Koala-ty-V

Koala Bears - Amazing videos are here

Look at how cute and cuddly they are. It’s adorable, isn’t? God, I could just watch them for hours. They’re eerily human-like, with their opposable thumbs and arms and up-right sitting. I can really relate to them. Sitting there, eating. Hours upon hours of sitting and eating while watching koalas.

Shifting gears a bit, I watch Smallville. Wow, it feels good to finally put it out there. I watch Smallville. I’m not proud of it, but I’m tired of living a lie, living in fear of what people would think if they found out. Well, I watch Smallville. But I am not a fan. I was for a little bit. The first two seasons were acceptably week, season three was averagely good, and then season four was pretty damn good (I may be off a bit on the seasons as I power-watched the first six seasons in a fit of depression). They’re on season 7 now, and I mainly watch out of curiosity as to how the show is still on and how bad they’re going to let it get. It’s on the WB or CW or whatever it is now, but it’s still on. It’s not that they jumped the shark (Clark still can’t fly), but it’s more like they decided to show a picture of a shark and then a pair of water skis and just kinda let the viewers assume that they had already jumped the shark and there was a reason for it being so bad. It is the antithesis of Arrested Development, un-witty, un-original, and still going. It just kinda seems like Billy Joel had it right all along: only the good die young, and those that are or at least considered good are drug out longer and longer until they are old and crippled and have no honor left. Well, that second part wasn’t really a part of his song, but you know what I mean.

Quality TV and Me!!!

I have to admit I felt a slight pain of realization/humility/disillusionment/abasement when Epley suggested that those of us who enjoy quality/cult television were merely being targeted as high-cultured, academic hipster wannabes, and that we are in all reality no better than the audiences who enjoy low-brow, lowest common denominator-catering television.

But after thinking about it... I decided that in a sense that parts of this idea may be true (certainly not in all cases) but I still will continue to honor artistic/creative merit and enjoy the same things I always have, and that I will use that new knowledge only to argue with those who think they have a better taste of "quality" than my own in regards to television. Actually the next day I think it was, one of my friends, who constantly must state his opinion about the quality, credibility, or mainstream vs. independently produced entertainment content, was sprouting his usual "people have no taste" or "I just have good taste" argument so I countered this time with a "your taste is relative" and "your simply being sold what people assume you will think is quality" kind of thing. While I do not totally buy into this new argument it was quite fun using it to belittle him by playing devil's advocate and maybe next time he'll think twice before making fun of me for watching How I Met Your Mother!!!

I recognize the "four ways to approach quality" and can see how they relate to the TV I watch. I would consider some of my favorite shows such as The Office, Arrested Development, 30 Rock and Lost (Lost has many quality qualities, but I'm still not sure if it entirely qualifies) to be in the "quality" category because they are all very distinct in their production and narrative and reward their niche audiences with self-referential humor and "in-jokes." It is very rewarding to "get it" and to recognize reoccurring jokes, gags, or plot lines.

The coolest thing happened to me at work the other day (well maybe not so cool but cool in the sense that nothing interesting actually happens at work to begin with) when a lady called and asked if we had any seasons of Lost for sale. Then she asked, "Well.. do you watch the show? Can I ask you some things?" She went on to ask me all about Danielle Russo's background, the purpose of the hatch, why the 'Others' had kidnapped Walt and why they want to have babies so badly, and my opinions on where the plot is leading. We talked for a good ten minutes, and she just kept saying "wow" and wished we could talk longer. I was like the "Lost wiki" in this woman's mind, and I have to admit it felt totally awesome and rewarding. I just felt it related so well to what we had talked about in class.

