Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Facebook Trying to Copyright the Words 'Face' and 'Book'

No joke:

Facebook, which has gone after sites with the word "book" in their names, is also trying to trademark the word "face," according to court documents.

But the social networking site has met with a familiar foe. As TechCrunch first reported, Aaron Greenspan has asked for an extension of time to file an opposition to Facebook's attempt. Greenspan is the president and CEO of Think Computer, the developer of a mobile payments app called FaceCash.

This reminds me of several years back when Metallica sued a band for infringing its copyright of the E-F chord progression.

Except that wasn't actually real. The story caught on, though, because of Metallica's high-profile lawsuit against music downloading service Napster. Napster, recall, spawned a horde of imitators in both function and name ("Friendster, Grokster, Aimster/Madster, Blubster"), but it didn't seem to mind.

The crucial difference, of course, is Napster was all but dead by lawsuit by 2003. Curiously, its founder, Sean Parker, also played a key role in the development of Facebook. If History doesn't repeat itself, it rhymes, it's been said. Failing that, it slant rhymes.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Common Ground

I've been reading on Wikileaks founder Julian Assange the past couple days, to better wrap my thoughts around the latest info dump and its significance. It's notable that in his critique of the American state, rooted in a civil libertarian tradition, Assange sounds almost conservative:

So there is a lot of good that has historically come from the United States. But after World War II, during World War II, the federal government of the United States started sucking the resources to the center, and the power of states started to diminish. Interestingly, the First Amendment started overriding states' laws around that time, which I see as a function of increasing central power in the United States.


Perhaps this will dissuade fellow government critic Sarah Palin from calling for his unilateral assassination.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Wikileaks, Round 3

They just keep coming, and the American government is not happy:

A [State Department] spokesman said: "These revelations are harmful to the United States and our interests."

He added: "They are going to create tension in relationships between our diplomats and our friends around the world."


How whiny.

The government destroys evidence of prisoner abuse with impunity, refuse trial for people illegally abducted and tortured, assert your right to target and kill an American citizen, all without judicial oversight and what amounts to a "Just trust us," rationale. In the name of state secrets information and evidence of these crimes is being withheld. By its absolute non-cooperation, seemingly exercising absolute power, the government has in fact entirely ceded its power.

For criminalizing important information, like criminalizing anything else in tremendous demand (alcohol, marijuana, pornography), puts it in the hands of forces beyond their control, with their own interests. Wikileaks exists to fulfill that demand, and while it is odious in its exposure of individuals who could be killed for collaborating with the U.S., the government bears ultimate responsibility for creating these conditions in the first place (and subsequently dismissing Wikileaks' overtures to redact the names of those threatened).

It should also go without saying that exposing atrocities would not upset so many allies if there were not atrocities to expose.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

In-YOU-end.... Oh.

Jeff Goldberg's got a lot of good things to say about the increasingly sick arms race going on between the TSA and potential terrorists. A few of the quotes he uses, however, scream of entendre:

Here is what President Obama, speaking in Lisbon, had to say about the furor over intrusive and humiliating airport security procedures: "...(I)n the aftermath of the Christmas Day bombing, our TSA personnel are, properly, under enormous pressure to make sure that you don't have somebody slipping on a plane with some sort of explosive device on their persons."

But, unfortunately, the threat comes not only from explosive devices on people, but in people. Our country has not yet experienced the terror of a cavity bomb -- a bomb inserted into the rectum or vagina of a suicide terrorist -- but this is what experts, in and out of government, fear is coming....

Three experts I spoke to this weekend -- two of whom are currently serving in government in counter-terrorism capacities -- believe it is only a matter of time before the technique is tried here. "We have nothing in our arsenal that would detect these bombs," one told me. "There is no taboo that we can see against this technique. Suicide is suicide, it doesn't matter how gross it is."


I know I risk forfeiting intellectual credibility I probably don't have--credibility credit, shall we say--but as an unreformed schoolboy who never saw a bad pun he couldn't appreciate, I felt I had to say something.

