Quagmire than someone she could get a disease from.” So the submissive, clumsy divorcee makes strides with hyperactive son, Tiger Woods, er, Cleveland Jr., to California. However while passing through his hometown of Virginia, he meets up with an unrequited crush, who he made a promise to long ago. It seems her husband did her wrong and left her with two kids. Thrilled at this opportunity, Cleveland decides to stay there instead. This will set the scene for their new Brady-esqe family, which includes, the new wife, Donna, her 16-year-old daughter, Roberta, along with her 5-year-old son, Rallo, as well as a much fatter and less hyper Cleveland Jr.
The new family lives alongside a family of eastern anthropomorphic bears; voiced by author and syndicated columnist, Arianna Huffington and Seth MacFarlane, himself. His other next-door neighbors are the British Pennyapple family. McFarlane also does the voice of the father, Barrington Pennyapple. Across the street live a family of rednecks who don't mask their discomfort with black people. Another familiar voice will be, longtime fan of The Family Guy, Kanye West. He will be the voice of Kenny West, soccer rival of Cleveland Jr.
The premiere has Stewy bidding goodbye to the “chocolate people.” scheduled to premiere in 2009.
Is FOX is taking a huge chance committing two seasons to a spin-off, especially one that hasn't
been tested? Historically, spin-offs are tricky business. Hopefully Cleveland won't follow the patterns of Golden Palace, Flo, and The Ropers. Haven't heard of these? Exactly my point.
c. 2009
Cleveland, the first spin-off from The Family Guy truly does have it all. I mean what more could you want from a sitcom “including love, rednecks and talking bears, oh my!”
Cleveland Brown is Peter Griffin's black neighbor on the family guy. Not only is he the president of the Quahog Chamber of Commerce, but he owns a deli called, Cleveland's Deli. He was a fluent auctioneer before he was hit in the head by a totem pole. This incident permanently slurred his speech, causing him to speak slower.
He gets along well with his white counterparts, and is considered the “responsible one.” However, being the “token black” in the neighborhood, he sometimes receives different treatment from the neighbors. For instance, in the episode “Stuck Together, Torn Apart,” the machinery in a police car labels him as a minority suspect. Another episode, titled “Blind Ambition,” he discusses with policeman Joe Swanson how black strangers should be viewed in white neighborhoods, like a black bowling ball amidst white bowling pins.
Cleveland was created by Cleveland, himself, aka Mike Henry and Rich Appel with help from Seth McFarland (creator of The Family Guy). Interestingly enough, Mike Henry is white and 72. The inspiration for the name was the Cleveland Browns.
Cleveland has officially left The Family Guy, but will occasionally drop by for guest appearances.
The spinoff is apparently expected to be a huge success, not unlike The Family Guy, which as become a $1 billion franchise. FOX already has it slated for 35 episodes (or 2 seasons). This contract will make Seth MacFarlane the highest paid television writer.
Cleveland loses both his wife, Loretta and his house (along with his beloved bathtub) in a messy divorce. Loretta has had an affair with Quagmire. Cleveland's response? “Better it be Quagmire than someone she could get a disease from.” So the submissive, clumsy divorcee makes strides with hyperactive son, Tiger Woods, er, Cleveland Jr., to California. However while passing through his hometown of Virginia, he meets up with an unrequited crush, who he made a promise to long ago. It seems her husband did her wrong and left her with two kids. Thrilled at this opportunity, Cleveland decides to stay there instead. This will set the scene for their new Brady-esqe family, which includes, the new wife, Donna, her 16-year-old daughter, Roberta, along with her 5-year-old son, Rallo, as well as a much fatter and less hyper Cleveland Jr.
The new family lives alongside a family of eastern anthropomorphic bears; voiced by author and syndicated columnist, Arianna Huffington and Seth MacFarlane, himself. His other next-door neighbors are the British Pennyapple family. McFarlane also does the voice of the father, Barrington Pennyapple. Across the street live a family of rednecks who don't mask their discomfort with black people. Another familiar voice will be, longtime fan of The Family Guy, Kanye West. He will be the voice of Kenny West, soccer rival of Cleveland Jr.
The premiere has Stewy bidding goodbye to the “chocolate people.” scheduled to premiere in 2009.
