Log in

No account? Create an account
DT: come reap
Posted on 2004.08.01 at 13:48
How I feel about it all: boredbored
Soundtrack: BBC News, which seems to be taking over NPR.
What's your least favourite news item? Political, Entertainment, other news...What bores you, turns you off, makes you gag?

My least favourite right now is the Parmalat scandal. I just can't work up enough feeling to be much more than vaguely bored by the whole thing.

The entertainment news that I hate the most is...well. I hate ALL entertainment news for the most part. Y'know, Entertainment Weekly, Access Hollywood and the like. *dry heaves* Especially anything that mentions BenLo, Britney Spears, or ANY reality TV. Bleh. Bleccch. Eww.

Basketball also leaves me completely cold. Ech.


quiridion at 2004-01-08 11:34 (UTC) ()
What's your least favourite news item?

I hate loathe and detest sports news, 'cos I just don't care. I mean, if there is some world shattering news event and Scotland have won at football (or been knocked out after getting further than usual--which more frequently happens) then the football result will be on the front page of the newspapers (and also pages 2, 3 and 4) with the world shattering news event coming second. It is pathetic! I also hate headlines like 'Black Rapist Gets Six Years' (as though they have to specify the fact they are black, implying that all black people are evil etc etc). I hate that sort of brain-washing propaganda shit. Actually, a lot of the time, I hate the media period.
The Foo Queen
erebor at 2004-01-08 11:44 (UTC) ()
'Black Rapist Gets Six Years'


You mean there are still places where they get away with shit like that???
quiridion at 2004-01-08 11:51 (UTC) ()
Yes. Unfortunately there is a lot of unintentional racism in Scotland, which is mainly due to ignorance rather than hatred. It is the one thing I hate about my country. :(
The Foo Queen
erebor at 2004-01-08 11:43 (UTC) ()
I agree. Thumbs down on Bennifer, Britney and reality crap. And even moreso on reports about women whose only claim to fame is (1) money (2) blonde hair (3) big boobs ... okay (d) all of the above. I like entertainment reports as long as they are about something that falls under the heading 'performing arts'. Performances. Talent. Arts. No thanks on the personal lives of the celebs.

But I universally tune out sports information. I've never understood why it's part of the news. Other than that's it's big business, of course. I'd rather the reporting time was spent on something of more import.
my life's so common it disappears
songdog at 2004-01-08 12:35 (UTC) ()
Oh, yes. My least favorite news item is entertainment news as well. Actually, I hate it being called *news*. It is mostly *gossip*. Occasionally I will listen to "Fresh Air" when a celebrity such as, say, Paul McCartney is on. There are many entertainers that I really admire for the work they do. But I am completely uninterested in where they have been seen, and with whom. In fact, I kind of resent this sort of inquiry on their behalfs....

Oddly enough, I just got an email from *Madonna*, supposedly, on behalf of General Clark's campaign. I like Madonna, I'm voting for Clark, but that she is supporting him is completely meaningless to me, except that I perhaps believe that she will vote for him, too, so, one more vote for Wes.

I also hate reality TV. And most other TV. But reality shows suck bigger raw eggs than pretty much any other thing that seems to pass as "entertainment". And I haven't deduced one iota of "reality" from the mercifully brief exposure I've had to these shows.

I used to occasionally pay a smidgen of attention to basketball when Larry Bird was playing for the Celtics, just to see his amazing talent. All the other guys on the team could be completely choking, and they'd hand the ball to Larry, and he'd pretty much win it on his own. Since then, yep. Cold. What I really hate is hockey. And I dislike auto racing of any kind. Both seem to be about waiting for blood and gore and guts (and in the case of hockey, veins in their teeth) to happen.
the day you left was just my beginning
patchfire at 2004-01-08 12:44 (UTC) ()
I hate entertainment news that's about the 'personalities.' I like it if they're just discussing a book, movie, album, show, what have you. Well, only if I might like it too. No interest in most tv shows and at least half of all movies. (Right now I am in this odd position where I have /seen/ every movie in the theatre that I want to see in the theatre. This is even going to last for the rest of the month, as far as I know. *boggles*)

I used to read about football, when I a) could afford the newspaper (ahh, student rates!), and b) had time to read it (aka sometime before 5 August 2000). Now, even if I had the paper and so on, I wouldn't bother with sports. Have turned horribly boring and would only read the political junk.

My NPR stations are crap, I tried my other radio but reception was scratchy and pathetic. You'd think a city this large could have a decent NPR station!
closet_geek at 2004-01-08 13:16 (UTC) ()
I think it's more the spirit of the news itself that I actually hate. It's become nothing but a magnifier for the terrible in society and preys on our fears, all for the sake of ratings, and I highly resent that. The T.V in my room has become my alarm clock, I have it programmed to the local news channel and it's the first thing I hear in the morning. Really, there's no better start to your day than, (hypothetically) "A twelve year old girl scout was raped and left for dead in the high school footbal stadium. Meanwhile, a puppy was cooked alive and eaten by Michael Jackson. Also, there is no more ice cream for anyone, ever." I heard a joke once...The news is where they start out with "Good Morning" and then tell you why it isn't. It's not as if I want anyone to be sugar-coating things for me, but I don't think that this one-sided 'everything is terrible' reporting is great journalism either. While I'm sure the reports like the girl scout story is true (and I would sympathize), I'm sure, somewhere, somehow, a kitten was caught up a tree and was rescued by some nice firemen. There should be a balance, not just shock stories.

