Somehow, I'm not surprised that Fox has found a way to capitalize on the current economic situtation. However, since I just finished reading an article about how last month's numerous mass-murders might be tied to the economy, I'm a bit horrified by this concept. Turning layoffs into a Surivoresque vote undermines the seriousness of the situation. These individuals are not being voted off an island from which they can return home; instead, they're losing their livliehoods. The article states that a "business consultant" will help advise employees which of their own should be laid off, but will the show offer any support or guidance to the newly terminated employee(s)? Having worked through two nasty mergers that resulted in layoffs I can attest that the knowledge of impending layoffs sends ripples of paranoia through a company. Loyalties are tested, territories mapped out, backstabbing occurs, etc. (it is a miserable environment in which to work). Indeed, the atmosphere does have some similarities with reality shows that have eliminations. But in a company facing layoffs there are few immunity idols.
Perhaps, with the amount of money it will cost to produce the show, Fox could be helping the situation rather than profiting from it. But, that would suggest that there is a Rhetoric of Compassion in our society, which is something that today's earlier post by M suggests is wholly missing.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30108232/
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
The Rhetoric of Compassion, or do we have a responsiblity to help others?
On this morning's Today Show, Meredith Vierra interviewed a young woman who was raped in a subway station in 2005. According to the woman, who is going public with her story now, at least two Metropolitan Transit Authorities witnessed her attack and did not offer her any significant form of help. A conductor and a ticket clerk did notify their superiors about the attack, who then contacted the police. Neither the conductor nor the ticket clerk made any other attempt to aid the young woman. By the time the police arrived, some 10 to 15 minutes later, she had been raped twice and her attacker had fled; no arrest has ever been made in the case. Following her assualt, the woman filed a civil suit against the MTA, alleging that the policies of the MTA enabled the attack. A judge ruled recently that the workers “had taken prompt and decisive action” in notifying their superiors, but they had no obligation to act beyond notifying their superiors. The young woman openly admits that she did not expect either worker to leave the train or the ticket booth, but she does believe that either could have stopped the attack by getting on the loud speaker and telling her attacker that the police were on their way.
As C and I watched this, we were both horrified. The young woman states that she met the gaze of both the conductor and the ticket clerk, and neither did anything more than notify their superiors. I honestly can't fathom not helping someone who was being attacked in front of me, even if interfering meant putting myself at risk. This story has bothered me all morning.
I do wonder, however, if the judge is right. The workers followed MTA procedure to the letter, but the procedure resulted in, at least indirectly, this young woman being raped twice. The judge's ruling, which had to be based on MTA policy, seems to have been right, as much as it sickens me. But did these individuals have a responsiblity, as human beings, to do something more to help this young woman? Is there such a thing as the rhetoric of compassion? Do we have a responsibility to help others who are in immediate danger?
As C and I watched this, we were both horrified. The young woman states that she met the gaze of both the conductor and the ticket clerk, and neither did anything more than notify their superiors. I honestly can't fathom not helping someone who was being attacked in front of me, even if interfering meant putting myself at risk. This story has bothered me all morning.
I do wonder, however, if the judge is right. The workers followed MTA procedure to the letter, but the procedure resulted in, at least indirectly, this young woman being raped twice. The judge's ruling, which had to be based on MTA policy, seems to have been right, as much as it sickens me. But did these individuals have a responsiblity, as human beings, to do something more to help this young woman? Is there such a thing as the rhetoric of compassion? Do we have a responsibility to help others who are in immediate danger?
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Damn those pants are square!
The scandalicious Burger King commercial is available on YouTube in an extended version:
hilarious. Not kid friendly. But hilarious :)
hilarious. Not kid friendly. But hilarious :)
A treat for the eyes and ears...
Eminem has a new video out, and, of course, he mocks nearly all of the recent tabloid stars. I think Oxy will enjoy Em's take on Bret Michaels. My favorite bit may be at approx. 2:17, when "Sarah Palin" dances in a bustier with a polar bear and an eskimo. But that's just me.
Edited to add: I don't know how to make this little video box smaller!
Edited to add: I don't know how to make this little video box smaller!
