Posts Tagged People are idiots

An Open Letter to Mark Bonokoski

Dear Mr. Bonokokski,

My name is Chris Battaglia. I am a first-year Journalism student at Ryerson University. In one of my classes this week, my professor showed the class an article, written by you, about my fellow classmates and me.

I must admit, it was quite amusing. I never expected to see a news piece on first-year Ryerson Journalism students. Personally, I didn’t think there was much news there.

Then again, it is the Sun; it’s not exactly a paper with the highest news standards.

But sir, I have to ask: do you feel better now? In the article, you’re clearly upset by the epidemic of laziness you see in the next generation of journalists, and you seem quite offended that they used electronic mail to contact you,

Do you want mp3 music download from online mp3 archive, Do you want download mp3 music from online mp3 archive

and misspelled your name in so many different, creative ways.

Mr. Bonosoki, you must be very concerned in order to commit an entire article to the subject. There’s no way you’re just picking on freshman students to make yourself feel big. After all, you are a professional journalist, right?

No really, I’m asking. You work for the Sun, so one can never be too sure.

Assuming you are, in fact, a professional, it must be genuine concern you are expressing. In that case, Mr. Bonolfski, let me assure you that your fears are completely unfounded, born more out of a desire to assure yourself that you are not fading away as the world begins to pass you by than a true unbiased account of the potential future of journalism.

Why am I so sure of this? Well, for starters, the assignment you refer to in your article, the one that makes you weep for a future that is sure to be full of Paris Hiltons with nanosecond attention spans, was the first assignment us first-year students received in that class. To suggest that this assignment (one that was handed out with very little prior instruction about interviewing or journalism in general, to students who are, for the most part, straight out of high school) is an accurate arbiter of the overall level of potential, determination, and passion that the future generation of journalists have for their chosen field, is downright absurd, and to put such a suggestion in print is downright irresponsible, sir.

Oh, that’s right, I forgot: it’s the Sun.

The truth is there are many journalism students currently attending Ryerson who are very passionate about writing, about reporting, and about the field of journalism in general. I cannot speak for them all, as I have not yet had the opportunity to meet all of my fellow classmates, but the ones I have met do care. They care enough to have applied to this very competitive program and put enough effort into their application to be chosen over 90% of other applicants who were not accepted. They are talented writers and intelligent human beings, but they are not yet journalists. They are here, along with me, to learn how to be journalists. This includes the interview process, a process that most first-year students, myself included, are completely unfamiliar with.

Mr. Boondockski, did you expect the first-year students who contacted you to know exactly what to do right away? Did you expect a flawless journalistic effort from them? Did you expect them to know that e-mailing is frowned upon so sternly by seasoned Toronto Sun veterans such as yourself? Were you really surprised that some of them made mistakes, mistakes that you might consider sloppy and amateur, when contacting you for an interview? As far as I can see, that was the point of the assignment. In fact, it seems to be the point of a lot of the first-time assignments us journalism students get: to make those mistakes, so we can learn from them, and so we won’t make those mistakes when it actually counts.

Seriously Mr. Blackdiamondski, you can’t expect people to believe that you were a flawless journalism student: a wide-eyed, sharp-as-nails journalistic prodigy determined to reshape the world of news and elevate the bar to a new level. My guess is you were just like us, only without the MP3s, text messaging, and high-speed internet. And my guess is that when you got your first assignments, you made more than your fair share of mistakes as well. In fact, I’m pretty sure you might not have been the journalism gem you made yourself out to be in your article. Why? Because, of all the papers you could be working for, you’re writing for the Toronto Sun.

Also: one-sentence paragraphs? That’s bush-league stuff, sir.

So the next time you feel like openly ridiculing the grammar of first-year journalism students, and the next time you want to openly lament about the sad state of kids these days and their darn high-speed cell phone MP3 contraptions, I would suggest taking a long look in the mirror before you do. Perhaps you will remember that you were once like them, and it was not because you were lazy or a product of your day’s brand of hedonistic popular culture, or that you were inferior to the generation of journalists that preceded you, but because you were still a young kid with a lot to learn, and a lot of mistakes to make.

