One of the downsides of having an empathic nature is that even TV shows and the trials and tribulations of their characters can leave me feeling for another's loss or pain.
Then there's Flight MH370, the Seattle mudslide, recent fires in NJ (Pt Pleasant motel & Edison elementary school--both supposedly caused by a discarded cigarette), and the "little pockets of pain" all over the world that devastate families and communities.
Sometimes being totally media aware can be draining.
All we can do is pray, offer strength and hope, and thank God for every moment we have a semblance of peace in our lives.
And turn off the flow of information rushing at us--at least a few seconds.
All this being said, I still don't believe Joss is really dead.
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Monday, May 16, 2011
No Tears for Oprah
Unless you have been under a rock and/or don't watch TV, it's impossible to escape the fact that Oprah (Winfrey) is ends the network run of her talk show this week after 25 years on-air.
I will preface these points by saying my words here are not about being a hater. I respect Oprah's accomplishments and believe she has worked hard for everything she has. For the most part, she appears to have a good heart but has suffered from some misguidance as she's gone about her career.
Although it may be overstating the obvious, Oprah deserves props for bringing our attention to many issues that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. However, I jumped off the Oprah bandwagon a few years ago. You will figure out why as you scan through the list below.
(Vogue Managing Editor) Andre Leon Talley. I stopped watching Oprah when her guest was this pompous arbiter of all that is fashion and womanhood, who was able to declare, unchallenged: "A woman is nothing without a pair of Manolos in her closet." Now as we all know, the Talleys of this world are pretty much paid to promote "high fashion," "haute couture," or whatever they're calling it these days. (Frankly, I call it misogynistic, size-biased, overpriced, budget-killing "stuff," at best.) If a woman needs fashion to feel like a woman, she should take a big step backward and find some real meaning in her life because it sure isn't in her closet.
Oprah made the Talleys of the world that much more powerful and never used her journalistic skills or impartiality to make valid points contesting such ridiculous assertions. Yet in a world with such increasingly precarious economic fragility, the need for more practical positions is becoming glaringly obvious with each passing day.
The hypocrisy in declaring the importance of "angel networks" and "now you know" and being aghast at the number of families going into debt due to "overspending" were clear to me, if not to the rest of her fans. I wrote, I expressed my concerns, no one paid attention. So I stopped paying attention too… to Oprah. I just couldn't stand the ridiculousness of the contrasts.
Target audience. In my opinion, although Oprah is indeed a proud Black woman who has never forgotten her life growing up with modest means in Black America, her target audience has obviously been middle to upper middle class white women. Many people of color have remained faithful fans over the years but in my opinion, I don't really believe Oprah has consistently used her juice to fully embrace and serve those who are still struggling with the kind of life she had been living before she started on her road to stardom.
To me, if anyone needs unending support and guidance, it's those trying to find a way out of desperation or a place from where they don't believe they'll ever emerge. Let's just say Oprah could focus a little more on those who seek direction and support than catering to those who already have the advantage of being able to tune in to her daily.
Commercialization. Those "My Favorite Things" segments have largely been focused on items embraced and affordable mostly by her middle to upper middle class devotees. While those episodes seem to be exciting and entertaining to watch—not a dry eye or seat in the audience—they were really hour-long commercials featuring pricier products that were more trendy than practical. It's not like Oprah paid full price for every item out of her own deep pockets; there were advertising trade-offs by the companies involved and lots of freebies for the privilege, and so on.
Actually, when any show concentrates on a certain person or group of persons that then receives huge rewards for their experiences, there's always that bittersweet sense of exclusion everyone else feels… as if they haven't done enough to benefit, they aren't worthy. Truth be told, I've stopped watching most shows like that because I'm just an all-exclusive kind of chick and I feel like others are being exploited for my entertainment.