Same-Sex Marriage in Vermont
Same-Sex Marriage is now legal In Vermont as the state's legisature enacted it over the Governor's (anti-democratic) veto.
Take that judicial activists.
Take that judicial activists.
Tuesday Afternoon Reading
If you are looking for something to read this afternoon, here is a report on Torture by the Red Cross.
If you are not interested in the report, The New York Times offers a summary.
If you are not interested in the report, The New York Times offers a summary.
Hacking Web Cams, or, Where's Oxymoron...
At Slate, Christopher Beam discusses the practice of Hackers taking control of your computer and watching you through your own Web Cam.
In a report released last month, Canadian researchers concluded that GhostNet has cracked at least 1,295 computers in 103 different countries, specifically targeting the Dalai Lama and other Tibetan activists and officials. Stealing documents and logging keystrokes—that I understand. You can get all sorts of useful information reading someone's e-mail or looking at their bank records. But peeking at them through their Web cameras? That seems creepy even by the standards of shady cyber-spying rings. It's one thing to read the Dalai Lama's IM conversations. It's another to actually watch him LOL.One program that allows you to do this is Back Orifice, a pun on Microsoft's BackOffice.
While this is not that common, it probably explains Oxymoron's absence.
Monday, April 06, 2009
Thick and Juicy
As someone rather well-endowed in the caboose department, I've always been amused by Sir Mix-a-lot's classic. It's catchy. It's funny.
Burger King is trying to promote their new kids' meals--square meals. As such, they've adapted Sir Mix-a-lot's song to "I like square butts." The BK king raps and checks the right angles of the ladies' butts as they shake their righteous booties. Sponge Bob Square Pants makes a few appearances too, thus the commercial creates an interesting (and I would suggest disturbing) series of contrasts between children's cartoons, kid's meals, and songs about sex and butts.
Thoughts? The video premeried during halftime (go Tarheels!) so I haven't been able to find it online yet.
Burger King is trying to promote their new kids' meals--square meals. As such, they've adapted Sir Mix-a-lot's song to "I like square butts." The BK king raps and checks the right angles of the ladies' butts as they shake their righteous booties. Sponge Bob Square Pants makes a few appearances too, thus the commercial creates an interesting (and I would suggest disturbing) series of contrasts between children's cartoons, kid's meals, and songs about sex and butts.
Thoughts? The video premeried during halftime (go Tarheels!) so I haven't been able to find it online yet.
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Finally Tyra Banks Serves a Purpose; or, Sarah Palin Versus Levi Johnston, Round 1
HahahahahahahahahahahahahaQuoth Madam Governor:
"Bristol did not even know Levi was going on the show. We're disappointed that Levi and his family, in a quest for fame, attention, and fortune, are engaging in flat-out lies, gross exaggeration, and even distortion of their relationship," says the statement from the Palin family rep.
"Bristol's focus will remain on raising Tripp, completing her education, and advocating abstinence," the statement continues. "It is unfortunate that Levi finds it more appealing to exploit his previous relationship with Bristol than to contribute to the well being of the child."
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
On the Impending Movie Version of The Road
Interesting Cast But They Had Better Not Mess This Up. It won't lend itself to film quite so smoothly as No Country For Old Men did. For one thing it's a better novel. Just sayin', y'all. Don't mess it up.The book cover, though, it's got some Rhetorical Pop. Harrogate will give it that.
Ohhh, Viggo.
STARRING: Viggo Mortensen, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Charlize Theron, Robert DuVal, Guy Pearce
DIRECTOR: John Hillcoat
STUDIO: The Wesinstein Co.
RATING: R (For graphic subject matter, including cannibalism and infanticide)
THEATER COUNT (Opening Weekend): TBD
RUNNING TIME: TBD
TOTAL DOMESTIC BOX OFFICE: TBD
U.S. DVD RELEASE DATE: TBD
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Franz Kafka International Airport
The World's Most Alienated Airport. It's not good. At times, there are 32 hour delays.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday Musical Tribute; Or, I Like Tea and Oranges
Not my usual sort of tribute, but this has been growing on me...