James Frey is the Kindest, Bravest, Warmest, Most Wonderful Human Being I've Ever Known in My Life

The infamous A Million Little Pieces author has started a publishing venture to crank out young-adult novels with the rigidly contracted help of aspiring writers. He sounds like he'd be a wonderful person to work for:

“I have very few friends who are writers … I’m a big fan of breaking the rules, creating new forms, moving on to new places. Contemporary artists like [Richard] Prince, Hirst, and Koons do that, but there are no literary equivalents. In literature, you don’t see many radical books. That’s what I want to do: write radical books that confuse and confound, polarize opinions. I’ve already been cast out of ‘proper’ American literary circles. I don’t have to be a good boy anymore. I find that the older I get, the more radical my work becomes.”


Setting aside whether finding a desperate MFA student to ghost-write the next Twilight is going to make literary history, let us consider hype. Frey uses the word 'radical' three times in this one quote, insisting that he is (a) radical. That's some high self-appraisal, but it really doesn't mean anything unless others will concur. The top results for a Googling of 'James Frey radical' brings up only responses to this New York Magazine piece. One should always approach media hype with a skeptical eye, even more so when it's the subject doing the hyping, and especially he is alone in doing so. If you have to talk about how radical you are, there's a good chance you're not really all that radical. Marketing is not radical.

For balance, let us also consider Edward Albee. Albee, author of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, is also stubborn and driven (he insists on only allowing what is to my mind an inferior version of The Zoo Story to be professionally produced), but his body of work speaks for itself. Ask any theatre critic about important American playwrights of the last half-century, and Albee's name will quickly fall from his lips.

Frey could learn from Albee's approach to fame:

GREEN -- Is that, in part, a way of looking out for posterity?

ALBEE -- Who is this posterity, and what does he want?

GREEN -- You tell me.

ALBEE -- I don't know.

GREEN -- Do you concern yourself with that?

ALBEE -- No. You can't think about yourself in the third person. That's madness.

GREEN -- But you have an impulse to protect what you've done.

ALBEE -- I am the guardian of the plays that are sitting in my head that want to come out.

GREEN -- And yet you're also the guardian of the plays that have already come out. At least the temporary guardian.

ALBEE -- I don't think we should think about legacies ourselves.


For what it's worth, Albee also runs a retreat for writers and other creative types. Frey offers young would-be authors stifling contracts to hitch their wagons to his star.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Gulf in Mexico


Andrew Sullivan flags a story on Mexican journalists, and how they have essentially stopped reporting on drug cartel violence, rightly fearing for their safety.

So where does one go to find out about the cartels? Not speaking Spanish myself I can only get so far, but I did manage to find a few sites that offer unvarnished coverage.

Politics in the Zeros has a list of four blogs devoted to finding news reports on cartel violence and analyzing them.

The Guardian mentions a Twitter feed, #Reynosafollow, that talks about shootouts and other incidents that go otherwise unreported by Mexican media.

The Daily Beast earlier this year wrote about Alarma! (not having seen the site myself, I'll repeat the Beast's warning of the graphic violence contained therein), which functions basically as a death tabloid.

The most famous coverage of the drug war comes from el Blog del Narco, maintained anonymously, a must-read for all sides of the conflict, one that the cartels contact directly, posting gruesome torture and execution videos.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Vergeben

Yesterday Fox News president Roger Ailes referred to NPR as "Nazis," and today apologized for it. Also:

Ailes and Foxman seem to have established an open line of communication of late. After the ADL criticized Glenn Beck for his statements about George Soros’ actions during the Holocaust, Ailes reached out to Foxman, Kurtz reported.


Think of it as a swear jar for Nazi Tourette's.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

The Genealogy of Emails

Funny, but very true:

There are some warning signs that you might have a bad e-mail address. First, is it oddly specific, but does it end in a number? You probably need to rethink your life. Anything along the lines of NobodyLovesTheCircusMore5 or ClevelandMortThePirateHunter7 is just a cry for help. The people who own these e-mail addresses clearly felt that they had their lives well in order until they noticed that NobodyLovesTheCircusMore was taken -- four times. At Hotmail.


My old email address falls roughly within these parameters, being based of all things off the 90s puzzle game Myst. Mostly I picked it because it sounded neat, and an unrelated number was en vogue at the time.