Quality Television

What is quality television? This is what we talked about all class this week, but I don't believe I ever got a clear picture for myself. I think that quality television is as hard to define as what is considered popular. Epley said that quality television usually has reoccurring actors or actresses. I don't know if I can go with that either. I like to think that the television I watch is fairly quality. Half of our class would totally disagree with that statement I am sure. There is nothing wrong with watching The Hills because there is something that people can learn from it. I will give you a list of the things that I have learned from The Hills just to prove that you can learn something....here it goes:
1. Don't date men that have dread locks and disregard general hygiene practices.
2. If your boss offers you a trip to Paris for work don't say no just so you can spend the summer with a guy.
3. Most men that live in California are scum...STAY AWAY!
Okay so there I made it pretty clear that The Hills probably isn't really quality. But what shows really teach people anything? I know that there are shows for little kids that teach them colors and the history channel might teach you something useful, but other then that what really gives you the "quality" that everyone is talking about? I personally think that there isn't one show that everyone can decide on and say is quality. It is an opinion that will vary person to person. We will probably never know what real quality television is because no one will ever be able to agree on it.

I love Ellen

I am really not sure what blogs I am missing but I don't think I have had the wonderful opportunity to write about my favorite person on television today...Ellen Degeneres. You may wonder why I think Ellen is just fabulous and I have many reasons for it. First of all how many talk shows do you watch that have the host and all the guests that come on the show dance?! Honestly I think that that is one of the best parts of her show. I wish that every show had the hosts dance because it just lets them show their fun side. Secondly I love Ellen because of her carefree attitude about how people view her. She is a lesbian and has a girlfriend and is very public about it all. She doesn't care what the media says about her homosexuality. She is very comfortable with herself and I think that is something to be admired. She gives a voice to people that didn't have the guts to talk about their homosexuality. When Ellen came out on her show back in the 90's and shortly after the show went to the dumps is just a shame. Ellen was a great show. It was like the Mary Tyler Moore Show of the 90's. Okay, maybe that isn't true completely but they did kind of have the same story line. I might just be partial to gay people. I think that I love everyone that is gay. I think that homosexuality is great and I wish I had a best gay friend. Anyway though....I think that having a acceptance of gay people in television was a great way to give gay people the chance to break out and be more socially accepted. And to end this blog...one last time...I ♥ Ellen!

If TV Said To Do It...You Do It!

Every person has a favorite show or genre of shows that you find interesting and watch every week; like Epley says, “You schedule watching it into your life.” If you don’t please tell me what you do instead, because we live in Iowa and you tell me something other to do than watch TV that doesn’t consist of something stupid, illegal, or requires you to be 6’5.” My roommates got me hooked on Lost and Heroes this year and believe me I’ve spent time watching all the beginning seasons to keep updated. You basically have to! Both in the Janovich and Mittell reading they describe TV shows that seem more like moves, with in depth storylines and the ever so changing characters. You can’t sit down this coming Thursday and watch Lost and be like, “Oh, yeah I can totally understand this.” It’s similar to that fact that you can’t leave during a two in a half newly released movie for and hour and comeback understanding everything. If you like a show and want to be “apart of it,” then you’ll put aside things on that night or schedule your classes before it airs because you my friends have entered a cult without ever really knowing it…lol. I love how popular movies and TV shows get classified as cult classics…

CULT-
–noun

1	a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

2.	an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

3.	the object of such devotion.

4.	a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

5.	Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

6.	a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

7.	the members of such a religion or sect.

8.	any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

I don’t see how TV can be religious, but of the definitions they give some that seem accurate. My roommates and I are bound together with the idea that we can talk/relate to given comments or things referring to the particular show we all watch because we’re regular watchers. You wont find me at a Lost convention dressed up like Sawyer, and I don’t rock black Nikes and drink the punch…cult, or whatever you want to call it, I’m not going to quite watching just yet, especially if I still reside in Iowa.

The 48-Hour Sales Event: Everything Must Go!

It's not so much that there isn't quality programming anymore. The problem is that there is so much other shit on your standard 80 channel cable hook-up that you've got to spend way more time sifting through the crap to get to the quality. Think of it like a TJ MAXX.