Plus, I hate the stories about Micheal Jackson. (More commonly known as Wacko Jacko.) Innocent before proven guilty.
try to catch the deluge in a paper cup
primroseburrows at 2004-01-08 22:13 (UTC) ()
It's become nothing but a magnifier for the terrible in society and preys on our fears, all for the sake of ratings, and I highly resent that.

Yesyesyes. I abhor local news because it's all sensationalism. I can't do anything about the fact that there was a woman killed by a hit-and-run driver in Providence. I can do something about a referendum in the state for more traffic law enforcement, except I'll never know, because that particular subject doesn't sell product. Wah and bleh.
petulans at 2004-01-08 21:25 (UTC) ()
I have to admit, I despise one media trend (which I believe is confined to the UK, at least in it's severity) above all others. Namely, the practise of promoting the murders of schoolchildren to become the topic of the nation's dinnertime conversations for anything up to six months at a time.

In recent years there has been a disturbing trend to not simply report these events and provide appropriate follow-up information when appropriate, but to swamp those watching or reading the news with every step of the case and subsequent trial from beginning to end, often running over periods half a year or more.

I'm all for the reporting of such events in a manner which increases public awareness (and thus with any luck safety), but, usually at about the point when the names of the victims switch from being 'given name surname' format to simply their first names in the news, the nation is expected to know the cases inside out and it is deemed newsworthy that both the killer and victims both ate porridge regularly or that the killer's next-door-neighbour's mother's best friend's lover once said that he was a bit spooky at times.

It drives me mad. I've actually, as hinted at in my interest list, got a fairly active interest in abnormal (specifically sociopathic) psychology and serial killers particularly. I've read a good twenty or twenty-five books on the subject, from essentially long psychology papers to recounts of the events and personalities involved in Richard Chase's "Sacramento Vampire" 'hijinks'. However, when I see the media circus fuelled by incensing public interest in these matters beyond the point where it serves a useful purpose, and, to be cynical (though I very much suspect realistic), cashing in on a terrible event primarily to increase interest in the news and thus increase sales or viewing figures, it really drives me up the wall. On a more personal level, I don't appreciate that I'm viewed as being uninformed when it slips out down the pub that no, I didn't know that "slashin' rippa" John Doe wore briefs, not boxers, and I certainly don't want to be dragged into a fifteen minute conversation about it.
The Moonlight Sonata
moonlight69 at 2004-01-08 21:37 (UTC) ()
*wibbles* You no likee basketball? :( The game, or just the news on it?
try to catch the deluge in a paper cup
primroseburrows at 2004-01-08 22:14 (UTC) ()
The game. And the news on it. AM baseball girl.

I still love you, though. *snogs*
Nec timeo Nec Sperno
muffytaj at 2004-01-08 23:37 (UTC) ()
Sports news. No contest.
peacey at 2004-01-09 03:47 (UTC) ()
I am getting so incredibly sick of political news, vis-a-vie primaries/caucuses. Candidates becoming frantic and desperate as the elections grow closer, telling every group what they want to hear. Bleah. What an awful taste it leaves in my mouth. Elections bring out the worst in American politics. They're all liars to one degree or another on some level. I'm sick of it already and am NOT looking forward to the peppering of front lawns with political signs as the election gets closer. I have never understood that. As if sticking a sign in your front yard will influence someone speeding past...although who knows? Maybe if some brainiac sees enough of them, he/she will vote for the candidate based on name recognition alone. People have done dumber things. I'm a big believer in the privacy of the vote and I don't necessarily care to announce my political affiliations to any random passerby (though I'm not exactly hard to peg, am I Kel?). Wishwishwish it was over.
try to catch the deluge in a paper cup
primroseburrows at 2004-01-09 05:28 (UTC) ()
I've watched a few of the debates (and listened to one), and I'm a bit of a political addict. But it's getting to the point that I don't want to hear the candidates (of any affiliaton) say the same things overandover. I already know what John Kerry or Howard Dean is going to say about George Bush , what Bush is going to say about Medicare and Iraq. But. I still watch, and listen, because occasionally something new comes up. I guess I'm more interested in how my gov't is going to be run in the next four years. I still watch, though, because it's fun to yell at the telly, and because I don't want to miss anything and *stands* my name is Primrose and I'm a political addict (everybody say, "hi, Primrose!")

I don't have a yard sign. All I have is a bumpersticker, my pin and this nifty icon *points*, which I don't think will change anyone's mind (I may go to NH though, for the weekend before the primary, to actually DO something that might actually help). I'd rather have someone with an informed opinion decide to vote against my candidate/cause/yadda than just blindly vote because they recognise a name on a sign. People who vote on the basis of name recognition and uninformed opinions deserve what they get. They may as well stay home on election day and watch "Joe Millionare" or another of those uber-intelligent shows. I'll be over here listening to NPR. *g* God, I sound like a snob. *nances off ,nose in the air*
Previous Entry  Next Entry