More reasons
9. Tiny rebates. Mail-in coupons. Undoubtedly just a ploy to get your information to sell you more stuff. For that matter, big rebates. Why do I have to spend $1,000 on a given electronics item, and wait to get the $150 rebate?
10. Reality role playing games. As fun as they are. Get a life. If that isn’t a game, it will be soon.
11. Incessant media coverage of celebrities, especially bad celebrities. Ah yes. Biting the hand that feeds my cats. I’m not talking about newspapers, my bread and butter. We have less space to devote to the latest scandal than 24-hour news networks, or even worse, entertainment networks.
The world specifically has to end because of the Michael Jackson trial. Anything that commands enough attention to require a court reenactment every night is wrong, wrong, wrong. I do not need daily rundowns of what Michael was wearing or how he was feeling. I think this case is unfortunate and sordid on both sides. It’s going to drag on for months.
But enough! Our paper actually had a short-lived ban on Michael Jackson photos on our state page, probably for good reason. Giggled insanely when Michael made it on the front page two days after the enforcement of the ban because he showed up to court in pajamas.
Geeze, I know too much about this case.
Also in the category of way too much coverage: Robert Blake, and Scott Peterson (only a celeb after the fact, fed by 24-hour televsion.)
“Get a life” already is a game. It’s called “The Sims,” and its on-line and in real time.
As to celebrity “news,” I think this is a phenomenon created by the 24 hour news cycle. These channels need something to fill air time, otherwise the same real news gets recycled endlessly. It gets recycled endlessly anyway, but you see my point. You lose viewers fast if the story you are recycling every ten minutes is: “Bush Social Security Plan Unpopular Among Voters.” The celebrity news at least mixes things up a bit, adds a dash of sex, vice, and decadence.
Personally, I’d rather go back to the days when you watched the news at 6:00, if at all. For me, the Internet has replaced 24 hour news channels. We don’t need Fox and CNN and MSNBC anymore.
You’re right. People won’t watch boring stuff. That’s what CSPAN is for.
I think I like seeing a good news magazine program every once in a while, but can never remember to watch one. But even the format of those is sometimes tiring. Especially if the program likes to sensationalize stuff.
I think this person, even if no one else is, is tired of bite-sized morsels of news that say nothing, or the same nothings over and over.
Though I am guilty of not reading my paper often enough (because I work on it, and I’ve read many of the stories already), I’d prefer to read more in-depth news. The lack of TV information is astounding, not to mention the lack of resposnibility about getting facts right, in most cases.
But I’d prefer not to read about Michael Jackson. Or any of the other celebrity crap. Which is unfortunately a problem, considering the state I live in.
But most of the fru-fru entertainment crap can at least be contained safely in the life section.