Aqua Teen Terrorist Force

[kaiser soze]

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/10890113/detail.html#

BOSTON -- Turner Broadcasting plans to take responsibility for the "hoax devices" that were found at several locations in and around Boston Wednesday that forced police bomb units to scramble throughout the area.

The incidents were part of a marketing campaign that involved a character from the cartoon show "Aqua Teen Hunger Force."
Even though people may think....yeah whatever some blinking lights and wires and batteries, many do not realize if a citizen did something like this and was caught they would be subject to the furthest extent of local and federal law.

We have seen many people charged with "terrorism" for completely unrelated crimed under the statutes of the Patriot Act. In my eyes these devices come much closer to an implied terrorist threat than a kid with a pound of weed.

This advertising campaign was strictly to cause a commotion and Turner should be held completely responsible, be criminally charged, and pay restitution

oh well...what's good for the gander is good for the Goose, corporations should not be able to get away with behavior the average citizen would be toasted for.

[JobDDT]

Thats the best news story I've ever read.

WHO NAMED US CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-
CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK-CLICK?

[Bob]

so THAT's what the delay was about today!

this is nuts, i sort of saw this.

i was waiting for the train today, and the loudspeaker kept saying something about a significant delay between X and Y stations, i really couldn't hear it too well, because the MBTA is ridiculous, and they use this odd robot voice thing to announce delays. my train came on time, and there were no delays to the station that i get off at, but apparently it stopped there for quite some time, guess i was lucky.

later on, i heard some people at school talking about how there was a suspicious device or something at whatever station the delay was centered around. i guess it was this.


on the way home (10 hours later, law school lol) as i was taking the bus (i take the bus home sometimes instead of the train if i get back late at night, the station i use is in the ghetto kind of), part of the road was blocked off and we had to take a detour. i have no idea if it had anything to do with this though, there was an ambulance and maybe 4-5 unmarked police cars behind it (well, unmarked apart from the sirens they had flashing), including one of those SUV's and something that looked a little like a swat van, but smaller. i have no idea if it was at all related to this, though.

and THEN, later on down the road, i saw one of the devices perched up on a building. all i had to say was "haha hey, it's err, how about that", i had no idea it was related.

[kaiser soze]

Looks like they arrested a fucking pawn of Turner

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070201/D8N0KUEG3.html

[Bob]

also

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/10890113/detail.html#


This advertising campaign was strictly to cause a commotion and Turner should be held completely responsible, be criminally charged, and pay restitution

oh well...what's good for the gander is good for the Goose, corporations should not be able to get away with behavior the average citizen would be toasted for.

Menino said. "The individuals who placed these packages should be warned that there is a heavy penalty -- two to five years imprisonment for each one of them. We are not playing around."

do you like, read the articles you post, or do you just read headlines and automatically go into righteous indignation mode?

[kaiser soze]

no, I read it....but thanks for asking :rolleyes:

My concern is that the corporation Time Warner/Turner will walk away unscathed and those who planted the devices will take the fall by themselves.

anything else why your not at it?

[Bob]

Looks like they arrested a fucking pawn of Turner

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070201/D8N0KUEG3.html

dude come ON

you make it sound like ted turner has this fiendish plot to abuse the legal system for the sake of flipping off the american public while sitting in his penthouse office and looking down over the city going "yes, everything is going according to plan...ah ha ha ha...AH hahaha...AH HA HA HAH AH HA HA HA HA"

it was a viral marketing scheme that they thought would be clever, but they turned out to be horribly horribly wrong, and now they're frantically trying to apologize for it, what do you want?

[Bob]

no, I read it....but thanks for asking :rolleyes:

My concern is that the corporation Time Warner/Turner will walk away unscathed and those who planted the devices will take the fall by themselves.

anything else why your not at it?

it's been a day bud

fuck it, it hasn't even been a full 24 hours yet. the legal system doesn't move that fast, i'm honestly suprised arrests have been made so quickly

[kaiser soze]

So, I guess you know how little this will cost the tax payers to clean up because I believe that the S.W.A.T. teams/emergency crews/bomb removal/and whatever resources that used (pulling them from a potentially more serious situation) don't come for free.

