Media-ocrity

Blogface,

Sorry to go on about the media again but fuck me, it's a bloody joke. A couple of examples..

Firstly, watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms

So Fox news prides itself on its unbiased look on the presidential election yet they comment on the most fickle things and pick at Obama like he's a monster. Oh, what's that? They made a deal with the Democratic party to host their Primary Debate? Aha - that explains it. It's disgusting that they would use this kind of propaganda and then deny it - though on a much less scale, it's similar to Nazi propaganda! I thought the whole point of the media was to give a completely unbiased view of the world and if anything was one-sided, it was made clear that it was an opinion of the individual. Of course, this isn't a new thing - look at newspapers, papers like the Daily Mail - they don't give us the news, they give us their right-wing spin on it. The fact that the government can affect the media is terrifying though - they can basically edit the news to for their own gain and millions of people will watch it none the wiser. Pathetic.

I’ll now move on to Prince Harry. He’s been serving in Afghanistan for a few months under strict secrecy. A foreign newspaper got hold of this news and decided to run with it. What kinds of monsters print this information? It’s not like someone is secretly gay or something – this is secret as it puts many many lives at Risk. But no, the media doesn’t give a shit about morals, they just want to sell papers (as if they don’t sell enough already). Even on a smaller scale – oh, Britney Spears isn’t wearing pants again…why the fuck are you laying on the curb getting an upskirt shot? Anyone else would be arrested for this!!

Anyway, rant over, very glad it’s the weekend – going to see Crystal Teet Heart and Corleone tonight – should be a bloody ruddy good gig!

Blogface - two blogs in the same week, how lucky are you? (that’s not a universal you, it’s the ‘you’ as in – the one or, at a push, two people that read this blog).

I have a few things on my mind that I’d like to write about and I’ll start with my vegetarian “adventure”. So far it’s going quite well. I don’t really crave meat at all and am finding it very easy. Unfortunately, the “eating fresh” part of my new diet is really not going well at all - Its cheese sandwiches all the way at the moment. Three nights in a row I’ve had a cheese sandwich for tea. I find it difficult to be motivated to make anything “proper” when I’m just making for myself and also when I’m busy and off out at night. Making a cheese sandwich is too easy and tasty to not bother with! That’s not to mention that I can’t cook and have never made anything more challenging than a pasta or salad. Poor show to be honest…

Last night I caught some of the Brit Awards. Firstly, the nominations were pretty terrible and I wish I had placed a bet on all winners in all categories…it was all extremely predictable. I don’t understand why so many average artists are put on such a pedestal. Everyone was jizzing all over Mark Ronson (metaphorically you understand) who basically rearranges songs with trumpets and suddenly he’s a genius. He is the white Jay-z it appears – he produces songs and collaborates with everyone under the sun. Onto one of his main collaborators - Amy Winehouse. She has been all over NME etc, once again everyone spurting their love juice everywhere at the idea of her playing the Brits. She sang Valerie with Mark Ronson and also one of her own songs. Both were completely dire – she looked a complete mess in physique and persona and her voice was terrible (Janice from Friends anyone?) yet the crowd went wild for her. I just read some of the Metro paper and surprise surprise, all the fuss is about her “flawless” performance. Please piss right off. Am I missing something or are people taking this “she’s a tortured genius” thing too far? If she wasn’t fucked off her face on drugs, I’m pretty sure that she wouldn’t be quite as popular which is a shame as it’s magazines like NME who glamorise her lifestyle. NME obvious deny this – on NME.com they have a section called “Tabloid hell” which they seem to think is some kind of semi-ironic take on the general media but no, YOU (nme) are telling us the news and you can coat it in what you like, you’re turning into the Heat magazine of the music industry. The NME cool list confirms this.

This also reminds me that I’ve been rewatching some episodes of the brilliant Brass Eye – a satirical look at today’s media. Brasseye’s 2001 Paedophilia special was ground-breaking TV and was obviously going to be controversial from the start. If you read the following passage from Wikipedia, the reaction to the show is exactly what Chris Morris satirises in his shows:

"Around 2000 complaints (and approximately 3000 calls of support) were received regarding the show, and some politicians hastily spoke out against Morris. Beverley Hughes described the show as "unspeakably sick" (while admitting that she had not seen the programme) and David Blunkett said he was "dismayed" by it. Although she did not criticise the show, Tessa Jowell was reported as asking the Independent Television Commission to revise its rules to allow such a controversial show to be prevented from broadcast [5] even though she hadn't watched the actual episode of the show. There was also a vociferous tabloid campaign against Morris, who refused to discuss the issue. The episode went on to win a Broadcast magazine award in 2002 and the complete series, including the 2001 special, was released as a bestselling DVD later that year.
The show caused a furore among sections of the British tabloid press. The Daily Star printed an article decrying Morris and the show next to a piece about the then 15-year-old singer Charlotte Church's breasts under the headline "She's a big girl now" [6][7]. The Daily Mail featured pictures of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, who were 13 and 11 at the time respectively, in their bikinis next to a headline describing Brass Eye as "Unspeakably Sick"[7]. Defenders of the show argued that the media reaction to the show reinforced its satire of the media's hysteria and hypocrisy on the subject of paedophilia.[7] This episode has been shown 3 times even though controversy was caused each time."


