Conviction, Take Two: “Denial”
I just got around to watching the second episode of “Conviction,” the latest addition to the Law & Order tv franchise. To give you an idea of the quality of this show, Blonde Justice can't even watch it, and she's a practicing public defender who knows a thing or two about criminal trials and prosecutors. As Magic Cookie suggests, the degree to which one likes this show may be inversely related to how much one knows about prosecutors. I guess I don't know very much, so the show retains some fascination.
The second episode raised lots of questions for those of us who don't really know the ins and outs of how prosecutors do their jobs. For example, how common is it for prosecutors to run around their jurisdiction chasing down witnesses and otherwise investigating cases? I've always been under the impression that prosecutors never leave their offices except to go to court. Don't the police do their investigation for them? Does it just depend on the jurisdiction? Or the prosecutor? And how often would they pay their witnesses? Here in D.C., witness get $40 just for showing up to court in response to a subpoena, so I guess prosecutors don't have to fork it over so much.
Next, Harry Potter (the baby prosecutor) would not be allowed to go handle arraignments for the first time w/out any supervision whatsoever, would he? I mean, prosecutors might be irresponsible, but...
And talk about your prosecutorial discretion—that blonde “bureau chief” w/the glasses sure has a lot of power. It seems like she's the only one who decides what to charge and what deals are allowed. Sure, they talk about political pressure coming from somewhere, but she's the enforcer. I would so hate to be that person, but I would hate even more working under her thumb and being told how I can and cannot handle my cases. She makes her prosecutors into even bigger tools than they would be on their own.
The best thing about this episode is that it shows that prosecutors often have to be inhuman jerks and prosecute people they don't think they should be prosecuting. I'm referring to the 14-year-old who beats his older brother to death with a baseball bat after the older brother had physically and mentally tortured the defendant for two years. The case also shows how frequently the law can do nothing about the real cause or guilty party in crime. Here, the father supposedly pushed the dead older brother mercilessly, and the older brother then took out his frustrations on his younger brother; therefore, the father is the real person to blame for the fact that the older brother is now dead. This is the kind of emotional manipulation this show (and its Law & Order siblings) is best at, but still, it's a pretty good illustration of one of the reasons I don't want to be a prosecutor—I just could not try that kid (as an adult, no less!) and lock him up for some sizable number of years.
Some might say that this sort of dreck humanizes prosecutors by casting them in the most favorable possible light. No doubt, that's true. But this is still positive b/c I think too many idealistic law students think they want to be prosecutors because they don't realize they're going to have to do these kinds of things and that they will have so little control over what to charge, what pleas they can offer, etc. So this kind of thing might at least give a short pause to some of those would-be prosecutors, and that's a good thing, I think.
The worst thing about this episode is the totally implausible (I hope) situation where the state's witness (described as a homeless, drug-addicted prostitute) doesn't show and instead of dismissing the case (which is what would probably happen in D.C.), the judge “orders” the attorneys to “make a deal.” As if. If I was the defense attorney I'd just say no deal and keep going to court in the hope that the witness would continue to not show and the judge would eventually dismiss. I guess if the offer was really awesome I might think about it, but....
I don't even want to get into the whole “bad” gambling prosecutor plotline. Whatever. I mean, I'm sure there are prosecutors who get into that sort of trouble, but those people—who obviously know their behavior is reprehensible, if not illegal—are not nearly as interesting to me as the ones who think they are doing the right thing.
Anyway, that's episode two. What did you think of it?
p.s.: Tivo should be recording episode three for me tonight, so whenever I get around to watching it, I'll let you know
Posted 10:53 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Conviction? Oh, that's clever.
Dick Wolf, Mr. Law and Order, has a new show that sings the praises of the beloved prosecutor. The show is called “Conviction.” You know, that's what prosecutors get b/c that's what they have.
(Excuse me. I just had to pause there to get a drink because I was starting to gag a little.)
From the name alone you can tell this is just going to be a top-notch show. And the opening scenes do not disappoint, setting up the whole cliched sympathy story about Nick Potter, the hot-shot law student who went to a great school (NYU) and has rich and powerful parents and friends but who turns down the big money firm job ($150k/year!) because “I really want to try cases.” You might think that's a bit of a dropped ball; if the guy really had conviction, wouldn't his motivation be to protect the public and put the bad guys behind bars? Of course it would! But don't worry, the show knows what it's doing—Potter can't just be born with the required conviction, he's going to have to earn it.
