Have you just reached the age of 50?
Well, I guess it's time for you to start listening to Old People News.
Old People News
H/T Karen Miller.
THE PERKS OF BEING OVER 40
1. Kidnappers are not very interested in you.
2. In a hostage situation you are likely to be released first.
3. No one expects you to run into a burning building.
4. People call at 9 PM and ask, "Did I wake you?"
5. People no longer view you as a hypochondriac.
6. There is nothing left to learn the hard way.
7. Things you buy now won't wear out.
8. You can eat dinner at 4 P.M.
9. You can live without sex but not without glasses.
10. You enjoy hearing about other peoples operations.
11. You sing along with elevator music.
12. Your eyes won't get much worse.
13. Your secrets are safe with your friends because they can't remember them either.
14. Your supply of brain cells is finally down to manageable size.
And earlier this month, Brad Pitt had an observation on turning 45:
"I like wisdom that comes with age," Pitt said in an interview...."I wouldn't trade it for youth any day."
Of course, Brad Pitt is just a kid. But what about being 47, as Welshman Peter Black became almost two years ago?
Today I am 47. Nothing remarkable about that except that I am told 47 is another one of those numbers that has some significance in the world of pop culture.
From local beginnings (i.e. Pomona College), the number invaded the Star Trek television empire in various guises, causing Rick Berman to observe:
47 is 42, corrected for inflation.
OK, so I'll misinterpet Berman's statement and celebrate my 42nd birthday today.
BEDEVERE:
So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1:
Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE:
Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
(from the script of Monty Python and the Holy Grail"
For much of my professional life, I have served as a "bridge" between various groups (for example, software engineers and software customers).
(from my LinkedIn profile)
My bridged-ness (or whatever you want to call it) was more in evidence on Thursday than it has been in some time. This particular blog, as well as some of my associated writings, are read by a very diverse group of people.
Let me illustrate by quoting from two comments to things that I had written.
Earlier today, I wrote a post about the two camps of opposition to Rick Warren - those from the LGBT community who oppose his support of Proposition 8, and those from some quarters of the conservative Christian community who oppose his theology and his perceived syncretism.
In the course of my post, I quoted something that I had written previously:
Enter Rick Warren, who is doing his best to be disliked by everybody. (Perhaps that means he's right.)
That particular statement caught the attention of John at True Discernment, a blog from which I have quoted from time to time (including in my post earlier today).
Now John certainly has his opinion on the theology of Rick Warren. For those who feel that Warren is representative of the entire conservative Christian community, you might want to take a gander at the titles of some of John's posts:
Saddleback founder Rick Warren driven to expand his Ego!
Pot calls kettle black - Warren says: Social gospel is “Marxism in Christian clothing”
Rick Warren to Headline at Muslim Event
And those are just the most recent posts. More importantly, look at some of the tags that John applies to the Rick Warren posts, and you'll get a good idea of John's opinion of Warren:
Anti-Christ, Apostasy, False Christians, Humanism, Mega Churches, Moonbats, Post-Modernism, Religious Babylon, Rick Warren, Signs of The Times, Wolves, abominations, Babylon, Christian Persecution, Discernment, Molech, One World Government, Persecuted Church, Synchretism, prophetic
Even non-Christians can easily see that terms such as "Babylon" are not necessarily meant as compliments. ("Molech" is especially damning, since it refers to an ancient religious practice of child sacrifice, which is why the term is often used by people who oppose abortion.)
So, considering John's view of Rick Warren, he didn't exactly agree with my statement that Warren must be doing something right. And he let me know. If you didn't see his Disqus comment, let me reprint it in full (incidentally, the reference to "hate" is in response to my statement "there are significant portions of the conservative Christian community that REALLY...um...hate Rick Warren"):
you said:
"Enter Rick Warren, who is doing his best to be disliked by everybody. (Perhaps that means he's right.)"
I say:
If that is what you believe makes someone right, then Adolf Hitler might have to be in the top running as being "right" as well.
Someone who claims to be a Christian leader is considered right when what they teach lines up with God's Word without the need to manipulate God's Word to make what they say seem right and good.
