themediamademecrazy.com

obama supporter, texas state senator kirk watson was unable to state ANY of obama’s accomplishments in the senate on ‘hardball with chris matthews.” it’s a remarkable piece of footage, right down to the studio laughter in the end. somewhat painful to watch, but necessary…

however, i would also like to post the question: when did “white voters” become a significant demographic? weren’t they always just referred to as “voters”? i love progress.

tonight’s premiere episode, “a clean escape,” starred sam waterson and judy davis as patient and psychiatrist, where the former cannot remember the past 24 years. it was interesting at best. disregarding the gaping plot holes (like where does he go when he leaves her office, or why has it taken 10 months to utilize what seems like the most probable solution?), the style of the program was poor. for me it began with davis’ character. a actress of 57 should be allowed to look 57; every close-up, especially her emotionally distraught ones, only offer further evidence that she is far to old for the role asked of her. it really prevents one from suspending disbelief.

furthermore, i think that the director put too much faith into the plot of the story and oversimplified the shooting, causing the entire project to collapse under poor visuals. in fact, i was much more interested in the story after listening to the dialogue on NPR (yeah, i listened to NPR yesterday… that’s another blog) than after watching the exact same scene.

however, i did commit to watching the whole episode and it generally improved from 2 1/2 to 3 stars (on a 5 star scale). but i have hope, and i will continue to watch the remaining 3 episodes, saturday nights in august at 10pm on abc.

Four thought-provoking tales of present and future Earth are brought to life in “Masters of Science Fiction,” an all-new anthology series featuring a stellar lineup of actors and directors, and narrated by acclaimed physicist Professor Stephen Hawking. The series premieres SATURDAY, AUGUST 4 (10:00-11:00 p.m., ET) on the ABC Television Network.

’saved by the bell’ (1989-1993) was one of the best integrations of race, class and gender that i’ve seen on television and decades ahead of its time. granted, children’s programs tend to integrate race effortlessly, because children will be children. however, after living in LA, i realize that it is not as simple as SBTB would lead one to believe. allow me to elaborate…

the main cast is multi ethnic: of the 6 main characters, half are white (zach, kelly, screech) while the other half are ‘of color’ (slater, jesse, lisa). although this may seem evident to the viewer, the narratives never highlighted their races or made that part of the discussion (despite living in southern california in the late 80s). the text tended to focus more on class and the trials and tribulations that come from teens dealing with these all-too-real differences: lisa is a shop-aholic, which clashes with her best friend kelly’s large family and spendthrift demands. for the other characters, class is less of an issue, although zach never sees his father because he is working and it takes a car accident to bring them together.

the characters are intended to be a slice of the american high school system (a classic tool of TV and film): the cool guy, the geek, the jock, the american sweetheart, the spoiled daddy’s girl, and the nerd/smart chick. this last category is also what draws me to the program. the smart chick, jesse spano, is both of questionable ethnicity (which is also never mentioned in the program) and remarkably attractive. she even lands the jock! it gives hope to all of us sexy smart chicks who question our own attractiveness. as for the gender reading, jesse was clearly a feminist, a label that many place on women who are too smart, too strong, or too driven. however, jesse was all of these things AND feminine. she was a feminine feminist, an elusive moniker that i try to advocate.

in short, i think that i am better off for watching ’saved by the bell’ at a key point in my development, as compared to other programs that were popular at the time, like baywatch, or melrose place.

prince’s half time show was the most amazing thing i’ve seen on television in a long time. it was beautiful, shocking, revolutionary, soft and wet. i’ve been raving about it for 24 hours and i’ve gotten some repeated comments:

1. “you know they fill the field with prince fans so that they can get footage of girls crying…”

duh. that does not negate a phenomenal performance. he had over 50,000 people in the stands singing along, not to mention the audiences at home, and around the world. i’m aware of the techniques, (raises into snobbish tone) i have a degree in television theory.

2. “half the crowd went to the bathroom anyway.”

well then they are damn fools. to walk away from a show like that. prince is a living legend, that’s like saying, “no thanks, i’m not interested in seeing ravi shankar, sir paul mccartney, and bebe king perform for free. i’ve got to use the restroom.”

more importantly, i am always affected when i know that the majority of the homes in the united states are watching and listening to the same thing that i am right now. only the lucky ones can feel the way i do too.

for part 2, click here

this has been a constant topic in my work and life. feel free to read the first rendition written with abran alaniz here and stay tuned for the sample chapter!

