posted
For me books feel less manipulative because there's not background music and dramatic lighting and such. However, when I think about it, the things I read have far more of an impact than the things I see. Maybe, though, that's just because the things I read tend to be more intelligent and earth-shattering, on average.
Well, though, I think maybe music is more influential if you count the mere inability to wrest something from one's thoughts. A complex train of thought or image induced by book or movie has nowhere near the staying power of, say, "Baby Beluga."
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't watched network or cable TV... pretty much since September 11, 2001. For a while even PBS was freaking me out, so I kind of cut back on that.
I do watch the Olympics, though, and I'm sad at how the coverage of that tends toward scandal.
When I broke my ribs last year and was drugged out, my brother made me watch some "Lost" and "American Idol." I also saw an episode of "American Inventor."
But maybe I'm why the terrorists are winning. I also have my Yahoo mail set to not show any headlines, though I see a few on the Yahoo main page. My husband just made an ostrich joke at me.
P.S. Now that I'm thinking about it, I was still watching news and PBS until 2003, and then my therapist told me I didn't really need to watch the news.
posted
We got our first Mitt Romney for President ad in Detroit yesterday.
According to it, he wants to slash the federal budget, and stop those wily judges from making laws left and right when they weren't even elected!
Pooka -
Where are you that all the Olympics coverage you get is scandal skewed? Between the CBC, a half dozen NBC channels, and various other sports channels, we can literally watch almost any sporting event taking place at any given time during the Olympics, and it's just coverage of the events, not commentators on scandal.
I loves my Olympics.
Don't bother watching the news. It's all reruns.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't live without reading the news. I check at least once every hour all the news - entertainment, political, business, even local sometimes, on Yahoo, MSNBC, NY Post, Washington Post, CNN. I think Google News is actually geared toward the conservative in the articles it displays. Strangely enough, I also read a lot. At present, I have 40 books checked out from my local library.
It's vital to me to know what's happening in the world; reading the news motivates me to know where the problems are in the world and to want to make a difference. Reading the news keeps me informed so I am better able to make good decisions.
Ugh, don't get me started on Mitt Romney. I read this article yesterday that basically summarized how he changed his viewpoints on practically every issue under the sky, including abortion, gay marriage, who he supports as candidates, gun control, and emulating past presidents. That's not changing your mind or learning from experience; that's tailoring your platform in a disgusting attempt to attract the most conservative votes. It's impossible to know how he really feels about the issues.
posted
I've only had broadcast/cable TV in my home for very short periods (usually due to another family member wanting it and paying for it) since 1991. As a result, I have very little patience with most programming - I refuse to watch ANYTHING with a laugh track, for example.
I rent some TV shows on DVD from Netflix, and on rare occasions, I'll catch a few minutes of TV in other's homes or hotels (I was in a hotel the night Anna Nicole died... I flipped through the channels until I found FoodTV and was appalled at how many shows were having ANSathons).
I get all of my news from online, usually from Hatrack first.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I think it's quite possible and rather simple. You look at their voting records and speeches, and you determine whether there's consistency on where they stand on the issues from the very beginning of their political career. It's easy to see that Mitt Romney is nothing but a flip-flopper who ran on one platform in the more liberal state of Massachusetts and now a conservative one because he wants to be elected President. I can believe that people change their mind or make mistakes, but not so much when someone changes their stance on all the issues right before they decide to run for President and need votes.
Posts: 155 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know enough about Romney to comment on his flip-flopping, but I found this Slate article interesting: The CEO CandidatePosts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