The part about the tabloids calling for Morris’ head next to the risqué pictures of famous youths is pretty much in line with NME’s ethic – ‘we’ll denounce all the tabloid rubbish, but report it anyway’."

From the Brits to the US and more importantly, the election. After 8 years under the realm of the dumb tyrant George Bush, it is time for a change and thank god the Americans agree. 9/11 was a terrible terrible event but it did wake America up and prove the vulnerability of this “Super nation”. However, action needed to be taken but Bush got it completely wrong. Setting up the product “The Axis of Evil™” allowed the Bush administration to scare Americans to death and more importantly to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq. The attack on Afghanistan was perhaps justified – to be honest I was quite young and never really knew what happened so can’t really comment. After a while, Bush decided to go after Saddam Hussein instead and pulled his men out of Afghanistan and put them in Iraq (even though Al-Qaeda is a much bigger threat to his country than Hussein??). You can talk all you want about oil and WMDs but the Iraq war and how manipulative the government and propaganda through media (boom, there it again!) but it’s time to move onto the now.

The presidential campaign is pretty much a three horse race between Obama, Clinton and McCain. The Republican corner will almost certainly be headed by McCain and come the election in November, I don’t think he’s likely to be a great contender – he’s in his 70’s and his policies are completely outdated and he thinks we’ll be in Iraq for the next 100 years. 100 YEARS! No one from the West should be there in the first place! So really, it’s down to Obama and Clinton and it looks like Obama will head Democrat party and then go on to be president. And good on him! Obama and Clinton have very similar policies but Obama will (hopefully) give a fresh view on the world and will be a very likable president. It’s hard to say at this stage – he might be a bare faced liar – but America needs change and Obama should be the man to take them forward. Besides, Clinton keeps crying in her campaigns and who wants a weak president? Somehow I can’t see her being able to hack G8 summits et al. But once again, the only way we can hear of anything on this matter is through the media and knowing how manipulative it can be, who knows what to believe?

David Lynch

Hi Blogface,

It's about time I said a few words on my favourite feature film director, Mr David Lynch. Not only is he a great director, he also writes most of his scripts and his unorthadox take on story telling is excellent. So far I have seen the following movies of his:

Eraserhead, Elephant Man, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire

I saw Eraserhead first and it's the first time I've come out of a film and had no idea how I felt initially. Repeated viewing helped me realise that there's not much point looking for a standard plot but to take in the visuals and symbolism and direction; if you will. Lynch is the only director I watch where I try to evaluate every scene - why that angle/lighting/sound/dialogue? It engages me a lot more.

I then saw Elephant Man which I completely love - it's the saddest film I've ever seen; Adagio for Strings coupled with his death is incredibly moving. The film is cast brilliantly and the lighting of the film, though black and white, is superb. The film drew criticism as it is not historically true - Joseph Merrick did not dislike the circus and the ringmaster was his best friend - however, this takes nothing away from it being a brilliant and touching story.

I then saw Lost Highway and although it looks a little dated now, I enjoyed it muchly and I admit that I was straight onto the message boards to read people's perceptions and it in turn helped me appreciate it more. Lynch also has unique ways of building tension - the coversation between Pullman and the Mystery Man is very tense - yet it takes place at a busy party in broad daylight (most directors would go for the "dark alley" approach I'm sure). Once again, I was very engaged by the film even though Pullman is not one of my favourite actors to say the least.

Mulholland Dr was next for me - apart from casting two hot girls that "geddit on", this is probably the best of Lynch's surreal films (that I have seen thus far). The film just looks and sounds great (my favourite OST along with Taxi Driver) and the story is not obvious, but makes a lot of sense and any metaphors are done subtley and brilliantly. The way Lynch blends reality and fantasy and past and present into his scenes is mind blowing and strangely, the more I think about the film, the more I enjoy it. Mulholland Dr is definitely worth a second viewing in the next few months.

Lastly, I watched Inland Empire. Although similar to Mulholland Dr's story, this was directed completely differently. I wasn't aware that Lynch cut the film amongst other things - it is uneasy viewing - unorthadox lighting, hand-held cameras with close-ups, the volume was all over the place...not easy to watch late at night (constantly turning it up and down throughout). I once again am not sure how I felt about the film after I watched it. I didn't enjoy it as much as the above films yet it intrigued me more and is once again worth another viewing. Like someone said above, you are on constant edge throughout the film yet it isn't a standard horror movie.

So in conclusion, I find Lynch's work extremely satisfying and am craving more of his work. Seeing interviews with him just furthers my opinion that not only is he an acomplished director, but a fascinating individual and someone I would genuinely love to meet. Next viewings of his work shall be The Straight Story and Blue Velvet..