Celebrity. In such a ridiculously celebrity-focused society such as ours, I'm sure topic-driven shows had to take second place to celebrity-driven shows. This no doubt included pressure from the network and staff. But Oprah took a turn somewhere along the line and her shows became more about fabulousness than real people. If someone with her juice didn't try to upset the apple cart and push the boundaries, then her mission to be real is still left somewhat unaccomplished. In a world where (literally) 1000 people can be bought for the price of one high-in-demand Hermes bag, Oprah still has some explaining to do for some degree of selling out.
Even if Oprah had taken her thyroid issues to a public audience more conscientiously, she could have made a significant difference for so many viewers. I contacted the show years before she was diagnosed because of what I saw to be an overwhelming prevalence of autoimmune diseases, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and similar medical conditions often categorized as "hypochondria" or "imagined." There seems to be astonishingly little information offered by broadcast media to help sufferers to understand what's happening to them and what can be done about it. Ironically (and tragically), it is largely Oprah's target audience that become primary sufferers from these conditions and could benefit the most from this kind of attention. The one episode or two done on Oprah's condition was so much more about her than about the condition.
Money. Again, Oprah deserves her billions, although I admit I giggled at her tear-laden declaration that her life has been so "enriched" by her audience. We should only see a drop in the bucket of the riches she has accumulated since her first show aired 25 years ago. But here's the reality: By having her own cable network (OWN—Oprah Winfrey Network), she stands to multiply her billions, especially when the time comes, I have no doubt, she announces that "The Oprah Winfrey Show" will see a new life on OWN.
So Hasta la vista, Oprah. Congratulations on your achievements. I know the networks are sad but I'm sure you're not disappearing off the face of the earth, either. Paraphrasing what your old pal Arnold has said: "You'll be back."
I will preface these points by saying my words here are not about being a hater. I respect Oprah's accomplishments and believe she has worked hard for everything she has. For the most part, she appears to have a good heart but has suffered from some misguidance as she's gone about her career.
Although it may be overstating the obvious, Oprah deserves props for bringing our attention to many issues that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. However, I jumped off the Oprah bandwagon a few years ago. You will figure out why as you scan through the list below.
(Vogue Managing Editor) Andre Leon Talley. I stopped watching Oprah when her guest was this pompous arbiter of all that is fashion and womanhood, who was able to declare, unchallenged: "A woman is nothing without a pair of Manolos in her closet." Now as we all know, the Talleys of this world are pretty much paid to promote "high fashion," "haute couture," or whatever they're calling it these days. (Frankly, I call it misogynistic, size-biased, overpriced, budget-killing "stuff," at best.) If a woman needs fashion to feel like a woman, she should take a big step backward and find some real meaning in her life because it sure isn't in her closet.
Oprah made the Talleys of the world that much more powerful and never used her journalistic skills or impartiality to make valid points contesting such ridiculous assertions. Yet in a world with such increasingly precarious economic fragility, the need for more practical positions is becoming glaringly obvious with each passing day.
The hypocrisy in declaring the importance of "angel networks" and "now you know" and being aghast at the number of families going into debt due to "overspending" were clear to me, if not to the rest of her fans. I wrote, I expressed my concerns, no one paid attention. So I stopped paying attention too… to Oprah. I just couldn't stand the ridiculousness of the contrasts.
Target audience. In my opinion, although Oprah is indeed a proud Black woman who has never forgotten her life growing up with modest means in Black America, her target audience has obviously been middle to upper middle class white women. Many people of color have remained faithful fans over the years but in my opinion, I don't really believe Oprah has consistently used her juice to fully embrace and serve those who are still struggling with the kind of life she had been living before she started on her road to stardom.
To me, if anyone needs unending support and guidance, it's those trying to find a way out of desperation or a place from where they don't believe they'll ever emerge. Let's just say Oprah could focus a little more on those who seek direction and support than catering to those who already have the advantage of being able to tune in to her daily.