As Potter goes about this task, the show makes sure to hammer us over the head with the righteousness of the prosecutor's profession just about as often as it can. Take, for example, our young hero's first meeting with his supervisor. As young Harry, er, Nick Potter is leaving his supervisor's office he points to a picture of a young, blonde, white girl pinned to the supervisor's bulletin board. “Is that your daughter?” Potter asks. “No. Murder victim,” the supervisor mutters. Hammer, meet head.
But it gets even better when a prosecutor is killed “in the line of duty.” (Because, well, you know, that kind of thing happens all the time.) The message is clear: Just like the cops, these valiant prosecutors are putting their lives on the line every day just to keep the streets safe for you, dear viewer. Don't you love and admire them?
To its credit, the show does not depict prosecutors as saints. They oversleep, drink too much, and have problems in their relationships. Sometimes they even make little blonde girls (there's a theme here, it seems) cry in order to make them testify so they can put the bad guys behind bars. Of course, that prosecutor had to make that little girl cry because of the cruel injustice that is the rule against hearsay and the defendant's right to cross examine witnesses against him. If not for that, the prosecutor could do the right thing and lock the bad guy up on the basis of videotaped testimony alone. Damn that pesky Constitution!
To further make the point that prosecutors are only human (but nobly so, because of their, um, conviction), one of them even leaves evidence laying around in a public place, thereby destroying the chain of custody and making the evidence inadmissible against her defendant. Lucky for us, the vulnerable and innocent public, the judge is there to save silly prosecutors like this from their own stupidity and help them keep increasing the prison population; the good judge just chooses to ignore this glaring violation of the rules of evidence. Hooray for the objective factfinder who is guided only by the rule off law!
In sum, the show is basically what you'd expect from the creator of Law & Order—another pean to the people that work so hard and sacrifice so much to keep us all safe. I for one, could hardly be more thankful. *cough*
Sarcasm aside, you know I'm going to keep watching the show. The over/under on Potter has him at three months. I'd say the over/under on this show is about three weeks. If you've seen it, would you take the over or the under?
Posted 04:05 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Battlestar Runway Survivor
Let's set aside the fact that I watch too much tv and focus on these important questions: 
One: Why is Battlestar Gallactica becoming a right-wing propaganda machine? First they make peace activists into terrorists, then they make abortion illegal. What gives? Did Karl Rove take over the show, or what?
Two: Who is going to win Project Runway? As I learned here, you can find all the collections online (Santino (much more dignified and even plain than expected), Chloe (nice!), Daniel (snore), Kara (much better than expected, but unfortunately it's only a decoy). Based on those collections, I'm thinking it's going to be a close race between Santino and Chloe. I've liked them both throughout the cycle so either would be good as far as I'm concerned. If I had to choose, I'd give it to Santino b/c he really seems to want it, whereas Chloe is definitely more ambivalent about it.
Three: Is Shane the most insane Survivor contestant ever? It's almost hard to watch Survivor after the impressiveness that is Project Runway. The designers on Runway are seriously talented and accomplished people, while the “survivors” are a real mixed bag. I guess it's a little like comparing apples and oranges, but in many ways it just seems that Runway is much more difficult than Survivor. And there's less to talk about with Survivor. I mean, the new exile island twist definitely is adding an interesting element and the Courtney tribe is crazy town, but otherwise? Well, we basically know what to expect. It's still just unpredictable enough to keep me watching, but just barely.
Posted 01:48 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Survivor Trippin'
The new cycle of Survivor started last night with a whole new cast and several new twists on the theme. I'm thinking the whole “exile island” thing might be interesting, the immunity idol hidden away for secret surprises later is fine, and the grouping of people by age and gender is lame. But what really threw me for a loop was the fact that, for the first time ever, I actually know one of the contestants on the show!
Yes, indeedy, I used to work with Courtney Marit. I recognized her right away but couldn't be sure until I saw her name was Courtney. Sure enough, her biography describes her as a highly unconventional woman who's done a little of everything in terms of world travel and the paper-pants hippy lifestyle, and:
She also worked as a massage therapist, ski instructor, snow maker, farmer, elder caregiver, trailblazer, biking/hiking guide and importer.
It was the biking/hiking guide part where our paths crossed—we both worked for Backroads. I don't remember if I ever actually led a trip with her, but I do remember hanging out with her at one or two leader houses and drinking with her at company events. In fact, I'm pretty sure we went through training together, but my memory is so hazy I can't be sure. Funny how time flies, huh?
Anyway, I wish Courtney lots of luck. If she doesn't go ga-ga over any more dead turtles maybe she'll be all right.
Posted 07:58 AM | Comments (3)
Asian Provocations
Asian Provacateur has been stirring up some very interesting trouble recently. For example, have you heard about the Chappelle Theory? Asian Provocateur has. This makes a certain sense, but.... What is Chappelle saying/doing now?
