"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

Reading:
A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Archy
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Fablog
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Mahablog
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Orcinus
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

Books
The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
Pledge
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
Media
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
P.S.
What's this?
OHMIGOD

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....
Phillipines

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
Archives
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives


Electioneering
Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Politics1
Polling Report

Information
American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
DebtChannel.org
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Inequality
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
JobWatch
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Connections
XML & RDF
Peevish for PDA



Blog Directory


Search








Credits
Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori





All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

February 16, 2004
I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, but if physicists don't know that an oval, oblong, or oblate spheroid, to be pretentious, shape packs more closely than a perfect sphere, then they need to . . . I don't know. Find another line of work? What kind of "expert" gets away with taking some amazingly obvious fact and releasing it as though it were some astounding new discovery?

Better question - can I get a job as that kind of "expert"? Announcing the merely obvious in a tone of breathless fervor . . . I think I could handle that.

Also, let me tender an apology, on behalf of my species, to the ground squirrel. You see, we just sort of assume anything that eats plants is going to like our plants better than any other plants and that's why we put a bounty on you and killed off several million of your friends, neighbors, and family members. Now that we realize you don't, in fact, like the crops we plant and that there are only about 350 of you left, we're really, really, really sorry. If we had a prairie left, we'd let you live on it. Honest.

(While I'm at it, let me apologize for the mindless stupidity of automatically generated "related advertising links" that attached the "Rat zapper kills rodents" ad to the bottom of that column.)

I'm sorry for all of the hearing-impaired people in the country whose television viewing is limited to what the government, in its infinite hubris wisdom decrees is "suitable" material for closed-captioning.

It seems that such programs as Bewitched, CNN (in Spanish), I Dream of Jeannie, Nancy Drew, JAG, Law and Order, and Women We Love (women in film) have been deemed inappropriate places to spend funds. PGA Golf also failed to make the cut.

I was unaware that such picking and choosing took place, but Ryan has much to say on the subject, not all of which I agree with.* I doubt, for instance, that this is some massive conspiracy to keep all but the blandest, most "puritan" content from the eyes of the hearing-impaired. The post is interesting reading, though.

* I'm happy to say that I was wrong. Not that I like being revealed as a 'skimmer' instead of a 'reader' yet again, but it gives me an excuse to use one of my favorite words. Pursuant.

Pursuant to a brief exchange with Ryan, I'd like to correct this. Ryan was not, in fact, decrying censorship on the part of the government. (Knowing his political views, I'll admit that that first reading of his post didn't make sense to me - which should have clued me in that I was missing something.) Hew was arguing there's no actual sign any censorship is taking place.

And, in any case, he's also right about the "new" Scooby Doo. It should be censored. As a mea culpa I am, at long last, getting around to adding his blog to my sidebar.

And, in keeping with the theme of this post, let me say, "I'm sorry."

But I'm leaving the rant up becase, in spite of the New Scooby Doo fiasco, I think everything, even the trash should be treated equally. Not that I care for the quality of "entertainment" we're getting these days, but it's no one business to decide that one program is more worthy than another of being accessed by all citizens.

I know, I know. These things cost money. Should I suggest that for the cost of one war, you could pay for a heck of a lot of domestic programs?

Posted by AnneZook at 11:51 AM


Comments

Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my post, but I *also* don't think it's some puritanical conspiracy to limit deaf people's access to TV. That's what the NAD is saying, not me. I'm just pointing out that the grant decision the NAD is complaining about is meaningless, because the closed captioning is going to happen anyway. There is no lost access.

I *am* happy to know that someone's reading my post, though :)

Posted by: Ryan at February 16, 2004 12:41 PM

Actually, I check your blog every day. :) The next time I get my lazy self around to updating my blogroll, I'm adding yours.

I'll have to re-read your post. I certainly came away from it with the wrong impression.

Posted by: Anne at February 16, 2004 01:12 PM