The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: brianhenke on May 22, 2014, 11:19:31 AM
-
Yesterday, President Obama spoke about allegations of misconduct at the Department of Veterans Affairs at a news conference. It just so happened he made those remarks while The Price Is Right and The View were on in the East Coast; both CBS and ABC respectively preempted the shows to run the press conference. That enraged Twitter users upset at Obama constantly interrupting their shows. The NY Daily News ran a story about the preemptions:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/daytime-tv-fans-outraged-obama-speech-va-hospitals-article-1.1801237 (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/daytime-tv-fans-outraged-obama-speech-va-hospitals-article-1.1801237)
Brian
-
That enraged Twitter users upset at Obama constantly interrupting their shows.
Right, no rage for CBS and ABC cutting in to show the press conference, just that goddamn Mooslim Socialist blocking them from watching Sherri Shepherd try to be funny.
Absolutely farking incredible. You wanna know why people didn't "get" Sajak's "joke"? Because asshats like that actually do exist.
-
That enraged Twitter users upset at Obama constantly interrupting their shows.
Right, no rage for CBS and ABC cutting in to show the press conference, just that goddamn Mooslim Socialist blocking them from watching Sherri Shepherd try to be funny.
And before anybody chimes in saying Chris is exaggerating:
1) this didn't seem to happen (raging over interruptions) as often in the previous administration
2) five years in, people are STILL trying to find ways to have him disqualified from office for not being a natural born citizen because they can't handle a black man being elected President twice. Your approval of his performance unwithstanding.
-
1) this didn't seem to happen (raging over interruptions) as often in the previous administration
How ubiquitous was Twitter back then?
It's possible that the complainants are just displeased that the show is preempted, and not who is doing it.
-
1) this didn't seem to happen (raging over interruptions) as often in the previous administration
How ubiquitous was Twitter back then?
It's possible that the complainants are just displeased that the show is preempted, and not who is doing it.
It's possible. But to dismiss it outright, especially given that there are many people who just hate the Prez just to do it, does no good.
-
I guess I don't follow your point: if the reason that "this didn't happen during the previous administration" is because the means of complaining wasn't there," then there's your answer. No one complained about George Washington's messages interrupting a favorite television show because television didn't exist.
There will always be people who need to tweak their perspective antenna. This too shall pass.
(Last night for some reason the last half of Millionaire got cut off because Tivo switched to "channel 1" on that tuner. I deleted the program from the hard drive and moved on to @midnight. Some of us are better at handling adversity than others.)
-
Your approval of his performance unwithstanding.
Regardless of your approval of his performance. And the word you were going for originally is 'notwithstanding' and generally doesn't land at the end of a sentence.
It's possible. But to dismiss it outright, especially given that there are many people who just hate the Prez just to do it, does no good.
Their motives are immaterial as far as I'm concerned. They need to crawl back into their holes and stop bothering us normals.
-
I guess I don't follow your point: if the reason that "this didn't happen during the previous administration" is because the means of complaining wasn't there," then there's your answer.
Then yes, you don't follow the point, which is: people still complained, but they placed the blame at the foot of the network cutting in on what they perceived to be non-news, whereas now they've switched to blaming the blah guy behind the podium because Faux Nooz has told them that EVERYTHING is his fault OMG Benghazi.
-
People complained about it when it was W., Clinton, H.W., Reagan, and so on. They just used different mediums.
Having worked in a news station, I guarantee you blue-haired biddies called the station to bitch over missing TPiR, Wheel, Y&R or whatever other game show/soap opera/fine daytime programming the Commander in Chief had them missing. And yes, the methods of complaining were different. In 1984, you called or wrote a letter. In 1994, you may have been able to send an email. In 2004, you could complain via LiveJournal and maybe Facebook*. Now, you have all of those, plus Twitter, text message, or whatever other blog.
That being said, Bush had his haters**, but it was not because of the color of his skin or his heritage. Chris P. is absolutely right; Obama could find a cure for cancer and AIDS, and folks would still say "ZOMG Socialist Muslim Black Guy!" and continue letting Faux News convince them he is the Antichrist.
*Although back then it was just a silly little college network
**Sorry to use that word, but it actually fits in the literal sense of the word
-
There are more TPIR fanb0iz than I thought!
-
We get a lot of angry phone calls when a show is interrupted for a special report or special weather coverage, and that's now expanded to angry Facebook comments on the station's page. The complaints haven't changed, just the medium in which people complain. It does seem to depend on the show though. Hardly anyone complains when The View is interrupted, but we get a ton whenever General Hospital or something in primetime is.
-
We get a lot of angry phone calls when a show is interrupted for a special report or special weather coverage, and that's now expanded to angry Facebook comments on the station's page. The complaints haven't changed, just the medium in which people complain. It does seem to depend on the show though. Hardly anyone complains when The View is interrupted, but we get a ton whenever General Hospital or something in primetime is.
You mean there's a media market where nobody really watches The View? I'd fit in perfectly there.
-
It's possible. But to dismiss it outright, especially given that there are many people who just hate the Prez just to do it, does no good.
Their motives are immaterial as far as I'm concerned. They need to crawl back into their holes and stop bothering us normals.
But they won't. Because their lives need meaning. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
Hell, I remember some people I know getting mad when my Millionaire episode got preempted in certain markets when it aired in primary slots around last Christmas. Boy howdy did some of those responses look unnecessarily hateful.
Regarding the criticisms of President Obama: no president, regardless of who he is, is immune to criticism. It comes with the job. That said, a lot of the criticisms laid at the feet of the prez is based largely on misinterpretation of facts, ignorance, and out and out racism. The spin always exists, but the ACA was based on Mitt Romney's Massachusetts law (which people conveniently forgot) and many thought that Obama was going to lose handily in the electoral vote, not learning from past mistakes. And do not even start on the birthers with me.