Asian Provacateur also notes that the Bush Administration has been working on a Nike commercial. That's what this piece by Jack Cafferty on CNN suggests. The video there is worth watching. Let me just add one thing: Who cares about his so-called “mandate” (that never existed). Want to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney? Just do it!
Posted 09:50 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Get Mine Firsters Are Losers
My final thoughts on this season of Survivor and particularly Cindy's decision about the cars. Unless you're a Survivor fan I promise your time will be better spent moving to some other location on the internets.
First, Professor Yin has posted some thoughts on the subject in terms of both game theory and morality/ethics. In terms of the game, he notes that Cindy could have taken home $15,000 more if she'd stayed through just one more vote.* In terms of morals/ethics, he suggests that the cost of those four cars has to be paid by someone, which means eventually to all car buyers (I guess); therefore, maybe Cindy did us a favor by taking just one car rather than taking four. I find that a rather implausible argument; I doubt GM just gave the cars to CBS in the first place and even if it did, such an expense is the least of GM's burdens future car buyers will be paying.
That said, I understand that we live in a “get mine first” world and that Survivor especially is a “get mine first” game. Without reviewing past seasons too closely, it seems that the “get mine first” players almost never win. The players who tend to win are those who are either:
1) Nice, mostly under-the-radar, and in good enough shape/smart enough to win crucial challenges to stay in the game. I'd put Tina Wesson (Season 2), Ethan Zohn (S3), Jenna Morasca (S6), Amber Brkich (S8), and Danni (S11) in this category.
2) Canny manipulators who are just good enough at getting people to do what they want that they earn respect for being so ruthless and capable and therefore end up winning. I'd put Richard Hatch (S1), Brian Heidek (S5), Sandra Diaz-Twine (S6), and Tom Westman (S10) in this category.
Group 1 wins because people underestimate them, they make it to the end, and then they have fewer enemies than their counterpart. Group 2 wins because they are able to see the big picture and give things up when necessary to get further in the game. My point is that neither of these types of players are “get mine firsters.” Hence, I continue to maintain that what Cindy did was just dumb in the context of the game.
Outside the game she's probably not too worried about it. Everyone who remained after her got enough money to buy 3-4 cars or more, so it's not like she totally shafted them. Still, I can't help thinking about the great sensation Cindy would have made if she had chosen differently. Her generosity would have made her a media darling, if only for a few minutes. It would have been shocking to the majority who thinks she did the right thing, and would have given tv-watchers a moment to consider giving rather than taking the next time they faced such a choice (by which I mean a choice between giving and taking generally, not a choice between taking one car or giving four away).
But whatever. That's not what happened. In the end, Cindy got more than she deserved (a new car plus $55,000) and a worthy contestant ended up winning. So goes Survivor.
I'm really not thinking 24/7 about Survivor, although from recent posts here it might seem that way. Still, since finals are over, what else do I have to think about? Getting a job? Oh, well, Survivor is clearly more fun.
* Wikipedia has a breakdown of how much money each contestant ends up with. Scroll down 5-6 screens to “prizes.”
Posted 11:06 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
What's wrong with you people!?
Ok, so I was waiting to see the big Survivor finale until after my final final of the semester. That's over now. It was decidedly mediocre. I sense a potential C in my future. Do I care? Sure. Am I moving on? Duh.
So let me just get right to it: I'm appalled! How could so many of you think it was perfectly ok for Cindy to give up the chance to give four cars away!? I guess I'm just totally out of it, but my answer was Option 3 -- both 1 & 2. The choice was selfish, greedy, and stupid. And look here, people, Heather Havrilesky agrees with me, so I must be right. ;-)
That Havrilesky piece was almost funny to read because it so closely mimicked the conversation L. and I had as we watched last Thursday's episode of Survivor. I'd seen a preview for this show so I knew the choice that someone was going to face. I told L: “This is going to be good. Someone is going to win a car and then they're going to have to give it up.” Why? she asked. “Because if they give it up, they can give the other four players a car each so of course they have to give it up.” Havrilesky was obviously thinking the same thing:
And that's without factoring in the millions of people watching. When you consider all those people out there, millions of people, lots of them young and impressionable, watching as you decide between doing the right thing, or doing the selfish thing?
