June 4, 2009 at 10:38 am (entertainment)
Tags: intelligence, maury povich, respect, television, TV
Let’s face it — this has gone way beyond the “Random Pet Peeve.” My peeves are more than random. They are frequent. Whose aren’t? Good thing I have a blog to vent about stuff.
I will readily admit that I have watched very little TV over the last five years or so. But when did this guy become the new Jerry Springer? Didn’t he used to be semi-respectable? Has his career shift affected his wife’s reputation as a “serious” journalist? Or did she lose respect years ago? I feel so out of touch. I just walked through my living room and read a caption that said “Jessica just found out her 16-year-old daughter has already prostituted herself.”
That sentence would be disturbing enough if not for the use of the word “already.” Why do we have TV shows that publicize the antics of the lowest rung of the intelligence scale? Why do people find this entertaining? It makes me so sad I can hardly stand it.
Leave a Comment
May 20, 2009 at 2:01 pm (Uncategorized)
Tags: actors, characters, dunder mifflin, fun run, jim halpert, meredith palmer, nbc, pam beasley, party, shows, television, the office, TV, work
You know why this is a good show? Because I totally feel like all these people are my crazy coworkers, and I love all of them in spite of (and sometimes because of) their flaws. Except Ryan. I really don’t see any redeeming qualities in him. And I am super excited for Pam and Jim that they’re going to have a baby! And they’re not. even. real. people. As someone who has worked as an office manager for 70+ employees, I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this show. As my mother would say, “Everybody has their strengths and weaknesses.”
I really want to have a Meredith Palmer Memorial Celebrity Rabies Awareness Pro Am Fun Run. And then a “The Office” party to watch all the best episodes with mixed drinks. Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
5 Comments
March 5, 2009 at 6:19 am (books)
Tags: books, Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, jerry mander, kill your TV, reading, television
I’m currently reading this book. It’s nothing new — it was written in the late 1970’s. But it needs to be resurrected and brought into the public awareness again. When I was a kid, my parents knew some people who didn’t have a TV. My friends and I always thought they were SO. WEIRD. I mean, the thought of living your life without television as a kid is unfathomable. However, I spent the bulk of my twenties, not without a television, but without television channels. I was living in the mountains and didn’t have cable and couldn’t get anything with rabbit ears. I watched plenty of movies but saw no TV shows (and more importantly no commercials) for many years. I think it’s one of the most beneficial things I’ve ever done for myself. I do have cable now, but I find that I rarely watch TV at all, and when I do it’s with a much more discerning eye and critical approach. I still love movies and stay pretty caught up on that side of the entertainment industry. Since I got out of the habit of watching TV, I haven’t seen anything that’s been entertaining enough to reel me back in except for Lost, and that is the one show I do watch. I am more likely to be reading, visiting with neighbors, catching up with friends over the phone. I think one of the best things anyone could do would be to give it up for a year, and then see if you actually missed it. I never did, and I learned a lot about myself and about our TV-obsessed culture during that time. I would be hard-pressed to give up my internet connection or my DVD player, but this book is making me seriously consider getting rid of cable again.
Leave a Comment
February 2, 2009 at 2:18 pm (Uncategorized)
Tags: america ferrera, body image, inspiring change, jessica simpson, television, ugly betty, weight
Okay, I swore that I was not going to add to the plethora of comments about Jessica Simpson and weight. But I can’t help myself. I went to a women’s college, where we had entire classes devoted to things like female body image and the portrayal of women in advertising. Jessica has put on a few pounds. Her outfit was a bad choice. Does she look unhealthy? No. Does she look like she weighs 500 lbs, New York Post? No. Come on. This will ultimately be good for her career, once she’s back on the cover of US Weekly talking about how Harley Pasternak helped her lose that 10 lbs. Whatever. I’m more concerned about something else that no one is talking about: Ugly Betty.
Ugly? Are you freaking kidding me?
Just because you put braces and ugly outfits on a perfectly attractive girl does not an ugly character make. She’s even lost weight since the show’s first season, and now I would say she is around a size 6. Which is about 4 sizes smaller than the average American woman. In general, I appreciate the way the show’s writers focus on individuality and the importance of staying true to yourself. Betty always does the right thing, even if no one else would in the same situation. And that is inspiring and uplifting, and something we don’t get enough of on TV nowadays. However, it is not respectful to the character they’ve created or the theme of the show when they 1) refer to her in the title as “ugly” 2) write episodes where Betty is crying because the boy she has a crush on would rather hook up with the tall, blond, model-esque, dumb girl than her. Why didn’t that episode make the guy look stupid instead of making Betty look sad and pathetic? Why does the one show on TV that encourages people to be themselves and be proud of that also have to feed into the thin-is-ultimately-beautiful stereotype? Because it’s Hollywood. Because it sells. Because the writers of that show are more concerned about ratings than morality statements.
What I’m going to do, as someone who works in marketing and is sometimes responsible for choosing advertising images, is to promote the idea that normal is beautiful. Be the change you want to see.
Leave a Comment