Marketing campaigns can be quite effective without placing the public at risk (ie: paranoia, frustration, lost time, and money)

go plant some "devices" and see what the results are....I'm sure you won't get any high-fives

[Bob]

So, I guess you know how little this will cost the tax payers to clean up because I believe that the S.W.A.T. teams/emergency crews/bomb removal/and whatever resources that used (pulling them from a potentially more serious situation) don't come for free.

Marketing campaigns can be quite effective without placing the public at risk (ie: paranoia, frustration, lost time, and money)

go plant some "devices" and see what the results are....I'm sure you won't get any high-fives

like i'm gonna plant devices now that i know that it'll attract the attention of swat teams

it's just that you're attaching this devious intent to turner, like they said "hey you know what would be a great advertising campaign, is if we set up these devices that have the electronic signature of IED's, and attract the attention of bomb squads and SWAT teams and shut down trains and buses and cause a bomb scare, this'll be great, HEY MAKE SURE IT LOOKS MORE LIKE AN IED JEFF, WE WANT PEOPLE TO PANIC"

i just don't see how they could have expected this to happen, is all.

also they're seeking retribution from those responsible and turner sounds like they're owning up to it

the response to this has been fairly reasonable so far, your kneejerking is bothering the crap out of me

[Bob]

i take back what i said about the response to this being reasonable, it's been blown way out of proportion. like i said, i saw one of these signs on the way home tonight, and my first response was "haha". even if i didn't recognize the character, these things don't look like bombs, they look like lite-brites.

they've been up in 10 cities for over a month, they just got noticed today, apparently.

and as for your concerns about turner getting off scott free, here's this

"STATEMENT FROM MAYOR MENINO

First, I want to congratulate the Boston Police Department and all the public safety agencies for responding in a coordinated effort today. As most of you know, there were reports of nine suspicious packages found throughout the city and area earlier today. At this time there is no reason to be alarmed. The coordinated response by all departments proves the system we have in place works. Today, my Office of Emergency Preparedness and the Boston Police Department shared intelligence with the Boston Regional Intelligence Center, Boston Fire Department, Emergency Medical Services, Massachusetts State Police, ATF and FBI and we will continue to do so whenever necessary.

It is outrageous, in a post 9/11 world, that a company would use this type of marketing scheme. I am prepared to take any and all legal action against Turner Broadcasting and its affiliates for any and all expenses incurred during the response to today’s incidents. Boston will look to coordinate our efforts going forward with Cambridge, Somerville and any other affected agencies."

http://www.citizenobserver.com/alert_crime.jsp?id=534066

post 9/11 world :rolleyes:

love this guy

meanwhile, turner is furiously apologizing (http://mucus.net/adultswimbump.mov)

that's an adult swim bumper, but it's just a quote from turner's CEO (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/31/TBS.statement/index.html)

as for the kid who got paid to put up the signs getting arrested, that's fucked up, but calm down, he hasn't exactly been sent to gitmo yet. this is day one of the fiasco, the police are reacting as powerfully as they can to look important. once the facts start coming in and people start thinking, i'd hope that the kid gets off. turner isn't exactly hiding the ball here, it sounds like once they discovered how strong the reaction to this was, they've been doing everything they can to co-operate. i imagine they'll divulge their agreement with the kid, too. at this point everyone knows that the ad campaign was their idea, they have absolutely nothing to gain by selling him out. if he gets fucked, it's the courts' fault.

[Schmeltz]

Interesting thought from Bob Harris over at This Modern World (www.thismodernworld.com):


One last thought (I hope) about the Boston “bomb hoax” — amazingly, that completely incorrect phrase is still being used in a few major media headlines, despite the well-established fact that nothing of the kind ever happened.

