[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
an outlet
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 16:57:28 EST
From: JOELTLE515@xxxxxxx
Subject: an outlet..
I have decided to use this outlet, since I don't
really have any other
that
will reach a group of people, to express my outrage
and disgust and
anger over
the media frenzy about what I'm gonna call: "the
boob".
at a time where this country is expected to reach a
record deficit of
$500
billion this year, the bush administration "hinting"
that WMD in iraq
don't
exist (only cheney and rumsfeld seem to have hope that
it still does),
meanwhile
it is costing over 500 american lives and thousands
more of iraqi
civilians,
about over 1,000 people in the third world, as i'm
typing this, have
died from
either hunger or AIDS, John kerry is winning most of
the democratic
primaries,
and yet "the boob" is the biggest story this country
is dealing with.
who
cares?! and to top it all off, CBS have decided to ban
"miss J." from
the grammy
awards because of this incident. she was expected to
just simply
present and
introduce a tribute to Luther vandross. timberlake
however is expected
to go on
and I feel if he is so smart, he will protest this by
either making a
statement during his performance or drop out of the
program altogether.
how come
eminem was allowed to go on when he performed with
elton John but Janet
isn't?
ratings perhaps?
what has happened to this "free nation"? a country
where it seems
violence on
TV is more acceptable than sex or nudity. i'd rather
have the sex and
nudity
than the violence thank you. sorry if I sound like a
"hippie". i've
nothing
against violence on TV really, just seems unfair that
a stupid "boob"
and bono
cursing at the golden globes last year gets more
press. I think 9/11 is
a good
example of violence on television. but that's just me.
agree or disagree with me if you want, I just needed
an outlet to get
all
this off my chest. it's very rediculous. why should a
"free nation"
like america
having censoring on, let's say, the osbournes but when
it's aired in
england,
all the cursing is left in and no one makes a big deal
about it over
there?
.....................................................
I'm afraid i am very surprised at America's reaction
to this. I was watching the super bowl live here at
2am and enjoying a fucking great game. (some of us
brits do indeed understand, and enjoy this great
game.)
Anyway, as you rightly say, it seems that violence can
be shown on mainstream tv, pictures of innocent people
in the middle east with bits hanging off, shootings,
killings are all, it seems, accepted as the norm. It
is not the norm. Yet when it comes to nudity and bad
language, people are crucified for it. i always
thought it stupid that Roger may get in trouble for
swearing on stage -during a song! Nuts!!
Here in the uk though, as long as you put it in an
"arty" programme, you can get away with anything.
This week has been a good example. During a reality tv
programme, I'm a celeb, get me out of here, Johnny
Rotten, live on tv, said the fuck and cunt word. They
only had 80 complaints! (mind you, i think only 90
people watch it)
ANd as for that streaker at half-time at the
superbowl, the tv refused to show the pictures.He is a
serial streaker and has done many events over here. I
dont know what their concerns were about, he a very
small penis.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html