My Beefs with Quality Television (or lack thereof)

1. Nothing is real on reality TV. Everything from Man vs. Wild to The Real World reeks of staged events and over-scripted dialog. When you see how the show is made and how Survivor is filmed 500 feet away from air-conditioned Mac editing bays, it seems to take the wind out of our falsified tension-building sails.

2. Nothing actually matters. Entertainment Tonight, ESPN, and CNN 24 Hour News are all guilty in some form or another. Shows like Entertainment Tonight and E! News do nothing more than show you explicit and semi-normal photos with an “I can't believe they did this” slanted storyline. ESPN takes the honor of being able to drag a storyline out better than any other station in history. For the most recent examples, see Brett Favre, steroids controversy, or the NFL Draft. All of the 24 hour news stations have this amazing power to create stories when there is seemingly nothing else to talk about. All day and all night, these stations need to be talking. By this point, I have seen every possible angle of the 2008 Presidential Election spun from every type of person imaginable on CNN. I really just want to tell them that nothing matters anymore...at least until November.

3. The television “directed” at me doesn't relate to me. Honestly, how many 21 year olds can relate to the life that is led on The Hills? The show shows 20-somethings leading posh, BMW driving, credit-card dependent lifestyles where the most controversial issue to ever have surfaced revolved around “those ugly socks that I can't believe Jason wore with those shorts.” I mean, yeah, people want to be whisked away once in a while to their own little fantasy, but is this the kind of fantasy we should be promoting to our 12-24 year old demographic? It smells like awkward combination of silicone and Chanel.

4. Nobody wants to cut the bullshit. The important issues that matter for the development of our own well-being aren't ever brought up. Instead, people with the power to actually do something would rather not be so controversial or not choose sides. What we need is a live show that springs unscripted questions on important people. Sure, you'll probably only get one show out of the deal, but you'll have some amazing and not-so-amazing answers that truly reveal how a person in the spotlight thinks without cue cards.

Like I said before, there is quality television. It's just that right now, I don't have the time or resources to sift through the clearance bin. I've got more important things stimulating my brain...like chewing gum, for instance.

Barack Obama Disciplines America for "Acting Like Children"

A few thoughts:

1. I wish I would have numbered my blog posts

2. I wish I would have known they are graded individually rather than the previous statement of “basically if you post all your blogs, you'll do great”

3. I wish I watched more TV so I could understand you kids and your crazy pop culture references

I have watched no more than three significant programs in the last week. One involved the raising of gorillas in Cameroon, one involved UNI's very own Deric Mickens winning Tila Tequila's Fantasy Couple Contest at South Padre, and the final and most significant program was Barack Obama's speech on racism and diversity in America entitled “A More Perfect Union.”

While I will gladly stand proud for participating and taking interest in the American political system, I would by no means classify myself as a political revolutionary by any stretch of the word. I feel my powers are better utilized at calling out people on their bullshit and pointing out the cold, logical, and sometimes unwanted, rationale behind an issue. Let me tell you this...if every American spoke about issues of racism and discrimination as Mr. Obama spoke about it on Tuesday, America would be a very different, and most likely better, place – and yes, even on television.

Barack Obama addressed racism and diversity in America as every American should – with a cold truth and a smooth baritone voice. He addressed the scared black man that grew up in the South during the Civil Rights Movement. He addressed the illegal immigrant looking to better his family's well-being. And he addressed the confused white man – a man that can't express fears about a downtrodden urban community without being labeled as racist. Just as America uses statistics and polls to avoid the larger issue, so too does the American television industry.

The television industry makes the mistake of addressing race and diversity quantitatively - “...only 6.4% of owners are minorities, while only 3.7% are women, and only 12.9% of television news anchors are black, while 2.1% are homosexual, but only 10.4% can afford to hire a part-time gardener...” When it comes down to it, it's not a matter of statistics or regulation - it's a change in lifestyle and culture. Sure...everyone wants to live in a happy world full of equal representation and ownership, but it doesn't work like that. There were “network families” and personal relationships rooted long before any issue of diversity in the media ever came up.