The phrase occurs in this case not because it’s related to reality, but simply because authority figures used it. And now it continues on, lingering, refusing to die despite its complete uselessness in describing the event.

Consider: this is what happens when local officials briefly utter nonsense about a single, simple, and domestic issue that is immediately debunked. The horseshit still takes weeks to filter out.

Now imagine the case when powerful national officials repeatedly utter manipulated half-truths about multiple, complex, overseas concerns that are later debunked. Are there enough filters in the world to clean out that crap? Possibly not.

And then, years later, the reality-based community wonders why millions of Americans still don’t understand basic stuff like Iraq’s lack of connection to 9-11. We wonder how Bush can get away with blurring Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda in the recent State of the Union address. But maybe it’s no wonder at all.

The Mooninite incident is kinda scary to think about. But not because of any blinking lights in Boston.


A testament to the media's indirect complicity in spreading panic, hysteria, and misinformation through their addiction to sensationalism.

[yeahwho]

I think our government has a hand in the way many of these reporters choose their byline.

When a nation votes in a government to serve them they expect the truth. Four years ago, on February 5, 2003, while the nation's and the world's television cameras rolled, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered the Bush administration's "proof" to the UN Security Council that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and deserved to be attacked. Powell's case was recognizably thin and it eventually proved to be no case at all.

It's just another day (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030501-15.html) for the blind to lead the blind.

And now this war is $700 billion, the media should be repulsed not complicit.

[D_Raay]

I think our government has a hand in the way many of these reporters choose their byline.

When a nation votes in a government to serve them they expect the truth. Four years ago, on February 5, 2003, while the nation's and the world's television cameras rolled, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered the Bush administration's "proof" to the UN Security Council that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and deserved to be attacked. Powell's case was recognizably thin and it eventually proved to be no case at all.

It's just another day (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030501-15.html) for the blind to lead the blind.

And now this war is $700 billion, the media should be repulsed not complicit.

Before the war started, Mitch Daniels, then the White House budget director, had said the war would be an "affordable endeavor" and rejected an estimate by the chief White House economic adviser that the war would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion as "very, very high."

Nothing is as it seems with these guys. I have said it before, I will say it again... we HAVE to get these guys out now.

Get busy writing letters and corresponding in any way you can. The people have to end this and stop this administration.

[D_Raay]

Um, I don't know anything about this whole thing, but it's not the media that are addicted to sensationalism.

It's the general public. They want it, the media provide it. People tune out and companies lose dollars if there isn't an element of sensationalism to a story.

So stories are chosen for their sensationalist/emotion evoking properties, and are given priority.

Generally the mass media are giving the general public what they're interested in seeing and hearing.

I'm not saying that it's a good thing, but the media is a business and the stories/wording that fly are the ones that pay the bills.
Yes that is correct, however, isn't it the responsibility of the media (who I would hope have some intelligent, deserving overseers) to tell us what is the truth without embellishing or adding flair or scaring the shit out of us?

[Schmeltz]

OK, so the media's addicted to money. That's even worse.

[yeahwho]

OK, so the media's addicted to money. That's even worse.
It's survival of the fittest the past 30+ years. Every once in a while a major paper will do it right, mostly in the ed/op page. The one page usually reserve to no advertising. In Seattle the battle between the 2 major papers ended up with one paper buying the other in a joint merger agreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_operating_agreement). Both papers are printed in the same facility with the actual news being gathered in two different front buildings.

The advertising dept. and classifieds are the same in both papers.

Even with this one of the papers is going to have to go.

I think USAToday has a huge influence on how reporting is done. It has the Wal-Mart effect on local newspapers.

As far as major papers in the US I like the LATimes and Washington Post, ever since the NYTimes went with pay-per-view online they have had little effect on the national viewpoint. 2 years ago Friedman, Dowd, Rich, Krugman, Herbert, Kristof were common names daily on news blogs and message boards. Now they have very little impact with the NYTimes Select pay per view. (http://select.nytimes.com/pages/timesselect/index.html)

So alot of the voices that shaped up a skeptical and objective liberal POV have been muted by money.