Thank you for your time.

Yours truly,
Christopher Battaglia
First-year Journalism student
Ryerson University

6 Comments

Studio 60 and the Sad State of Modern Television

The best show on TV this past season wasn’t Grey’s Anatomy. It wasn’t C.S.I. It wasn’t Heroes, although that show was awesome. No, the best show of the 2006/07 TV campaign was Studio 60, and it won’t be coming back for another season.

NBC just finished airing the remaining episodes of the series, after pulling it mid-season in favor of the Paul Haggis Irish mob drama The Black Donnellys, which sucked.

Why did NBC pull the plug on Studio 60? After all, everything about the show was good. The writing was solid and clever; everything you’d expect from a craftsman such as Aaron Sorkin. The acting was top-notch, especially for TV. You can thank the group of all-stars, veterans, and perfectly-cast unknowns that made up the cast for that. Matthew Perry was never this funny, or awesome, on Friends, even though he was the best of the bunch there, and Nate Corddry has enough comic potential to fill any of the ridiculous costumes he wore. The directing, the lighting, heck, even the title screen, it all fit. It all worked. Perfectly.

But more important than that, Studio 60 had something to say. From the first episode, Studio 60’s point was clear: television is about more than art and culture. It’s about more than making people laugh or cry, about more than telling a story. Television is about power, influence, control, and most of all, money. It is a business through and through, a delivery service for commercials, and any chance of broadcasting anything with some artistic merit is merely a side-benefit, one that isn’t very high on most networks’ list of priorities.

This commitment to commerce and indifference to art has become even more transparent in recent years. No, it’s not a dirty little secret that corporations are out to make money, in fact, it’s what they’re designed to do, but that doesn’t also mean the pursuit of the almighty dollar is a noble one. Sacrificing culture for cash is not something that should be commended.

And that’s where Studio 60 said more than it meant to. Its short run made its points about the TV industry self-referential. Case and point: Studio 60 was pulled for The Black Donnellys. When that low-rent mob-movie rip-off couldn’t stand on the shoulders of Paul Haggis’ name, it was pulled as well. What replaced it? The Real Wedding Crashers, a reality TV show.

The proliferation of reality TV is no secret, but it is the best example of a disturbing trend in modern entertainment. Reality TV is leading the way in a stream of entertainment so mindless and fake, so flashy and simplified, that it has no real cultural or artistic value. It’s all about money. The shows can be produced for pennies, because the people on the shows only want their 15 minutes, which means most of the ad revenue generated will be profit. And speaking of ads, the amount of product placement and name-brand sponsorship during the show alone is a gold-mine for any network.

In a TV landscape dominated by cheap, sleazy, reality cash-cows that lower the standards and attention spans of average viewers and Nielsen households, clever and thoughtful dramas like Studio 60 can’t compete. Neither can clever comedies like Arrested Development, which was lucky to get 2.5 seasons on Fox, despite its genius. The fact is, there’s no appreciation for clever anymore. Clever doesn’t sell. People don’t want nuance, or subtlety, or subtext. These days, most entertainment carries about as much subtlety as being hit in the head with a brick.

Critics of Studio 60 can, and will point to the ratings as proof of the show’s impotence. They’ll say people gave it a fair chance, and just weren’t interested in watching. That may be true, but it doesn’t answer why. The show’s quality was top-notch, so it couldn’t have been that. Perhaps, instead, between our obsession with celebrity, the sensationalism of our news media, and the constant glorification of everything mundane thing we do, we didn’t want the rug pulled out from under us. Most of us don’t want to hear it’s all a joke when the ride’s so much easy, spoon-fed fun, and the TV networks (and the corporations that control them) are happy to accommodate this, as long as we keep watching and give them more money.

In a way, I’m glad Studio 60 got cancelled. I do lament the fact that there won’t be new episodes for me to enjoy, but it’s kind of comforting knowing that it never became a pop success. In a world where reality TV shows are dominating the airwaves and topping ratings numbers, perhaps high ratings aren’t a great thing. All that ratings are proving these days is that people prefer low-brow, low-grade entertainment that never asks them to think, so not catching on actually serves to validate what Studio 60 really was. It was smart. It was clever. It did make you smile and frown, because it made you think, which is precisely why it was beyond what TV is.