Commercialization. Those "My Favorite Things" segments have largely been focused on items embraced and affordable mostly by her middle to upper middle class devotees. While those episodes seem to be exciting and entertaining to watch—not a dry eye or seat in the audience—they were really hour-long commercials featuring pricier products that were more trendy than practical. It's not like Oprah paid full price for every item out of her own deep pockets; there were advertising trade-offs by the companies involved and lots of freebies for the privilege, and so on.
Actually, when any show concentrates on a certain person or group of persons that then receives huge rewards for their experiences, there's always that bittersweet sense of exclusion everyone else feels… as if they haven't done enough to benefit, they aren't worthy. Truth be told, I've stopped watching most shows like that because I'm just an all-exclusive kind of chick and I feel like others are being exploited for my entertainment.
Celebrity. In such a ridiculously celebrity-focused society such as ours, I'm sure topic-driven shows had to take second place to celebrity-driven shows. This no doubt included pressure from the network and staff. But Oprah took a turn somewhere along the line and her shows became more about fabulousness than real people. If someone with her juice didn't try to upset the apple cart and push the boundaries, then her mission to be real is still left somewhat unaccomplished. In a world where (literally) 1000 people can be bought for the price of one high-in-demand Hermes bag, Oprah still has some explaining to do for some degree of selling out.
Even if Oprah had taken her thyroid issues to a public audience more conscientiously, she could have made a significant difference for so many viewers. I contacted the show years before she was diagnosed because of what I saw to be an overwhelming prevalence of autoimmune diseases, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and similar medical conditions often categorized as "hypochondria" or "imagined." There seems to be astonishingly little information offered by broadcast media to help sufferers to understand what's happening to them and what can be done about it. Ironically (and tragically), it is largely Oprah's target audience that become primary sufferers from these conditions and could benefit the most from this kind of attention. The one episode or two done on Oprah's condition was so much more about her than about the condition.
Money. Again, Oprah deserves her billions, although I admit I giggled at her tear-laden declaration that her life has been so "enriched" by her audience. We should only see a drop in the bucket of the riches she has accumulated since her first show aired 25 years ago. But here's the reality: By having her own cable network (OWN—Oprah Winfrey Network), she stands to multiply her billions, especially when the time comes, I have no doubt, she announces that "The Oprah Winfrey Show" will see a new life on OWN.
So Hasta la vista, Oprah. Congratulations on your achievements. I know the networks are sad but I'm sure you're not disappearing off the face of the earth, either. Paraphrasing what your old pal Arnold has said: "You'll be back."
Monday, April 25, 2011
Turning On is A Turn-Off
There's a preponderance of images riding the airwaves and so little of it is satisfying an itch. It's like getting a craving for something but you're not sure exactly what you want. You're only sure what you don't --and I'm getting plenty of that.
This William & Kate thing is so ridiculously overkill that it borders on the obscene. Not every woman grows up with a princess fantasy and many who do were probably buried in pink and chiffon since birth and never moved on. (Makes it quite difficult for the man who falls in love with her to grant every desire, since there's no magic wand.)
W&K appear happy, it all sounds like grand fun but let's just wish them well and let it play out.
I'm a grownup. I don't need such trivial distractions from the brutal realities of life by living vicariously through people across the pond and monitoring their every breath. Instead of insisting I wake up at 4am to watch something I can easily DVR or watch in clips ad infinitum, constructively inform me about things that matter! It's five days before the wedding; I've already turned off all local and national morning news shows and watching reruns of Frasier instead!
Really, just who is making the decisions these days? The news business has cut back by firing talented veteran news professionals the past few years. People who became honored and credible journalists dedicated to bringing quality news to viewers and readers for decades. The money saved has been invested instead in making sure we know what underwear Kate's wearing on wedding night.
It's deplorable.