In my opinion, the issue of minority and queer television is a textbook “band-aid issue.” Sure...we can flood the market with “classic black programming” or “notably queer personalities”, but rather than asking why these programs aren't on network television, we should be asking why the American public doesn't tune into these programs on network television. It is often said that the public interest determines the programming, or sometimes even that the programming determines what the public watches. I believe that by this point we've all come to the realization that it is a double-edged sword and the relationship flows both ways. Whether it's the producers or the viewers that don't “approve” of alternative programming seems to be a moot point. It's time we all just cut the bullshit and talked “as if we were adults.”

In case you're interested. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU

Spiegal Blog #5

Relating Spiegal to today's television programming does not seem to be that difficult of a task. Take a look at the programming of yesteryear and the programming of today, they have shocking similarities both in daytime and primetime programming. Let's start with daytime programming. The elements that were present in the beginning included magazine type shows, game shows, soap operas, and instructional shows that wouldn't distract the American housewife. These programs were easy to watch and didn't really challenge the viewer. They were more of a way to keep the viewer entertained, and were definitely made to instill consumer desires into the watcher. These shows aimed at improving the quality of the housewive's world, whether it be instructing techniques in better cooking or cleaning methods or promoting the new up-and-coming product. These elements are very prevelant in the daytime programming of the present day. The Today show seems to showcase everyday problems, new gadgets, interesting people and places, and sometimes news. I would say this show directly targets women just by the content of the material that is highlighted. They talk extensively about problems between men and women and also give advice on improving relationships between husbands and children. The funny part is that I basically watch this show in the way in which the original producers of television would want me to, while doing other things. If I were to sit down and deliberately watch this show I would probably get bored and turn it, but since I am not, it is tolerable. Another show that I watch that directly relates to the good old days would be The Price is Right. I have been a loyal friend and true to this show since as long as I can remember. But it is very apparent what the purpose of this show is, to sell you products. The entire show is one long commercial. It sucks you in with its pricing games and leads you to believe that you are enjoying yourself when actually you are being tricked into watching a commercial. It is evident that this tactic is used extensively by other game shows during the daytime viewing schedule. Now lets move on to primetime television. Speigal comments about television bringing families together and then later comments about television tearing families apart. Which idea is the correct idea? Or does it relate to the time period being discussed. In our present day programming I believe that both would hold true. Certain programs were designed to be accessible to viewers of all ages such as sitcoms, movies of the week, gameshows, and even some reality television. But there are also shows found in the primetime slots that may break up the family viewing time. Shows aimed at bringing in the younger audiences are not very enjoyable for people over the age of 30. These shows are not hard to find, just turn on FOX anytime after seven. But even now I think that television has the capacity to bring families together, even if it is just for an hour a day after supper has been eaten. It is apparent that social changes back in the beginning of television helped shape what programming was offered and also inspired producers of television today, sell sell sell!

Reactions to Videos Blog #4

As I sat through these mulitple examples of television from the past I spent a lot of time comparing them to their counterparts of the future. It seems like not too much has changed in fifty odd years. Let's start with the Today show. Unfortunately I have to admitt that I will tune into the Today show if I am in the vicinity of a television before the hour of 9 a.m. (After that it is of course Stewart and Colbert reruns and The Price is Right). The Today show has kept their same format all this time. They should definitely bring back the monkey though. I get a sense of what television was like back when daytime programming started to become important. It is centered around consumerism of course just like the rest of our lives should be, right? It is almost hilarious to watch all these different programs as a woman who grew up decades later. I mean, how naive can these women be? I LOVE to wait on my husband hand and foot and clean up after the five kids and make sure I still look hot at five p.m. when dinner is supposed to be on the table. But these were apparently what the standards were back then. I probably would have bought into the idea if I was born back then too. The funny thing is that things are still this way today. I mean, look at the coffee commercial in the "Queen for a Day" video. Although it looks pretty corny and gives me a sickening feeling in my stomach, it still closely resembles coffee commericials of today. I watch a Folgers commercial and I want to puke because their idea of a good life is so cliche. But I pretty much wanna puke whenever I watch any commercial that isn't cynical or comedic.

dare we watch "The Hills"?