Studio 60 wasn’t the first show to flounder in an industry more concerned with celebrity relationships, celebrating mediocrity, and product placement than solid storytelling, good acting, and comedy that’s actually funny, and it won’t be the last. It’s a shame that shows like Studio 60, shows built well from the ground up that are actually trying to say or do something interesting, can’t find a place on network TV, but it’s not really a surprise. Television exists for one purpose and one purpose only: to deliver commercials right into the homes of everyone with a TV screen to sit in front of. Art can’t win this fight; commerce has too much money behind it to lose. It’s sad, but it’s the truth: which is something you won’t see on the airways.

, ,

No Comments

Holocaust Denier Denies Denying Holocaust

While holocaust denier Jerry Stenson does not believe in the holocaust, he vehemently denies that he has ever stated so publicly.

“It’s simply not true,” Stenson stated from the front porch of his suburban Virginia home. “I have never denied the holocaust, even though it never happened.”

Stenson claims that the media is to blame for his image as a holocaust denier, a label he would never apply to himself.

“The mainstream media is so quick to demonize anyone who doesn’t agree with their bias. After all, it’s run by ‘them.’ ‘They’ control the world.”

Stenson later clarified that, by ‘they,’ he meant people with money. He would not elaborate further.

,

No Comments

We’re Already Fucked: Part 2

It is said that there are five stages most people go through when grieving a loss. The first is denial, then anger, bargaining, depression, and finally, acceptance. Different people advance through these stages of grief at differing rates, some taking longer with certain stages than others.

No, I’m not saying the world is dead, nor am I claiming that humankind is doomed and we just have to deal with it. To say that is horribly pessimistic, lazy, and just plain presumptuous. I’m not dealing in fortune telling; I’m dealing in reality. Funny thing is, the five stages of grief can be applied beyond loss to reality in general, and the grief experienced when reality is something that’s hard to deal with.

The reality is, we’re doing a very good job of making our environment less inhabitable. We’ve been doing this for a while. Ever since the industrial revolution and the population explosion that followed, we’ve shifted into overdrive, and all of that inertia from more than a hundred years of consumption and pollution is not easy to slow down, let alone stop and reverse.

It’s a hard pill to swallow, I know. That’s why most people are stuck in the earlier of the five stages. There are plenty in denial, looking at selective and short-range data in order to comfort themselves with the belief that everything is okay. It’s perfectly understandable. These are the same people who need the comfort given by the idea of an afterlife to combat their fear of death.

Then there are those who have just finished watching An Inconvenient Truth, and are ready to take drastic action against those they believe are most at fault for global warming. These angry reactionary activists are just as short-sighted as those in denial, because they fail to acknowledge that the true problem is bigger than one corporation or one politician, or one corporate politician. The irrational rage of those stuck in the anger stage does nothing but turn global warming into a pop-politics spin game. In Left vs. Right, ideology trumps facts, and nobody gets anywhere.

But not everyone gets angry at global warming. Some move through that stage very quickly, and proceed to depression. They give up. These are the doomsday preachers and bottled water hoarders; the ones who have lost all hope because it’s easier than working to change things. Again, like denial and anger, depression doesn’t really do anything. Sulking doesn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as you might think.

It would seem, from the descriptions of denial, anger, and depression, the people stuck in these stages are doing the most harm to the process of saving our asses from ourselves, but they aren’t. By far, the most harmful and annoying stage for people to get stuck in is bargaining, because bargainers believe they’ve reached the finish line. They are the type of people who buy a Prius, express their support for whichever environment-savvy candidate is in the news that week, and proceed to stick their nose so high in the air it should have airplane warning lights on it. It’s incredibly difficult to talk about global warming with bargainers, because they truly believe that the problem can be solved if everyone buys a hybrid like they just did, or installs some energy-saving appliances, or boycotts Esso and writes letters to politicians asking for tougher emissions standards.