Is FOX is taking a huge chance committing two seasons to a spin-off, especially one that hasn't
been tested? Historically, spin-offs are tricky business. Hopefully Cleveland won't follow the patterns of Golden Palace, Flo, and The Ropers. Haven't heard of these? Exactly my point.
c. 2009
Bravo: Gay TV
One thing that struck me as I was watching the Bravo network the other day was the overabundance of estrogen; both real and fabricated. According to Reuters, Bravo is one of the leading gay-friendly stations. Bravo, part of the NBC/Universal family, is known for it's both female and gay appeal. Fashion shows, and reality shows such as Top Chef, America's Top Model, Kathy Griffin's My Life on the D List, Inside the Actor's Studio, Make Me a Supermodel, Miami Social, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, all seem to have a gay element to them. If Lifetime is called “TV for women,” I think we can safely call Bravo, “TV for gays.”
The Fashion Show, is hosted by Isaac Mizrahi, where a collection of designers, both over-the-top women and extremely flamboyant men get together and have a “design-off,” as well as vie not to be the “design that greatly disappointed us this week.” In one of the competitions they are told to sketch a dress from memory. This checks their eye for detail, (because “being a designer is kind of like being a secret agent,” don'tcha know). Just like any other reality show, some contestants get voted off.
The blunt or “direct,” as she prefers, lesbian Tabitha Coffey's, Tabitha's Salon Takeover showcases her razor-sharp directions to motley salons' staff. After bringing one stylist to tears, she declares, coldly, “I hate tears. Why don't you channel all those tears and emotions into something productive....work.”
Lesbian, Jackie Warner hosts Work Out, a show that chronicles the life and drama of a Beverly Hills spa owner. The cast includes the trainers at her spa,”Sky Sport and Spa,” as well as Warner's lover, Mimi, who is a self-centered Brazilian She-Rah.
Of course there's Queer Eye For the Straight Guy where 5 gay guys transform an everyday shlub to sheer fabulousness.
Comedy Central even hosted a spoof on it called Straight Plan for the Gay Man, which featured four heterosexual men teaching gay men how to be straight, or “mannish,” redecorating their homes with neon beer signs and teaching them about sports.”
United States Congressman Barney Frank speaking to the New York Post commented on Queer Eye, saying, "The notion that gay men have a superior fashion sense is not true and it's damaging. It's perfectly possible to enjoy that show and say, look at those clever homosexuals. What they do with hair! And not support gays at all.".
On Top Chef, It seems food isn't the only thing holding the attention of the viewers. The restaurant's kitchen is the backdrop for a saucy soap opera. The chefs, both gay and straight, have 30 minutes to cook dishes complete with amuse-bouches, and refreshing palate cleansers, topped off with sexual innuendoes and double entendres.
The judges hold nothing back. One chef's dish, quoted judge, Steven “reminded me of the career of Elvis Presley. It started out great, but then died on the toilet.”
So, is gay TV really that odd an idea? It is not rare for other subcultures have a channel that is exclusively theirs. Some say that they, just as anyone would, want to have a voice; a representation. Others say that they are trying to push their agenda on all of us straight people, thus validating themselves. Some say that they are trying to make homosexuality seem “normal” or mainstream, turning the kettle water up a notch, so to speak.
I think whatever they are doing, for good or for bad, is working. I remember 20 years ago, gayness was very much in the broadcast closet. TV networks would never even think of putting a gay character on one of their shows (Jack Tripper, aside). An entire gay channel would have been out of the question.
Now, however, it seems we have surpassed mere acceptability. We are embracing it. Celebrating it, even. We are forced to revel in their flamboyancy. My question is, can we honestly say that we celebrate or feel an obligation to be “OK” with any other subculture as much as the homosexual culture?
c.2009
The Fashion Show, is hosted by Isaac Mizrahi, where a collection of designers, both over-the-top women and extremely flamboyant men get together and have a “design-off,” as well as vie not to be the “design that greatly disappointed us this week.” In one of the competitions they are told to sketch a dress from memory. This checks their eye for detail, (because “being a designer is kind of like being a secret agent,” don'tcha know). Just like any other reality show, some contestants get voted off.
The blunt or “direct,” as she prefers, lesbian Tabitha Coffey's, Tabitha's Salon Takeover showcases her razor-sharp directions to motley salons' staff. After bringing one stylist to tears, she declares, coldly, “I hate tears. Why don't you channel all those tears and emotions into something productive....work.”
Lesbian, Jackie Warner hosts Work Out, a show that chronicles the life and drama of a Beverly Hills spa owner. The cast includes the trainers at her spa,”Sky Sport and Spa,” as well as Warner's lover, Mimi, who is a self-centered Brazilian She-Rah.
Of course there's Queer Eye For the Straight Guy where 5 gay guys transform an everyday shlub to sheer fabulousness.