A Non-Watcher's Guide to The Hills
From Gawker:
"The Hills is masterfully crafted, beautifully shot arch melodrama. You bring me the best of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, and I'll show you its parallel on The Hills. It's a picture of self-involvement and social anxieties that could be seen as representing the minds and experiences of many young people, only writ large and ludicrous. So you don't hate it, you just don't understand it yet."

Diversity on TV

Oh how do I miss shows like In Living Color and the Wayans Brothers on TV. You can catch a re-run of the shows on BET from time to time, but I miss them being on all the time. I just moved so I can't turn to BET right now to tell you what's on, but it has created a way for diversity to be seen on TV. So what else do we see that shows diversity on TV? I can find Fresh Prince of Bel-Air on late night, Chappelle show on Comedy Central and reality TV shows are including more and more diversity. What I never realized until reading last weeks readings is how bad non-white writers/producers are discriminated against and have their productions overlooked. The "whassup" ads were a big wakeup call, and it was criticized heavily for the way it portrayed African-American males around their age. Personally, I thought it reminded me of crap my friends and I do. So does that mean if my friends and I produced something of that nature, that we're gonna be criticized for

More Pomo?

Honestly, I kind of enjoy the different arguments about Post Modernism and in certain respects I really enjoy it, and in others, I despise it. I did find Epley's argument about PoMo being around for much longer than the textbook writers will say it has been. He would bring up architecture and stuff from a couple centuries ago and how it's pastiche and all. Well, lately I stumbled upon a commercial made for a European audience where the ads will last up to 5 minutes or so. It's an advertisement for Prada where a woman is reciting a piece of literature as a voice over. It sounds incredibly modern. However, what she is reading is from a Gnostic text entitled Thunder Perfect Mind, which would have been written sometime in the first or second century, which takes Epley's argument much further back. Gnosticism was an early form of Christianity that died out after a couple centuries. Their texts focus more on theology and really stretched the mind, rather than really focusing on Jesus and all that... Anyways, the text was lost until it was discovered again in the 1940s along with about 11 or 12 other texts in a collection that is known as the Nag Hammadi library. Here is the Ad, hope find it as interesting as I do.

If You Hype It They Will Come...

Television is filled with diversity today (classy…I think not), but either way you look at it TV has an increasing amount of African American Sitcoms to gay reality shows. The Real World is the first current show that comes to my mind when thinking about the Gray and McCarthy readings. They pick seven strangers and almost every time there’s an African American male/female and one gay or lesbian individual. Sure it makes for “good” drama TV, but understanding the big picture is what I see most often skewed by viewers because they think that one individual represents the entire race or sexual preference. There still has yet to be a sitcom drama that consists of an all black family that deals with realistic problems and beliefs. Like the readings before, a sitcom like that would probably shock and make viewers uncomfortable, so we’re going to have to stick with comedic shows like Fresh Prince of Bel-Air and more recently The Chappelle Show (which is a hole other realm of comedy). Shows like Heroes and Lost are great for today’s society because people like the variety and want to see themselves relating to a character, and those multicultural shows allow for that to happen. I mean come on who’s a white, young college student who doesn’t want to be like Peter Petrelli?

As for the Watts reading, I think today’s TV choices for commercials definitely reflect on the success of the Wassssup? Guys. Ads still use other’s “cool” culture aspect to make you think that if you buy the product you will become that much closer to “coolness.” But like I said before, beer is beer and you either like it or you don’t, and quite frankly a person to go that in depth on a commercial like that makes me not sleep well at night. Either way commercials today still go for a multicultural/relatable aspect (much like the sitcoms today) to get viewers to buy in on the hype.

Diversity?