In America alone, we are intricately involved/engaged in several major wars; $5 gas prices have quickly become the norm; tornadoes have destroyed entire towns; we have yet to determine the complete economic, environmental and humanitarian impact of Japan's earthquake and nuclear disasters; we are continually told the economy is improving but can't figure out what we're doing wrong because all our cutbacks aren't helping our families stay afloat financially; and beautiful young women are vanishing without explanation. Emerging us in the royal wedding is … insulting.
Here's my initial television wish list:
- Don't bury me in tearjerker scenarios by exploiting the disadvantaged
- Stop trying to convince me that "Cougar Town," "30 Rock," "Mad Love," "Mr. Sunshine," and "Parks & Recreation" are quality television. Overly frantic or pot-induced scenarios do not equal funny or entertaining.
- More first-run episodes of current programming. There are some shows on their third play of episodes that were new at season's start.
- Use your brain and don't cancel a show with as great potential and star power as "The Paul Reiser Show" after two runs. Yeah, it needs a bit of tweaking but it's got much better bones than 75% of anything else making an appearance these days. (Such a bone head, knee jerk reaction to pull it.)
- Stop taking the lowest common denominator of female and focusing on their despicably vile behavior, then make sure they receive millions of dollars and unending attention for the effort
- Tell me how to stay sane in the most frightening of economies; with the most apathetic of authorities; the least inattentive and uncooperative of vendors, salespeople and service people; and help us understand why the most vigorous of us are ready to collapse in a heap on the floor from all the stress.
Just in case you think I'm no youngster and not hip enough to know what's worth viewing, I watch more television across the board and generations than most. It's people my age who are still watching television these days and should have some consideration in programming content. My voice can't be the only one shouting.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Ageism & Discrimination in the News Business
You would have to be extremely clueless to know the news industry and not see the rampant discrimination. Ageism has been par for the course for a long time. Does one need to go back to the Norville-Pauley days to recognize it? Norville essentially has since proven herself in many ways, although she suffered "reverse ageism backlash" more than most. (That was so long ago that Norville now has to be the one looking for the "little pishers" trying to edge her out of the way.)
Kaity Tong remains a reputable, likeable newsperson, as does Marchiano in Sports and even Watkins as an anchor. (Watkins' contract, BTW, has NOT been renewed.) Kaity can still hold her own anywhere. None of the people mentioned in the article really look their age. (Can Kaity TRULY be almost 60???)
This being said, WPIX news is a train wreck and has been for quite some time. I believe it's more technically-induced than anchor-initiated but something's not right somewhere. I have literally watched the 10pm news fall apart mid-cast and the spirit of the anchors along with it. Methinks letting Berlamino go was a wise move because of this.
I watch WCBS and WABC news most frequently and although WABC has been riddled with tech problems for a while (appears to be more switcher and automation related than anything), their reporting and anchors remain professionally solid. (Except for the major Good Morning America faux pas last week during which Robin Roberts spread the word that "26 billion--1 out of every 7 people in the world--will be watching World Cup Soccer events at some point over the next 30 days..." I had just woken up in my autoimmune-disease-fog-ridden-state and knew how out of whack such a stat was. There are less than 6.9 billion people in the entire world!! But I digress...)
At least WABC appears faithful to their "oldtimers" more than most stations. And with good reason. You'd be a fool to let go of solid journalists the likes of a Diana Williams.
WCBS seems to ask the most of their anchors (Mary Calvi & Chris Wragge especially) and they come through with flying colors. They're solid, likeable and I sure hope they're getting paid for keeping the local news afloat (and in Wragge's case, the The Early Show Weekend... he's anchored the 11:00 news on a Friday and manages to co-anchor network at 7am the next morning with style and professionalism).
I worked behind the camera in news for several years and I can tell you that the industry kills many of its most dedicated. It took the best years I had left. Because I let it. Dedication to this or any job at the sacrifice of your health and mental well-being (regardless of your desire to make an impact and do good for others) is a mistake. I still physically suffer now (SEVEN YEARS LATER) and hardly anyone I worked with has looked back--despite the fact that I sourced THREE emmy-award winning stories before I left and few have even whispered my name.
