gts@dmcnh.UUCP (10/09/84)
+< Love, exciting and new; come aboard, we're expecting you... >+ >I get a little tired of >all the lunkheads writing into to anywhere that they feel is appropriate >and bitching because some network broadcast a speech by the president, a >convention, a debate, the president getting shot, the beginning of >WWIII, or any other item that is news-worthy to the entire populace >because it pre-empted their favourite show. I get a little tired of >people thinking that the world revolves around Dallas, As the Net Turns, >or Hill Street Blues. If they'd get out of their easy chair, take a look >around them at what goes on, and do something about it, as opposed to >living in a TV fantasy world, the world might not be in such sh*tty >shape. >[Andy Banta] Because the big three networks are forever trying to convince the public that they are striving to "bring you the world," many people feel that they can get total enlightenment from the tube. The very condition you promote (i.e., the airing of special newsworthy events) seduces the audience into believing that they are abreast of the real world while "sucking mindlessly on the glass teat." (Harlan Elison) There are people out there who actually think "Nightline" with Ted Koppel IS indepth newsreporting. What television could and should be is mindless entertainment without pretense of reflecting reality. The networks should show no news, no docu-dramas, and effectively say, "hey, if you want entertainment, check us out, if you want news, you have to look around." That's why I find it is my civic duty as an American and as a human being to watch "Love Boat" instead of "The Presidential Assassination: A Retro- spective (Music by Micheal Jackson)." -From the padded cubicle of ><..!decvax!ittvax!sii!dmcnh!gts Disclaimer: This opinion is not necessarily that of my employer nor of anyone loose in society.
ag5@pucc-i (Henry C. Mensch) (10/12/84)
><Oh, grow up!>< >I get a little tired of >all the lunkheads writing into to anywhere that they feel is appropriate >and bitching because some network broadcast a speech by the president, a >convention, a debate, the president getting shot, the beginning of >WWIII, or any other item that is news-worthy to the entire populace >because it pre-empted their favourite show. I get a little tired of >people thinking that the world revolves around Dallas, As the Net Turns, >or Hill Street Blues. If they'd get out of their easy chair, take a look >around them at what goes on, and do something about it, as opposed to >living in a TV fantasy world, the world might not be in such sh*tty >shape. >[Andy Banta] Anybody with a *real* mind doesn't depend upon the boob tube for news. I find it very hard to take anything the three major networks have to say (in the area of news commentary) very seriously. This is so particularly when I see these bimbos broadcasting such crap as they do these days while dinging the better shows ("All in the Family" had some of the best social commentary of it's time, and "The Paper Chase" gave Americans a glimpse into the academic institution that they haven't seen before.) Depending on the tube for news is like depending upon the *Purdue Exponent* for world news..... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Henry C. Mensch | User Confuser | Purdue University User Services {decvax|ucbvax|sequent|icalqa|inuxc|uiucdcs|ihnp4}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5 -------------------------------------------------------------------- "How sweet it is to be loved by you . . ." -- James Taylor
agz@pucc-k (Andrew Banta) (10/12/84)
I certainly must admit that I had never viewed (er, thought of) TV in
that sense. If you want purely fictional, non-stop-drivel,
entertainment, of course TV is the way to go. I just also figured that
it was the obligation of the networks and TV stations to inform people
who would normally never find out otherwise that the president was shot,
there is an election coming up, or other things that effect people
overall.
Now that I think about it, there are probably alot of people who really
don't care. I guess that's their perogative. I certainly do care.
(That's why I rioted last Saturday night :-)) How about if we just say
that people who really are interested in the world will look to
something other than TV for news-worthy items.
Just an interesting question: Does anyone out there know of any people
who turn on the TV when thye walk in the door and turn it off when they
leave or go to bed? These were the people I was flaming in my last
letter. These probably also the people who write in to complain that
their TV show was cancelled ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Banta {decvax!allegra!ihnp4}!pur-ee!pucc-k!agz
Dept. of Mental Instability, Purdue University --- "I'm OK, You're a CS Major"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Nothing's good, the news is bad.
The heat goes on and it drives you mad ... "kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery) (10/16/84)
[Support your local mushroom farm.] > Anybody with a *real* mind doesn't depend upon the boob tube for news. What does one depend on then? The newspapers? (Shall I mail you a copy of the local travesty?) Or maybe net.flame? :-) Maybe its just to keep us in the dark and on a steady diet of bull. (0.5 :-)) > ... dinging the better shows ("All in the Family" had some of the > best social commentary of it's time ...) Yea! Now that was a real show! Lately it seems like network people wouldn't know a show with substance if you brained them with it. -- "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs" Ken Montgomery ...!{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm [Usenet, when working] kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA [for Arpanauts only]