I really find odd what some consider to be diversity in television, even in 2008. Not one person has really pointed out any considerable examples of "true" representations of African American or Queer culture on television, as demonstrated by the readings. I think that the majority of people searching for these examples and coming up with shows like "Ellen", "In Living Color", or even the entire BET Network (which by they way is now owned by Viacom I believe and therefore not really in the hands of black producers anymore) are ignoring the fact that they cannot say what are authentic representations of these minority cultures. One of my favorite terms in communications/cultural studies has to be Richard Dyer's "whiteness." This prevents people--as culturally enlightened as they assume to or aspire to be-- from totally accepting the fact that as members of the Caucasian race we are are assumed the default race by privilege. When Caucasions watch TV we fail to see how overrepresented we are. It's not necessarily a bad thing, it's human nature to immediately recognize and relate with similar types. Really "whiteness" can be replaced by "defaultness" so that it also applies to other minority cultures which we fail to recognize as well.

For those of you who think I'm full of complete BS right now, just know that I know that whites or any other mainstream cultural groups can be stereotyped or poorly represented, but honestly it just does not happen so much. Even reality shows, which are starting to have more diverse casts, typically try to find a recognizable or stereotypical character that one can easily categorize.

Don't get me wrong. I know that the aforementioned shows and others listed as "diversity promoting" shows have really made some progress in the industry. But that doesn't change the fact that they are so few and far between that I can't even think of any more than a hand full of shows that aim to represent the underrepresented. Even shows with "self representing" producer's such as "Tyler Perry's House of Payne" or "Chappele's Show" fall into a formula of previous representation--appealing to white audiences only through comedy and using comedy to touch on racial issues. Once again not always a bad thing, but it shows that after such a long time of this struggle for representation, television viewers are still assumed not to be comfortable enough to stomach "authentic" black culture without it being sugar coated with "universal comedy."

I know I'm kind of on a rant. Maybe I have white guilt. Maybe I'm a hippy liberal like my dad likes to call me. Or maybe I just realize that racism, sexism, and bigotry exists in EVERYONE no matter what. We might always and forever have certain connotations associated with all groups of others. But in regards to TV, I honestly am just wondering if we will ever see a day where we don't have to strain so hard to see a more accurate representation of the world we live in. I'm not talking about some magical rainbow of equality here. Just some realness and the recognition that race, gender, nationality, and sexuality matters a lot.

Inadvertent Villain

I feel a slight pain of annoyance every time a black comedian impersonates a white guy with a pre-pubescent, nasally, nerd voice. Whether or not I am allowed to express this as a feeling can be left up to anyone who would see it as something other than distaste for bad taste, but really it ought to be considered for more than that. In a way I have always seen the world in a racist manner. I should appropriately rephrase that to say that I have always seen television in a racist manner. I’m white, therefore I am very, very easily racist. A sense of humor about social struggles for gay and lesbian people or African Americans can be cool if you always support the claim that civil liberties just aren’t being upheld when the only portrayal that large communities of people get are stereotypes. Otherwise, I’m a racist and a bigot. I don’t support the people who are not only different than me, but also would need mine and others’ support if they are ever going to get an equal or maybe fair representation broadcasted. I don’t support them in anyway that would be considered real support. I attempt to sympathize. I wish they could have more programming oriented towards them, or even be included in a variety of situations and contexts. I even wish there were more black people and homosexual people writing for television and cinema. Still, it doesn’t mean I would tell other people that is right. I don’t get angry when I see black people portrayed as criminals or homosexuals portrayed as fairies or bikers. In a way, I’m more of a racist, a bigot, and a misogynist than I’ll ever have to account for because I am totally cool with television’s representation as is, I’m ok with the “balance” that it has, or at least my apathy would lead people to believe that is the case.

FCC policy clarified, finally

As this clip from the Onion explains, FCC rules are really quite straightforward and clear.