As we watched the show and saw that Cindy was not doing what we expected, we were appalled. We went through the same analysis as Havrilesky—it was both strategically and morally stupid to keep the car:
And then you throw in the long-term picture: You give up the car, and millions of people are watching. Here's what happens next: 1) Everyone at camp loves you, and feels a personal sense of obligation to make sure you make it into the final three at the very least, 2) everyone at home goes “Awww, that was so nice of her!” which means that 3) you'll be sitting down with Katie Couric and Matt Lauer and God knows who else to discuss your huge, generous heart, which means that 4) you'll demand a good sum as a public speaker for a few years and 5) you might just earn a hefty sum for appearing in a few print ads and, hey, even if you don't want any of that stuff 6) you can spend the rest of your life with your head held high, knowing that you did the right thing.
Now let's look at what happens when you keep the car: 1) Everyone at camp instantly dislikes you, and for a very good reason, 2) everyone at home goes “Ewww” and tries to pry your mean little face out of their minds forever, 3) you get voted off at the next tribal council, 4) not even the host of “The Early Show” on CBS really wants to speak to you, 5) your 15 minutes of fame are reduced to five minutes and 6) you spend the rest of your life known as the Selfish, Morally Bankrupt Idiot Who Sold Her Soul for a Pontiac.
This is exactly what we were thinking. And then Havrilesky summed it all up:
But then, shock of all shocks, a majority of (the admittedly small number of) readers of this blog made the same choice Cindy made. What were you people thinking? I obviously couldn't hack it on Survivor so I guess it's a good thing I never applied. I'm thinking it's time I finish that damned application, though. Someone needs to be there to save humanity from the savages. Meanwhile, I'm loving the Survivors Strike Back blog written by previous contestants. It's a good thing I didn't learn about this sooner or my grades this semester would have been even lower.
So people, please: Explain to me how you justify your choice in the previous poll. Why was Cindy right? I just don't get it.
Posted 12:15 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Survivor Dilemma
I sometimes feel like I'm the only one who still watches Survivor, but in case I'm not, here's a poll for you:
For those of you who don't watch, you can still vote. The situation was just as the question describes: Cindy won a car in a challenge, and then she got a choice—she could either keep the one car for herself, or give it up and give a car to each of the remaining four players. Cindy chose to keep the car. Should she have done that? Would you have? They didn't cover this sort of ethical conundrum in my professional responsibility class so all comments are welcome.
UPDATE: Geez, that poll sort of screwed up my page. Oh, and I just discovered there's a Survivor blog where past contestants take shots at the current players. So much for me studying for that final on Monday....
Posted 10:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Kurt Vonnegut is my hero.
For the past week or so life around the imbroglio has been almost completely tv-free because, for various reasons, we temporarily had no cable. The cable has now been fixed, which allowed me to watch a recent episode of The Daily Show which featured an interview with Kurt Vonnegut. One Good Move has the interview available here, and it's totally worth your five minutes to watch. As others have noted, Vonnegut is still very much on his game, dishing out the dark irony better than just about anyone else does. A couple of choice quotes:
And:
Posted 06:59 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Notes on BSG: “The Farm”
What, you don't watch Battlestar Gallactica? What's wrong with you? But that's ok; I watched, and here's what you missed:
Geez, Starbuck, are you hot for every guy who looks like Apollo?
Yay! EJO (Captain Adama) is back! But why is he being so stupid about wanting to be enemies w/the president? Come on, man, don't follow Tie's lead! Just because he screwed everything up doesn't mean you have to be stupid, too.
No. You can't kill Starbuck. EJO just got well and now you've shot Starbuck!? Quit screwing w/us, Mr. Moore!
Can you love a machine? I love my computer. Does that mean the Cylons are just machines?
Does Starbuck even have the Arrow of Apollo? That's why she was going back to Caprica in the first place, right? I haven't seen that damn thing in a while. I guess she's too busy getting jiggy w/Cylons like Anders, the Pyramid player who led her into the ambush that got her shot! Listen Starbuck, you're the reason I watch this stupid show. Quit screwing around and get back to the damned battlestar so we can have more witty repartee between you and Apollo and EJO and Tie!
OMG! Starbuck's being treated by Cylons!? Yikes! And they're doing sick fertility experiments to try to reproduce themselves!?
We learn about another one of the 12 Cylon people types (the doctor), so we now know 5, L says. But then Boomer/Sharon saves Starbuck, so does that mean the Cylons can actually be good?
And why is EJO crying over Boomer? Is he cracking, or what?
Ok. so now Starbuck's got the Arrow of Apollo. Anders gave it to her—he saved it special for her. How did he know to do that? Does that mean he is or isn't a Cylon? And why don't they just load everyone onto the heavy raider and jump back to the fleet?