Am I bitter? No, I'm really not. I let what happened to me happen. All I needed to do was walk away. Instead I stayed until I could barely crawl away. A word of warning to all: Monitor your health. No story, news director, paycheck... nothing is worth your health. Just look at the list of wonderful news people (not just in the large markets) who died from cancer... When your body's talking, listen. Don't put off a doctor's appointment to share the next big story. Because the one after that could be YOUR obit.
But a healthy older person who still has the chops... There's no reason for them to be drummed out and shame on all who think that's the way to go. Hope it bites you in the a$$ but good. Karma's a sonofagun. I just may smirk as I see it do its work.
Now if only someone at PIX could explain why anyone thought the scandal-mired Mendte was a good idea... I really try not to be mean but he was a washed up blowhard way before he made his way across the East River to share his mindless drivel on the airwaves--and get paid for it???
Kaity Tong remains a reputable, likeable newsperson, as does Marchiano in Sports and even Watkins as an anchor. (Watkins' contract, BTW, has NOT been renewed.) Kaity can still hold her own anywhere. None of the people mentioned in the article really look their age. (Can Kaity TRULY be almost 60???)
This being said, WPIX news is a train wreck and has been for quite some time. I believe it's more technically-induced than anchor-initiated but something's not right somewhere. I have literally watched the 10pm news fall apart mid-cast and the spirit of the anchors along with it. Methinks letting Berlamino go was a wise move because of this.
I watch WCBS and WABC news most frequently and although WABC has been riddled with tech problems for a while (appears to be more switcher and automation related than anything), their reporting and anchors remain professionally solid. (Except for the major Good Morning America faux pas last week during which Robin Roberts spread the word that "26 billion--1 out of every 7 people in the world--will be watching World Cup Soccer events at some point over the next 30 days..." I had just woken up in my autoimmune-disease-fog-ridden-state and knew how out of whack such a stat was. There are less than 6.9 billion people in the entire world!! But I digress...)
At least WABC appears faithful to their "oldtimers" more than most stations. And with good reason. You'd be a fool to let go of solid journalists the likes of a Diana Williams.
WCBS seems to ask the most of their anchors (Mary Calvi & Chris Wragge especially) and they come through with flying colors. They're solid, likeable and I sure hope they're getting paid for keeping the local news afloat (and in Wragge's case, the The Early Show Weekend... he's anchored the 11:00 news on a Friday and manages to co-anchor network at 7am the next morning with style and professionalism).
I worked behind the camera in news for several years and I can tell you that the industry kills many of its most dedicated. It took the best years I had left. Because I let it. Dedication to this or any job at the sacrifice of your health and mental well-being (regardless of your desire to make an impact and do good for others) is a mistake. I still physically suffer now (SEVEN YEARS LATER) and hardly anyone I worked with has looked back--despite the fact that I sourced THREE emmy-award winning stories before I left and few have even whispered my name.
Am I bitter? No, I'm really not. I let what happened to me happen. All I needed to do was walk away. Instead I stayed until I could barely crawl away. A word of warning to all: Monitor your health. No story, news director, paycheck... nothing is worth your health. Just look at the list of wonderful news people (not just in the large markets) who died from cancer... When your body's talking, listen. Don't put off a doctor's appointment to share the next big story. Because the one after that could be YOUR obit.
But a healthy older person who still has the chops... There's no reason for them to be drummed out and shame on all who think that's the way to go. Hope it bites you in the a$$ but good. Karma's a sonofagun. I just may smirk as I see it do its work.
Now if only someone at PIX could explain why anyone thought the scandal-mired Mendte was a good idea... I really try not to be mean but he was a washed up blowhard way before he made his way across the East River to share his mindless drivel on the airwaves--and get paid for it???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)