I just visited a few news sites and noticed that this "Bruce Jenner" tosspot, whose only recent contribution to the world as far as I know was to kill an old lady in a car accident, is the subject of something like 20% of their current front page articles. I've also been vaguely aware that his family, whose only contribution to the world as far as I can tell seems to be the possession of comically large buttocks, are the subject of a similar percentage of the news media's overall output. I would like, at this point, to thank the news media for providing me with a fail safe indicator of the kind of people I wish to have nothing to do with in this world, to wit, anyone who  who is in the slightest bit interested, fascinated, entertained or captivated by this irrelevant bottom feeding trash. It's drawn a clear line for me. 

It is a bit sickening, like all these 'Reality TV' programs that have taken over and infested the air waves and minds of people, I don't get it, can't see the interest, it's just brain deadening to me, but that is the way of the world. Maybe it's all intended to distract from all the other stuff that is going on, reality . . . Each to their own I guess.

sharke
I just visited a few news sites and noticed that this "Bruce Jenner" tosspot, whose only recent contribution to the world as far as I know was to kill an old lady in a car accident, is the subject of something like 20% of their current front page articles. I've also been vaguely aware that his family, whose only contribution to the world as far as I can tell seems to be the possession of comically large buttocks, are the subject of a similar percentage of the news media's overall output. I would like, at this point, to thank the news media for providing me with a fail safe indicator of the kind of people I wish to have nothing to do with in this world, to wit, anyone who  who is in the slightest bit interested, fascinated, entertained or captivated by this irrelevant bottom feeding trash. It's drawn a clear line for me. 

Hi James-


I've never watched or been interested in watching the Kardashian's or any other so-called "reality" TV show, but I think the current media brouhaha is about Diane Sawyer's interview with Bruce Jenner in which he self-identifies as transgender. I think that is newsworthy, since he's a public figure (formerly know as "The World's Greatest Athlete", having won the Olympic medal for the decathlon.)
 
I didn't watch the interview, but I can imagine it was a pretty big deal for transgenders to see such a public figure "come out" on national TV.
 
But I agree with you that so-called "Reality TV" is basically voyeuristic garbage!
 
-Susan 

Atm there is some nasty reality tv in Finland. The idea this time is that 3 people go to a nice island naked and they are like on a date there. Then one of them who is in the gender minority chooses who he/she wants to be with. I dislike such tv. I even prefer to watch Ren and Stimpy reruns (I secretly like the Ren and Stimpy show).

What can we learn from history?
The Romans pacified the ever restless population with  panem et circenses bread and circuses ..
 
modern TV and film are the digital equivalent of such 

Ham N Egz
What can we learn from history?
... 
modern TV and film are the digital equivalent of such 
...

The American/Hollywood film YES ... it is crap. And yet we all go to see it and take our children with us, even if it is cardboard mysticism and silliness. We support the inane world!
 
There is a lot of great film out there, but you won't find a whole lot of it in America. Most of it is in Film Festivals, and even then, Robert Redford has become a turkey as has the Independent Channel ... they will only support one film ... which they have an interest in, of course!
 
But there are a lot of directors doing something totally different, but I doubt that American audiences can appreciate them a whole lot. It's similar here, where there are a handful of folks that have heard other musics than the top ten (so to speak), and know there are different things out there ... but when mentioned to a couple others that play regularly ... it's like the plague and some of them react like it will kill their own knowledge and gig.
 
America is not used to discussing arts, film, music ... on a "café" (French word intentional), because at times it feels like all they know is the "hits". AND all they want is to come off like their guitar hero!
 
So what you got left? ... some media bs ... that tends to make people think that you are not as important as they are!
 
Sorry! You all are much more valuable and important to me, than anyone in TV land!

