Larry King, I never knew ya!
You know, I seem to remember the days when Larry King was an icon of sorts, the type of interviewer that would ask hard-hitting questions to politically or culturally relevant (yes, using bold makes it seem cool) subjects that everyone would want to hear. Maybe it was just because I was really young or something that I seem to think that Larry King is now a shadow of his former self! Last night I saw him interview Kirstie Alley, who was promoting her new show, "Fat Actress", which I also saw the premier of on Showtime. Wow. He still asked the hard questions, such as, "How did this happen?", to which she answered, "You mean how did I get fat????" Honestly, between the number of tabloids with article titles like "Kirstie's Battle of the Bulg", her book, and now her show, isn't there something more interesting in the world to talk about than Kirstie Alley's getting fat? And why did he ask every question as if it were interesting? Was that to somehow trick the audience into thinking that pondering how and why someone gained weight was of any consequence to their lives?
And what about Kirstie Alley, anyway? Showtime's lineup last night could have been self-hatred for fat people night, with Supersize Me coming on before Alley's premier. Her show began with an agonizing ten-minute sequence of her weeping on the floor, ample breasts spilling out of a silk robe, calling various people who told her honestly that yes, she was fat. An interesting career choice on her part. It's a brave move to make yourself the "butt" of an extended, public joke like that, but I can see how she might have chosen to with no other options. Still, though, the show basically reaffirms that woman's worth is intrinsically tied to her weight, and the way it promotes the morality of fatness (a thin woman is morally superior to a fat one) is particularly tiresome. This is why I don't watch TV.
Speaking of the media, has anyone else been disturbed by this recent Bush-loving orgy in terms of Middle East policy? So the Lebanese start protesting Syrian occupation after their former prime minister is killed and there's yet another cease fire. The Egyptian president decides to hold elections. Therefore, the occupation of Iraq and subsequent diplomacy by the bush admin. has resulted in a new wave of democracy in the Middle East!!!!!!!!!!!!! (some slightly more nuanced, but still illusrative examples here and here). Now, this type of praise has been somewhat more restrained since the Hezbollah demonstration. I am not saying that I am rooting for Hezbollah; Syria out of Lebanon would be great, and it's exciting that the Lebanese are out in the streets. I am not saying that I want the suicide bomber attacks and fence building to continue; a cease-fire and some semblance of peace between Israel and Palestine would be something that I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. I would like to point out that I think it's dangerous to make assumptions about cause and effect the way the Bush admin is especially brilliant at doing, but even more dangerous to have the media process and blur the difference between these as truth. This is how it works:
Lebanese clamor for Syria out of Lebanon gets translated to Lebanese incited by the spirit of democracy (I am too lazy to find a bush quote, but that about sums it up), which then is shown as a reflection of the democratic spirit taking hold in the middle east, which by extension, is obviously a result of U.S. policies which have been trying to get that spirit to take hold after all! So what does that all mean? Bush was right!!! (about what is generally left to the imagination. It's sort of a blanket type of statement...)
Hmmm. Hezbollah and the counter-movement aside, this analysis leaves a couple of questions in my mind. First of all, how do a few protests, following a symbolic and blatant assassination, equal democracy on the rise? What does democracy mean, as Zakaria asks, and what would it mean within the context of a place like Lebanon, a place that's been having elections for years? (I have to be honest here, I don't know that much about it in particular...) Second of all, aren't there a few inconsistencies here with regards to our approach to other places? What about the Haitian military killing protesters asking for a return of their democratically elected leader?Aren't there protests democracy in the rise? Third, how is democracy like a disease (well, a happy disease, maybe a contact high?) that everyone catches and just becomes? Isn't there some kind of work you gotta do to put it in place, and doesn't that work have to come from the people of those places? At what point do you signal that there is "democracy" in a place, and at what point can you establish that it has things like rule of law and everything else needed to make it workable?
This isn't a new tactic, this blurring of the links between bits of information and the lack of detail that the media presents us with. It seems particularly insiduous, however, as this was the same media that convinced so many that there was a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, successful elections in Iraq, and the list goes on.
