|is this really happening?|
Homphobia, mysogyny, ignorance, and hate are all horrilbe aspects of humanity that exist in different parts of the world. From New York City to Bangkok, from Los Angeles to Tokyo, these atrocities are responsible for severe social problems, inequality, racism, and even death. However, you dont need to go very far to witness all 4 of them. Just go to your nearest television and turn on \"The Man Show.\"
In this half hour program, the hosts, adam corolla and jimmy kimmel, manage to alienate, degradate, and de-humanize gay people, treat women as sex objects, promote ignorance, and encourage a whole audience of men to live and act as they do. Like a mix between \"Benny Hill\", \"Married with Children\", and the playboy channel, \"The Man Show\" is a moral throwback which tears apart advancement in gay rights,
woman\'s rights, and acceptance in general. While some shows of questionable morality are at times tolerable because of their clever jokes or witty commentary, \"The Man Show\" lacks even the smallest amount of intelligence. Their humor could have easily origianted in the mind of a hormonal, puberty-driven, 13 year-old boy. Their jokes are not only in poor taste, but poorly delivered, and poorly conceived.
If you ever have the desire to watch two hosts and a whole audience of men revel in their ignorance and stupidity, then, by all means, turn on \"The Man Show.\" Im not saying that it shouldnt be allowed on television. Freedom of speech includes all opinions, no matter how ignorant or hateful. I just think it never should have happened in the first place. Look at the lyrics to the Theme Song:
Grab a beer and drop your pants
send the wife and kid to France
IT\'S THE MAN SHOW!
Quit your job and light a fart
Yank your favorite private part
IT\'S THE MAN SHOW!!
It\'s a place where men can
Look at the cans on this chick,
her name\'s Heather
Juggy girls on trampolines
Time to loosen those blue jeans
IT\'S THE MAN SHOW!!!
Do you really need to hear anymore? This show just sucks, plain and simple.
posted by: dan : 2000.8.6
chuck d and lars ulrich on the charlie rose show.
last night\'s charlie rose show featured a debate between chuck d from public enemy and lars ulrich from metallica concerning napster, the mp3 file format and the future of the music \"industry.\"
from the get-go, things looked bad. charlie rose repeatedly referred to napster as a \"website,\" proving that he never used the program. ( metallica.com quotes the band saying that they hadn\'t used the program either. ) on the other hand, chuck has immersed himself in the emerging technologies of digital music. ( see rapstation.com for proof of that )
lars opened the debate and pretty much said all he had to say in the first few minutes. his key word for the night was \"control.\" he stressed that artists should have control over their pieces of work. his intentions make sense, in that the artist should have control, however his misunderstanding of how napster ( and music on the web in general ) works hurt his arguments. the main contradiction in lars\' argument was his insistence that the issue wasn\'t \"about money, it\'s about control\" but then reverting to complaining that \"someone is going to profit from this.\" meaning -- it IS about money.
chuck d\'s sentiments echoed my own and i was really excited to hear him get the opportunity to voice them in a public forum. chuck believes ( correctly ) that mp3 file-swapping fosters enthusiasm for music, that napster users aren\'t pirates but rabid music fans. he likened napster to a new form of radio and brought up past examples of technological innovation scares. ( ie - the advent of radio, cassette decks, CD-R ) with each of these advances, the industry has yelled and made a big deal. at one point it was asserted that VCRs would be the end of the movie industry. however, time has proven that these technologies have only increased people\'s interest in those forms of entertainment.
it was uncomfortable to hear charlie rose refer to the artist creating a \"product.\" i don\'t write songs as \"products.\" that\'s what commercial jingles are for. chuck D pushed the fact that the MP3 has allowed smaller artists who either chose not to or aren\'t able to hook up with major labels to be heard. this is more true than ever. with the increasingly smaller number of corporations controlling all forms of media, how can one expect to hear anything new?
i read an interview with DEVO today in reference to the box set that warner bros. put out. the track listing the band came up with was organized so that each of 4 discs had a distinct feel, but this was determined unacceptable at \"the retail-level.\" so instead of unheard DEVO tracks and remixes, the new box set will be a collection of previously released works.
since you are reading this, it can be assumed that you have some interest in the wealth of music floating below the corporate radar. get knowledgable about what is going on. right now is a crucial time for the future of music distribution. the anarchistic, self-regulation internet is starting to slip away and lose it\'s freedom. a network built on the shoulders of free, open-source software should not be run by the same laws that govern the closed worlds of print, television and radio.
chuck\'s latest journal entry pretty much sums it up.
posted by: kevin : 2000.5.13