News
Topic: Television and Media
The Weekly World News has made a lot of mileage on Bat Boy in the past. It's unbelievable; a ridiculous fake photo that's gotten way more use than it should have. But they keep adding stories onto it.

But that's what the WWN does... they print unbelievable stories that people will still read, even though they know it's bunk. It doesn't matter if it's bullshit... it's entertaining bullshit. All they have to do is get a story and a doctored up photograph, and they've got another paper out for the week.

I was reviewing the headlines earlier today, after leaving the local pharmacy ("Bungee Jumping In Space!"), and the cashier and another customer were laughing at the cover with me. The customer commented on what a great job that would be. "Anyone with a good computer could do that." he said. And the Commanding Officer of my brain contacted the engine room, and ordered "all stop."*

"Hey," I thought. "I have a good computer. And I could write the stories too. I could... I could be a web version of the W.W.N!"

Then I stopped thinking that before I hated myself.

See, I don't want to be associated with a rag. I don't want people to say "He writes that rag? What's his problem?" I always think "What kind of person writes this drek?" and I get this image of a fat, hairy guy sitting behind a desk with an Underwood in front of him and a greasy pizza box next to him. He's wearing a greasy tank-top and smoking a cigar, and thinking "Yeah... this is gonna make 'em freak!"

That's so not me. I don't smoke.

But it's the image I have of their writers. For all I know, they're third-grade girls, and one of them has an older brother that does the pictures. I could believe that. But it doesn't matter, because whatever they're really like, I get the image of Captain Flatulo and his amazing Underwood.

And they've captured the formula, too. Write something so unbelievable that nobody would ever take it seriously, add a cheesey photograph, play on the readerships' heartstrings when possible, and sell papers. And once they get a formula that works, they stick with it, no matter what. It's why they've kept Bat Boy so long.

But I have to give them credit. They're not using Bat Boy on the cover of this week's issue. Nope. Not at all. They've apparently decided to move on and do something new and unique. Unfortunately, the part that's unique isn't very new, and the part that's new isn't very unique.

You see, this week, the cover story is not about Bat Boy.

It's about Boy Bat.

I am not exaggerating, I am not making it up. Go to the news stand yourself. Just remember, no matter what it says on the banner, it's not really the news.

It's bird cage liner.

---

*The engineer on duty replied "All stop, aye," and made it so. He's very dedicated, and good at his job.

---

Watch
Topic: Television and Media
Well. Nick and Jessica are splitting up.

A cat-eating python has been caught in Florida.

UNICEF bombed a smurf village in Belgium.

These are the headlines I'm seeing. Now, while I'm also seeing stuff that's really interesting and really news, such as the hurricane recovery efforts and Supreme Court personnel changes,* I really am not interested in Nick and Jessica. They're not news. People split up all the time. Bloody Hells... this was a Hollywood marriage. It took place on MTV, for Gods' sakes! Did anyone not see this coming? It wasn't news when they got married, either! I got married, and it didn't happen on MTV. Maybe that's why I'm still married.

You know what I think. I think they never really got married. I think it was all staged, they've been living together, and it was all put together by MTV to make a show. Now, their contracts are finished, and they can start being single again and get on with their lives. They got their money, there won't be breach of contract because they pretended long enough, and now they're going their separate ways.

See, that's the kind of cynicism that Hollywood instills within me. Television isn't real. Movies aren't real. Hollywood isn't real. They may as well be a cartoon, or puppets.

The Hollywood psychology of a need to sell a story is also present in the news media. They need to sell air time or page space to advertisers. They won't sell it if the story sucks and everyone is watching some other channel, or reading some other paper. So, along with a little bit of real news, they give us stupidity.

That's the really bad thing, though. They wouldn't get people to buy this drek if people weren't interested in the first place. People want to see this! They actually, for some reason, care more about the relationships of people they've never met than they care about the relationships of their own family members. Or about their own relationships. They care about someone else's cats being eaten by pythons on the other side of the country. They care about smurf villages being bombed by UNICEF. It actually matters to spectators whether or not one team of players defeats another team of players, even if neither team is from the spectator's home town.

Why? I don't understand it. I never have. Yes, I think the plight of the people in Louisiana is sad, and knowing it could happen here makes it important to me as well. That's why I consider it news... it's relevant. Smurfs, pythons, and yes, even Jessica, are not.

I really don't know whether the news media began delivering drek because people started wanting it, or if people started wanting it because it was what was being delivered. But enough people live Jessica's life vicariously through the media that she has become news.

Television isn't real... not even so-called reality T.V. All the people on those shows have signed contracts to do the things in the show, even if it is to accept the show as part of their every day lives. That's the point... I have financial agreements, but they are limited to things like rent and utilities. I live with people because I choose to do so, not because I'm getting paid for it,** and I don't have a video camera up my ass the whole day either.

I do my part. I don't watch these shows. I watch documentaries and a few cartoons, for the most part, with a bit of Comedy Central's The Daily Show. I know television is there for entertainment. And not the kind of entertainment I saw several years ago, where the news broke in to the regular programming to replay footage of a man getting gunned down by the police. Yes, they actually showed a man getting killed by multiple gunshot wounds on prime time television, on all the networks, thanks to the local news recognizing the peoples' need to know and see people killed. It is the most recent foray into public execution that I can remember. It wasn't planned, but it didn't need to be broadcast every five minutes, either. (No, that's not an exaggeration, and I got pretty sick of it, shut off the television, and opened a book). Television is there to attract viewers so that the station can make profits by selling air time to advertisers. The viewer only matters as a parameter to be met when deciding what to broadcast, and apparently, we want to see drek.

Television and other forms of "news" used to be there to educate and inform as well. To a degree, it still does that. But only to a very minor degree. You have to look carefully for it, but it's there. Program directors are there to disguise their drek as fulfilling entertainment. It's our job to not be fooled.

---

*Okay. The smurf bombing is kinda cool.
**I'm not.

---

Stop
Topic: Television and Media
This morning, London lost 40 people's lives, and 700 people were injured, by 4 explosions in their transit system. Authorities have stated which terrorist group they consider most likely to have done it. The media lets us know the name of the group quite often in their news reports, and CNN exclusively covered the event all morning, and possibly still are. I don't know. I just woke up.

I know so much about this, though, because it's all over the media. They have ensured that everyone knows all about it, and which people are to blame, and what Tony Blair's doing about it, what the United States is doing about it, and what all-the-little-people should do about it. In other words, they have made things easier for those responsible for the explosions.

Terrorism only works if it can cause the most reaction. And thanks to the media, the maximum reaction to a terrorist action gets realized. All the terrorists had to do was post a web page (a web page, for Gods' sakes!) claiming responsibility, and the media did the rest.

Do you know what a troll is? It's a slang term, defined as "One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument" by the Urban Dictionary. Know how to get rid of a troll? Don't feed him. Don't even acknowledge him.

Know how to make sure he'll never go away? Pay attention to him, and flame him, and make sure everyone knows he's a bastard, and so on.

I don't suggest that we ignore the events and tragedies that unfold as a result of terrorist activities. But giving them as much attention as the media does only serves the terrorists' purpose. A middle ground of simply reporting the events, the reactions of those affected, and statements of politicians should be exercised. The key thing is to never mention the name of the organization believed responsible. The politicans shouldn't do it. The witnesses and rescue workers shouldn't do it. And the media definitely shouldn't do it.

The people have a right to know when their safety is at risk. But knowing who perpetrated the terrorism will not change their level of safety. Responsible media informs people that there is a risk involved in a certain action, that a disaster has occurred, or what to do to help recover from that disaster. Irresponsible media posts pictures of the attack, the victims, and those responsible, along with a list of their demands and what motivated the attack. Minimize the attention to the terrorists themselves, and you minimize the effectiveness of the terrorism. It won't erase the tragedy, but it will take away the reason for doing it. This might not stop terrorism, but it will make it less effective.

Don't feed the trolls. They're like cats; feed them once, they keep coming back.

I Know Where My Towel Is
Topic: Television and Media
In a burst of inspiration caused by the cinematic entertainment I enjoyed yesterday, I have become a field researcher for The Guide. I am now researcher 1531122. My first entry is entitled "How to Hide A Body and Avoid Embarassment Until the Authorities Arrive, and What to Do When They Get There."

H2G2 is a project hosted by BBCi which mirrors the fictional Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

In the fictional Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, field researchers would wander the galaxy with their guides, write an entry about something they felt a hitchhiker needed to know, and submit it. It would be edited a bit, and then added to The Guide as a revision. But because it was a book in constant communication via "sub-etha wave" with the publisher's computers and therefore updated instantly when the entry in the computers was, you never needed to buy a new guide.

In H2G2, anyone with a computer and the ability to register as a field researcher can become one. As a result, you often get entries like this one, or maybe this, or in extreme cases, such as this. But it is equally possible to find an informative entry.
There is an edited portion, the appropriately named "Edited Guide," that they refer to as "the heart of h2g2." It is where you'll find useful information. It's likely to be more useful than Ask Jeeves, which is just a search engine anyway and less effective than Google. With h2g2, you actually have information from someone, even if it's not written by a real expert, or not completely factual. It may be apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate. But it'll be fun.

Besides. If you really want to research something, go to the library.

A Comparative Analysis
Topic: Television and Media
Today's subjects: MacGyver Vs. The A-Team.

Why? Well, to quote one "Bluto" Blutarski, "Why not?" You don't like it, then you can go to the hampsterdance page. The rest of you, take notes. This is all testable.

Comparison:

Both were just a T.V. show. Stop drooling.

Contrast:

Lots.

1: Weapons
The A-Team: Everything. Power tools, vehicles, bricks, boards, broken branches, and B.A. Oh, and guns. Guns. Lots, lots, lots of guns! More guns than you could find in an armory. Praise The Lord, and pass the ammunition. Calling all cars, shots fired. More shots fired than anywhere else in the history of the universe (actual statistic, but probably not true). Oddly, nobody ever died.
Mac: A swiss army knife. Mac hated guns. Oddly, people died.

2: Vehicles
The A-Team: B.A.'s van, apparently inspired by Starsky and Hutch's Ford Torino. But they also had helicopters, tanks, jeeps, trucks, big trucks, bigger trucks, and whatever else Face could score.
Mac: Company car. Okay, he did occasionally drive a personal vehicle, but it changed now and then. Usually it was a jeep. Not a military G.P. vehicle, but your mass-consumer type, 'cos the military is bad, mmmkay?

3: Plans
The A-Team: Hannibal loved it when a plan came together. They didn't do anything haphazardly. Even Murdock planned, in some far-off dimension whose colors we cannot begin to imagine but exist only in processed cheese spread. They always had a plan. Sometimes, they had several. Success ratio: 100%
Mac: He'd heard of plans, but they cramped his style. Success ratio: 100% Coincidentally, he seemed to get captured about as often as The A-Team too, and they both always escaped. When, oh, when will the bad guys learn to execute their prisoners on the spot?

4: Women
The A-Team: First, they had Amy, and considered her a team member. Then, they had Tawnia, who left the show shortly after joining it because her name was too smegging pretentious. There weren't a lot of love interests, though.
Mac: Who had time for women? Actually, there were always women on the show, both professionally and as a "love interest" hinted at from the wings, but he always mishandled it and it was the most boring part of the show, and so I never paid attention. I'm not gay, I just don't like watching guys fail to impress ladies, even when they can use an old inner tube and the car's exhaust as an auto jack.

5: The Boss
The A-Team: "If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the A-Team." It's amazing how often civilians with no skills whatsoever found The A-Team, but the entire manpower of the U.S. Army's military justice department couldn't. They didn't get paid often, either.
Mac:Steady job, working for Pete Thornton at The Phoenix Foundation. I don't think they ever quite explained what it is that The Phoenix Foundation did. I don't even think it was in Phoenix. But at least Mac got paid regularly.

Conclusion: The A-Team was a lot cooler, but really weren't all that cool. MacGyver was a lot more resourceful and clever, but really wasn't all that cool. The A-Team had some resourcefulness, in that no matter where they were, they somehow found not only power tools, but the electricity needed to operate them, and raw materials on which to use them. ("There we were, trapped in a lifeboat at sea, nothing for miles. Luckily, we had power tools. We built a 130 ft. yacht out of the water around us, and sailed home. Face got some great pics of Murdock water-skiing on the way back.")

The bottom line is that these were both kid's shows, like Knight Rider (which can occasionally be seen masquerading as science fiction to this very day). They were bad T.V. Yet they were almost embarrassingly (to our race and society) popular. Please don't watch these shows, but if you do, at least choose Macgyver over The A-Team. At least Mac will teach you how to do something that looks very cool, and might even work in this reality. But if you really want to watch a kid's show, make it Bill Nye, The Science Guy. He's smart, funny, you'll learn something, not a single shot gets fired, and nobody dies. Not even your brain cells.

Occupational Envy
Topic: Television and Media
If you've never heard of Mythbusters, you're either living in a cave, or you don't have cable (it could be both). I suppose it's equally likely that you don't live in a cave, and you do have cable, but you just don't watch The Discovery Channel.*

If you're not familiar with it, The Mythbusters are one Jamie Hyneman and one Adam Savage. These individuals are special effects masters, capable of building anything out of anything else. They are the gadgeteer's gadgeteers, and the model crasher's model crashers. They take an urban myth, examine the basic premise behind it, and then try, under controlled conditions, to replicate it, in an attempt to prove or disprove it, often under personal pain. Adam's description of the show is a lot simpler; he says "It's Jackass meets Mr. Science."

And that's a pretty apropriate description. So far on the show, among other things, they have tested a duck to see if its quack echos, manufactured a cannon out of a tree trunk, mixed Pop Rocks with cola in order to see if they could explode a pig's stomach (it was no longer in the pig, and the pig didn't need it any more), welded rocket engines to a '66 Impala and remotely controlled it from a helicopter, milked a 'daddy long-legs' spider, constructed a pneumatic chicken gun (the gun was pneumatic, not the chickens. The chickens were ammo), buried Jamie alive, and tested toothbrushes for fecal bacteria (to quote Adam, "There's poo everywhere!").

It sounds strange, but they somehow manage to apply the scientific method to all their experiments. They use a 'control' whenever they can, and establish a baseline. They tested the possibility of poppy seeds causing you to test positive for drug use, and the first test they did was with a 'clean' sample (presumably drug-free, since they tested negative). After eating a very large amount of poppy seed confections and pastries, they tried again. As early as 3 hours later, they were testing positive, and it lasted well over 24 hours. Let this be a lesson to you: don't eat poppy seeds before a big 'test.'

Jamie is the founder of M5 Industries, as his link will show you. Adam's site will demonstrate to you his talents as well, ranging from sculpture and writing to his work in feature films. The two are to special effects today what Ray Harryhausen was to monster movies, and what Lon Chaney Jr. was to makeup.

Urban myths and legends hold a special place in our society, partly because we want them to be true, and partly because a good story is hard to keep to yourself. The job of these brilliant maniacs is to see if the myth is possible... they don't necessarily show if it really happened. But if it is found to be impossible, they know it didn't happen. If it is found to be possible, that just means that it might have happened. Remember, they approach it scientifically, and just because something is possible doesn't mean it is historical.

However, it is, often, hysterical. Just observing the events is amusing in itself, but their commentary only makes it funnier. Examples... "Jamie want big boom." "That was *beep*ing significant!" "That's the coolest toy ever!" And of course, Jamie's admission that he always enjoys seeing Adam in pain.

I decided that this was one of my all-time favorite shows with the very first episode I watched. It has science, humor, and it's just damned fun! I wanted their jobs the moment I saw what they did, although I know I could never do it as well.

Recently, they've added Christine Chamberlain to the show as an intern. My envy is palpable.

Check them out, watch the show, and enjoy yourself. Then, check out the (unofficial, but there's high hopes) Mythbusters Fan Club web site. Tell BlackWidowNor that I sent you. It won't get either of us anything, but it'll start some conversation, and she's worth talking to.

*You knob.

The "It's Not Real" World
Topic: Television and Media
I want MTV to start a new 'reality' show. They seem to be the people that like the edgier kind of programs, so this is right up their edgey alley.

I call it "The 'It's Not Real' World." It's kind of like The Truman Show. Take 4 people, and tell them they're going to be in the next The Real World series. Put them on an island with all the amenities... the supposed object of this show being that they don't have any other people to interact with but each other, and they'll only be able to contact home once per week. They'll have food, shelter, and everything will be run on a series of generators; the island is completely self-sufficient. They'll even have satellite TV.

Then, leave them there. Tell them they're going to be alone a bit while the rest of the group is picked up. While they're by themselves, run a 'broadcast' on their televisions (it's actually closed-circuit) that makes them think there's been a nuclear war, and everyone lost but them. They're the last people on the planet. I know it wouldn't be easy, but so what? If we can put a man on the moon, we can make 4 people stupid enough to be on a 'reality TV' series believe they're the last idiots on the planet.

Here's the kicker. It's 2 men and 2 women. But one of the men and one of the women are gay.

"Next week, on our new series, watch what happens when 4 people stop being polite, and explore their own sexuality in an attempt to save mankind by repopulating the Earth." If they're going to repopulate, they all need to participate, right? But why should the gays have to do something unpleasant for them, and not the straights? If everyone's going to be fair, the straights are going to have to quid-pro-quo...

Having dropped that on you, I'll just let you imagine the ensuing fun.

Just don't miss the final episode, when they get told it was all just a gag.