Saturday, March 28, 2009
The Rhetoric of Science, or, the rejection of science
Earlier this morning,the family and I visited the "fish store," deciding whether or not Sweet Toddler J's fascination with fish is a lasting experience or a fad. If it were a lasting experience, we would purchase a small aquarium and possibly some clown fish; if it were a fad, we should make a few more trips to the aquariums or zoos in the area so she could persuade us that she would like fish, then a monkey, maybe a rhino, so forth and so on. We decided not to buy at this moment, though we are still undecided on the fish issue.
While we were looking at the "big fish"-- the typical assortment of Japanese Koi that you would find at the entrance of a restaurant-- in the pond at the front of the store, a women and her autistic daughter entered so her daughter could feed the "big fish." While Megs and Sweet Toddler J went to look at other fish, the women with the autistic daughter turned to me and said:
Now, certainly there is a lot to unpack in this scenario. First, if one were to "do your research," a person would find that, first, the scientist who claimed there was a connection with the MMR shots and autism would find out that the scientist manipulated the data to create the appearance of a link.
In addition, a recent court case that reviewed the evidence between the shots with mercury and autism and, consequently, ruled against families who brought forth a suit against drug companies, also found that no link existed between the shots and autism. According to CNN, in the trial, scientists have failed to establish a link between the shots and audience. Of course, even with the Court's ruling, people who believed in the link rejected the Court's decision, claiming a conflict of interest existed as the Court ruled in favor of the government (Health and Human Services), since a person must bring forth a claim against HHS rather than the drug manufacturer. This tends to lead to conspiracy rhetoric though, which usually brings forth a dangerous set of arguments.
Second, even though science has failed to establish a connection, some people with autistic children still advance the argument that the shots are the cause. In my encounter, rather than mention this, for what good would it have done to disagree with here, especially at a fish store, I listened to her story. What struck my while listening to her was her outpouring of guilt ("I worked full time" and "could not pay attention,") and the scapegoating of the vaccinations, even without a evidence of a connection between the MMr vaccines and autism.
I wonder if it would be appropriate to mention this in a public setting. It seems that because of not knowing the other person, there would be no credibility to engage in a debate about this topic with the mother. Further, with her child as an inartistic proof, the mother would just say here is my daughter who regressed, especially in her communicative abilities, after receiving vaccinations.
While I certainly was not in any condition to debate with the mother, it also seems I may have an ethical responsibility as a professor to try and correct what seems to be incorrect assumptions about the link between the vaccinations and autism. I would do this in a classroom and, hence, I should be willing to do it when speaking with others about a topic I could address with some credibility. Granted, I am not a physician, but because of professional and personal relationships, I have followed this debate.
Thoughts?
While we were looking at the "big fish"-- the typical assortment of Japanese Koi that you would find at the entrance of a restaurant-- in the pond at the front of the store, a women and her autistic daughter entered so her daughter could feed the "big fish." While Megs and Sweet Toddler J went to look at other fish, the women with the autistic daughter turned to me and said:
How cute your son, I mean daughter,-- I just saw the blue jacket-- is. I just wanted to let you know, watch the children when they receive their shots. Watch them after every shot and every booster. I worked full time and never could pay that close attention... Now I want to tell people.... My daughter, at age three, lost all language, the ability to point, to jump... It's the mercury. I just want to tell parents because no one told me. Do your research. But I just feel as if I need to tell people.
Now, certainly there is a lot to unpack in this scenario. First, if one were to "do your research," a person would find that, first, the scientist who claimed there was a connection with the MMR shots and autism would find out that the scientist manipulated the data to create the appearance of a link.
In addition, a recent court case that reviewed the evidence between the shots with mercury and autism and, consequently, ruled against families who brought forth a suit against drug companies, also found that no link existed between the shots and autism. According to CNN, in the trial, scientists have failed to establish a link between the shots and audience. Of course, even with the Court's ruling, people who believed in the link rejected the Court's decision, claiming a conflict of interest existed as the Court ruled in favor of the government (Health and Human Services), since a person must bring forth a claim against HHS rather than the drug manufacturer. This tends to lead to conspiracy rhetoric though, which usually brings forth a dangerous set of arguments.