I hold onto it now for a few reasons: many of my friends and family already have that as my contact and switching is just mildly inconvenient. It's also a good way to separate personal and business mail. Finally, I have a peculiar loyalty for it--fifteen years of providing email under the same goofy name is not casually tossed aside.

h/t Ezra Klein

Slow News Day...

...for Thomas Friedman, who uses the entirety of his column today to re-cap an Anderson Cooper investigation with little more input than nods of approval:

On Nov. 4, Anderson Cooper did the country a favor. He expertly deconstructed on his CNN show the bogus rumor that President Obama’s trip to Asia would cost $200 million a day. This was an important “story.” It underscored just how far ahead of his time Mark Twain was when he said a century before the Internet, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” But it also showed that there is an antidote to malicious journalism — and that’s good journalism.


The piece is but ten paragraphs long, seven of which contain Cooper's name in the first or second sentence.

I mean, really, a link to the story or an embedded video is all that's necessary.



Telling the story of telling the story is so meta and dull. Get a blog, dude.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Fired Fox Browsing


In the wake of Keith Olbermann being suspended from MSNBC for making donations to Jack Conway, Gabrielle Giffords, and Raul Grijalva, I thought I would engage in some free association, some false equivalency, and poke around to find out, given Olbermann's anchoring anchor status, what, say, a Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity would have to do to get fired from MSNBC rival Fox News.

Turns out he would have to quite a lot. Though there have been some local reporters fired from Fox affiliates for various causes over the years, when it comes to the parent network, there aren't too many high profile cases of sudden cannings, and certainly none of Olbermann's stature.

But there are a few firings, in any case. Roger Friedman, a movie reviewer, lost his job for pirating a bad Fox movie, (Wolverine) for one of his segments. And reporter "Fox and Friends" co-host Kiran Chetry had the temerity to try to get Gretchen Carlson fired when negotiating a contract renewal.

That's about it. E.D. Hill was let go after her "terrorist fist jab" comment, but she was allowed to finish her contract, so that doesn't totally count. And that was going by the quaint, 2008-era standards of political discourse. Fox today validates fears of people in "Muslim garb" in airports and has already floated the notion that Barack Obama is a Muslim, so for them Obama being a terrorist is 2+2. They report, you decide.

It should also be mentioned, especially in light of Olbermann, that Fox did fire reporter Jennifer Locke for telling John McCain, on air, that she voted for him. But come on. Given the million dollars Fox has given the Republicans, to say nothing of on-air shilling, this makes Locke the Lyndie England of partisan journalism.

No, Bill O'Reilly should be just fine, as long as he doesn't donate to Raul Grijalva.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Quota, Unquote

Apparently the talkies need more memorable quotes:

“I’m at a loss, because the lines for a while were coming fast and furious,” said Laurence Mark, who had us at “hello” as a producer of “Jerry Maguire,” and is a producer of “How Do You Know,” which is written and directed by James L. Brooks and scheduled to open just before Christmas. (In 1987 Mr. Brooks mapped the media future in seven words from “Broadcast News”: “Let’s never forget, we’re the real story.”)

If film lines don’t stick the way they used to, Mr. Mark said, it is not for lack of wit and wisdom in Hollywood. “What I don’t believe is that the writers are less talented,” he insisted. “I don’t think that’s true, I just don’t.”

Speaking by phone recently, however, Mr. Mark was hard-pressed to come up with a line that stuck with him in the last few years. “I will try my darnedest to think of one,” he promised.


Herroooo?

Why so serious, New York Times?

It's because of pieces like this that I wish I knew how to quit you.

Oh, I'm sorry. Did I drink your milkshake?

Monday, October 11, 2010

Squishy Culture Jam

Banksy's Simpsons intro is getting lots of attention. The video's been removed from YouTube, but here's a bootleg:



Depicting Korean slave labor grinding up kittens and chaining unicorns in service of producing the show's animation is supposed to draw attention to the plight of cheap foreign labor--an important issue I'm sure--but its effectiveness is questionable. Like fellow graffiti artist Shepard Fairey, Banksy's work, at least here, is steeped in irony and turning giant cultural forces against themselves. This is fine for taking the piss out of the powerful, but for advancing a positive argument the effect is muddled. Is he serious? one must ask. Even the master ironist Stephen Colbert breaks character when it comes time to actually make a point:



Irony can also lead to a certain infinite regress: The Simpsons mocks its own harsh labor practices...by using harsh labor practices!

