|
Posted on 01.16.07 by Widge @ 3:19 am
Okay, check this out. FCC Commissioner Michael Copps was also on hand at the conference and took broadcasters to task for their current content, speaking of "too little news, too much baloney passed off as news. Too little quality entertainment, too many people eating bugs on reality TV. Too little local and regional music, too much brain-numbing national play-lists." That's right…the people that will bend over backwards to fine folks because a vast (vast!) minority of letter writers will bitch about anything and everything are going to tell television what's the right content they should have. The people who get their panties in a wad about profanity and nipples and don't trust you to change the channel if you don't like what you're seeing…are getting ready to use the police power of the government to regulate what can and cannot be shown on television. Why? Because the networks show baloney and people eating bugs and that's not, in their estimation, quality. Newsflash, you dumb pricks. The vast majority of people like baloney and bugs. If they didn't, and they tuned out, then the networks wouldn't show it. The networks are in this for one thing and one thing only: money. If high brow entertainment sold well, then Spike TV would be doing Merchant Ivory marathons instead of Bond. Here's how this is going to work. Because Nanny Government thinks that you Americans aren't smart enough to pick your own radio and television programming, they're going to legislate it. Or lean on people so that they don't even have to go through Congress. And sadly, some of you Americans aren't smart enough to realize that this is a really terrible idea. Because first they're going to go after network television, then cable. They've already said they want to. So ask yourself if the government, which can't protect our borders, protect our ports, get out of the military's way to let them do their jobs, balance their own checkbook, or teach your children, is who you want telling you what you can eat and what you can watch and what you can listen to. And ask yourself if you want the government to have the power to dictate these things to you, especially when at any moment, your opposition could have control of the government. For you liberals, imagine what it would be like if right wing Christian conservatives had absolute power over television. For you conservatives, imagine what it would be like if left wing hippies had absolute power over television. Let your worst suspicions and nightmares run rampant. Because that's what you're inviting in. Half of you might be partying, but the other half–the smart ones–are very patiently waiting for it to be their turn to fuck with your world. Wouldn't it be so much safer just to not allow anybody that sort of power in the first place? Filed under: General BS
|
|
Posted on 12.15.05 by Widge @ 10:23 am
"Do not try and change radio. That's impossible. Instead…only try to realize the truth." The News Blog has an interesting overview of how radio is following in the path down which television has already gone: we pay for television because we want what we want. Just like some folks pay for Tivo (and other such services) because we want what we want when we want it. I forget how long ago I read this in Wired, but the line (or at least a reasonable facsimile) stuck with me. The article was about satellite radio, and said we'd pay for radio because of the same principle that made us pay for cable TV: a free service can suck so bad you'll be willing to pay for it. Setting aside the fact that a paid service can work around the FCC and their idiocy (only for now–the decency loons are going to go after all that next, no doubt), I'm wondering how many people listen to radio like I listen to radio: I roll my own. For example, I took an Airtran flight recently on one of their planes that comes with XM Radio in every seat. I unplugged my headphones from my iPod, plugged them into XM, went through all hundred channels, thought "Well, that's nice," and went back to my iPod. As is in evidence by this site, if nothing else, I'm a control freak. I don't want somebody else telling me what to listen to. I also wonder about these studies showing that people only have a hundred songs they listen to. Can this be accurate? I have 4500+ songs on my iPod at any given time (out of the 8000+ I have ripped thus far), and sure, if I'm not in the mood for B. B. King or System of a Down at a particular moment, I'll hit skip. There are certain songs I listen to more than others. I sometimes get a hankering (yes, I said hankering) for a particular artist or genre. But for the most part, I'm content to sit back and let my own personal radio station, WIDG, do its thing. If somebody only has a hundred songs in their listening queue, that's sad. But if you've got a wide array of listening options, Shuffle Songs is a wonderful thing. Filed under: General BS
|

John Robinson is a writer of prose, poetry and comics who also writes under
the pseudonym of Widgett Walls.
This is my latest book. Short stories written especially for you, or at least someone who reminded me a lot of you at the time.