And in regards to me hating Rick Warren. I do not hate Rick Warren. I do not hate anyone, I just recognize that what he teaches is not Biblical, therefore he is a false teacher. It would seem that you have fallen for the post modern delusion that if you show that what someone is teaching or doing is wrong it means you hate them.
Under the post-modern misinterpretation of what hate is, then I must hate my chidlren as I teach them against bad and wrong behavior.
As far as Biblical Christian Theology goes, Rick Warren is dead wrong. His theology is not based on the Bible but secular marketing techniques and secular atheist psychology. And those who teach according to a fallen humanist ideology do not understand the things of God therefore they operate under the same premises and fallen logic that those who d onot know Christ operate under.
As the Apostle Paul says in 1 Coirinthians 2:13-14:
These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The problem today is that most people, and it seems yourself included get their "education" via "googling". they are slaves to the fallen humanistic media culture. Their idea of a "great man of wisdom" is one who puts on a good polished media persona, and gives them goose bumps!
I will go so far as making a suggestion, If you do not strongly believe in anything, you would do well to delete this blog as all you are contributing is that much more luke warm on the fence worhless pulp to the internet.
(In case you're interested in my response, it is here.)
Now the depth of "false prophet" feeling about Rick Warren is something that I've been around for years, and so therefore I often take it for granted that EVERYONE knows that Warren is considered as a non-Christian by some. But then I remember that a lot of people are unaware of this group of opposition to Warren. This hit home when I read this Duncan Riley post in the Inquisitr:
President-elect Barack Obama has defended his decision to invite Pastor Rick Warren, an opponent of gay marriage rights, to deliver the invocation at his Inauguration in January.
The choice of Warren has outraged GLBT, liberals and moderate religious leaders due to Warren’s role in supporting Proposition 8, and his anti-abortion stance.
And that, as far as Riley knew, was the extent of the opposition to Warren. Riley and I obviously travel in different circles. I pointed this out on FriendFeed:
Duncan, you only got half the story. There are some conservative Christians who REALLY hate this decision, not because they believe Warren is a Bible thumper, but because they believe Warren has no regard for the Bible and would just as soon use the Quran or an MBA textbook. In their view, Warren's desire to pray for an abortion supporter proves his apostasy. When I blogged that if Warren's getting hate from both sides he's doing something right, a commenter encouraged me to quit blogging...
Riley responded:
...Ontario, I wasn't aware of the criticism the other way: I did some digging on his beliefs and came up with a list, but didn't see right wing criticism....
So, for those who haven't seen it, here are some of the selected theological conservative criticisms of Rick Warren (I say "selected" because some theological conservatives consider Warren to be orthodox, just with the wrong emphasis).
I've already cited the True Discernment post, Rick Warren to Headline at Muslim Event, taken from one of John's favorite sources, Slice of Laodicea. (Which reminds me: I should probably elaborate on my Laodicea-Berea comparison at some point.) Here's a...um...slice of that post:
Rick Warren is headlining at the 8th Annual Muslim Public Affairs Counsel convention coming up on December 20th in Long Beach, California....Rick will not be there to proclaim Christ crucified, the only hope for the world. He will not be there to warn the Muslims that they worship a false god who will lead them to hell. He will give them instructions on how they can link arms with Christians to make the world a jollier, nicer place....
Rick Warren is doing what he has always done so well—obscuring the truth by giving half truths and promoting works righteousness for non-believers. At every turn, this man has had opportunities to lift up the name of Jesus Christ and His atoning work on the cross. He has chosen, instead, to promote a new, false gospel of good works, without Christ or the cross, while millions perish in their sins. This is why I will continue to warn, with the loudest voice, that Rick Warren is a false prophet with a very distinct role to serve.
But on the Obama invocation, look at the reaction documented on CBN (i.e. Pat Robertson's mouthpiece):
Liberals and gay activists aren’t happy with Barack Obama for choosing pro-life and prop 8 supporting pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at Obama’s inaugural. But pro-life readers seem to be equally upset at Rick warren for agreeing to it.
The Brody File has been flooded with emails and most of them absolutely rip Pastor Warren for doing this.
I've already quoted from one disappointed Christian, Billy ("A little leaven leaveneth the whole loaf, and Mr Warren should realize that the leaven of compromise is the beginning of unending compromise"). That was one of the milder reactions.
From Larry:
I was saddened to read that Dr Warren will be praying at the inauguration. I different with him on almost all areas of theology, doctrine and church polity, though he holds himself out as a evangelical. I was devastated by the election. Not that a Democrat was elected, I'm more of a person not a party voter. Not that President Elect is a mixed race. I was devastated by a number of reasons and one grieves me most when I think of Dr Warren praying at the inauguration. As the result of one Supreme Court Decision, over 50 million babies have been murdered to date. The President Elect has in no uncertain terms pledged to continue the pro abortion agenda. How could around 54% of Catholics, 96% of African Americans, many who claim to be professing Bible Christians, @ 100% of Jewish Voters, who apparently have forgotten about the Holocaust and probably 50% or more of all kinds of other professing Bible Christians vote for the President Elect in light of his pro-abortion agenda? How? The same reason Dr Warren is going to pray at the inauguration. There is no real moral outrage in our Nation about Abortion. "Just words, just words," as the resident Elect said often in his campaign about his opposition. Words, but not real outrage and action.
From Pat:
This is terrible; this man call's himself a Christian????Barack H. Obama is the most PRO-DEATH president America has ever elected!!!!! He has said that as president he is going to pass the "Freedom of Choice Act" how can our country get any better with this type of MURDER?????? Mr. Warren school be ashamed of himself, protection of the unborn is the MOST IMPERATIVE issue as a Christian!!!!! For without life do we continue to have a society at all??? I think not!!!!!
God Bless & MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From Anonymous:
I have had about all I can stand of Rick Warren's double standards. WHOSE side is he really on anyway? I'm beginning to think all he cares about are his questionable political connections. When I saw your article announcing his participation in "that one's" so called inauguration ceremony it absolutely sickened me. It isn't enough Obama is so full of himself that he "thinks" he's God. - Apparently now Rick Warren believes he is too. This is a complete mockery of all things sacred.
Why did so many Christians end up opposing Rick Warren? Not because of his initial book about how to study the Bible, but because of the book that put him on the map - The Purpose Driven Life. Here's a sampling of what the Fundamental Evangelistic Association thinks about the book.
Even before opening the book to analyze the content of this spiritual journey, the discerning believer will question the doctrinal soundness and spiritual integrity of the book when confronted with the theologically diverse list of denominations and churches that have publicly endorsed the book and
churches that have publically endorsed the book and hosted a 40 Days of Purpose campaign....Immediately, one should seriously question whether or not the same spiritual journey embraced by a Seventh-Day Adventist, Nazarene or United Methodist is a spiritual journey that is faithful to God's Word and, therefore, worthy of his use....
The Purpose-Driven® Life is seriously flawed, hermeneutically speaking, in three ways: First, Warren completely misinterprets and misapplies certain texts; second, Warren presupposes his own ideas and beliefs and then "proof-texts" his points rather than exegeting the Scriptural text in order to discover its true meaning; and third, several paraphrases and translations used by Warren may prove his points, but they fail to relate even remotely the true meaning of the underlying Greek or Hebrew text....
The Purpose-Driven® Life cannot claim to be a Scripture-only approach to living the Christian life. Throughout the book, Warren supplements Scripture with psychological principles and speculation in order to allow the reader to better analyze and understand human behavior....Clearly, Warren has integrated psychological principles and speculation into his understanding of living the Christian life. The Bible does not support the idea that one must understand his "shape" and personality in order to effectively minister. The Bible does not support the idea that a believer's "most effective ministry will come out of [his] deepest hurts" or that the things he is most embarrassed about and ashamed of are "the very tools God can use most powerfully to heal others." The Bible does not support the idea that "most conflict is rooted in unmet needs," for the Bible describes man as a sinner who does not even truly know what he "needs." The Bible does not support the idea that we "prove our worth" when we understand our purpose for existence. And certainly, 2 Corinthians 1:8-10 does not support the idea that the apostle Paul experienced clinical or psychological "bouts of depression" just as the Old Testament does not describe Gideon's weakness as "low self-esteem" and "deep insecurity." Warren has clearly forced his own understanding of humanistic psychological principles upon the Biblical texts. Such an approach is certainly not a healthy, sound part of any spiritual journey....
Consider several individuals to whom Warren refers and quotes in a positive manner in order to support his own principles:
C. S. Lewis—although loved and lauded by many Evangelicals today, Lewis' theology of the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture and even the doctrine of salvation is unorthodox....
Mother Teresa—a Catholic nun who believed that her service to others and sacrificial manner of life procured the favor of God.
Billy Graham—a renowned evangelist who has publicly committed to working with Catholics, Orthodox, theological liberals and others who embrace and propagate all manner of false doctrine....
Yet, despite the significant criticism, there are still groups that are using Warren's The Purpose Driven Life. For example, here's a church in Indianapolis, Indiana that is using the program.
Are you affected by HIV/AIDS? Are you looking for ways to find support and grow spiritually? Welcome to the Positively + Oasis! Please plan to attend with a heart attuned to learning what plans God has for your future! We will look at ways to grow and praise God.
We will begin meeting the first week in December on Wednesday evenings at the Church. The Group is open to anyone who is affected by HIV/AIDS. For the first few meetings, we will get acquainted, share stories, and decide together how the Group will function.
Then we will study The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren, with an emphasis on how those affected by HIV can look forward and determine God’s purpose for their lives.
What's notable about this isn't the fact that PDL (gotta learn the acronyms) is being used in an HIV/AIDS ministry. What's notable about this is that this church happens to be a Metropolitan Community Church - a very gay-friendly church, to say the least.
So apparently not every gay will be tuning out the Inaugural invocation.
Tod Browning was the director of Bela Lugosi's Dracula (1931), but is also known for a 1932 movie that he directed, entitled Freaks.
Cinephiles.net says the following about the movie:
Among classic horror films, FREAKS stands alone as one of the most grotesque and the most controversial. Rarely seen since its 1932 release, and banned in Britain for thirty years, it hasHans from FREAKS achieved cult status as the masterpiece of the macabre.
The film features a cast of actual sideshow freaks, human-beings of every conceivable physical aberration. yet the film soon reveals that the normal members of the traveling carnival are the true monsters; pitiless, conniving and murderous! When one beautiful trapeze artist discovers one of the freaks has a small fortune, she lures him into marriage.
IMDB plot summaries are here (including the ending).
Here is an excerpt from the screenplay:
JON:
But Monsieur Dubois, at first, I could not believe my own eyes. A lot of horrible, twisted things crawling, whining, globbering.
DUBOIS:
Really, Jon, what were you drinking last night?
JON:
Nothing, monsieur, I assure you. (We see what appears to be a family group in the distance.) Oh, monsieur, there must be a law in France to smother such things at birth, or lock them up.
DUBOIS:
All right, Jon, if there's anything like you say on my grounds we'll have it removed.
They suddenly freeze and stare at what is ahead. A group of circus "freaks" are singing and dancing in a circle, while one lies on the ground playing a harmonica. There are four "pinheads," a "half-boy," a "human skeleton," a "human worm," and a dwarf. When they see the two men approach, they run to their mistress, a normal woman, for protection, as Jon yells at them.
JON:
Go away all of you! Don't you know tresspassing's the same as stealing.
THE WOMAN:
Oh, I'm sorry, monsieur. I am Madame Tetrallini. These are children of my circus.
JON:
Children! Monsters!
Here's a clip from later in the movie:
But the movie that was shown to the public was not the original version:
By the time Freaks was finally unveiled for a public preview, it had already gone through numerous changes. For one thing, the studio insisted on a macabre ending and rejected Browning's more melancholy fadeout, which sympathized with the plight of these much-maligned social outcasts. But after the horrified response to the preview screening of Freaks, the studio drastically cut the film from a length of around ninety minutes to just over an hour. According to the authors of Dark Carnival: The Secret World of Tod Browning, "The truncated version jettisoned the horrifying details of the mud-dripping freaks swarming over the tree-pinned Olga Baclanova and pouring into a circus wagon to castrate her lover. Several comic scenes were eliminated, including one of the turtle-girl being amorously pursued by a seal. A rambling epilogue set in a second-story London dime museum called Tetrallini's Freaks and Music Hall...was completely discarded, save for the final shot of Cleopatra quacking; a new prologue was added, featuring a spieling barker....who introduces the "most amazing, the most astonishing human monstrosity of all time." And finally, a second epilogue, evidently intended as a happy....ending, depicted the reconciliation of the midget lovers in Hans' palatial estate, approvingly played by Phroso and Venus."
And when the movie was finally released, reaction was...well, it wasn't good:
When this new version of Freaks finally went into national release, it was not only savaged by most critics (The New York Times suggested that it should be screened at a medical center instead of a theatre) but also attacked by civic groups and the spokeswoman for the National Association of Women who pointed to it as a further example of Hollywood's collapsing moral standards.
And Tod Browning himself was tarnished by the experience:
The film was highly controversial, even after heavy editing to remove many disturbing scenes, and was a commercial failure. Browning's career was derailed.
Browning found himself unable to get his requested projects greenlighted....
In 1942 he retired and moved to Malibu. He became such a recluse that soon after his wife died in 1944, Variety accidentally published an obituary for him. Even his neighbors rarely saw him. In the late 1950s he developed throat cancer, necessitating tongue surgery. When his brother Avery died in 1959, he attended the funeral from a private room and would not let family members see him. On October 6th, 1962, he was found dead in the bathroom of some friends.
But now everyone loves the movie and thinks it's wonderful, and the portion of the movie shown in the YouTube sequence above was reborn several decades later:
Even the punk rock group, The Ramones, lifted their rallying cry of "gabba-gabba-hey" from the bizarre wedding sequence in Freaks where the sideshow oddities chant a strange toast to the newlyweds Hans and Cleopatra.
In a post earlier today, I argued that there is no difference between Lucy & Desi promoting cigarettes on their TV show, and a blogger talking about K Mart on his blog.
Not everyone agrees with me, however. Stowe Boyd:
That was in the era of payola: it was a commonplace. It is less acceptable now, just like smoking indoors and trying to hook kids on cigarettes.
There is still a place for celebrity endorsements -- Clive Owen wearing a Tag watch in a magazine ad -- because the placement with a gazillionaire is understood to be totally mercantile, and everyone knows he can afford any damn watch he wants. And he has sixty of them. It's a no op.
But for a opinion leader to do this raises [too] many questions, in today's world.
I've been thinking, however, and have realized that there are modern-day occurrences in which this practice still happens, and is totally accepted. I alluded to it in my earlier post:
Or just listen to any talk radio show for more than a half an hour and see how many products are being hawked there.
This applies to both political talk radio and sports talk radio, and for that matter news radio. I live in the Los Angeles area, and I have heard repeated commercials from Bill Handel, John Kobylt, Tony Bruno, various traffic reporters, Vic "the Brick" Jacobs, and so forth. Here are there we have some exceptions - I don't think I've ever heard a commercial from Gene "Bean" Baxter, for example - but I don't think less of, say, Richard Blade for doing commercial work when Bean doesn't.
In fact, KLAC AM 570 has even changed their format; while claiming that they only have two commercial breaks every hour, you'll find Petros Papadakis or Matt "Money" Smith suddenly launching into a commercial in the middle of their conversation - frankly, it's just like the radio and TV shows during the 1940s and the 1950s.
Well. If people argue that bloggers who are paid per post are diminishing their credibility and authority, then what will happen when the same people go after the radio guys who are doing commercials all the time?
Last night I got a hearty laugh (well, a somewhat silent laugh - it was late) over this post from Red Stick Rant. Apparently when you search for the phrase "the Episcopal Church welcomes you" on Google, this December 2007 Red Stick Rant post is placed fairly high (either 4th or 3rd, depending upon the search).
The title of the post? "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You. If You Agree With Us, That Is."
It quotes from a welcoming, inclusive letter from an Episcopalian which states, in part:
Go back to your narrow-minded, non-accepting, un-Christ-like thinking/attitudes and leave us Episcopalians alone to think and believe as Christ did, not judging, but accepting all who believe in Him!
The letter from Karen T. Morgan of Colton, New York has since been moved to an archival page, but can still be found in the December 2007 archive (down toward the bottom).
Apparently December 2007 was a turbulent month for the Episcopal Church. (Actually every month is probably a turbulent month for the Episcopal Church.) While one Episcopalian was becoming a Roman Catholic, another Episcopalian (John-David Schofield) was uniting with the Argentina-based Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, which prompted this letter:
Continuing Episcopalians making plans to reconstitute Diocese of San Joaquin
By Robert Miller • Minneapolis, Minnesota, Dec 14, 2007
A little-known background on David Schofield, which, in part, explains his rejection of the polity of the Episcopal Church: he received his formation as a priest in the Church of England, not in any American seminary. Consequently, his understanding of Episcopal authority follows the Church of England model. I first met David while he was serving St. Colomba's Church in Inverness, California. Upon ordination in the Diocese of California, I was invited to celebrate my first Eucharist at St. Colomba's. To my surprise, the Missal on the altar was that of the Church of England, and not the book published for use in this country by the Frank Gavin Foundation. Alas, before family and friends, I stumbled along as best I could with a service I was altogether unfamiliar with.
Presumably Schofield's behavior was forwarded to the Episcopal Committee on Un-American Activities. Actually, it was.
Schofield now has two months to recant his position or renounce his orders by way of Title IV, Canon 8, Sec. 2 or Title III, Canon 12, Sec. 7.
As a Lutheran, I found that word "recant" particularly amusing.
As for Schofield, he didn't...um...recant.
My Kim Amidon post is the gift that just keeps on giving. It appears that people are still really displeased with Kim Amidon's dismissal, even though it took place almost a year ago.
Bob Z was listening to the new team, and offered this comment:
I was listening to them for the first time this morning. Never listened after Kim left. So they are doing the Hollywood gossip thing and this Kristen says Benicio Del Toro hopes everyone will watch his new 4 hour movie "Cheee". That's right, she had no idea how to say the name.
Unfortunately, Mark didn't impress Bob much, either:
So Mark comes in to gently correct the situation and explains that the movie is about the Bolivian Revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Rivera. That's right, he said Rivera, not Guevara.
Now to be fair, a KOST deejay doesn't necessarily need to know the historial context of Cuban ideology; he or she just needs to know the names of the songs that they play, know the name of the traffic reporter, and be able to declare that it is "72 degrees along...
...
...
...
...
...the KOST."
And I don't know that Amidon is getting into heavy political discussion at K-EARTH, especially since I'm not sure if K-EARTH deejays are allowed to mention the Reagan Administration yet...and you have to get tired of talking about WIN buttons and a "crisis of confidence" after a while.
Here's a video from YouTube's new Monty Python channel.
Considering the Saturday public performance of "High School Musical on Stage!" in Claremont, California this afternoon, this is timely.
PopEater shared this South Park clip about kids at a school who want to follow their own dreams.
The entire episode is here.
On Election Night, I probably spent more time online than I did watching TV, and when I did watch TV, I was flipping through several channels.
Therefore, I did not actually see what has been designated as The Television Technical Enhancement of 2008 - the hologram.
I finally saw it when I looked at this Extreme Mortman post, which shared this YouTube video:
Extreme Mortman got to the crux of the matter with its post title: "Help Me Obi Won Blitzer, You’re Our Only Hope."
And if you don't recognize the reference, Silicon Alley Insider spells it out:
The hologram...was a throwback to Star Wars, complete with the hunched-over, I'm-talking-to-a-droid body posture...
So why did CNN do this? To keep people glued to the dial. News coverage is competitive, and always has been:
Going all-out is a TV news tradition, since at least 1960. That year, NBC transformed Studio 8H (now home of "Saturday Night Live") into a vast election center, with anchors David Brinkley and Chet Huntley presiding over dozens of correspondents and banks of numerical displays.
Though impressive in scale, the coverage (which can be glimpsed on YouTube clips) had no holograms, nor any reference to red or blue states (for one reason, it wasn't aired in color yet).
This video shows the 1960 technology, including the summary board (ooh!) and the RCA 501 computer (aah!). Much time was spent on explaining the operations of the RCA 501 computer, which took incoming vote data; used stored statistics on farm, labor, and other voting blocs; and used this data to extrapolate election results.
The clip is from the beginning of the broadcast. So what happened? Tech.Blorge:
Once 10% of the results are in, the computer predicts John F Kennedy will beat Richard Nixon by 51.1% to 48.9% in the popular vote, a forecast it sticks to throughout the night.
The network proudly proclaims that RAC-501 is the only computer which at no point predicts a Nixon victory; says one NBC anchor, “If they ever teach this machine to talk, we’re out of business.” (The actual vote results are slightly different because RCA-501 doesn’t include third-party candidates; of votes cast for the two leading candidates, Kennedy prevails by 50.1-49.9%)
And, more importantly to NBC...
As the networks recognize, the stakes are impalpable but high. Thus when Chet Huntley and David Brinkley scored for NBC in 1960, NBC magically swept past CBS to become the top network in most other respects as well.
But what of 2008 and CNN's gizmo? As I write this, the only available ratings are for the broadcast networks.
In the early metered market report ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC combined for a 26.5/37 (household rating, share). ABC led with a 9.3/13, followed by NBC with an 8.5/12, CBS with a 4.7/7 and Fox with a 4.0/5.
I'm not sure how much a ratings point is worth financially, or how much of CBS' low performance is due to the Couric effect, but if Couric is the cause of the low ratings, that hire was more expensive than first believed.
Ironically, Tom Shales praised Couric's performance, even though many apparently didn't see it:
And at CBS News, the decision was made to forgo the fancy high-tech trappings and emphasize the human element, with Couric anchoring and commentators Bob Schieffer (vigorous and helpful) and Jeff Greenfield (the proverbial fuddy-duddy) helping. The 2008 campaign, especially in recent months, marked a genuine comeback for Couric, who has been much maligned since moving to the evening news; she did the best of all network interviews with vice presidential candidate Palin.
Perhaps Couric should have interviewed Edward R. Murrow as part of the proceedings. That might have gotten CBS some additional viewers.
If you've monitored my FriendFeed and/or my Google Reader Shared Items, you know that I've been collecting news about the Jessica Simpson movie over the last few days.
The first post I saw was a Duncan Riley Inquisitr post on the movie, entitled "Major Movie Star." After noting that the movie hadn't been released in the U.S. in any form, Riley noted:
[W]hat doesn’t work in the US, sometimes works overseas, with Major Movie Star climbing to the Number One position at the Russian box office.
Riley helpfully provided a promo clip:
My daughter usually checks with me before going to Internet sites which she hasn't heard of before. She asked me about a site that was supposed to have episodes of one of the CW shows, but I suggested she check it out first since it wasn't at the CW web site.
The very next day, I had to visit the CBS website for professional purposes (I was checking on a possible product placement). To do this, I watched a recent episode of one of CBS's shows (actually, I just watched the beginning of the episode, which concerned the product placement in question). While CBS advertised that the video for this one-hour show was only 44 minutes long, I noticed that they were inserting commercial breaks into the episode. However, the commercial breaks were shorter than the ones I would have seen on regular TV.
As networks accept the new online model, some people are opting out of cable or satellite service altogether. Look at this tweet:
canceled my comcast cable and tivo - from this point forward I'm going all internet / netflix
As is the case with many tweets, this launched a FriendFeed discussion. It also launched an L.A. Times blog post:
Kevin Rose is an influential guy in Silicon Valley, the kind other young gearheads follow. And that includes on micro-blogging service Twitter, which is where Rose announced to the world that he had canceled his Comcast cable and TiVo subscriptions.
"From this point forward I'm going all internet / netflix," he wrote. A few dozen FriendFeed users posted comments about his decision, with many saying that they had done the same or were thinking about it.
But the availability of shows wasn't the only reason that Rose dumped Comcast.
Rose should be in the cable industry's sweet spot. He takes his entertainment seriously. But he said he decided to dump Comcast after reading a slew of stories on Digg about how to conserve cash during the recession.
Note the product placement. Let's continue:
"I was not going to cut my gym membership," said Rose, who is sporting a newly buffed physique.
It's not that Rose is against ponying up for entertainment. His complaint: Cable companies don't offer an a la carte menu so Rose can pay for only what he wants. "I'd be happy to pay for it if they would offer it," he said. "But they don't offer that. It's all or nothing."
Bloggers who are much less knowledgeable than Kevin Rose have talked about this little problem with cable and satellite subscriptions. Is it possible that a move away from cable and satellite to online viewing will cause the cable and satellite companies to offer a la carte pricing?
Nah, they'll just lobby the next Congress to put restrictions on online broadcasting.
From Franklin Avenue:
If you're looking for a different way to celebrate the holiday, you might want to consider joining in on L.A.'s mass "Thriller" group dance.
The event is part of Thrill the World, a global effort to get as many people dancing the "Thriller" as possible.
The local Thrillers, or whatever you call them, have a MySpace page.
Vincent Price is not expected to join the festivities.
And if you have never heard of this dance, watch the video. My favorite line: "I'm not like other guys."
Check the picture in this Franklin Avenue post, "If Spock and Marilyn Monroe Had A Love Child."
And yes, Trekkers, I know that Spock only mates once every seven years or whatever.
Get a life.
After running a marathon, you need donuts and barbells.
Sphere: Related ContentThis morning when I got into the car for my morning commute, I popped Brian Eno's "Another Day on Earth" CD into my car CD player.
There's nothing really unusual about that, except for the fact that this was the first time that I had listened to this CD, and that it was a present to myself.
A present that I had given myself at Christmas.
Christmas 2006.
Yes, I bought a CD over a year and a half ago (back when Tower Records in Brea closed), and I'm just getting around to listening to it.
What's more, I still have two other Christmas presents that I haven't gotten around to using yet, including a Vanguard/Sugar Hill sampler (no, not Sugar Hill Gang) and the Johnny Cash movie.
I'll get around to those eventually.
On the evening of April 24, I was listening to my LAUNCHcast station and posting a running commentary.
What I've heard: Kelly Osbourne, One Word (Chris Cox Radio Mix). Daft Punk, Something About Us. Merle Haggard, Mama Tried. New Philharmonia Orchestra, Peer Gynt: Suite No. 1, Op. 46: II, Ases Death (Andante Doloroso).
I ended up adding the Osbourne song (which I hadn't heard previously) to my last.fm playlist. The song ended up playing for me today, and causing positive reactions on FriendFeed. Here's a sample:
I'm embarrassed of myself, but I dig this track
For those who merely think of Osbourne as the TV brat, it turns out that her music evolved over the years:
Kelly Osbourne's debut, Shut Up — later retitled Changes upon its 2003 reissue — arrived in 2002 in the thick of punk-pop's popularity in the early 2000s and it reflected the sound of the times. Three years later, Osbourne returned with her follow-up, Sleeping in the Nothing, and it sounded nothing like Shut Up/Changes, but like that debut, it reflected its times: it spurned punk revival for new wave revival. So, as the pop culture of the new millennium lives a quarter century in the past, Osbourne rides the wave, drafting L.A.'s favorite collaborator of the last five years, Ms. Linda Perry — who struck it big with Pink, Xtina Aguilera, and Gwen Stefani, not so big with Courtney Love, Lisa Marie Presley, and Fischerspooner — as writer, producer, chief collaborator, and overall musical director.
The official video for Kelly Osbourne's "One Word" is itself interesting. Here's what MTV had to say:
"I'm going for something like very 'Alphaville,' " Osbourne told MTV News last month when she was dreaming up the concept...."Very '60s, nothing that I thought I'd ever do, like very black-and-white. I'm excited for that. And I'm going to wear a wig!"
To flesh out her idea, Osbourne enlisted director Chris Applebaum to emulate "Alphaville," Jean-Luc Godard's classic 1965 avant-garde film. Their take, which shot this past weekend, was filmed in black-and-white 35 mm, while Osbourne herself embodied the look of the film's star, Anna Karina, with sharp bangs and porcelain skin.
See here for a full description of the video. Or just watch it.
P.S. No, I haven't bought Velocifero yet, and haven't heard anything off of it other than "Black Cat."
P.P.S. If you search my FriendFeed for mentions of this song, you will run across an obviously non-lip-synced performance. And this may not be in the feed yet, but it will be. It's...it's...well, let's just say that George Takei has a performer for his wedding reception.
Posts
All Comments