Speaking of which, what is Starbuck going to do when she gets back to the fleet and finds that in order to give the president the arrow she has to join a mutiny against Adama? Big conflict coming down the pike, people! But at least Starbuck is alive and finally getting the heck off Caprica. I'm so tired of the Caprica plotline!
But we can't just get the fleet back together happily and safely, can we? No, of course not. That would just be too conventional or whatever, right? So now 1/3 of the fleet has headed off to Kobol and Starbuck is going to have to go searching for the president against Adama's orders and the only thing good about that is that then, finally, Starbuck and Apollo will be together as part of the “religious” rebellion and we can finally get the Starbuck/Apollo relationship/repartee we've been missing. Plus, I'm sure we'll get some good Adama/Starbuck give and take along the way, and maybe a few jabs with Tie, so really, there's a lot to look forward to here.
So there you go; that's it for this week. If you want to follow the action in more detail, be sure to check out the BSG podcast w/producer Ron Moore. Good stuff. I'm also told the TWOP forums are a great place for all the gos, but I really wouldn't (cough) know.
Posted 11:16 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Happy Birthday Blonde Justice (and more!)
Happy Birthday to Blonde Justice (the blawg), which is one whole year old today!:
Blondie is probably watching the big Survivor finale right now, and I'm headed there soon, too. (The magic of Tivo means I generally start watching about 20-30 minutes into a network program so that I can then skip through the commercials.) What big surprises are in store? It's supposed to be television like you've never seen it before! Oh my gosh, I can hardly wait!
Really, after such a great season of the Amazing Race, Survivor has had a hard time keeping up. It's gotten better recently, so tonight could be good, but I'm not holding my breath.
It's been quiet around here recently as I worked on a little freelance project which is now mostly finished. Work starts tomorrow. I'm looking forward to it, but it's also been nice having a bit of freedom the last few days. More on all that soon.
Posted 08:38 PM | Comments (3)
TV Daze
Paper writing is hard. Watching tv is easy. Which do you think I've been doing?
But seriously, I've had some serious catching up to do with the idiot box (not that I was really deprived during the semester, but...), and thanks to the wonders of Tivo I've been able to stay on the edge of my seat with all of my favorite shows, including:
The Amazing Race: It's wrong how much I want Rob and Amber to win. They're sort of evil and ruthless, but they have so much fun doing what they do and they're so nice to each other and just so damn good at the whole business that it's hard not to root for them. Still, their competition is tough and also hard not to root for, mostly. For example, it was sad to see Meredith and Gretchen (the oldest couple to ever make it this far) last on the map tonight; they totally deserved to win. They did the incredible thing of taking longer than anyone to do almost everything, yet still they stayed in the race week after week. Uchenna and Joyce also deserve to win—happy, earnest, nice people who have worked well as a team and played completely above board the whole time. Plus, Joyce sacrificed her hair to win, so that's worth something. (Although, I really think she looked great after the hair came off—not that she didn't before, just that it didn't seem like a huge sacrifice, aesthetically-speaking, to me. I'm sure I'd feel differently if I was a woman and I had as much beautiful hair as she did....) Finally, Ron and Kelly. What's to say? As L. says, they were clearly set up to be America's Sweethearts (the beauty queen and the former P.O.W. in Iraq), but instead they've turned into America's Breakhearts. Overall I feel sorry for Kelly b/c Ron so consistently takes his stress out on her and it's awful. Kelly can be annoying, too, but how is she supposed to respond? So yeah, Ron's the bad guy there, I think. It's too bad. If they win it will be a little sad just because they are so clearly destined to not be together, whereas the other two remaining teams pretty clearly are. Not that the goal of the race is to reward the happiest couple, but...
America's Next Top Model (ANTM) 4; Yeah, I watch. You wanna make something of it? L. got me into it and at first I resisted, but then I kept catching the end and wondering why one woman was going rather than the others and I just got sucked in. This season I was miffed from the beginning that they dumped Brita so early, and then Rebecca and then Tiffany. I mean, who am I to judge? But Brita didn't even get a chance, Rebecca got knocked for why? And Tiffany, well, I thought she was really going somewhere for a while. Whatever. At this point my money's on Naima, but since I have no money, I'm not risking much by saying that. I'd guess maybe Brittany has a pretty good shot, too, but it seems inevitable that Michelle and Keenyah are going to be taking bows soon. Christina? Dude, who knew botox could take a woman so far?
