Archived entries for Television

New Democrat 3.0

Glenn Greenwald on Neda, Obama, Helen Thomas and the failure of some journalists to comprehend people power. Cutting off Helen Thomas for doing her job is more something I’d expect from Reagan or Bush – it’s just disingenuous, and in this instance, derisive as well. Since when is connecting the dots between U.S. behavior and the behavior of those whom the U.S. critiques off limits? Getting pretty tired of the double-talk, and not really interested in hearing about hope, either. As Bill Maher recently said, “He’s not your boyfriend.

The “Zero respect for the dead” award goes to…

While I understand that CNN’s coverage on the unfolding events in Iran has improved, and that they’re not the only network that indulges in sensationalism, this is over the top. From Twitter:

@octavianasrCNN: You watched her die in front of your eyes.. Now MEET #NEDA! full report on AC360 #iranelection

I’m waiting for Howard Beale and Sybil the Soothsayer to enter stage left. Or perhaps those wacky revos on the Mao Tse-tung hour

(Props to @cjdkc on Twitter for bringing this to folks’ attention)

Meanwhile, plenty of oppression in the U.S.

Just Jo Nubian reminds us all to keep under-reported stories about the murdering of African-Americans in the U.S. in mind, as the mainstream media continues to cover events in Iran.

Warm heart, cold Friday

Been busy doing background reading – Johnson-Reagon, Foucault, Hardt & Negri; looking towards next week for blogging on all that. In the meantime, here’s a somewhat sniffly wrap-up:

20 year anniversary of Do the Right Thing. I’d say read the Newsweek article on it, but it’s full of feigned praise, if not backhanded compliments. Who shows up at someone’s birthday and says, “That outfit makes you look great…for your size”? Much better fare is the New York interview with Spike Lee.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright has a hymietown moment. If you mean AIPAC, say AIPAC, alright? Can’t even claim privacy of conversation, he said it to a reporter. I think he got dogged during the elections, but “those Jews”? Come on.

Obama administration may be strong-arming potential swing votes on the war spending bill, which includes $100 million for the IMF.

A fabulous write-up from SexGenderBody on Joss Whedon’s Dollhouse as Gothic literature.

A very interesting lecture on “Evolution, religion, schizophrenia and the schizotypal personality”.

That’s it! Off to rest, relax and make sure this cold doesn’t get the better of me. Much love, see you on the downbeat…

Funk it with feeling, y’all…it’s the Friday wrap-up

KKK gets pwnd by…clowns. Twitter props to @FeminaPotens and numerous others in the blogtwitterosphere.

Havana times: Homophobia is the problem, not gays.

Wired gets it more or less right this time: The New Socialism: Global Collectivist Society Is Coming Online. They even break down Clay Shirky’s steps for online collaboration and action! Yay. Serious props to “Anarch” in the article’s comments for pointing out that this isn’t the New Socialism, but is the New Anarchism. You said it compañera/o. Boo to the idiot who said that libertarian socialism contains “a high degree of coercion” because every system that has used the term socialist is coercive, and therefore, he can’t be bothered to look up its history, even when numerous examples of said history were contained within the thread. Kronstadt, hello? /ostrich, FAIL Also, see: http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/82/tactical_briefing.html

Joss Whedon on Humanism. A lovely meditation on the need for compassion and intellect over ideology.

Really great guest blog by @Jesimone on walking as healing and the complexities of race.

#win of the week: Sotomayor. Stay strong, Boriqua, we’re counting on you.

#fail of the week: CA supreme court prop8 decision. While I’m glad that they respect the rights of CA residents to make their own decisions (no matter how backward), the whole thing smacks of compromise and politicization. Can’t wait for this shit to get overturned at the ballot box; yet another example of how California is nowhere near as liberal as its reputation suggests.

Welcome to the Twithouse

The first few times I watched Dollhouse, I hated it. It seemed inexplicably bad, what with the cheesy soundtrack (bad porn) and the woman-as-prey plots (again, bad porn) – it was as if Joss Whedon had a bad dream in some not-so-alternate GOP universe after a much-too-late dinner, then left the cable on when he dozed off at 2 AM. (If you haven’t seen the series, the Dollhouse is mostly a sex-for-hire conclave, but with perhaps-willingly-perhaps-not human participants as programmable sexbots. It’s much more nuanced than that, but that’s the gist.) The show has started to raise some serious questions about the relationship of identity to technology, and particularly as the first season begins to reach its close, some serious overarching themes regarding race, class and gender are beginning to take shape. It’s also become as entertaining as Buffy was, but without all the gosh-shucks-I-have-a-dark-side hijinx – the intersections of sex work, technology and identity that are being covered is definitely transgressive territory, and Whedon deserves to be applauded for raising an increasingly provocative and uncomfortable series of questions in relation to that territory.

What happens though when something like Dollhouse – or if you will, a technology that resembles a neurologically programmable version of Second Life – becomes as commonplace as Twitter? If the evolution of the web is any indication, as social media evolves as a mass medium, there will be more people involved with far less agency in real life than the various and sundry digerati typically found in social media’s earlier stages; for example, more women and people of color will be involved, but most likely in an inverse relationship. (It simply is not the case that Oprah singing the virtues of microblogging means that homegirl on the corner with a cell phone and a Twitter account is gonna be kickin’ it with Ashton Kutcher – or landing a prestigious gig at Google – in real life.) It’s also true that at least some of the people involved with the earlier stages of the technology will drop out entirely due to becoming bored with the medium, or more precisely, because it doesn’t reflect their self image as much as it used to.

None of this is to meant to assert that bleeding edge d00ds jumping ship once a technology goes viral is inherently unwelcome. If anything, this particular point is where a given technology begins to represent actual social power on a national or global scale. (It also allows for the possibility of further advancement of the technological shifts in question, which in turn, creates the possibility for more rapid grassroots social change, as well as an expansion of social degradation and control.) This amassing of collective social power is brought up repeatedly by the critical theorists Hardt and Negri (and to some degree, by Shirky); pulling from Foucault’s concept of Biopower, which can loosely be defined as the mechanisms of global power made manifest in people’s social consciousness, Hardt and Negri note that mechanisms of social control that are utilized on a mass scale to empower Empire are so integrated into the fabric of people’s daily lives and interactions, that these same mechanisms can be used to cultivate mass power in a decentralized fashion. This also calls into question, or at least submits for revision, the notion that social transformation can only occur through centralized bodies, such as political parties. For Hardt and Negri, social transformation looks somewhat like culture jamming on a mass scale, and much less like building a worker’s party. This ties into historical and cultural shifts that have occurred post-World War II, which I will write about later this week; but for now, I’ll suffice by saying that all is not as it seems when it comes to agency and power in the post-industrial world, and there’s much that is reflected in Whedon’s work – and in particular, in Dollhouse and to some degree, Firefly – that can be viewed in the context of cultural and literary tensions between modernism and post-modernism.

Further reading:

Hardt and Negri, Multitude
Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody