A one-time school project gone terribly, terribly wrong.

11 February 2004

Chuck Lorre productions has been driving me nuts with the little cards, crammed with text, which appear after every episode of their shows.

That's it for today. Nothing to see. Don't bother scrolling down to the bottom.

Do I have to admit I like a show that's only on WTN here?

Okay, okay, I occasionally like a shot of Dharma and Greg. I suppose it's 'cos I find the show somehow sweetly American--reminds me that we're all just people (even those of us who blog--Heresy!). It's also 'cos I've known substantial numbers of people every bit as flaky as her, and every bit as retentive as him.

However, as time goes on, has anyone else noted that while both of the main characters have lost their extreme flaky-or-uptight-ness, Greg seems to have morphed into a fairly average guy? Dharma, on the other hand, is still clearly an irresponsible, naive dope. This clearly displays the show's male-dominated republican agenda, which is why it only airs on WTN--likely the second least-watched station in the country after APTN.

WTN is so desperate for viewers that once you're on their Web site, you can't leave: The back button won't take you anywhere.

Speaking of television, how does this happen? A nationally recognized organization agrees to stump up $2 million to buy thirty seconds of precious Superbowl time, but is turned down because the ad is "controversial".

The media company involved, CBS, claims they don't go in for "advocacy". They will run ads from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (a bastard organization founded in 1988, and perpetuated by the current band of robber barons).

But this presumably isn't advocacy, since advocacy is generally about giving the voiceless a voice.

So lemme get this straight: On the Superbowl, not to mention every-daily tube watching, we see ads for SUV's and beer (and lousy beer at that), often together, and we'll get ONDCP ads telling us and our kids what to think of drugs.

None of these things is in the slightest way either controversial, or "advocacy".

Right. Got it (edging away with fear in eyes, grabbing for cell phone to contact men in white coats). Makes perfect sense to me.

Some notes on stupid Web sites: Coors, as with many other beer sites, requires that you be over twenty-one before entering. Verification is done by assuming that no-one under 21 can do math well enough to figure out a good birth year to enter in the appropriate space. If pornography Web sites were this well-run, it would save a lot of time on behalf of all the thirteen-year-olds filling out "age verification" forms.

The Hummer site is annoying too. The splash animation deploys (No doubt that's what the GM Web designer called it--it's such a military term!) as a pop-up.

I must admit my prejudices in this matter:

Hummers belong on battlegrounds--an environment category under which most roads (with the exception of the L.A. Freeway) don't qualify. Whoa, though.

Coors light is simply panther p!$$. Historically, prohibition allowed beers under 3% alcohol. Therefore the great brewing traditions of the Irish, Dutch, Germans and others who came to the US to brew beer became somewhat watered down--like the product itself.

Americans serve beer ice cold because traditionally that's been the only way to avoid tasting it. And a lot of Canadian lager isn't much better.

No--I'm not a beer snob. But this story seems to confirm that what you're used to is what you prefer to drink, and I grew up in a beer-and-wine-making home, thank you God. More about beer and beer commercials at some other time.

If you're scrolling to the bottom of this post in response to my earlier remark, this is where to stop:

Geez--you fell for that? I didn't believe you were that gullible! You deserve a reward. How about some haiku?

Speaking of gullible. Or how about this (dated) gem from Terry Jones?


Post a Comment

<< Home