-
That being said, Bush had his haters**, but it was not because of the color of his skin or his heritage. ...
Yes, he did. They just weren't as obnoxiously vocal as today.
Racism goes full circle, sir.
-
That being said, Bush had his haters**, but it was not because of the color of his skin or his heritage. ...
Yes, he did. They just weren't as obnoxiously vocal as today.
Racism goes full circle, sir.
That's bullshit and you know it. I defy you to find me one person other than Kanye West who hated W. because of his being white.
And I know BFG doesn't need me to speak for him but I certainly don't like your implication.
-
I defy you to find me one person other than Kanye West who hated W. because of his being white.
Oh, this isn't going to end well for you...
-
I defy you to find me one person other than Kanye West who hated W. because of his being white.
Oh, this isn't going to end well for you...
Perhaps I should take it in a different direction then.
Original question withdrawn.
New question: how do you know for certain that your statement is factual and not just speculation you're cooking up to justify a position that's wrong?
-
New question: how do you know for certain that your statement is factual and not just speculation you're cooking up to justify a position that's wrong?
Slightly better-handled (until the end there), but the answer is still the same: do you really think there isn't a single person who has referred to GWB as a "that cracker-ass-cracker in the White House"?
I don't think Thunder was pointing out anything more nefarious than that.
-
New question: how do you know for certain that your statement is factual and not just speculation you're cooking up to justify a position that's wrong?
Slightly better-handled (until the end there), but the answer is still the same: do you really think there isn't a single person who has referred to GWB as a "that cracker-ass-cracker in the White House"?
I don't think Thunder was pointing out anything more nefarious than that.
Certainly not, but those people had enough sense to keep it to themselves or not spread it like chickenpox all over the media. And those that didn't, well, got theirs. :)
That said, I read Thunder's statement in a different manner: that because some unnamed individuals said racially insensitive things about GWB, it makes the larger number doing so to Barry O in a much more vile manner justified. I don't like that.
-
That said, I read Thunder's statement in a different manner: that because some unnamed individuals said racially insensitive things about GWB, it makes the larger number doing so to Barry O in a much more vile manner justified. I don't like that.
Neither do I, which is why I'm pretty sure that's not where he was going with that.
-
That said, I read Thunder's statement in a different manner: that because some unnamed individuals said racially insensitive things about GWB, it makes the larger number doing so to Barry O in a much more vile manner justified. I don't like that.
Neither do I, which is why I'm pretty sure that's not where he was going with that.
I don't know...considering some of his more recent posts I can't not entertain the notion. But to each his own, as I say.
-
That being said, Bush had his haters**, but it was not because of the color of his skin or his heritage. ...
Yes, he did. They just weren't as obnoxiously vocal as today.
Racism goes full circle, sir.
Sure it does, I'll give you that. But I'd say for every Kanye outburst, you've probably had 10 more people demanding a birth certificate or calling the president a Muslim, but as a pejorative. We haven't even touched on the number of people who have openly called him a type of racist slur (not just the N-word), or worse, threatened to assassinate him.
However, I'd still say that 90% of those who disliked Bush either hated his policies, thought he was out of touch with middle class (not racist, just out of touch), or fed off of the jokes about his perceived lack of intelligence. That's prolly where the "obnoxiously vocal" part comes in, and goes back to my point about having more media available today, as opposed to less than a decade ago.
-
However, I'd still say that 90% of those who disliked Bush either hated his policies, thought he was out of touch with middle class (not racist, just out of touch), or fed off of the jokes about his perceived lack of intelligence.
What's different today? For any president roughly half the country disagrees with his policies. For every idiot racist dumbass there's thousands of people who just don't like his platform. Maybe tens of thousands.
The great thing about social media is that it reveals the idiot racist dumbassery of people who think that way, but there's a difference between not liking someone, not liking where he stands, and bigotry.
(I'll note for the crowd Russell Brand's contribution at some awards show referring to the previous president as "that retarded cowboy." Way to elevate the dialog there, guy.)
-
I don't know...considering some of his more recent posts I can't not entertain the notion. But to each his own, as I say.
I'm going to ask this politely.
If you have a question regarding the murkiness of anything that I say, please feel free to contact me directly. My inbox is open to you and I'll be glad to give you my email address.
We've had our differences before but I've moved way past this and want you to do the same.
-
Nothing new. Isn't there the story of housewives being enraged in the 80's because all the networks were covering the Challenger disaster?
There's always going to be shithead idiots who are really that stupid, or are trolling for a rise out of the sane.
I'll say that I'm not above being disappointed that a TV show I wanted to watch is being preempted, but after about 10 seconds I'm over it and either listen, find something else to watch, or complain about how Casey Anthony wasn't worth round the clock coverage.
Honestly, the President should be applauded for speaking for 20 minutes and breaking into The View. That was 20 less minutes people had to be exposed to Jenny "It Causes Autism" McCarthy.
-
I'll say that I'm not above being disappointed that a TV show I wanted to watch is being preempted, but after about 10 seconds I'm over it and either listen, find something else to watch, or complain about how Casey Anthony wasn't worth round the clock coverage.
That reminds me: I need to check in on CNN to see if there's any news about the Malaysian airplane crash.
Honestly, the President should be applauded for speaking for 20 minutes and breaking into The View. That was 20 less minutes people had to be exposed to Jenny "It Causes Autism" McCarthy.
For the brief period until someone wrests the crown from you, you sir have won the internet.