[JobDDT]

Money has always been around, its not like its anything new.

So yes, of course there will be media members who are corrupted by money. But I think you need to draw a line between television news and print news.

For me, if you go to a news site like Reuters, you will get nothing but unbias news. However, some people confuse guys like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity for journalists.

This is wrong, of course, because cable news is not news. 95% of a cable news network (especially FOX) is opinionated commentary. Just look at their lineup. NONE of their programs feature hard news, all of them have "guests" or "contributors" to give opinions.

The sad thing is, people get their news from people like Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart. Bill O'Reilly puts his own personal take on everything presented, and Jon Stewart does as well. No longer do we have the patience to sit and watch a program that is straight forward, unbias news.

The thing about print media, at least print media seperates its OpEds from its News section.

[Schmeltz]

^True to an extent - I suppose Hearst did the same thing before and during the Spanish-American War, just so he could sell more papers.

I guess the most disappointing thing is the total lack of critical thinking on the part of the general public. If big money is actually being made off sensationalism masquerading as genuine journalism, it just goes to show that even in the information age people are either unprepared or unwilling to critically assess the sources of their information. Shitty deals.

Also, I wouldn't lump John Stewart in with Bill O'Reilly; I think it's pretty clear that Stewart doesn't make any attempt to pass himself off as anything but a comedian with a penchant for political satire, while O'Reilly seems to believe that everyone who doesn't parrot his own talking points is unworthy of consideration.

[JobDDT]

I'd also like to throw out there, the world is too much into "We Report, You Decide".

Its so polarizing. There are some things you CAN'T have opinions on. Its creating an entire nation of people who hear a new story about a freak wildfire killing a group of children, and then somehow "deciding" on something after that.

There are some stories where there is nothing to "decide" on.

[Auton]

so you'd rather be told what to believe? right.

and jon stewart is a comedian, he has no responsibility whatsoever to give the public news. it's satire.

[JobDDT]

No, its fair to decide on political issues.

The problem is when people hear "Cat Stuck in Tree" and think there is something they as an individual should decide about that.

By the way, you're getting me wrong if you think I'm blaming Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart. Both of their programs are innocent enough, and they both have points other than "give the public news". However, the problem is, most people GET their news from those programs, and only those programs.

I'm fine with people getting a news story and then seeing it in a satirical form, but when people only watch a story on the Daily Show about President Bush and it is heavily edited to make him look like even more of an idiot than he already is, then that loses the balance between comedy and what the common person sees as news.

[D_Raay]

It's quite troubling that sometimes the only way you can cut through the bullshit, and get a little chuckle at the same time, is to watch Jon Stewart.

You should be able to EASILY do this without having to watch someone who is perceived as being part of one side or another. The truth doesn't have a side.

[DroppinScience]

so you'd rather be told what to believe? right.

and jon stewart is a comedian, he has no responsibility whatsoever to give the public news. it's satire.

Despite the fact that he's just a comedian, he's a far better journalist than the "real" ones.

And when you watch Jon Stewart, you know exactly what you're getting (political satire, "fake news"). He's not pretending to be anything he's not (which is O'Reilly's job). I'd argue that people who "get their news" from Daily Show also go to other news sources. Their viewers are easily better informed than any show on FOX News.

So I don't know what you're on about, DDT.

[Schmeltz]

Underage Girlie, you make a good point that it's a two-way street and obviously the public needs to do more in terms of critical thinking. It's true that not much thought is usually given to the complexities of journalism and the media industry. But at the same time the public is basically the passive partner in this relationship; it can only react to the information with which it is presented. For all that mass media is subject to various pressures that go mostly unreported (no pun intended), the responsibility to provide dispassionate, unbiased information still rests entirely with its members. Public perceptions are not aided by journalism that tends toward the sensational and the editorial for the sake of ratings and advertising money, and I tend to think that media conglomerates in possession of billions of dollars and sophisticated technology should bear up under the responsibility to provide a quality product instead of pandering to the lowest common denominator - which will always be a given element in even the most educated, aware, and responsible society.