As I said before, as liberals we have to be very careful to not make it seem that we are wanting this promising "trend", if we are to accept this notion, to fail. We have to be clear in that what we are arguing against is the media complacency to accept the Bush administration's framing of recent positive events in the Middle East as direct consequences of his policies, declaring victory as they did over the elections in Iraq. Juan Cole of course has a much more educated analysis.
http://www.juancole.com/
And what about Kirstie Alley, anyway? Showtime's lineup last night could have been self-hatred for fat people night, with Supersize Me coming on before Alley's premier. Her show began with an agonizing ten-minute sequence of her weeping on the floor, ample breasts spilling out of a silk robe, calling various people who told her honestly that yes, she was fat. An interesting career choice on her part. It's a brave move to make yourself the "butt" of an extended, public joke like that, but I can see how she might have chosen to with no other options. Still, though, the show basically reaffirms that woman's worth is intrinsically tied to her weight, and the way it promotes the morality of fatness (a thin woman is morally superior to a fat one) is particularly tiresome. This is why I don't watch TV.
Speaking of the media, has anyone else been disturbed by this recent Bush-loving orgy in terms of Middle East policy? So the Lebanese start protesting Syrian occupation after their former prime minister is killed and there's yet another cease fire. The Egyptian president decides to hold elections. Therefore, the occupation of Iraq and subsequent diplomacy by the bush admin. has resulted in a new wave of democracy in the Middle East!!!!!!!!!!!!! (some slightly more nuanced, but still illusrative examples here and here). Now, this type of praise has been somewhat more restrained since the Hezbollah demonstration. I am not saying that I am rooting for Hezbollah; Syria out of Lebanon would be great, and it's exciting that the Lebanese are out in the streets. I am not saying that I want the suicide bomber attacks and fence building to continue; a cease-fire and some semblance of peace between Israel and Palestine would be something that I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. I would like to point out that I think it's dangerous to make assumptions about cause and effect the way the Bush admin is especially brilliant at doing, but even more dangerous to have the media process and blur the difference between these as truth. This is how it works:
Lebanese clamor for Syria out of Lebanon gets translated to Lebanese incited by the spirit of democracy (I am too lazy to find a bush quote, but that about sums it up), which then is shown as a reflection of the democratic spirit taking hold in the middle east, which by extension, is obviously a result of U.S. policies which have been trying to get that spirit to take hold after all! So what does that all mean? Bush was right!!! (about what is generally left to the imagination. It's sort of a blanket type of statement...)
Hmmm. Hezbollah and the counter-movement aside, this analysis leaves a couple of questions in my mind. First of all, how do a few protests, following a symbolic and blatant assassination, equal democracy on the rise? What does democracy mean, as Zakaria asks, and what would it mean within the context of a place like Lebanon, a place that's been having elections for years? (I have to be honest here, I don't know that much about it in particular...) Second of all, aren't there a few inconsistencies here with regards to our approach to other places? What about the Haitian military killing protesters asking for a return of their democratically elected leader?Aren't there protests democracy in the rise? Third, how is democracy like a disease (well, a happy disease, maybe a contact high?) that everyone catches and just becomes? Isn't there some kind of work you gotta do to put it in place, and doesn't that work have to come from the people of those places? At what point do you signal that there is "democracy" in a place, and at what point can you establish that it has things like rule of law and everything else needed to make it workable?
This isn't a new tactic, this blurring of the links between bits of information and the lack of detail that the media presents us with. It seems particularly insiduous, however, as this was the same media that convinced so many that there was a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, successful elections in Iraq, and the list goes on.
As I said before, as liberals we have to be very careful to not make it seem that we are wanting this promising "trend", if we are to accept this notion, to fail. We have to be clear in that what we are arguing against is the media complacency to accept the Bush administration's framing of recent positive events in the Middle East as direct consequences of his policies, declaring victory as they did over the elections in Iraq. Juan Cole of course has a much more educated analysis.
http://www.juancole.com/
posted by Brynne at 6:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home