Exactly. It's SUCH Bs.
Between fuzzy asses on actresses and the occasional male (DOUBLE-STANDARD bill****, mind you), the fuzzy boobs, the bleeped or omitted words, and the content clipping/speeding...why on earth should they expect my support?
I used to donate to PBS pretty religiously (yes, that pun was intentional....really, it's irony, but..). I've stopped doing so. Largely for all the reasons mentioned, but also, I feel increasingly that if they are getting the airwaves for the PUBLIC GOOD, they should stop being so adamantly left-wing.
n.b.: both of the rants that are below, mostly belong in the P&R thread. They're not meant to be about that, but
someone will, possibly, get their knickers in a twist about it. The first is about public airwaves; the latter is about the increasing encroachment on the idea of intellectual rigor, in determining our OWN choices. However, both are--not deliberately--about liberals in media and other positions. IF someone here gets wonk about it,
I'm happy to delete them. I genuinely don't mean to be discussing politics, as opposed to something else, but...you know how folks are. The political bent is,
truly, an accidental part--the side-effect--of what's occurring. I would say the same thing if the slant were in any other direction. It's...it's coincidence, more than anything else, but the ACTS involved are not. And it is they about which I am kvetching.
rant about that part:
Spoiler:
I get that they are all, by nature, do-gooders, and like so many journalists, they end up being left-wing. Fine. But here's the thing--unlike CNN, which bids for its airwaves and bandwidth, and all that, THEY, PBS, don't have to. They are here to serve the public good--and half the public aren't Clintonites and whatever all else. I increasingly despair that there will ever be reliable news, without a slant, in this world. There's simply nary one decent news station that can be relied upon for actual NEWS, as opposed to how they predigest it and regurgitate it with their spin. CNN is particularly egregious, but not alone. And no, I'm not just picking on liberals, but it's also true that they hold probably 95% of the so-called "news" stations, channels, etc., in the US. Bloody annoying.
In that vein, about GOOGLE:
Spoiler:
Don't get me started about how shocked I was when I conducted search TESTS on Google, versus Bing, DuckDuckGo, etc. If you try to do something simple--say, search on a phrase like "bad things about Hillary Clinton," or "30 bad things...etc." you will get surprisingly few results. That's what made me go "hmmmm." (No, I wasn't searching for that specific thing; I was trying to research one of the assertions in Clinton Cash, which is how I discovered this.) Then go do the SAME search on Bing or DDG or any other search engine, and be prepared to be surprised. I knew that Google had a conflict of interest in how they direct traffic, of course--website A has Google adverts, versus website B that does not--but this? This is shockingly flagrant. NOT delivering opinions or news, about the liberal candidate, that's "bad?" That is appalling. I've lost a lot of respect for Google, which I thought would at LEAST have the decency to be honest and forthright about SEARCH in the news category. They are, literally, forming public opinion by the simple expedient of FILTERING out anything "bad" about Clinton, et al. I haven't had the time or energy, to be honest, to see if it's simply her, or "liberal-wide," but I suspect, it's not just her. Can you IMAGINE the hue and cry, if CNN discovered that they were doing that on behalf of conservatives? How they'd SCREAM about it? But this--well, this is for the GOOD, right, because it will help get her elected? Honestly...this country is going right to the crapper, in terms of intellectual rigor. Is there some reason that the liberal machine thinks that allowing people to see EVERYTHING, and decide for themselves, is a PROBLEM???? What--they're feeding confirmation bias? Moses on a Pony. And, yes: I'd bitch about this if it was in the other direction, too. It ought NOT be providing 1984-like services, for the formation of public opinion. Anyone here feel all fuzzy about Google--now that you know it's essentially a propagandistic search provider, upon which you may not rely for the facts?
AND, really, about the shows--enough of that crap. It's like watching the infamous "airline versions" of movies. You end up with unresolved plot points, irrational dialogue, etc. PBS wants my dough? Then they need to step up and earn it a bit more than they are now. I waited a year+ just so I could watch Downton Abby without their "HELP" in watching it.
Again, if someone gets all bent, just let me know, and I'll delete the spoilers. In fairness,
you've been warned.
</grumble>
Hitch