[FunkyHiFi]

1) the media is pretty much strictly entertainment now, with bits of facts thrown in to create some semblance of legitimacy. Witness all the video game-like and infantile IMO visual and audio effects used in pretty much all news programs.

2) the American public is getting more and more ignorant day by day, myself included, becasue for the most part the organizations we rely on for the truth are now mostly concerned about $$$.

FYI: rent the 1976 movie Network (http://imdb.com/title/tt0074958/) for more on this. And don't be put off by its age: I watched this somber/expertly acted movie last year and what's portrayed in it is soooooo close to what is happening now it's creepy.

One of the issues brought up in the movie is very obvious nowadays. One of the characters said (Im paraphrasing here): "Can't you see it's not about countries or patriotism anymore? Corporations are what matter and who are actually running things." Chilling.

3) sort of related to #2 but with material things: I think the marketing & advertising sectors have done a great job in training many people to buy just about anything, regardless of whether they actually need it or not. And now they're doing it with teenagers and even younger kids. :mad: I haven't read this yet but here's another story written quite some time ago, 1952 in this case, that foretold of today's happenings: The Space Merchants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants). It was cowritten by the same man who wrote the short story "The Marching Morons" which I've mentioned here recently.

In a vastly overpopulated world, the economy has replaced all political systems, and states exist merely to ensure the survival of huge trans-national corporations, which in fact hold all political power. Advertising has become hugely aggressive and by far the most well paid profession. Through advertising, the public is constantly deluded into thinking that the quality of life is improved by all the products placed on the market. However, the most basic elements are incredibly scarce, including water and fuel.
Sound familiar? This is also why I worry about so many schools not requiring students to read older books and similar materials ("if it's not hip and cool and shiny and politically correct, its worthless" :() in history and literature classes.

[Auton]

Despite the fact that he's just a comedian, he's a far better journalist than the "real" ones.

And when you watch Jon Stewart, you know exactly what you're getting (political satire, "fake news"). He's not pretending to be anything he's not (which is O'Reilly's job). I'd argue that people who "get their news" from Daily Show also go to other news sources. Their viewers are easily better informed than any show on FOX News..

oh, no, i agree with you completely. im just saying you cant hold him responsible for having a bias because his job isnt to give the news. i looooove jon stewart, and yeah he's more reliable than most anchors and is a good journalist, im just saying people have excuse his bias.

[JobDDT]

Despite the fact that he's just a comedian, he's a far better journalist than the "real" ones.

And when you watch Jon Stewart, you know exactly what you're getting (political satire, "fake news"). He's not pretending to be anything he's not (which is O'Reilly's job). I'd argue that people who "get their news" from Daily Show also go to other news sources. Their viewers are easily better informed than any show on FOX News.

So I don't know what you're on about, DDT.

But for some, particularly those age 18-34, it’s true. A famed statistic from the Pew Institute is that 21 percent of TV viewers 18-34 get the bulk of their news from “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.”

That is what I am "on about". Look, I am a huge fan of the Daily Show, but what I'm worried about is people who see them take something out of context or have a fake expert on their show in front of a green screen and use it to form their opinions on something. The issue isn't too gigantic, but its still an issue.

Jon Stewart himself wouldn't even consider himself a journalist. And if you talk about real, objective journalists, you're really fooling yourself if you think hes a better journalist than the "real ones". Is he better than the hacks on FOX News and other cable news networks? Of course, but I wouldn't consider those schmucks journalists either.

His audience may be more informed, but its still a program that latches its opinions onto every single tidbit of every single story. For the 21% of the youth today that gets their news from that comedy program, there is a bit of a bias problem there.

[FunkyHiFi]

I swear I didn't know about this before wrting my previous post:

The Turner Classic Movie channel is going to be showing Network tonight at 1:30AM: movie description/trailer/schedule. (http://www.tcmdb.com/title/title.jsp?stid=342)

[Schmeltz]

Case in point. (http://www.bobharris.com/images/stories/everygoddamnetwork.jpg) Laughable.