It comes down to effectiveness: is this really going to make anyone sit up and say, "No more!" or will the viewer chuckle, concede that he's probably right, and then move on to the next cute animal montage on YouTube?




P.S. Clerks' Korean labor gag was funnier.

Monday, October 4, 2010

Rick Sanchez Redux

Leave it to Jon Stewart to make us feel a little bad for piling on Rick Sanchez. He had some fun at Sanchez's expense, but saw that at this point kicking him when he's down would just be cruel.

Revisiting Sanchez's remarks, it seems Hitchens may be right, that Sanchez hardly said anything controversial, but as to getting his job back.... Let us go back to his words:

I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they, the people in this country who are Jewish, are an oppressed minority? Yeah.


"The Jews run the media/country/world" is old hat for anti-Semites, taking an objective fact, that of Jewish overrepresentation in government, media, and culture, and spinning it into grand conspiracy. Sanchez didn't do this, and was rather trying to make a (poorly supported) point about Jon Stewart being part of a liberal white elite that condescends to Hispanics like himself (nevermind that no one would know of Sanchez's ethnicity if it weren't for his last name).

But the long history of Jewish conspiracy theories makes mention of the Jewish presence taboo, much the same way depicting Barack Obama as a chimp is seen as offensive in a way it wasn't when the same was done to George Bush. Using the history of racists instead of the personal history of accused isn't entirely fair, but one has to wonder how dense people could be to wonder why such things could be thought offensive.

Rick Sanchez just happens to be very dense.

His offense, then, was running his mouth, which, as Stewart pointed out, he tended to do on CNN on a regular basis. (I'll take this moment admit to my own haste in writing my original snarky post on this incident.) So yes, his being fired for more or less doing what he was paid to do is unfair. But Helen Thomas went down in flames over similarly ill-considered (though much more offensive) remarks which she instantly regretted, and she was an actual journalist. If we are going to speak of capriciously rescueing a capriciously ended career, it might as well be one worth saving.

Friday, October 1, 2010

MyFace

This examination of early Columbia-based Facebook competitor Campus Network is well worth a read, but this may be the key insight is a topic worth exploring (was contradicting myself):

Neither site, of course, can claim to be the first social network—Friendster and MySpace already had large followings in 2003. But both Facebook and Campus Network had the crucial insight that overlaying a virtual community on top of an existing community—a college campus—would cement users' trust and loyalty. Campus Network figured it out first. Facebook just executed it better.


There is some truth to this. Speaking anecdotally, MySpace was from the beginning open to everybody and for me led to a lot of annoying friend requests from people who, say, lived in the same town but were complete strangers (this happens occasionally on Facebook, but it's usually a friend-of-a-friend).

But there were other factors, important ones, too: user-designed MySpace pages and backdrops often caused browsers to crash. The blogging aspect, perhaps because it was so prominent (more than Facebook's Notes, by my reckoning) and combined with the built-in-audience aspect, was addictive, much more than I've ever found Facebook to be, which was the reason I deleted my account after only a few months. And I do think on some level the Newscorp acquisition rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. I hadn't heard much about Mark Zuckerberg before some of the more recent Facebook privacy complaints; Rupert Murdoch, on the other hand, is the conservative arch-fiend, The Man.

It still is amazing, though, that MySpace, at one time the most popular social networking website on the internet, could be so quickly surpassed and dethroned by the Harvard upstart.

Adios, Rick Sanchez

CNN has fired Rick Sanchez for saying CNN is run by Jews, as part of a broader complaint about Jon Stewart being a bigot, and see, no one would not be hired for being Jewish.

No one would be not hired because he was Irish. Or Italian.

THE IRISH-ITALIAN JEWS RUN THE MEDIA.