i’ve been struck by some amazing epiphanies lately. the most recent came while reading TIME (october 23, 2006) which featured an analysis of america at 300 million. the graphs were amazing. here are my two favorites:

topographical population

race/ethnic demographics

the former made me want to move to a spot somewhere in the middle of the country where no one lives. it seems so simple and ripe for my own happy little community of one (maybe two [smile]). the image also gives a pictoral representation of the empty expanse of the land. i’ve never made it off the coasts (aside from a week in denver, phoenix, and vegas) and it makes me want to take a journey across the country…

but it was the latter that really changed the way i look at media. for some reason i was upset with the culture-via-TV that perpetuated the demographics that “i” did not exist. that is to say, i rarely see someone that looks like me on television, specifically multi-ethnic individuals. but looking at the demographic map, i realize that we are less than 2% of the population. of course you never see asians on television, they comprise 4.4% of the population. in fact, their presence on television is equivalent to the national average!

that’s when i realized that my problem was not with television or its statements on race and the ethnographic breakdown of the nation. but rather the collapse of local television. national networks must create programming for a nationwide audience. 80% of which is white. this simply never occurred to me as i have only lived in densely populated, diverse, urban areas (i.e. new york N>18m; boston N>5m, los angeles N>12m). the interactions i have are drastically different from the larger national body. worse yet, when an nationwide network attempts to recreate “my” lifestyle for a nationwide audience, it comes out strangely warped (e.g. friends).

i would like to see more local programming, not just news and commercials, but rather programs of all genres. unfortunately i do not have access to public access channels due to my building’s agreement with sbc. i think i need a set of rabbit ears.

I’m currently watching “Tommy Lee Goes to College” a new half hour reality sitcom on NBC featuring Tommy Lee as a freshman at University of Nebraska. This show is another program in what I deem to be a recent trend of academic television.

Originating with the celebrity success of Ken Jennings on “Jeopardy” and continuing on with ABC’s “The Scholar,” and the WB’s “Beauty and the Geek,” network television has recently embraced smart celebrities. Even Tommy Lee’s wife, Pamela Anderson, starred in her own academic sitcom, “Stacked.”

NOTE: Perhaps it originated with the intellectual component of Survivor…

I’m not certain whether this is a fad or indicative of a general trend towards an acceptance of the academic as cool. Of course I do my best to incorporate an attractive, pop appeal to the academic stereotype and I think that most of these shows are trying to do the same. On the other hand, education is something that everyone is capable and should be pursued by a larger percentage of the population. By having successful pop stars pursue an education and by making academics celebrities, the media seems to be pushing an agenda to encourage academic pursuits. I guess we’ll see if he gets past his freshman year…

On the plus side, Tommy Lee has an incredibly sexy chemistry tutor. I wish I had one when I failed 5.11 the first time.

“What sculpture is to a block of marble, education is to the soul.” –Joseph Addison

The WB network is introducing a new reality show tonight from executive producer ashton kutcher called beauty and the geek where they pair up a series of incredibly geeky men with beautiful dumb supermodels and watch the hilarity ensue…

where do i begin?

first of all i am remarkably offended by the program. it only reinforces the binary that geeks can not be beautiful. it perpetuates the beautiful dumb blonde stereotype, blonde brunette or otherwise, of women. women are never given the chance to be beautiful AND intelligent. i just feel frustrated by the fact that sexy smart women don’t exist in our mediated televisual reality.

and they seem to have gotten some of the geekiest men to be a part of this project, not to mention that everyone involved is white. i guess that ethnic individuals are cursed with an atavistic sexuality that cannot be considered geeky.

the most frustrating thing to me is the fact that i really enjoy ashton kutcher’s work. i own dude where’s my car, i have watched that seventies show since the beginning and have shared my critical thoughts on the direction of the program and its use of race and the absent father. granted i didn’t shell out money for ‘just married’ or ‘a lot like love’ but i did see the butterfly effect in theaters, which i thought was a great movie for his star persona. either way, i have a great amount of respect for kutcher, and his executive producer credit on this program hurts in my soul.

i figure as a stereotypical pretty boy who has performed in projects that both ironically embrace and deny it, i would expect him to recognize the disgusting stereotypes and clichés that are continued with this program.

but then again, ratings are money and maybe its just television. plus extreme individuals create extreme situations, which breeds humor, not intelligent messages and behavior. but i can assure you that any intelligent individual, more importantly any intelligent woman, will be offended and disgusted with the program.

shame on you ashton. you know better.

although i think it would make me smile to see the exact same program with the gender roles switch, sexy Abercrombie and Fitch men paired up with female phd’s and ceo’s.

i’ve developed an affection for upn’s girlfriends.

i think its better than sex in the city…

there i said it.

it all came to me last night when i was watching the materialist girlfriend analyze her whirlwind marriage to a man she has recently discovered is $750,000 in debt. in order to maintain her life status, she decides to leave him. in her soliloquy she says…

“being poor in LA is wearing round-toed shoes in a pointy-toed season.”