[JobDDT]

Case in point. (http://www.bobharris.com/images/stories/everygoddamnetwork.jpg) Laughable.

Thats the story people want to read the most.

What exactly is wrong with that? A famous person dies. So you may not like her, ok. Its still news.

[D_Raay]

Thats the story people want to read the most.

What exactly is wrong with that? A famous person dies. So you may not like her, ok. Its still news.
Sure it's news, but front page of every paper and hours of coverage on every network? How many people died in Iraq today hmmm?

[JobDDT]

Sure it's news, but front page of every paper and hours of coverage on every network? How many people died in Iraq today hmmm?

I know thats a bigger story, but you have to understand the public. People die in Iraq every day, as sad as that is, and people have grown numb to it. It isn't every day that a famous Playboy model and reality TV show star dies with mysterious circumstances.

[Schmeltz]

Thats the story people want to read the most.


No, that's the story to which people are exposed the most.


but you have to understand the public.


Not very hard to do, apparently.

[DroppinScience]

That is what I am "on about". Look, I am a huge fan of the Daily Show, but what I'm worried about is people who see them take something out of context or have a fake expert on their show in front of a green screen and use it to form their opinions on something. The issue isn't too gigantic, but its still an issue.

Jon Stewart himself wouldn't even consider himself a journalist. And if you talk about real, objective journalists, you're really fooling yourself if you think hes a better journalist than the "real ones". Is he better than the hacks on FOX News and other cable news networks? Of course, but I wouldn't consider those schmucks journalists either.

His audience may be more informed, but its still a program that latches its opinions onto every single tidbit of every single story. For the 21% of the youth today that gets their news from that comedy program, there is a bit of a bias problem there.

I see where your concern is, and while I have no doubt your heart is in the right place, I'm not convinced that Jon Stewart has any role in the decline of today's media.

Right around the time O'Reilly accused the Daily Show's viewers of being "stoned slackers," there was some kind of poll done and it was found that regular Daily Show viewers were much more likely to be educated (i.e. college/university) than O'Reilly's most loyal viewers.

As for bias, sure there's bias evident on TDS, but it wears it on its sleeve and anyone who watches it regularly should be able to pick this up. Everyone should be fully aware it's a joke and that it's satire. I've never seen it pretend otherwise. Even if the joke-y segments can be biased, Stewart welcomes guests of every stripe on the show. Each night, you're exposed to views from the left, right, center and everything in-between, treating the subjects with the utmost respect and even throws in good debate and food for thought. That aspect alone I find engaging and appreciate the show all the more for providing it.

As an interesting little aside to Schmeltz's photo of CNN/MSNBC/FOX, etc. all carrying the same Anna Nicole Smith headline, I immediately went over to PBS's news section. You know what they're talking about? Everything else that's happened in the world EXCEPT Anna Nicole Smith, so there's your outlet for finding substantial info. (y)

[D_Raay]

I know thats a bigger story, but you have to understand the public. People die in Iraq every day, as sad as that is, and people have grown numb to it. It isn't every day that a famous Playboy model and reality TV show star dies with mysterious circumstances.
You keep saying people. I am "people", I am the "public", and I had but a passing interest in the story. Perhaps you aren't being clear enough? Maybe a Johnny Depp moment is warranted?

[JobDDT]

You keep saying people. I am "people", I am the "public", and I had but a passing interest in the story. Perhaps you aren't being clear enough? Maybe a Johnny Depp moment is warranted?

Alright, I'll play your game.

People die in Iraq every single day. That won't sell over a famous star dying.

North Korea is halfway across the world and the majority of Americans not as educated as you are (:) ) would rather hear about someone they know about dying than the same "progression" story thats been coming out of North Korea for a month.

I highly doubt you represent the entire mass of this country.