Comedy Central even hosted a spoof on it called Straight Plan for the Gay Man, which featured four heterosexual men teaching gay men how to be straight, or “mannish,” redecorating their homes with neon beer signs and teaching them about sports.”
United States Congressman Barney Frank speaking to the New York Post commented on Queer Eye, saying, "The notion that gay men have a superior fashion sense is not true and it's damaging. It's perfectly possible to enjoy that show and say, look at those clever homosexuals. What they do with hair! And not support gays at all.".
On Top Chef, It seems food isn't the only thing holding the attention of the viewers. The restaurant's kitchen is the backdrop for a saucy soap opera. The chefs, both gay and straight, have 30 minutes to cook dishes complete with amuse-bouches, and refreshing palate cleansers, topped off with sexual innuendoes and double entendres.
The judges hold nothing back. One chef's dish, quoted judge, Steven “reminded me of the career of Elvis Presley. It started out great, but then died on the toilet.”
So, is gay TV really that odd an idea? It is not rare for other subcultures have a channel that is exclusively theirs. Some say that they, just as anyone would, want to have a voice; a representation. Others say that they are trying to push their agenda on all of us straight people, thus validating themselves. Some say that they are trying to make homosexuality seem “normal” or mainstream, turning the kettle water up a notch, so to speak.
I think whatever they are doing, for good or for bad, is working. I remember 20 years ago, gayness was very much in the broadcast closet. TV networks would never even think of putting a gay character on one of their shows (Jack Tripper, aside). An entire gay channel would have been out of the question.
Now, however, it seems we have surpassed mere acceptability. We are embracing it. Celebrating it, even. We are forced to revel in their flamboyancy. My question is, can we honestly say that we celebrate or feel an obligation to be “OK” with any other subculture as much as the homosexual culture?
c.2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Fair or Foul?
Booke Musterman and Adam Martin
Controversy sells. Controversy diversifies. So why is the government shunning such a pillar of our social and economic freedom? Why must the government decide what is fair for us?
Not according to the Fairness Doctrine, which was introduced in 1949, and rescinded in 1988. Radio stations would be required to present both sides of controversial issues in a manner that was honest, equitable and balanced.
"Honest, equitable and balanced?" By whose standards? Who is in a position to mandate which opposing side gets equal time? Will we also be giving equal time to crooks and NAMBLA members?
Who decides what's "fair?" I wonder how quickly Liberal, er, Progressive stations will be to invoke the fairness doctrine for things like the Evolution/Intelligent design debate.
First of all, why in the world would we need anything close to the "Fairness Doctrine?' Doesn't every radio have an OFF switch? If you don't happen to like what is on the air, you are fully within your rights to turn it off.
Any Conservative, will tell you that the media is slanted leftward. Any Liberal, will tell you the opposite. There are several websites dedicated to the respective exposes of biased news. So if both are right, don't we already have a sort of equal time?
Adrian Cronauer, the inspiration for the 1987 Robin Williams film, Good Morning Vietnam, writes in his article, The Fairness Doctrine: A Solution in Search of a Problem, that radio stations would just not air controversial issues. This would allow less access to varied viewpoints. He says that the current ever-evolving, immediate access to media "is achieving the sort of diversity and access the Fairness Doctrine was designed to foster, but could never attain."
Steve Rendell of the Progressive media criticism group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, says in The Fairness Doctrine How We Lost it, and Why We Need it Back, that the doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but just that contrasting viewpoints be presented.
So the opportunity for slanting and bias is still there. A Liberal host would be fully within the law spending 30 minutes presenting a shiny argument for his side, while getting a dull Conservative to spend 5 minutes on the opposing side.
Some say this is a purely Capitalist issue. Think of it this way, radio stations who air Rush Limbaugh's show are often very opposed to his caustic manner. But his ratings are so good that the advertising money potentially lost would be unimaginable.
When Sinclair Broadcasting was going to air the anti-Kerry documentary, Stolen Honor, the backlash from Liberals was huge. However, even when bombarded with complaints and calls to action, the FCC wouldn't prohibit the airing of the documentary. Eventually, Sinclair bowed to an advertising boycott threat.
Though the Fairness Doctrine no longer applies today, Congress passed Dick Durbin's amendment, which "calls on the FCC to 'encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.'"
Enforcement of the doctrine was extreme and controversial. The FCC could refuse to renew broadcasting licenses, upon violations. Station owners resented the fact that they, were the only media subject to this regulation.