At one point he complained that Jon Stewart can destroy careers, but it looks like Sanchez's was happily able to implode on its own.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

The Twilight Zone

I wanted to loathe The Official Twilight Convention ©™. Everything I have ever read about the books and movies—by most accounts a collection of slackly constructed, dead-eyed romantic longings without dramatic incident or tension—together with their baffling popularity suggests a further slide in the decline of Western Civilization. The chance to witness a gathering of this benighted franchise’s readership in the throes of celebrating it, then, seemed a fine opportunity to document said cultural atrophy. And yet it felt mean to hate on an event so stunningly ill-attended.

(I should add before proceeding that I have not read or watched any of the Twilight books or movies, for the same reasons I was only recently exposed to the scribblings of Dan Brown. While arguing from a position of ignorance is almost always to be frowned upon, I should hope those who have had the misfortune of slogging through one or another of the Twilight saga’s installments would defend me in my (obviously unfounded) assertion that Twilight is bad enough to present an exceptional exception.)

The proceedings of the Official Twilight Convention ©™ started somewhere around 11 AM. I was late in getting started and without a ride downtown, so I put on my running shoes and set out around 11:45. In a little under an hour-and-a-half I made the 17 blocks west, 12 blocks north, 3-4 mile walk, arriving around 1:15 PM.

A word on expectations: I was wondering if how packed the convention center would be, whether I would be able to get in. When I hear the words “Official Twilight Convention ©™,” I think booth after booth after booth, dressed down with moody black and gray backdrops bearing Kristen Stewart’s vacant stare, gazing into the romantically-malnourished souls of hundreds of Hot Topic-shopping attendees, young and often teen-aged girls whose excited chatter creates a background noise broken only by shrieks of hysteria whenever one of the series’ principals makes everyone there more beautiful by their presence.

And all that was there, but on video.

Being projected onto a large screen in the Sheraton hotel’s convention room , was a 2007 Twilight convention interview in which leads Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, and Taylor Lautner had to field such questions as “Which movie [of two, I note] is your favorite?” with their every other sentence being interrupted by rapturous, presumably female, screaming. Stewart and Lautner (who is a beauty, I’ll admit, but nothing worth losing one’s mind over) made do as much as they could, but Pattinson seemed distinctly annoyed with the whole thing, at one point being unable to think of a favorite trait of his character, Edward.

I reiterate, this was all on video that surely must be floating around the internet somewhere. Yet the fans present seemed to be eating it up, all thirty-five of them, plainly dressed except for a little girl with a black cape, clustered in the reserved front three rows of some 150 seats, laughing at things like a story about Pattinson looking like a large teletubby during the shooting of a CGI scene. I later found the vendors sitting at their kiosks with nothing to do, and ditto the guy manning a gimmicky photography booth.

This was unreal: that the total number of fans in attendance was less than my graduating high school class was almost as baffling as Twilight’s having become popular in the first place. Had the absent majority already gotten their fill on Friday and Saturday and sat this one out? Had the advertising department fallen down on the job? Or was the Twilight juggernaut in reality a Potemkin fad invented and embellished by shrewd marketing? I know not the answer, but I can be fairly certain this caught some of the involved parties by surprise. The MCs noted the “intimacy” of the crowd, and the woman from whom I bought a ticket (which included an “officially autographed” photo of…someone) remarked to one of her friends while I was paying, “Yay, I have a customer!”

I got some satisfaction in seeing the Twilight beast humbled, but felt a twang of sympathy for the ladies and occasional lad who, at least for now, did not have the vague comfort of being a part of a mass phenomenon. Myself, I felt a little vulnerable for similar reasons, sticking visibly out instead of disappearing into an aggregate crowd. But the other attendees didn’t seem to mind me, or their own underwhelming numbers.

Shortly after the video finished the second Q&A guest of the day was introduced, Chaske Spencer, who plays one of the second-tier (so designated because I, the uninitiated, have never heard of him) character known only as Sam. Dark-haired and olive-skinned, clad in a green V-neck tee and jeans and carrying a can of Mug root beer, he walked onstage and, instead of sitting on the fold-out chair provided, sat on the edge of the stage, due to the crowd’s previously stated intimacy. The MC mentioned the other guests had done this too, suggesting that the previous days had had a depressed turnout as well.