Just goes to show that there is nothing new under the sun. I don't recall a time in my life where truly irrelevant details of celebrity's lives were not big business. We just have more outlets for it now. I recall growing up seeing figures like Elizabeth Taylor on the cover of tabloids and magazines like People despite not having done anything meaningful in decades. Our culture seems to have a deep need to create royalty, even if they are powerless. Even nations that still have a monarchy create celebrities who are simply famous for being famous. The conspiracy  minded certainly have ammo to claim intentional manipulation of the masses via distraction. The political minded can chalk such things up to the nature of capitalism. Frivolous things that generate revenue without actually producing anything functional or tangible could very well simply be a by product of an economic system reliant on massive consumerism. I think the Bruce Jenner aspect is probably more newsworthy since he is (despite his achievements being decades old) such a legendary sports icon. A sex change by THE Wheaties guy is kind of mindblowing for some and by far the most successful athlete to do anything like this. The Kardashian connection makes it cheesier, but unfortunately more and more big names have grabbed the money that comes with reality tv. Ozzy Osbourne, Gene Simmons and so on took the plunge and it does not seem to be going away. I can't bring myself to watch it, but I find myself being less harsh on those that do because all of us indulge in something others may find totally frivolous and pointless (like CH). I doubt our making copycat thread titles and bad puns contributes anything more to society than people watching a family of sluts for entertainment.

Bruce (as Susan mentioned) actually did something once to earn his fame, but what have the Kardashians ever done except be born the spoiled offspring of a lawyer who lost an easy trial?

craigb
Bruce (as Susan mentioned) actually did something once to earn his fame, but what have the Kardashians ever done except be born the spoiled offspring of a lawyer who lost an easy trial?

I guess I'm just not a believer in the concept of anyone "deserving" or "earning" fame. To some people , a man running around a track is just as unworthy of fame as a woman who's rise to fame was based on a sex tape with another celebrity. She is famous because enough people take an active interest in her for them to read articles about her and watch her stupid show. i get a different variation of forwarded posts claiming soldiers should get paid millions instead of athletes and my reaction applies the same logic; when people are willing to pay exorbitant ticket prices and $200 for jerseys and other things no one actually "deserves" then they will get paid that kind of money and fame. There are countless unsung heroes that arguably should be a bigger object of focus than the people tabloids follow, but to really feel that one person's frivolous in the big picture's attention is more deserving than another borders on arrogance since it implies that "my determination of who should be important is superior to everyone else".  My daughter finds no value in professional sports. She thinks the idea of men being paid to play games is silly.  I don't agree but  i can understand the sentiment.

dubdisciple

craigb
Bruce (as Susan mentioned) actually did something once to earn his fame, but what have the Kardashians ever done except be born the spoiled offspring of a lawyer who lost an easy trial?

I guess I'm just not a believer in the concept of anyone "deserving" or "earning" fame. To some people , a man running around a track is just as unworthy of fame as a woman who's rise to fame was based on a sex tape with another celebrity. She is famous because enough people take an active interest in her for them to read articles about her and watch her stupid show. i get a different variation of forwarded posts claiming soldiers should get paid millions instead of athletes and my reaction applies the same logic; when people are willing to pay exorbitant ticket prices and $200 for jerseys and other things no one actually "deserves" then they will get paid that kind of money and fame. There are countless unsung heroes that arguably should be a bigger object of focus than the people tabloids follow, but to really feel that one person's frivolous in the big picture's attention is more deserving than another borders on arrogance since it implies that "my determination of who should be important is superior to everyone else".  My daughter finds no value in professional sports. She thinks the idea of men being paid to play games is silly.  I don't agree but  i can understand the sentiment.

Hi dubdisciple-


I don't think winning the Gold Medal in the Olympics in the Decathlon equates to "a man running around a track" or a woman making a sex tape with a celebrity. It's undeniably an accomplishment that took years of hard work and training to achieve.
 
If you really believe that no one is capable of "deserving" or "earning" fame, then I'd have to disagree, but I certainly do agree that many who are deserving of it don't have it and many who aren't do.
 
-Susan