This morning two of my co-workers were complaining about the stupid president interrupting their programs with his stupid speech, and how first he did it with the finale of Friends and now he was going to do it with Gray’s Anatomy, and doesn’t he watch TV?
As Bruce Willis would say, somebody call the wahhhmbulance. Like the president or not, watch his speeches or not, going on like this is essentially saying, “I’m an American—I’m politically uninformed and entertainment saturated and if you disrupt my cushy little life you may feel my wrath, which is more likely to come against you for disrupting my TV schedule than for any of your so-called ‘policies,’ whatever they may be.”
Which all goes to say: Don't parade your ignorance for all to see.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hey Suzanne.
Want to play a game called ride the wahhhmbulance?
It's like chicken, except we both drive at each other in our particular vehicle and see who stays in the longest without bailing.
Do you know why people watch Fox on Monday night? I'll give you two guesses. If you picked 'Prison Break' or '24' then you get a prize! Wheee! If you picked 'hear the President talk about dirty mexicans and what we're going to do about them' then you get a frowny face sticker and the boys that are sitting behind you will probably snicker (but you intimidate them so when you quickly snap around in your seat, glaring, they'll immediately shut up and look straight ahead).
I have no problem if the president wants to talk about his so-called 'policies', whatever they may be. However, as an American, I'm entitled to freedom of the press, and freedom of speech.
If I choose to listen to the president ramble, I'll turn the channel to C-Span or Fox News. If I choose to be entertained, I'll watch Grey's Anatomy, or Prison Break, I've got channels set up to do that. I get annoyed when my well-defined channel boundaries get all criss-crossed so the government can properly educate me on current events. Also I hope you caught the fact that I used "government", "educate", and "current events" all in that last sentence. I know you've read enough fiction to infer some subtext.
But the most waaaahhh thing about your post is that you state that a person prefering Grey's Anatomy over a Bush speech is analogous to declaring ignorance. It's absolutely not. The 'informed' vs 'entertained' options are in no way mutually exclusive. I ignored the President's message, and watched my shows afterwards. Tomorrow morning, I'm going to read what the news websites tell me abouth Bush's speech. And tomorrow night, the Daily Show will definitely have something to say about the speech. And because I'm like any other American in my demographic, that's where I get all my news anyway.
Also, let me real quick check out what time it is. Oh, 2006? I find it a little ironic that you're using a blog of all things to complain about the parade of ignorance. More than any other medium I can think of off the top of my head, blogs (and comments to said blogs) are the vehicle which proudly shouts "I'm ignorant! Listen to me!" I just wanted to point that out.
Also I'll post this comment in the superficial version of your diary, so most likely no one interesting will ever read it.
You know I like you by the way, I was just bored and looking for some sort of intellectual stimulation via argument. Feel free to bomb my diary with comments that are four times longer than the post itself. Also keep this argument going, so we can keep doing this wahhbulance chicken thing.
Hey Hell Hampster,
Want to treat public discourse with some respect?
It's a game where people share ideas and disagree all the while maintaining a level of courtesy for the other.
I don't know who you are, and I am not aware of your relationship with Suzanne, so I apologize if I am overstepping my bounds or butting in to a private conversation. However, the fact the the conversation is taking place on a blog, does make me feel justified to continue.
As it is said in the wide world of online commenting, IMHO, your references to waaahhhh were uncalled for and unnecessary. Firstly, I don't why your opinions about the tone of Suzanne post require comment at all. It seems to me that dealing with the content of what was said would suffice. However, if you did feel that it was necessary to make comment on the tone, perhaps you could have done it in another venue without calling out Suzanne personally. However, if you did feel that it would be inappropriate to let Suzanne get away with this kind of message, perhaps you could have been more respectfull in your tone and less flip.
I apologize if my remarks here have come across as uncalled for or crass. Suzanne and I were both beverages in a play once, and that is a bond that is not easily broken. Not that I believe she is in need of defense. I simply wanted to add my comment to this discourse.
And as long as I'm writing, I think I will also add my opinion regarding the content of the post.
While the President is certainly a powerful person, he does not in fact control the media. He may request coverage, but generally merely informs the media that he is making a statement. It is then up to the media to show, or not to show the statment. It is up to them to show it live or on tape delay, or just edited into sound bites.
In this case, the meda decided to show the President's statement live, knowing full well that it may upset some viewers and lower ratings. Why would they do that? The media is an ad driven comercial industry. Their goal is to make money, to make money they need to maximize their viewership, so why would they risk alienating viewers?
I think it's because they know in a democracy the media is a part of the system. It is vital to the nature of a republic that its citizens remained informed as to the actions and policy of thier representatives. I believe that is why the media pre-empts their programming. They do it so that people can watch and listen. They even take away other choices, because they believe the people need to listen. They do it with the hope that the people will.
All that is left, is for the people to respond. And it doesn't take much. Just leave the TV on, and stay seated. This is a wonderfully easy way to be apart of goverment, really to be a part of the country, a fully fledged citizen. And you don't even have to leave the couch.
I know it has been said that we don't have to choose between being entertained and being informed, but I would suggest we put this to the test. Trying watching the full statement the next time the President makes a speech and then compare it to the sound bites on the news and the parody on Comedy Central. Let me know how it goes.
Ok, that's probably long enough. Thanks for reading this far. Suzanne feel free to delete this if you like.
From one beverage to another--I love you, man. Thanks. :)
Right back at 'cha my bubbly friend
Post a Comment