I was expecting the same inanity that saturated the just-finished video interview, and occasionally there were turkeys like “If you could take three items on a desert island, what would they be?” (which was asked of the next guest as well). But there were occasionally some questions of substance, with intriguing answers. Hailing from Montana and (Lewiston) Idaho, Spencer is of Sioux, Nez Perce, Cherokee, Creek, Dutch and French heritage. The book he most recently read was Jon Krakauer’s Pat Tillman tome: “He was an interesting, mysterious person,” Spencer said, and “what they did to him after he died, lying to his family, was unacceptable.” He is also a photographer, had once wanted to be a war photographer, and would want to live in Berlin for its architecture, its artists, and the fact that David Bowie recorded a trilogy of albums there with Brian Eno.

Perhaps his most surprising comment, especially given the setting, was that he was really excited about his next movie, Shouting Secrets, because he gets to, you know, act. “I love it when I actually get to work. I love Twilight, but it’s really just take off my shirt, beefcake stuff.”

The last thing I ever expected from attending The Official Twilight Convention ©™ was to empathize with one of the people responsible for foisting it on the world, yet Chaske Spencer came off positively alright, someone with whom I would actually want to hang out and bullshit. He was obviously having a good time fielding questions, but it’s clear he has no illusions about it all being just another acting gig, which are hard enough to land to begin with.

The next guest, the unfortunately named Booboo Stewart, didn’t come off nearly so well. He had the look and affect of a clueless teenager, because he was, being only 16 years old and soon to get his first car. This made me feel tremendously old, and I was losing interest in everything that was going on, except for a bubbly older woman covered in Twilight memorabilia named Donna; she must have been one of the handlers for The Official Twilight Convention©™, for Stewart got to play harmonica and dance. Occasionally she made such interjections as “What the fur?” and “I feel sheepish. I feel baaad…” She was more interesting than Stewart, in any case.

That was enough for me. I’m on vacation, and two hours is more than enough time to spend at The Official Twilight Convention ©™. I left feeling more sad than anything. Many of Twilight’s participants seem to be aware that the series is microwaved junk food, but are content to ride its pop tsunami for all it’s worth. The fans’ devotion is genuine, if terribly misguided. They really do deserve better. Yet the sparse attendance of the event (which may have precipitated the markdown in ticket prices from thirty dollars to ten) is perhaps a telling sign of, pardon the pun, a breaking dawn of prevailing good taste that may yet put the Twilight saga in its coffin for good.

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

High Fidel-ity

Jeffrey Goldberg was invited to Cuba to talk to Fidel Castro about his article about an impending bombing of Iran. Strange details abound, but this is a particular standout:

After this first meeting, I asked Julia to explain the meaning of Castro's invitation to me, and of his message to Ahmadinejad. "Fidel is at an early stage of reinventing himself as a senior statesman, not as head of state, on the domestic stage, but primarily on the international stage, which has always been a priority for him," she said. "Matters of war, peace and international security are a central focus: Nuclear proliferation climate change, these are the major issues for him, and he's really just getting started, using any potential media platform to communicate his views. He has time on his hands now that he didn't expect to have. And he's revisiting history, and revisiting his own history."


"Any media platform." Think of the implications. As a lurid curiosity, a Fidel Castro Facebook or Twitter account could put Sarah Palin's to shame. Better yet, they could engage in an internet arms race. Their Wall-to-Wall, their back-and-forth tweeting; Cold War flaming.

Monday, April 12, 2010

The Funny Thing About ICP

Exhibit A: The New Insane Clown Posse single, "Miracles:"



Funny stuff.

Exhibit B: Cracked.com's Textbook for Juggalos, introduced thus:

There is so much magic, so many unexplained phenomena occurring every day, that the Detroit Clown Madness Duo simply can’t contain its awe.

Oddly, what the Insane Clown Posse categorize as “magical unexplained mysteries” involve things like “rainbows” and “giraffes” and “magnets.”

Somewhere down the line, the public school system has failed Violent J and Shaggy 2 Dope. That’s right, I blame not Misters J and Dope, but the system. The burden of education falls on the shoulders of our teachers, not students. If the traditional methods of teaching aren’t getting through to a child, it is the obligation of the teacher to find a new method that will.


Funny stuff.

Exhibit 3: The Detroit public school system in question.