Survivor: Palau: What a crazy season—one tribe never won a single immunity challenge. I was sad last week to see Stephanie voted off, but not surprised. Going into last week's show I thought I woudl be more disappointed if she got the axe, but after watching how she played the situation (or at least how they edited how she played it), I didn't have much sympathy for her. She needed to push a lotharder if she was going to make a power play against Tom, but instead she just “planted the seed” and hoped her sistahs would have the sense to play to win. It's getting old watching “strong” men run the tribes until the end, even if women do win in the end. Wouldn't it have been great if Stephanie would have pulled off a coup and picked off Tom, Ian, and Greg, one by one? That would have put the remaining women in places 1-4; now they're likely to go 4-7. Of course, at some point I imagine the three remaining men are going to turn on each other, and they're going to try to take a woman with them in the hopes they can dominate the challenges against her, and then that woman will win in the final vote. At least, that's the way it generally seems to go. Why do I even watch this show? Oh yeah, it's so much better than writing papers.
Oh, I've also managed to watch three more movies in the last couple of days (yeah, I am working hard):
- Sideways: Great show. I see now why it got so much buzz. Of course, I'm a sucker for any story about a failed or failing outcast writer, but the juxtaposition of the archetypal loser with the guy who seems to have it all but is really the losingest loser of all, well, it was very well done. Once L. told me why I recognized Virginia Madsen all I could think whenever she was on was “candyman candyman candyman,” but other than that, this was a keeper.
- Code 46: Oh man. What an awful awful movie. There's a reason you've never heard of it, so just forget I mentioned it. Once again I got suckered by the sci-fi premise, which was actually fairly interesting. The future world was well-designed in many ways, with its own language melange, good scenes and logical technical advances like viruses that can make you more empathetic, or make you immune to bacteria, etc. But the actual love affair between Tim Robbins and Samantha Morton? No. And the plot? Implausible doesn't even begin to describe it. Come on people! How about a little internal consistency here?
- Starsky and Hutch: It was on HBO, ok? Exactly what you'd expect from Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson. Exactly.
Posted 11:08 PM | Comments (6)
Survivor Palau 1
Ed. note: The following contains spoilers of the new Survivor. If you don't want to read spoilers, don't click “more.” And even if you don't care about spoilers, I'm certain you have better things to do than read about an episode of Survivor, anyway. Another “season” of Survivor began tonight—the 10th episode. Will it be worth watching? Let's see.... First we learn about Wrold War II and see some bits of wreckage from the big WWII battles that were fought here. Then it really starts with a terrific bit of symbolism: The boat filled with 20 people slowly paddles its way to shore where one immunity necklace is waiting for the first woman ashore, and another for the first man ashore. The two most impatient people (I think) leap off the boat, thinking they are tough and fast and can do better on their own than they can by cooperating with the group. Of course, the two jumpers almost immediately get left in the dust as the boat speeds on toward shore. This is why “reality tv” is awesome—you couldn't script human folly any more precisely. Jolanda eats a grasshopper. Why? Is that little grasshopper really going to make the difference on the first challenge? Oh, she's a lawyer. Coby immediately starts trying to make alliances and plot the first person voted out. Why? Does he want to be the first person voted out? Oh, he's a hairdresser. Koala Jeff (or is he Old War Battle Jeff now?) shows up and says they're going to get rid of two people immediately. Yikes! Ian and Jolanda get to choose teams, just like in gradeschool for kickball, boy-girl, boy-girl. Oops, but then their picks get to pick, just to mix things up even more. The field narrows and Crazy Wanda is one of the first to go. I now owe L. $5 b/c she bet Wanda would be off the show before the hour was up and she's been proven correct in the first 15 minutes. (Note to self: L. is never wrong!) Sad music enhances the melodrama, and some of the remaining survivors cry over losing “friends” they just met two hours ago. Yes, your lives are hard. Boo hoo. We get blue and brown buffs and everyone is all tribal now, except that they're going to continue to share the same beach. Whasup w/that? Tears from those picked last, while we get some reflection about the makeup up of the tribes and what their chances will be based on age, athletic ability, and number of nose rings per capita. Oh, and how many models. There are lots of “models” and “actors” here, so the vogueing challenge is going to be hard fought, for sure. Challenge! Military items, obstacle course, canoes, paddling and flags and racing to shore! Hooray! Immunity back up for grabs and the immunity idol is revealed. Covet covet. Lots of googley-eyed coveting going on. The big challenge is: “Do we take the food and water, or just the fire?” The H-team votes for just the fire, and the O-team falls behind bringing food and water. They'll be cold, but well-fed? Paddle paddle the canoes, tongues