FCC Okays Nudity On TV If It's Alyson Hannigan

A Big Fat Whassup

I can’t claim to watch many shows that have a constant black or gay character, let alone leads. I can really only think of Chef right now, though I’m probably simply over thinking. No, I just paused for a minute and I’m not, I really don’t watch any shows that have much of a minority cast. So be it. Perhaps I don’t watch any show like that because I simply can’t identify with such characters, or perhaps it’s because my target demographic isn’t one that that allows for having a lot of minorities in the cast. I don’t know.

I still think that Will & Grace was only on for as long as it was because of Jack. Critically, the show isn’t ‘gay’ enough, insofar as inclusion of the variety of different sexualities. It has two main homosexual characters, one of which who is very much in agreement with the standard expectations of society with the exception of being gay, and one who’s so flamboyant and effeminate that everything he does is comedic. Network wise, it’s probably still too gay. Still, if the gay-themed shows continue and even have the slighted bit of quality to them, I think that Ellen was right, and in twenty years, a gay character on TV won’t be a big deal. But that doesn’t mean that the representations will be that much better.

It seems like TV’s that entertaining is rarely TV that’s academically acceptable. It just seems to be a thing that needs to be weighed out and properly used. TV shows that are good for helping society grow and move past certain stigmas is most likely not going to be watched a lot and therefore not going to be able to be on TV much. But there’s also some very popular TV that’s pretty damaging on an unconscious social level. The Cosby show may not have been great about actually tackling issues of racism and representation, but the show ran for a long time and was able to familiarize the country with the representation of blacks that aren’t poor and urban. As far as the Whassup commercial goes, I honestly feel that, for as accurate as a lot of the analysis seems, that it was simply over analyzed. Yes, it put forth an all-black cast in an ‘other’ narrative, but in its frame it doesn’t seem any worse than the hundreds of other commercials that do pretty much the same thing.

Walt Liquor... a new delicious refreshment from Disney!

Disney is the ultimate marketing company. They used entire shows to advertise their new attractions. Separate from earlier network shows that had sponsors, the fact that Disney was able to produce entire programs just about their parks is ridiculous. What's worse is the fact of how people bought into it! I don't get how Walt was apparently that damn smart that he figured all this out. What was really going through his mind? "I'm gonna be fucking rich!!!!!!!" That could be it. I don't have any clue. What is interesting is how Disney has been able to market and sell whatever it damn well pleases. The fact that it can actually make people go crazy over "releasing a movie from the vault" is utterly amazing. I suppose, if Disney decided to start brewing some hops, or distilling some hard alcohol... people would buy it. They could make something "family oriented" about it. "It isn't really family night unless Dad is drunk, yelling, and throwing things, now is it?"

Ratings should be slaves; not masters

Minnow's speech about the future of television is something that is truly motivating. Had I been one of those privileged media producers in that room, I feel I would have been truly inspired to take action over most of the things that were addressed. His ideas, his honesty, and his cold rationale are something that seem unparalleled in today's media industry.

Minnow begins by affirmatively reassuring the audience that television is not a bad thing. It is a wonderful tool that has endless possibilities to expand the minds of millions of Americans, and when it is good, “nothing is better.” He then addresses that most television unfortunately doesn't fall under this category and speaks of how television itself has become a “vast wasteland.”

Minnow goes on to discuss many important issues in his speech: children's educational programming, rating systems, censorship, networks, licensing, and diverse and alternative programming. He makes fantastic points on every single issue and reassures all broadcasters that he is not there to stop the progress of television, but simply push it in the right direction.

However, I couldn't help but feel disturbed while reading this speech. Simply put, none of these amazing ideas ever surfaced. Today, networks are still slaves to the ratings, advertisers still control the programming, educational television is still at a minimum, and diverse programming is becoming less and less while stations look to capitalize off of others' previous successes. It's troubling to read about how different the future of television could have been if these producers would have looked up toward the horizon rather than down at the Nielsen. Like Minnow said, “Never have so few owed so much to so many.”

Can't stand it.