Funny Stuff.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Palm Reading



Sarah Palin used crib notes for her post-speech Q&A at the Tea Party Convention last weekend. This is stupid because people generally stop resorting to them after high school. It's absurd because it was for a Q&A, which is supposed to be unscripted and off-the-cuff, albeit in an entirely different fashion. It's hypocritical because Palin had just criticized Obama for using a teleprompter, which is elitist because she pretends she can't afford one, or something. It's horrific because this stupid, absurd, hypocritical woman wants to be President of the United States of America and millions think the same and apparently see nothing wrong with this picture.

Many people got a laugh at her expense. The best, naturally, were Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart.

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Sarah Palin Uses a Hand-O-Prompter
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorEconomy


The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
AmeriGasm
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Crisis


They're comedians, we expect that of them, and they do it very well. We don't expect it of MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell:



Certainly not from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs:



I might expect this sort of thing from Rachel Maddow, but only because she's made a name for herself in obnoxious snark. I'm not a viewer and so I can't name a particular instance, but this Ben Hyman NPR piece highlights what I'm trying to say:

Maddow’s journalism is of the fact-checked, responsible variety, and her interviews are sharp and engaging. If she wanted to play it straight, she probably could. But she almost always starts her pieces by smirking her way through a snarky gem of an introduction, as if to say, “Really? Can you believe this nonsense?” Her style is grounded in a skepticism that all too often turns out to be deserved. When Maddow uses snark, she is mapping the uncharted space in journalism between Walter Cronkite and The Daily Show.


Hyman doesn't see anything wrong with this. But why are we mapping the gulf between Walter Cronkite and The Daily Show? TDS is already the comfortable medium between Cronkite and Conan, with the baggage attending such journalistic limbo, do we really need a journalist of all people muddying the waters further? We go to these people for information, not half-baked zingers, and given the limited time television affords each night, any time spent on the latter and not the former is time wasted. It looks petty. Maddow's smugness is symptomatic of MSNBC generally, which itself is caught between the hyper-nationalist Republican zealotry of Fox News and the middling uselessness of CNN. It's turned a fire-breathing liberal like me off from the network, and to see that attitude making its way into the mouthpiece for Obama (who has always been the adult in the room) is extremely dismaying.

I have little doubt that Obama's people have some very colorful opinions about Palin and the opposition. MSNBC's staff leaves no doubt whatsoever. But there are places for such views to be aired. Private conversation; blogs (especially the free ones that almost nobody reads); and The Daily Show and Colbert Report. There, at least, the jokes are actually funny.

Perhaps the saddest part is that Palin herself got in on the joke; at a Sunday speech she had, "Hi Mom!" written on her palm. The circle is complete. Perhaps this is will become routine: Palin does something grossly unbecoming of the office she seeks, people who know better laugh at the stupidity of her actions, and she rebounds, joining in the laughter, without ever having to address how inappropriate she was in the first place and using the incident as red meat to whip up her base about condescending fake Americans. And so we continue on, all the while amusing ourselves to death.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Worn-Out Welcomes


There's not much surprising in this interview with Calvin & Hobbes creator Bill Watterson, ostensibly the first since 1989. Watterson made his intentions clear in the 10th Anniversary Collection that he wanted his creation to maintain its integrity, which would have been hard to do if it had been licensed onto every manner of stuffed animal, cartoon, lunchbox, etc. etc. (He didn't name names, but it's patently obvious that he had the odious Garfield in mind.) For that same reason he decided to quit while he was ahead:

This isn't as hard to understand as people try to make it. By the end of 10 years, I'd said pretty much everything I had come there to say.

It's always better to leave the party early. If I had rolled along with the strip's popularity and repeated myself for another five, 10 or 20 years, the people now "grieving" for "Calvin and Hobbes" would be wishing me dead and cursing newspapers for running tedious, ancient strips like mine instead of acquiring fresher, livelier talent. And I'd be agreeing with them.

I think some of the reason "Calvin and Hobbes" still finds an audience today is because I chose not to run the wheels off it.

I've never regretted stopping when I did.


Those who wish Watterson had kept going would be well-advised to compare the last ten years' output of The Simpsons to their mid-1990s heyday. Are we really glad it's still around?