Thursday, July 12, 2012

Frog Redux

Example




This is the sort of stuff that I'm opposed too and the reason why I distrust 'journalists' in general.

How many progressives? What makes the person a progressive? If over 50 percent of the population (of the US) why do they believe this?

No, durr, it's Twitter, I can't post all that every time. No, you know what I mean, COME ON!

Show your work.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

There's a frog in my throat

This was my lone unfinished post. I don't remember why I didn't finish it, but I'll attempt to fill in the unwritten/unknown to 2008 me parts. Original at the end of the post.
 
One tip for any blogger.

Never use "we."

Sport blogs, political blogs, any type of blog. Because I used to be somewhat political, I'll use the political blog as an example.

A blog I read (I don't remember which, but there are many still guilty of this) used the term "we" to describe his/her preferential candidate. I know it might be difficult to remain sterile and unattached, because if you are the people you are writing for will likewise become unattached, but that's why you need to "wow" them with something. I feel, then and now, that blogs just fill their space with statistics and hamfisted half truths without remembering why (or never knowing in the first place) they are writing the blog.


"We" can mean many things, like he/she has donated to the campaign, volunteered, just want it to feel like everyone's in the "group" and the list goes on. But there is no we. It's only the person running for that office. It isn't the ideas or ideals that are put out for the public to vote on. You can't know what 'we' want. You can't say because I'm not one of 'we' I wouldn't understand. Try me. Not with bombastic language, but with critical thinking. Don't pander to unknown 'we'. Show your work.

Another point is the use of terms that leave the reader with a certain feeling without having the proper context behind it. Fascist. Democracy. Muslim. American. Us v Them. The list goes on. I think I know what the writer is trying to convey, but am not entirely sure. Does the writer believe we're actually becoming less of a democracy? Does the writer even know how this country works? Does the writer actually think that exaggerating his/her claim will sway people?

I don't know. That's probably why I want[ed] 'The Newsroom' to succeed.

Democracy is dead.

LONG LIVE THE DEMOCRACY. 

[Original]

One tip for any blogger.

Never use "we."

Sport blogs, political blogs, any type of blog. Because I'm somewhat political, I'll use the political blog as an example.

A blog I read used the term "we" to describe his/her preferential candidate. It is a point if you remain sterile and unattached the people you are writing for will likewise become unattached, but that's why you need to "wow" them what something.

"We" can mean many things, like he/she has donated to the campaign, volunteered, just want it to feel like everyone's in the "group" and the list goes on. But there is no we. It's only the person running for that office. He/she could do anything they feel like

Monday, July 02, 2012

The Newsroom

I really want to like The Newsroom.

I'm not saying I hate 'The Newsroom', but maybe I'm at that point in my life where I need more. I can tell you exactly what I need more of. What to do about the underlying problems with news. Network news, cable news, internet news, newspaper news and so forth.

I'm not expecting, in the pilot episode no less, to be guided by pulling my ear to the solution, however, not just a bunch of tropes that Sorkin perfected. We'll get a lot more before the show ends its run. I wanted, and still want mind you, solutions to the problems. Not social ones like the Deepwater Horizon fallout or the archaic Arizona immigration law, but what's wrong with newsrooms or the news in general and how to fix it.

If 'The West Wing' were to come out today I'd probably watch a season or two then quit. Not just because it became glorified Democrat-in-a-near-perfect universe, but because the problems it faced were unrealistic. Unrealistic? TV isn't supposed to be realistic you say. I agree.

This has more to do with people making it out to be more than what it is than Sorkin's vision, what we've seen of it so far, for the show. It's paint-by-the-numbers Sorkin. A lot of talking, some of it needless, relationship woes, romantic and otherwise, and a splash of realism to make the critics gush with enthusiasm for the project.

I don't hate Sorkin's vision, I'm just bored with it. I was excited too. But cautiously excited and after two episodes I feel like I've seen this before. On 'The West Wing'. On 'Sports Night'. On 'Studio 60'. I mean Will McAvoy is a carbon copy of Harriet Hayes. Conservatism, yay! Social conservatism, boo.

I'll probably watch 'The Newsroom' for a season then stop and that's sad because I had high hopes for this program.

Subscribe in NewsGator Online Feed Shark Blog Flux Directory blog rating and reviews Blog Top Sites Listed in LS Blogs Politics Blog Directory Find Blogs in the Blog Directory

Listed on BlogShares

Made with love, who's love I do not know. (c) me in 2006-2008