Tuesday, February 2, 2010

More media ridiculousness

Today's critique of media nonsense stems from this video:

Since the threats mentioned in the video refer to black students, it makes total sense that interviewers talked to phenotypically white kids to find out their reactions to some graffitti that explicitly threatened black students.  The one black student interviewed had to be identified by the news reporter as black.  Without this critical tidbit of information, we could have easily accused this news segment of exhibiting bias.  As is, we can only accuse the creators of this story of totally irresponsible reporting verging on bias.

Supposedly, according to other internet media sources, the president of this institution, his wife, and their dog have gallantly offered to stay in the dorm where the threatening message was found.  Somehow, this selfless and magnanimous gesture was meant to assure black students that, really, the threatening message wasn't aimed at white people.

/end snarky rant

Really, I can't even make this stuff up.  Its like shooting fish in a barrel.

Posted via email from Fijese que...

Monday, February 1, 2010

Main Stream News Crap

I should really stop reading the news. Its either depressing (Afghanistan, job reports, endless wars, political ineptitude, etc.), ridiculous (celebrity news, reality shows, Grammy awards, etc.) or just plain stupid and pisses me off. The news article that has prompted this pronouncement is the following, from the normally sensible Christian Science Monitor:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2010/0129/Is-Sarah-Palin-right-Did-feminist-groups-overthrow-the-Tebow-ad-attack

This article, entitled "Is Sarah Palin Right?" suggests that we seriously investigate Sarah Palin's ludicrous announcement that the proposed Focus on the Family anti-choice Superbowl ad is somehow "pro-family" and "empowering for women." Here, I can put an end to all of this nonsense right now!

No.

This bizarre article then goes on to explain that if the National Organization for Women (NOW) hadn't have called so much attention to the proposed ad, then no one really would have noticed it. Even more bizarrely, some dude from the Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture at Syracuse University goes so far as to admonish NOW for even getting upset about the ad before having seen it. The implication being that its possible that the proposed Focus on the Family ad actually didn't (and won't and would never) contain anti-choice messages. Dude doesn't even stop there! He concludes his insightful analysis of the supposedly wacko anger of crazed feminists by saying, "That's not a very intelligent way to approach it [the ad]."

Hey! Thanks, dude! Its so great when some douchebag steps in to explain to women how to do feminism right, because we just can't seem to figure it out. If feminists were somehow just more....well, intelligent, we wouldn't have to point out that the chances of Focus on the Family running an actually women friendly ad are approximately zilch.

Palin, whose personal Facebook page now somehow counts as a sound news source, tops the Blier Center dude: "My message to these groups who are inexplicably offended by a pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life message airing during the Super Bowl: please concentrate on empowering women, help with efforts to prevent unexpected pregnancies, stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our ‘modern’ culture and that we can expect better in 2010.”

Inexplicably offended? How about just opposed to a certainly anti-choice, anti-woman, anti-feminist ad running in a coveted national advertising spot that will reach millions of people?

Yeah, inexplicable and above all, remember, feminists just aren't very intelligent.

Posted via email from Fijese que...

Tucson Sky