hanging out with exhaustion as H-team cruises to an easy victory. H-team wins immunity and gets to keep its fire. Ah-oh. Tribes have to split up. H-team chooses to head to the new beach. Was this a good decision? Um, well, first we have to tip over our canoe and dump our reward on the bottom of the ocean floor. Excellent. O-team decides to vote off the tattoos, which sucks, because I like tattoos. But then Jolanda starts bossing everyone around and effectively paints a big fat target on her back, so, um, who will it be? I know you're on the edge of your seat. I am. But my anxiety is spiced with the sound of the snare drum that they've added to the usual Survivor soundtrack to remind us that we're on Palau and there were big battles here during World War II! Oh, wait, we're at tribal (council, that is, but all the cool kids just call it “tribal”). Jeff schools the team on brains v. braun, Jolanda says she wants to be team dictator but not really, and tattoos says her head is on the chopping block. Vote vote votey vote, putting the little papers in an old ammo box because, did we mention there were big battles here during world war II? Oh and the snares! Tappa tappa tappa. The drama! Edge of seat, private! Votes are being read. Tattoos. Jo. Tattoos. Jo. Who will it be who will it be? Tattoos does some mental calculations, the tide shifts, and Jo's gotta go. Sadness all around. Koala Jeff gives a little lesson about making decisions and flying right, and that's it. So yeah, it's another Survivor. I have to watch, but now you don't. See you next week. Maybe. UPDATE: See also Changing the Rules of Survivor on Crooked Timber.Posted 09:15 PM
When Blogs Do Bad
Blogs have toppled another semi-public figure:I agree that one great function of blogs is to make the invisible visible, to shine a light on those issues, statements, actions, etc. that do not get enough attention in the mainstream media and popular discourse. However, this light-shining function can be a double-edged sword. Where's the line between a witch hunt and a critical, good faith inquiry into what's really going on? Did Eason really deserve this? Or did he just make an offhand comment at the wrong place and time that was blown out of proportion and twisted to suit the rabid radicals of the most jingoistic right? (Hey look, I can write just like the editors of the Hart and Wecsler's!) If you saw BSG last night (it's been renewed for another season!), you'll know it raised the same question of when healthy social inquiry might turn into egomaniacal power grab. L. (my personal guru in reading against the grain) noted astutely that BSG might have been making an argument that we shouldn't be questioning how Bush has handled post-9/11 security and foreign affairs. Apparently the show's creators have explicitly said they're trying to make the show parallel recent history to some extent, but it's hard to say what they were trying to communicate last night in that regard. Was Capt. Adama supposed to be George Bush, and the Independent Tribunal the 9/11 Commission? Remember, Bush at first tried to tell the 9/11 Commission that he was above their purview, and that's basically what Adama did last night with the tribunal. Then again, was the 9/11 Commission a witch hunt or power grab, which is how the Independent Tribunal was starting to look last night? Could the chief investigator have been Ashcroft trying to argue that all civil liberties should be swept aside in favor of “security,” while Adama was the voice of the reasonable civil libertarian upholding his and his officers' rights? See, it's hard to figure out. And really, these questions are L.'s, so if she comes up with any answers, perhaps she'll share. Anyway, BSG is only relevant to the extent that it shows that investigation can be a multi-edged sword. First it was Dan Rather (who may or may not have resigned b/c of the Bush national guard story), now it's Eason Jordan. Who's next? Are bloggers getting drunk with power and doing more harm than good in pursuit of their own agendas?Eason Jordan, a senior executive at CNN who was responsible for coordinating the cable network's Iraq coverage, resigned abruptly last night, citing a journalistic tempest he touched off during a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, late last month in which he appeared to suggest that United States troops had deliberately aimed at journalists, killing some.
Posted 02:01 PM | Comments (2)
Political Geek “Star” Sighting
I just saw Jim Strock, who was a “candidate” on Showtime's “American Candidate” series last summer. He was on foot at the corner of 20th and J Street downtown, crossing 20th against the light. He looked right at me and I said hello because I thought I knew him, then as soon as I was past I remembered why I recognized his face. Burning dilemma: Should I have gone back to say hello? I've only had a couple of “star” sightings in my life, but I've always thought it was poor taste to say anything to people you don't really know, but just recognize from tv or movies. A I wrong? Should I have seized the moment? If it had been Keith or Lisa or Bruce or Malia, I might not have been able to stop myself because I would have had to complement them on their roles in the show and their positions on the issues. But Jim? The only thing I could have said was “Hi. You seemed nice, but I never would have voted for you.” Somehow, that really didn't seem appropriate. Anyway, I wonder what he was doing in D.C...Posted 08:33 PM
Congratulations, Eva!
