One of the first, among the many skills a trial attorney must learn after the law, is how to ask a question, to frame a question, to be more accurate, to lead a witness, to give a desired answer. Any viewer of court room drama has more than once heard a judge verbally chastise a lawyer’s questing as leading a witness. Those within earshot of this cross examination can be both influenced by the question and the answer, so, the judge may again step in, cautioning them to disregard both the question and the answer. Which leads me to wonder as to why MSNBC’s program, Revolution, an exclusive interview with Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, was conducted in earshot of a live audience. As I watched, I felt as a viewer, I was being led by both the laughter and the applause of the audience and not by any opinion expressed. We have seen this contrivance on television comedy shows deploying a laugh track, designed to influence the viewing audience to laugh at a given point in the show. It can most expertly be seen by this American President at his every rally, as one would hope for his views on many issues, to be properly dispensed before the American people, at a prescheduled televised official news conference, and not before a cheering crowd of what appears to be supporters, leaving other citizens at home watching, scratching their heads, unable to separate policy from merely campaign entertainment.
About that police officer, that I’m sure is no myth, that retires, after some twenty years of service, having never, not even once, fired his weapon in the line of duty or in anger. Gets up every morning dresses in the uniform of a peace officer, included in that chore, the strapping on of a weapon of life altering destruction, of attack, of defense. That in intervals of departmental rules must have some sort of maintenance performed on it, oiled and cleaned, babied, if you will, as a means of upkeep, always at the ready to spring into action. At least twice a year, must attend a firing range to requalify as the operator of one in possession of just such a deadly weapon. Have often heard of officers in the department that have been said to have an itchy finger, as if that day of weapon use, in the line of duty cannot come soon enough, then there are those that hope that day will never come. It can be quite understandable, I hypothesize, that when both types are in the field, faced with an encounter, of when, in the line of duty, the opportunity presents itself, to use or not, the action of deadly force, after years of babying this side arm as if it is indeed a natural appendage of oneself, that it should suddenly be seriously considered to be called into action. Something can and has on occasion, taken over a once mind of sound judgment, resulting in weapon overuse, of five to eight shots fired at some perceived threat, when one or two would have sufficed, a feeling never experienced before, a new sudden sensation of power, that only subsides, that can only be satisfied when the perceived threat is no more alive, mowed down, unmoving, and dead.
The image of a news anchor, during those early days of broadcast news can be painted with the conception of a Walter Cronkite or of a Howard K. Smith, that authoritative appearance was no accident of clever image marketing, it was just how men in charge looked in those days and was accepted as being true to life without them ever uttering a single word. At this point in my post, it is often asked; how did the females look? They didn’t. They didn’t even exist, where not allowed to anchor a news program. The men could appear on the air in age related gray hair; can you even picture today, a female so allowed or would even consent to appearing in age related gray hair? Eventually women could report and anchor the news on television, but they had to bring that something extra to the role that no man would ever be able to fulfill, and that is the portrayal of appearance trophyism. As anyone with eyes can clearly see, most women on a news program are dye head blonds, perhaps, most, is too strong a word, how about, a few, so much so that if one was to be portrayed in fiction, blond dye head would not be out of line in casting. Men with gray hair sides, women with long dark hair, is so stereotypical of most everyday broadcast news programing today, here is where the word most is more than just merely appropriate, it is demanded.