Little did I know that Disney had it's own show that was self-referential, and advertised itself within the show. Maybe it's just painful for me to watch old shows that I have no interest in. It's hard enough for shows nowadays to keep my interest. I don't know if I could stand TV in the 1950s-70s if I grew up then. Props to Disney though, he made a buck or two by advertising his amusement park on TV. So how does this relate to this week in TV? Advertising of course. A drama like "Las Vegas" is similar because we see the strip, the clubs, and the fancy casinos. It's not a show like "Disneyland" but you can obviously see the promotion. To be honest, i've never seen a show like Disneyland before. I found it weird to watch a TV show that is promoting an amusement park by the owner itself. Do you think Girls Gone Wild could be in this category? Promoting drunk girls on spring break? But Disneyland was in the public interest. Something around 40% of households and 26 million viewers tuned into Disneyland. The Reality TV genre fits that mold today, gaining the public interest from shows like American Idol. It's what the public wants, so keep feeding the wolves.

Total Merchandising

While this may not be the exact thing required to blog about, I feel that total merchandising is one of the most important and prevalent things to arise out of the Magic Kingdom. Much of Disney's work can be seen in the businesses we see today. While it may not come in the form of an actual product created by a company, it my come in the form of a likeness or character being used to promote various different products. For example, yesterday I was watching a documentary about the creation of Star Wars and the trouble Lucas went through to create this film. In the beginning, it seemed as though this dream would simply stay that way, and the film would never get off the ground. However, with the release of "A New Hope" the popularity of this film was booming and people couldn't keep their hands off it. I distinctly remember a quote by Carrie Fisher saying "I wasn't famous, Princess Leia was famous." These people were buying up the images created by George Lucas. Kids could go to their local movie theater, watch the film while eating Star Wars endorsed M&Ms, Pepsi, and Popcorn, go to their local Wal-Mart, purchase Force-O's and make a mask out of the picture of Luke printed on the side while the creators ride the money train all the way to the bank. 

Although this idea of endorsement isn't EXACTLY total merchandising, I believe it plays a much larger role in our society today than the ideas created by Walt Disney. However, this idea of endorsement will not last forever. The figure who is being featured on the product still needs to be considered both popular and wanted by the buyers or else their worth will plummet.

Telefission

If TV is a vast wasteland, then TV Land is a vast wasteland-land. TV has become self-sustaining. It reached it’s critical mass. Minimum input with maximum output. TV shows based on and about earlier TV shows. Disneyland (the amusement park) was the fundamental example of postmodernism in Media Lit, so it’s not so surprising to read that they’re essentially the ones that implemented this chain-reaction of television. True, it wasn’t quite the same form as today because they were making TV about movies and parks, but it opened the door. Davey Crocket? Really Disneyland? An epic that swept the nation? I think I said this in my response paper (no, I will not take the time to look), but I gotta repect the Dis if nothing else. That man got a lot done in his time, AND he could work the camera. Smiling and telling the viewers what great things are in store for them today. If only he had had something worthwhile to put that type of energy towards, he probably would have been president…of one of the broadcast companies.

I watch a lotta C-SPAN with a side of C-SPAN2/BookTV in there. I don’t give a fuck how lame people think it is, I find it fascinating. Specifically because of how few people stereotypically tune in. I think it’s a lot better than most of the TV out there in both informative and entertaining lights. It’s amazing to watch the human psyche in action. To see how certain people can manipulate and how some can be manipulated, or how a back and forth game of coercion can develop because neither parties are prepared to actually put the true topic out in the air. Watching people’s reactions and phone-in responses of both incredible naivety and intelligence can keep me entertained for a good while. It makes me wonder how that particular person developed to this point in their life to say or ask what they did. It’s the same things that make me wonder why there is such Grade D crap on the air and in the system. In my gut I’d agree with Minow about ‘the people’s taste’ not being as low as the broadcasters assume, but in my head I can’t help but notice how there is absolutely no demand for anything more than what we’re being served. It’s quite curious, how placid we’ve become.