this morning i saw several stories on the l.a. times website that i thought i would comment on, or at least mention.
the first was about a brother and sister that were recently shot, both randomly, at the same birthday party. of course, the story is told with some semi-sappy details and journalism, but it's still sad. these two were @ a party, not standing near each other, and someone opened fire through the fence. both were stuck and killed. sad stuff. the story also stood out to me because i've been places recently, and you're just standing around, enjoying yourself, and some random stuff like this could just happen. generally, i tend to believe that crime follows criminals. that is, you usually don't end up in trouble like this if you're not mixing it up. and, generally, statistics show this. but, random stuff does happen. sad stuff.
the second story that i wanted to comment on was about a new reality tv show. it's about a "news anchor." basically, the producer of american idol and some other shows took this actress/model/dancer/whatever and plopped her into some town in texas. of course, the other news anchors are upset about this. it wipes away what little credibility that these "journalists" have. especially upset are the other females at the station, who are mortified that a barbie-esque woman is being plopped into their situation. but, can they complain? or, do they become shrews or worse for "hating" on this blond? so, what is a news anchor other than a pretty face, or a voice that reads a teleprompter. let's be honest, it's not like most anchors are out researching stories. they have something written for them, and they deliver it like a well versed pitch. frankly, it doesn't bother me at all that this show is exposing the "news" for what it is: a glorified dog & pony show. perhaps i'm being too harsh. but i'll allow myself to do that. the nightly news is barely any different than any other nightly television program. it's just not as funny as the comedies and the story lines often aren't as interesting as the dramas. anchors are chosen for their look, their voice, their delivery. and if they don't fit the look, they change. if you don't believe me, ask kopi soteropolis about his amazing hair regeneration (or, if you prefer, toupe). or ask yourself why it seems like every news team has a blond and a brunette on it?
the third story somewhat follows. it seems that mattel is suing a porn site. china barbie is apparently not a chinese barbie. or, at least mattel doesn't want you to associate their barbie with this porn star. they believe that this other company, "used a domain name containing the word 'barbie' in a 'bad faith attempt to profit from Mattel's Barbie trademarks." i think i have to agree.
since i'm talking about women, why not mention the fact that the l.a. times has a female motorcycle reviewer. i always thought this was pretty cool, and have linked to her reviews before. the bike world is dominated by men, which i am one of. i would imagine that most bike journalists/reviewers/etc are also men. so, i'm pretty impressed that the times hasn't been afraid to use a woman where it would be so easy to just go with a man. anyway, to the story. a custom motorcycle company has a pretty nice bike that they designed just for the ladies. pretty cool idea. i especially enjoy her semi-practical suggestions for improvement of a "ladies" bike.
finally, i think i'll end with a story about a possible credit crisis. this, apparently, may be the straw that breaks the camel's back for the republicans. what? an unwinnable quagmire isn't? the systematic disregard for our rights and constitution isn't? the continual impeacheable acts committed by the president, vice president and attorney general aren't?
No comments:
Post a Comment