Dick Morris seems to think that this will cause talk radio to be limited to the Internet. Of course, then the internet will be regulated, which will then limit Conservative talk to private conversations, then when they start policing those, it will be limited to mere thought, and then, in come the thought police. It's all so very 1984.
A source from the FCC told me, "Although the new doctrine would apply to broadcast television as well, the real target is AM radio.”
This is so suspicious. Why are they "targeting" AM radio. It would seem that they are directly trying to thwart Conservative talk. Think about it, when was the last time you heard someone crying for the Fairness Doctrine on generally Liberal slanted TV.
Why is the print media any different? According to Patrick Gibson, aka, The Evil Conservative, this is because radio is interactive. TV and print don't encourage dialogue. Even so. why should it be subject to differing broadcast regulations?
Why was the doctrine abolished? According to Adam Thierer, Director for Digital Media Freedom, "there were concerns that it was in violation of First Amendment free speech principles."
Val E. Limburg, of The Museum of Broadcast Communications, concurs, saying, that the doctrine might actually have a "chilling effect" and might be in violation of the First Amendment. In 1987, the courts declared that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and that the FCC did not have to continue to enforce it. The doctrine was dissolved that year.
Backers of the doctrine claim that listeners have the right to hear all sides of controversial issues. They are afraid broadcasters would resort to partisan coverage of such issues. But it's not as if diverse opinions are silenced. We have an outlet for any and all sorts of opinions to be heard.
FCC Chairman, Kevin J. Martin says, "I see no compelling reason to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in today's broadcast environment, and believe that such a step would inhibit the robust discussion...over the nations airwaves."
I was able to interview Patrick Gibson, aka The Evil Conservative, host of WVOX's Evil Conservative Radio in New York. I wanted to find out exactly how Conservative talk would be affected by this.
Why does the FD only apply to radio? The FCC controls TV as well.
The fairness doctrine is designed to... make controversial programming burdensome for radio stations. Radio stations are the target because they carry talk radio, and the issue-oriented focus of talk radio offends liberals. Liberals love government and hate talk radio... so it's a hop, skip, and a jump from there to using government to attack talk radio.
How enforceable is the doctrine? It isn't....The Fairness Doctrine is almost European in its potential for silly and destructive unintended ramifications. Or maybe that's exactly what they intend. Who knows?
Isn't this a purely Capitalist issue? Liberal talk doesn't seem to sell as well as Conservative. It is from the side of free speech. For the authoritarian liberals it's a matter of morality. People should do as they are told and feel the way [the media] tells them to feel. They are viscerally offended by talk radio and its issue-based, in-depth content. They know that, in the arena of ideas and concepts, they can't compete....To the authoritarian liberal, there is something patently offensive about analyzing events through a constitutional lens.
How feasible is providing equal time to every issue? What about things like evolution/intelligent design? This isn't an agenda focused on free thought and expression at all. It is exactly the opposite. In all likelihood the govt would see evolution as scientific fact requiring no equal time for rebuttal... like global warming.
Don't we already have a sort of fairness doctrine with the accessibility of varied media? we have as much "fairness" in media as the government could or should provide. You see the variety on cable TV... while the regulated networks all preach off the same page. Contrast the diversity available in the same medium with and without regulation.
c. 2009
Controversy sells. Controversy diversifies. So why is the government shunning such a pillar of our social and economic freedom? Why must the government decide what is fair for us?
Not according to the Fairness Doctrine, which was introduced in 1949, and rescinded in 1988. Radio stations would be required to present both sides of controversial issues in a manner that was honest, equitable and balanced.
"Honest, equitable and balanced?" By whose standards? Who is in a position to mandate which opposing side gets equal time? Will we also be giving equal time to crooks and NAMBLA members?
Who decides what's "fair?" I wonder how quickly Liberal, er, Progressive stations will be to invoke the fairness doctrine for things like the Evolution/Intelligent design debate.
First of all, why in the world would we need anything close to the "Fairness Doctrine?' Doesn't every radio have an OFF switch? If you don't happen to like what is on the air, you are fully within your rights to turn it off.
Any Conservative, will tell you that the media is slanted leftward. Any Liberal, will tell you the opposite. There are several websites dedicated to the respective exposes of biased news. So if both are right, don't we already have a sort of equal time?
Adrian Cronauer, the inspiration for the 1987 Robin Williams film, Good Morning Vietnam, writes in his article, The Fairness Doctrine: A Solution in Search of a Problem, that radio stations would just not air controversial issues. This would allow less access to varied viewpoints. He says that the current ever-evolving, immediate access to media "is achieving the sort of diversity and access the Fairness Doctrine was designed to foster, but could never attain."