Global warming isn’t a tax hike. It isn’t a marriage on the rocks or a mid-life crisis; something that can be worked out at a weekend retreat. It’s bigger than that, and it’s bigger than you or me. So no, you have not done your part by believing the hype and buying what you’re told will make you a greener person. Glaciers aren’t going to look at the tiny solar panel on your roof and say “well, that’s a fair compromise,” and stop melting. There is no easy way out of this, and your empty, consumer-oriented gestures are a weak bargaining chip to begin with. In the end, you’re just blowing hot air up your own ass.

So what do we do once we’ve reached the stage of acceptance? What can we say once we acknowledge all we have done and the scope of the situation? Honestly, I’m not sure. I don’t know how to slow down, let alone stop the pollution created by our industrialized world without crippling the global economy. In fact, I’m not sure it can be done. But I’m not counting it out, I’m not ignoring the problem, I’m not finger-pointing, I’m not giving up, and I’m definitely not deluding myself into thinking simple, superficial gestures are going to fix the world.

And neither should you.

,

No Comments

We’re Already Fucked: Part 1

One night this past December, I was walking home from a party with two friends. We stopped at a busy intersection, and on the side of a building nearby there was a digital clock. It was around 2 A.M., but the time was not what interested me or my friends. The clock was alternating between displaying the time and the temperature. When it switched to display the temperature, it read 9 degrees Celsius. No, the clock was not broken. The outside temperature at 2 A.M. on a December night in Toronto was 9 degrees. With bemused laughter I looked over at my friends. One expressed bewilderment with a shrug of his shoulders. The other uttered a golden nugget of truth, one that, as with most truths, many people seem to avoid confronting.

His eyes still glued to the clock, he exclaimed “We’re already fucked. People think global warming is something that’s coming in the near future. It’s already fucking here. This is it.”

My friend had a point.

Global warming has slowly grown into the popular, fashionable cause it is today with the help of celebrities and celebrity politicians. It’s the new gay. The talking heads and their followers love munching their gums about the pros and cons of hybrids and Kyoto, and there’s an ever-growing sentiment amongst the public that global warming might be an issue we need to take seriously.

You don’t need to look further than Hollywood to see confirmation of this. An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore’s lecture-turned-documentary about ice caps melting and climates changing, has been nominated for an Oscar. Cameron Diaz runs her mouth about her Prius and its imaginary MPG figures every chance she gets. It won’t be long before climate change tops AIDS in Africa as the top cause for celebrities who want to feel like they’re important.

But it’s all bullshit, and it’s all happening too late. Like every popular concern, people are catching on with their 20/20 hindsight, and saying “we should do something about this!” With something like AIDS in Africa, it’s okay that we didn’t get to the problem in time for solutions, because it’s not about finding solutions, it’s about acknowledging the problem. Most people don’t need to worry about solving those problems because those problems aren’t actually a part of their lives. The difference here is that unlike AIDS in Africa, global warming is worldwide. Climate change isn’t something that exists in pictures of far-off exotic lands; it’s happening right in our own back yards. The temperature in Toronto should not be 9 degrees in the middle of a December night. Things should be frozen. Things need to be frozen. It’s part of the balance of nature.

We’re not dealing with a problem we will face soon. This isn’t an asteroid plummeting towards earth. Global warming has already hit, and because it has, it’s all the more impossible to undo the damage and find a solution. It’s even more impossible when people refuse to acknowledge this and continue to talk about global warming like it’s something on the horizon. And it’s all but impossible when we wrap ourselves in a shroud of egoism and discuss the matter as though the earth is our machine: we broke it, and we can fix it.

We can’t fix the earth. We don’t have the ability to fix a planet. And we aren’t killing the earth, we’re killing ourselves. The earth will continue to exist, whether we’re living on it or not. That is probably the biggest irony of this entire issue, and the hardest one for people to face. Global warming isn’t about saving the earth from us; it’s about saving our asses from ourselves.

More on this next week…

,

2 Comments