Thought Quotient

Shock Jock Howard Stern Vents on Air

You know, I’m really glad that the FCC and Licensing Institutions are finally beginning to pay attention to what is being broadcast. Coming from a family who was involved with broadcasting, I have been continually amazed at how little effort has been put forth (until now) in monitoring television and radio broadcast. It’s about time.

“Shock Jock” Stern’s show should have been pulled from the airwaves long ago if the FCC had really been doing it’s job. However, as is the case with most media issues, the popularity of the show trumped the broadcasting standards. Maybe recent media faux pas are finally forcing the issue and Stern will be faced with either cleaning up his act (literally) or losing his audience. Honestly, I doubt it. But there’s hope.

Here’s what I found interesting in this article (a quote from APNews):

“It was Tuesday’s Stern show that prompted the Clear Channel decision. The program featured typical fare: Paris Hilton’s ex-boyfriend hawking his sex tape of the hotel heiress. Two women getting naked after losing a contest.”

“But it was apparently a call from a listener who used the “n-word” that spurred Hogan’s reaction.”

Now, this article is horribly ambiguous - it’s impossible to judge what the “n-word” is. It hardly seems likely that they would fine the broadcast for the use of the word “nipple” as it is a technical term - though in this case the context may have rendered it indecent. I’m left with the assumption that it must have been a racial slur.

If such is the case, notice that it wasn’t the lewd sexual content (so prevalent in Stern’s program) nor the tasteless nature of the program that was deemed inappropriate… it was a racial comment. Now, I’m certainly against racism of any sort - but this signals that there are still some major issues with what is considered “acceptable” and “unacceptable” by Clear Channel and companies like them. Political correctness may apparently be more of an issue than broadcasting adult illicit sexual content to potential audiences including children. I think there may be problem here.

Passion, Persecution, and Power

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=entertainmentNews&storyID=4440744&section=news

Well, here we go. The whirlwind has begun. The Passion of the Christ opened yesterday and as expected, the mainstream media is amplifying the voice of a relative few groups of people who have complained (since long before the movie was released, no less) of anti-semitism as though it were a crowd of epic proportions. Critics are “concerned about reaction to the film” both inside and outside the United States.

How uncharacteristic of them. No one seemed concerned about the reaction to violent movies like Freddy vs. Jason whose depiction of violence is absolutely purposeless or sex-saturated films like The Real Cancun whose entire purpose is to capitalize on the pathetic sex starved antics of voyeuristic young people. No one seems upset about the horribly graphic depiction of life as a prostitute presented in Monster including a brutal rape scene. Rather, people are lauding praises for that movie! No one in Hollywood seems to take offense at the countless stereotypes of Christian ministers and clergy depicted as drunkards, rapists, child molesters and power junkies. But for some reason, this movie that shows the historically accurate story of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice for mankind is a reason for outrage!? Suddenly, Hollywood sounds conservative!

I think not. It is painfully obvious that there is more going on here. Hollywood likes that they can put down Christianity as a sect of bumbling idiots in the minority who have no clue about reality and are all about control. Regardless of the facts to the contrary. They like the fact that they can squelch the moral consequences of a depiction of the Gospel of Christ by downplaying and berating both the God-man and his followers. This movie has the potential to actually affect people, to gain wide audience, to perhaps change some of the views of our culture and there is a large segment of elite individuals who don’t like that. They are very happy with the fact that they can control the morals and opinions of the population. Mel and his friends are walking on their territory!

This manipulative agenda is quite obvious in the New York Times’ turn from cries of Anti-Semitism to the statement that “to condemn “The Passion of the Christ” for its supposed bigotry is to miss its point and to misstate its problems.” Apparently the problem lies in Gibson’s “most serious artistic failure” was that “he never provides a clear sense of what all of this bloodshed was for.” Seems quite a change from previous comments .

New York Times Review

Of course, many are going to seize on the woman who died of an apparent heart attack during the film. Even though the verdict isn’t in yet on why she died, whether she had any pre-existing conditions, etc. And, naturally, for those who want the film’s message squelched - this will provide a perfect opportunity to complain. However, having watched the movie at a special showing on the 24th, I can tell you that the crucifixion scene (during which the woman apparently expired) is in no way the most emotional or painful part of the movie. It was actually a relief to get to the crucifixion.