Steve Rendell of the Progressive media criticism group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, says in The Fairness Doctrine How We Lost it, and Why We Need it Back, that the doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but just that contrasting viewpoints be presented.
So the opportunity for slanting and bias is still there. A Liberal host would be fully within the law spending 30 minutes presenting a shiny argument for his side, while getting a dull Conservative to spend 5 minutes on the opposing side.
Some say this is a purely Capitalist issue. Think of it this way, radio stations who air Rush Limbaugh's show are often very opposed to his caustic manner. But his ratings are so good that the advertising money potentially lost would be unimaginable.
When Sinclair Broadcasting was going to air the anti-Kerry documentary, Stolen Honor, the backlash from Liberals was huge. However, even when bombarded with complaints and calls to action, the FCC wouldn't prohibit the airing of the documentary. Eventually, Sinclair bowed to an advertising boycott threat.
Though the Fairness Doctrine no longer applies today, Congress passed Dick Durbin's amendment, which "calls on the FCC to 'encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.'"
Enforcement of the doctrine was extreme and controversial. The FCC could refuse to renew broadcasting licenses, upon violations. Station owners resented the fact that they, were the only media subject to this regulation.
Dick Morris seems to think that this will cause talk radio to be limited to the Internet. Of course, then the internet will be regulated, which will then limit Conservative talk to private conversations, then when they start policing those, it will be limited to mere thought, and then, in come the thought police. It's all so very 1984.
A source from the FCC told me, "Although the new doctrine would apply to broadcast television as well, the real target is AM radio.”
This is so suspicious. Why are they "targeting" AM radio. It would seem that they are directly trying to thwart Conservative talk. Think about it, when was the last time you heard someone crying for the Fairness Doctrine on generally Liberal slanted TV.
Why is the print media any different? According to Patrick Gibson, aka, The Evil Conservative, this is because radio is interactive. TV and print don't encourage dialogue. Even so. why should it be subject to differing broadcast regulations?
Why was the doctrine abolished? According to Adam Thierer, Director for Digital Media Freedom, "there were concerns that it was in violation of First Amendment free speech principles."
Val E. Limburg, of The Museum of Broadcast Communications, concurs, saying, that the doctrine might actually have a "chilling effect" and might be in violation of the First Amendment. In 1987, the courts declared that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and that the FCC did not have to continue to enforce it. The doctrine was dissolved that year.
Backers of the doctrine claim that listeners have the right to hear all sides of controversial issues. They are afraid broadcasters would resort to partisan coverage of such issues. But it's not as if diverse opinions are silenced. We have an outlet for any and all sorts of opinions to be heard.
FCC Chairman, Kevin J. Martin says, "I see no compelling reason to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in today's broadcast environment, and believe that such a step would inhibit the robust discussion...over the nations airwaves."
I was able to interview Patrick Gibson, aka The Evil Conservative, host of WVOX's Evil Conservative Radio in New York. I wanted to find out exactly how Conservative talk would be affected by this.
Why does the FD only apply to radio? The FCC controls TV as well.
The fairness doctrine is designed to... make controversial programming burdensome for radio stations. Radio stations are the target because they carry talk radio, and the issue-oriented focus of talk radio offends liberals. Liberals love government and hate talk radio... so it's a hop, skip, and a jump from there to using government to attack talk radio.
How enforceable is the doctrine? It isn't....The Fairness Doctrine is almost European in its potential for silly and destructive unintended ramifications. Or maybe that's exactly what they intend. Who knows?
Isn't this a purely Capitalist issue? Liberal talk doesn't seem to sell as well as Conservative. It is from the side of free speech. For the authoritarian liberals it's a matter of morality. People should do as they are told and feel the way [the media] tells them to feel. They are viscerally offended by talk radio and its issue-based, in-depth content. They know that, in the arena of ideas and concepts, they can't compete....To the authoritarian liberal, there is something patently offensive about analyzing events through a constitutional lens.
How feasible is providing equal time to every issue? What about things like evolution/intelligent design? This isn't an agenda focused on free thought and expression at all. It is exactly the opposite. In all likelihood the govt would see evolution as scientific fact requiring no equal time for rebuttal... like global warming.
Don't we already have a sort of fairness doctrine with the accessibility of varied media? we have as much "fairness" in media as the government could or should provide. You see the variety on cable TV... while the regulated networks all preach off the same page. Contrast the diversity available in the same medium with and without regulation.
c. 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
