Jan 28
Permit me, if you will, for the brief intrusion by the Boy Wonder of the original, campy Batman series:
“Holy hutzpah, Batman!” (Genuinely uttered by Robin, if this website’s facts are in order).
Today’s topic of incredulity is payola – not the mispronounced, yet delectable Spanish rice dish, but that egregious act of dropping dollar sign labelled sacks of cold, hard cash on the laps of commentators, columnists and pundits. In plain English: paying someone to promote a point of view, to argue from a specific standpoint, to come out in favour of a particular policy. In a word: bribery.
I guess the emcee was right: money does make the world go round, the world go round…
Even my own skewed version of ethics can place the recent discoveries of paid proselytizers Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher and Michael McManus into the “baaaaaaaaaaaad” category. For those who have been living under the proverbial rock these past few weeks, revel in their respective exposés on GoogleNews.
(Mind you, if offered $240,000, who among us does not immediately replace their pupils with $$ à la Bugs Bunny et al.?)
To shill or not to shill, that is the question…many (presumably unsullied) commentators have harped about how implicitly wrong it is for writers of any feather to accept money for promoting a stance. And if it does happen, then gosh, you better darn well disclose it! As you would expect however, there are 259 different sides to this coin. For a frank look at the nuanced opinions on payola, check out Editor & Publisher’s examination of what colleagues of Williams, Gallagher & McManus have to say.
The one thing that puzzles me the most from this media brouhaha are the desires of Williams and co. to have their cake and eat it to. They insist that they already believe in the policies that they advanced (in their cases, education and marriage). Maybe I’ve been inundated with an antiquated view of writing, but if you truly believe in something, why the materialism? If you really want to get paid for writing about your beliefs, join a think tank or become a university professor…
I think a grand sweeping statement is in order: People prefer to hear opinions over news. The popularity of Rush Limbaugh and Jon Stewart (and yes, he’s simply espousing his opinion) can certainly attest to the validity of said sweeping statement. While our consciousnesses are peppered daily with events that educate us about the global scene, is there anything grander that watching, reading or listening to our favourite commentator ripping into what irks him or her at that very point in time?
Hey – why isn’t anyone paying me?
Jan 19
You can never really appreciate the absurdity of the Bush administration. From a certain point of view, a cast of colourful characters and caricatures are running the hyperpower of the 21st century. To help develop that tableau, Salon.com has compiled a list of 34 scandals currently plaguing the White House. A good read, some pretty damning stuff, particularly the figures involved with Halliburton. No one in their right mind can deny that the only word to describe it is: absurd.
Perhaps on the other end of the absurd-o-spectrometer was this 20-minute sequence of characters performing a strange ritual on television. No, not some Monday evening Discovery Channel Special on pagan cultures, but professional wrestling. (You can’t help being impressed by it: these are serious men & women in peak physical condition performing constantly). A little background info is warranted: Monday Night Raw was being held here in Toronto, with a match between two Canadians, Chris Benoit and Chris Jericho. Naturally you’d expect the crowd display their respect to these two men through the usual whoops, chants and unintelligible warbles associated with ‘rassling…
Instead, the TV audience was treated with a good old fashioned Canadian feel-good love-in: everyone sitting quietly in their seats, politely applauding the performers and the show they are presenting. It was almost as if the sports entertainment broadcast from Hogtown was magically transformed into a gold medal event at the Olympics. Only in Canada?
Still, the image of the ho-hum, well-mannered, “nice” Canadian is (subconsciously or not) reinforced – not a bad thing per se. There are many advantages to being polite…
But right in the middle, balancing my mind out, was this single thought: what a glorious time to be alive and witness these daily spectacles!
On a different note, I think time is an intriguing concept. What does time mean? What does it mean to us? Our lives are so structured by a concept. Perhaps this is presumptuous and pretentious of me, but I intend to explore that concept. Keep me brain ticking. But don’t expect some philosophical breakthrough any time soon: I’ll be going at my own pace (pun woefully intended).
Jan 09
While yaks, blogs and other such may be a tremendously engaging subject for some, they have failed to spark more than a fleeting interest on my part. This, to the extent, that I have generally found this medium a little tedious and more than a little unsatisfactory.
Essentially, in the spectrum of modes that constitute self-expression, the blog is a curious halfway house. In most forms of mass distribution media, content tends to be researched, polished and targeted at a sizable audience. The blog obviates such requirements and allows for a more instant, informal style. For me, however, this negates the very appeal of writing. The time I would spend formulating proto-conversational prose is better spent, as far as I’m concerned, actually conversing. Given the size of our readership, it would probably even take less time to talk to each person individually than it would to compose some vapid pontification.
And so this is my last post.
Older Entries Newer Entries