The border between Mexico and the United States spans six Mexican and four U.S. states, 1,954 miles, parts of which have been in dispute since the earliest days of its exists. But at no time in all its recent history has an American President been so obsessed with it as a political bouncing ball, to the point we now find an extended threat to send U.S. military to the border to stop immigrants. Even to the marrow of curtailing foreign aid to South American countries if they don’t help in the retrenching the immigrant flow. Mexico is not such a hostile neighbor that a wall must be built, that the U.S. must be walled off, protected from them at great cost, straining both trade and diplomatic relations. Some have said that he is merely obsessed with illegal immigrants, and I say, not so, that he has even shown more than once in deeds and words, contempt for legal immigration too, not only from Mexico but from others, in his words, s#@% hole nations. Which I find hard to understand, him being the President of a nation of immigrants, his own family, immigrants that made good after a name change, now wants to pull up the ladder, stating, no more room at the Inn. This American President has failed to convince a Republican led congress to fund a border wall when there are so many other more pressing issues that require urgent funding, like veteran’s healthcare and housing. And grossly underpaid teachers of the U.S. young, increasingly under educated, measured next to other first world nations, the U.S. a well walled in nation of immigrants, in fear of any new immigrants…
A few closing questions; why do they continue to come? If it was a matter of life or death in your home country, what would you risk? Historically, worldwide, your answer would be, everything…
Every time I watch a news program on television, I get this loud ping to my senses, as if I have not said enough concerning the below issue, as the only lone voice shouting in the wilderness.
It’s no secret where I stand on appearance fakery on television, particularly on journalist that regularly appear on it, they have their journalism that should stand as their cash cow, and in that regard, females have always been stationed at the lowest rung on the ladder of televised journalism because of it, with their blond streaking dyed hair, long false eyelashes and greasy red lips. Now it’s the males, in resemblance, that need to have room made for them as they plummet to the same level as the females or even lower, simply because they once held the high ground, by appearing bald or totally gray on television as they practiced the craft, but as they say, these times are a changing. So, unless you are a male high schooler, dare to show a little gray hair, which can be used to display the wisdom of your age, and not some perceived marketing advantage of an empty head, covered with dyed hair.
A cavalcade of female television journalists that have been lured into this fake hair dye syndrome, from the youngest to the oldest among them, is no longer just to hide the gray, but has blurred into a kinda pseudo beauty pageantry, as if that was not bad enough, the males of the species first now have viewers considering their hair sham before their journalism, its no longer do they of don’t they, but why, placing their journalist integrity in jeopardy to an all time low. The prime cesspool of this male masquerade of deceitful hair pungency, though not alone, is seemly, PBS’s Washington Week, which is now in epidemic mode across all television networks, not to mention, CNN, I was told not to mention, CNN, or MSNBC, did someone mention, Fox News too? Ok, I did… It’s now possible to spend all day watching news programing and not view one tress of gray hair, as for those entertainment shows, “mettici una croce sopra”, this is now the new normal, although, be it a fake one…And, about all those female news contributors, when thanked for appearing, the appropriate reply would be, you’re welcome, instead of the self-serving, thanks for having me, delivered with a straight face, in their broadcast standard greasy red lips…which is very trying on the eyes…and the brains memory banks too, after viewing a couple of times, hard to shake out…
Well, boys and girls, its 6:AM somewhere and the voice of The IMAN is no more, at least not on the radio, live, on the radio. Years from now, many will remember ‘shock jock’ Don Imus with this thought ringing their head, ‘you can’t say that on the radio’, and they would be right for whatever that moment in time that it was, when a certain remark was heard, at some future time, well maybe you can say that on the radio, and it would be ok, just like, you can go home again, and you can say that on the radio, thanks to The IMAN, and other shock jocks of the past and future.
As with so many of my posts, its Wikipedia, that I rely upon to fully explain a phenomenon.
“A shock jock is a type of radio broadcaster or disc jockey who entertains listeners or attracts attention using humor and/or melodramatic exaggeration that some portion of the listening audience may find offensive. The term is usually used pejoratively to describe provocative or irreverent broadcasters whose mannerisms, statements and actions are typically offensive to many members of the community. It is a popular term, generally not used within the radio industry. A shock jock is considered to be the radio equivalent of the tabloid newspaper, for which entertaining readers is as important as, or more important than, providing factual information. Within the radio industry, a radio station that relies primarily on shock jocks for its programming is said to have a hot talk format”.
If it had not been invented suddenly, the shock jock, would have had to come about naturally, thru trial and error, as it eventually did, since radio was, most of the time, bland and boring, like Betty Crocker cooking, American, safe and sound, so 1950ish, if you well, as if the ingredients, hot and spicy, did not exist in the American culinary arts, but it did on the radio in the guise of the shock jock.