You're just being foolish if you think a headline of "Four more people die in Iraq" would sell over "Playboy playmate and reality star collapses, dies". While there is no doubt what is more important in the long run, your pretentious attitude towards the media for trying to make money in a capitalistic society by giving the masses what they want is simply unfair.

If you want to read a different story, turn the newspaper page, or look in a damn different place on the Internet. It isn't that hard.

[Schmeltz]

your pretentious attitude towards the media for trying to make money in a capitalistic society by giving the masses what they want is simply unfair.

Yes, those poor mistreated transnational corporate media conglomerates, with their billions of dollars and stranglehold on public perceptions and massive ability to influence entire cultures. They have it so tough, trying to make an honest buck and getting shot down all the time.

I don't see anything pretentious about calling out the colossally influential mass media industry for pandering to macabre voyeurism in the name of profits instead of using their position more responsibly. What's so pretentious about demanding a higher standard in journalism, exactly? What is unfair about holding powerful media outlets to the standard of quality one would expect in a free and informed society?

[D_Raay]

Well said schmeltz (as always)...

Don't get me wrong DDT, I don't disagree that many people would like to hear this story. It's just that the media pollutes it's true role in society. It's all about sensationilism and titillation, when it should be about educating and informing.

[yeahwho]

Jim Samples (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/09/ap/entertainment/mainD8N6DNSG2.shtml), the head of the Cartoon Network resigned after 13 years today. The ratings of Aqua teen stayed exactly the same (slightly lower) even with all the attention focused on it this past week. So an immediate spike in ratings did not happen. Turner did pay Boston $2 million for the scare and now everybody has already taken most of their collective attention span onto another topic.

so it seems.

how about that scooter libby (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1151AP_CIA_Leak_White_House.html) trial?

[kaiser soze]

looks like a harmless prank after all :rolleyes:

[D_Raay]

Alright, I'll play your game.

People die in Iraq every single day. That won't sell over a famous star dying.

North Korea is halfway across the world and the majority of Americans not as educated as you are (:) ) would rather hear about someone they know about dying than the same "progression" story thats been coming out of North Korea for a month.

I highly doubt you represent the entire mass of this country.

You're just being foolish if you think a headline of "Four more people die in Iraq" would sell over "Playboy playmate and reality star collapses, dies". While there is no doubt what is more important in the long run, your pretentious attitude towards the media for trying to make money in a capitalistic society by giving the masses what they want is simply unfair.

If you want to read a different story, turn the newspaper page, or look in a damn different place on the Internet. It isn't that hard.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/02/13/the-daily-show-rips-msm-for-anna-nicole-coverage/

[JobDDT]

Like I said, the death of a famous person is big news.

NOW the cable news networks have taken it too far though, with the "WHO IS THE BABY'S DADDY?" garbage. Jesus Christ, there isn't a paternity test coming up in the near future, so drop the story. She is dead, it isn't news anymore.

Although I will still stand by the fact that this is a perfectly printable front page story.

Keep in mind though, cable news is absolute garbage. I wasn't justifying all of the speculation that came with the story. But as a news story? You're damn straight this is news.

Now, the North Korea thing isn't getting as much media coverage as Anna Nicole on cable TV, which is an abomination.

[DroppinScience]

Like I said, the death of a famous person is big news.

NOW the cable news networks have taken it too far though, with the "WHO IS THE BABY'S DADDY?" garbage. Jesus Christ, there isn't a paternity test coming up in the near future, so drop the story. She is dead, it isn't news anymore.

Although I will still stand by the fact that this is a perfectly printable front page story.

Keep in mind though, cable news is absolute garbage. I wasn't justifying all of the speculation that came with the story. But as a news story? You're damn straight this is news.

Now, the North Korea thing isn't getting as much media coverage as Anna Nicole on cable TV, which is an abomination.

Oh, I don't deny Smith's death being newsworthy or worthy of the front page. She lived one hell of a soap opera, so this fodder is just begging to be covered by the media. Having said that, there ARE other things going in the world.