Woman dies watching ‘Passion’

I guess I’ll end this way. If there’s such a concern suddenly for bigotry, violence and inappropriate material… why does it seem to manifest itself only in this movie? It’s a question that needs to be answered. Artistic license is apparently not valid for people who actually want to convey a message.

The new political issue…

“Strategists claim that electablity narrowly beats out the economy when it comes to Ohio primary voters’ top concerns.”

Electability is now an issue, just like the economy, abortion, etc…

I can’t see myself getting a call from a pollster asking my views on ‘electability’….”are you in favor of electability and does this candidate represent your views on electability?”

What? This is silly. We have gotten to the point in politics where the impression that someone gives is more important than what kind of person they really are and what they believe. Are we saying we want to elect a president where the primary issue is not really an issue at all but just a feeling?

Mars Water Myths

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/02/19/shc.mars.search/index.html

Ok, I’ll admit it up front. I’m biased about this whole Mars exploration thing. Every time I read a news blurb on the current U.S. mars exploration, it becomes more and more obvious why Spirit and Opportunity exist. Scientists are determined to find evidence of life on mars.

“What’s wrong with that?” you might ask.

If you’re determined to find something. You’re almost certain to find it whether it’s really there or not. If this is truly a scientific expedition, why is every little observation tied to the existence of water on the planet? They find some shiny spheres… evidence of water. Some soil sticks to the tires… evidence of water. They find a groove in the ground… evidence of water. Smooth rocks… you guessed it, evidence of water.

Reality check. There are many explanations for the observations they’ve made. Why is it that they keep pushing the water explanation? Oh yeah, because they have an agenda. It’s two-fold (at least). First, they are committed to a atheistic materialistic philosophy. And the only way they can keep that afloat is if they can come up with some answers to the many questions and failings of evolutionary theory. And they figure they can stall it’s demise by planting seeds in our minds that maybe evolution has already occurred on mars. Doesn’t matter if they can prove it or not. We can’t observe the Mars evidence for ourselves, our view is shaped entirely by NASA’s opinions, reports, claims and the pretty pictures they keep throwing at us. How is anyone going to argue? They can always respond by pointing out that we aren’t in command of all the evidence. If you can filter the evidence, you can have your way.

Second, If they can hold onto our imaginations, they can hold onto the cash flow. This is the biggest cash cow NASA’s got - especially considering the trouble they’ve had with the shuttles. They have to hype it. The Sci-Fi channel can’t hold a candle to this! NASA is creating their own space drama in real-time!

Now, I love science fiction… always have. Over fifty percent of my personal movie collection is science fiction. But we need to be realistic here. Even if they find solid evidence of water - and they have a long way to go for that - that does not come anywhere close to proving that there is/has been life on mars.

And while I’m at it… has anyone else noticed the startling influx of science fiction movies about Mars over the past few years? I don’t want to be a conspiracist or anything… but - given that observation - doesn’t it seem a little ironic that NASA has chosen its current direction and is hyping it so strongly? Just thinking out loud.

Arnold Terminates Marriage Licenses

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/20/samesex.marriage/index.html

I’m glad to see that someone who has come out of Hollywood has a head on his shoulders:

Schwarzenegger’s statement said California citizens generated, and passed, Proposition 22 — the marriage law — and it will be defended.

It’s about time. One maverick mayor and a group of people with a political and social agenda do not a government make. I really have to ask… what kind of case do they have legally. Yes, they have the full force of the media and the left-wing community behind them. But what legal case do they have to thwart state law?

If this is not put down, it should sound the warning to all of us. This ever-increasing “laws be damned, I’ll do what I please” mentality has to be removed from our political and judicial system. Otherwise, it’s going to cave in on itself.

President Bush is a ‘divider?’

Here’s an AP story that has an interesting quote from Howard Dean…

“The principal difference between myself and George Bush is I believe we cannot continue as a divided society,” Dean told the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, criticizing the administration for what he called a too-harsh stance against Americans of Arab descent in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Contrast this by doing a quick read of the recent statements President Bush has made regarding Islam as they are posted here.