Second, even though science has failed to establish a connection, some people with autistic children still advance the argument that the shots are the cause. In my encounter, rather than mention this, for what good would it have done to disagree with here, especially at a fish store, I listened to her story. What struck my while listening to her was her outpouring of guilt ("I worked full time" and "could not pay attention,") and the scapegoating of the vaccinations, even without a evidence of a connection between the MMr vaccines and autism.
I wonder if it would be appropriate to mention this in a public setting. It seems that because of not knowing the other person, there would be no credibility to engage in a debate about this topic with the mother. Further, with her child as an inartistic proof, the mother would just say here is my daughter who regressed, especially in her communicative abilities, after receiving vaccinations.
While I certainly was not in any condition to debate with the mother, it also seems I may have an ethical responsibility as a professor to try and correct what seems to be incorrect assumptions about the link between the vaccinations and autism. I would do this in a classroom and, hence, I should be willing to do it when speaking with others about a topic I could address with some credibility. Granted, I am not a physician, but because of professional and personal relationships, I have followed this debate.
Thoughts?
Thursday, March 26, 2009
The title alone . . .
necessitated that I post this article, which is linked on MSNBC.com's homepage.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Why Don't Conservatives Plan Revolutions When Republicans Are in Office
First, Chuck Norris announced that he may run for President of Texas because the Country was on the verge on losing its identity/ rights/ path/ deep discounts at Walmart/ ability to beat up bad guys in scripted confrontations.
Now, Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) invoked the right to revolution. According to Politico:
Ironically, when the revolution were to occur, Jefferson was president of the United States and I do not think he used the bully pulpit to argue for a revolution.
I would argue that Norris and Bachmann are just grandstanding, but what do I know...
Now, Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) invoked the right to revolution. According to Politico:
"I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us ‘having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,’ and the people – we the people – are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States.”Of course, Bachmann must not have actually read the Jefferson quote and does not know the irony of the quote. Here is what Jefferson wrote:
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion... We have had thirteen States independent for eleven years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half, for each State. What country before ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion?" --Thomas Jefferson to William S. Smith, 1787. ME 6:372
Ironically, when the revolution were to occur, Jefferson was president of the United States and I do not think he used the bully pulpit to argue for a revolution.
I would argue that Norris and Bachmann are just grandstanding, but what do I know...
Tee Shirt of the Week®: Both Wholly Offensive, and a Retrospective Honorariam to St. Patrick's Day
Harrogate, btw, though no hater of bad puns like Supadiscomama and M, is not a huge fan of them either. Still, he likes this bad pun because of its linguistic realism.
Fun With The Intersection Between Pop Art, Race, & Partisanship: Michael Steele Raps
The embarrassment to politics that is Michael Steele continues to render gold for the comedy sectors, at any rate.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Celebrating (Again) The Creativity of Britney Spears: The Question of the Day
Building upon the illustrious work of Harrogate.(I cannot believe I am writing about this).
With her song, "If you see Amy," Britney Spears*** is following in the footsteps of blues pianist Memphis Slim, the Canadian band April Wine, the pop-punk band Poster Children, James Joyce in Ulysses, and William Shakespeare in Twelfth Night. Here is Slate's take, with all of the references.
Oh well, it could be worse, as James Joyce notes:
But, I ask you Situationers, what other examples of this type of brilliant wit do you admire?
*** Disclaimer: It is highly unlikely that Britney Spears wrote the lyrics to that song or the song itself, but, for a moment, we can live with the illusion.
With her song, "If you see Amy," Britney Spears*** is following in the footsteps of blues pianist Memphis Slim, the Canadian band April Wine, the pop-punk band Poster Children, James Joyce in Ulysses, and William Shakespeare in Twelfth Night. Here is Slate's take, with all of the references.
Oh well, it could be worse, as James Joyce notes:
If you see kay
Tell him he may
See you in tea
Tell him from me.
But, I ask you Situationers, what other examples of this type of brilliant wit do you admire?
*** Disclaimer: It is highly unlikely that Britney Spears wrote the lyrics to that song or the song itself, but, for a moment, we can live with the illusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)