Ok, I'm going to admit it: I kind of enjoyed watching most of “America's Next Top Model” this season. It's L's thing, really, but I get sucked in to watching it most of the time. Yeah, I know, that's a problem. But admitting you have a problem is the first step toward recovery, right? But since I did enjoy it, I just wanted to congratulate this season's top model, Eva. At times I thought maybe Nicole should have won, or Norelle, but I liked Eva all along and she was hands down the best choice of the final four or five. Heather Havrilesky (who now has her own blog) has a great piece in Salon about why Eva was the best pick, and about why the show is so wrongly watchable:Unfortunately, according to Havrilesky, a lot of the show's appeal has some deep connection to the trauma of growing up playing with Barbie dolls. I can't say I share that exactly, but still, the piece is a fun read if you watched the show. For the record, I do not watch “Desperate Housewives” or “Runway” or anything else like this (except insofar as “Survivor” and “The Amazing Race” are like it, which isn't very far), so maybe there's hope for me yet.
Posted 04:27 PM | Comments (1)
Reality TV: Why Is it good to watch people being bad?
In my ongoing quest to do anything but the work I'm supposed to do, I've been keeping up with both “Survivor” and “The Amazing Race” and just wanted to note that “Survivor” is getting better each week, and “TAR” is just the best show ever ever ever on tv. “Survivor” is great because finally, for once, for the first time ever, a women's alliance against the men has held strong. Ok, in the latest episode it was shaken, and it was shaken earlier when Amy orchestrated the ouster of a woman who had said something that made her mad, but otherwise, it's been solid. What's funny about this is that nearly every season I've watched potential women's alliances fall apart, and this season when it first started looking like the women were going to run the board, I resented their ruthlessness. At first I thought Amy was far too mean and uncompromising in the way she manipulated her “team” of women. But then, each week, she earned my respect for both her brilliant psychological play and her excellent performance in challenges. She's simply been nothing but loyal to her original alliance and dedicated to her goal to be in the final two with another woman. If Amy doesn't win this season, it won't be because she hasn't been an incredible player. I'd say easily in the top five ever, maybe top two or three. The trick for power players, though, is always to manage the god complex tightly enough that you don't generate enough fear and resentment to fuel a viable alliance against you. Now, it may be too late for Amy; the last episode set the stage for her ouster, but she's strong enough that she could win some key immunities, and she's certainly proven herself smart enough and persuasive enough to outmaneuver her remaining rivals. This, my friends, is good tv. Prof. Yin has some additional interesting thoughts on what last night's episode might reveal about CBS. Nothing too surprising, really. Ridiculous, if CBS is editing out gay affection the way Prof. Yin suggests they might be, but not surprising. Oh, and the latest episode of survivor was a big ad for Powerbooks, Mac OS X, and iSight cameras from Apple, so of course you know the show has to be about the best thing on tv. I say “almost” because, as mentioned, “TAR” wins that prize. It combines great settings and exciting “challenges” with the most excruciating inside look at how mean people can be to those they supposedly love. For better or worse (pardon the pun), the most continuous theme I see is that men constantly underestimate and disrespect the women they claim to love, and this often comes with verbal abuse and public humiliation. The ideology of patriarchy exposed? To their credit, often the women involved display all sorts of retaliatory, defensive, and even offensive tactics, but still it's very sad. And sadly, it's great tv, too. While being on “Survivor” doesn't really appeal to me anymore b/c of its individualist qualities and the way it rewards ruthlessness, “TAR” is an entirely different story. I would love to try it, and I would hope I and my teammate, whoever it was, could find ways to cope with the stress and the inevitable setbacks and frustrations, w/out taking them out on each other. Of course, I'm sure many of the people who actually get on the show hope so, too.Posted 10:54 AM | Comments (3)
Hooray for the Good Americans!
----- Amazing Race Spoiler Alert !!! ----- Congratulations to possibly the nicest and most deserving team ever to win The Amazing Race! It was a great finale that restored my faith in humanity. (Ok, maybe that's an exaggeration, but it was great to see a deserving couple win.) I'm guessing some will complain that Chip and Kim played dirty w/the yield and by deliberately misleading the "dating Christians" about which flag was correct. That's true, but what separates Chip and Kim from some of the other teams is that they never seemed to do anything just to be mean or for personal reasons. As a commenter on The Yin Blog said, they never did anything out of malice. They also showed the most enjoyment and real enthusiasm about the places they got to visit, and I think they showed the most respect for the people in those places. Whereas many of the other teams made derogatory comments about the local people or culture in different places, Chip and Kim just drank it all in with smiles and appreciation. In all, I felt like they played a positive game, a fair game. They helped other teams when they could afford to, and they didn't when they couldn't. In my book, they won fair and square. Congratulations, Chip and Kim! Kudos also to the show's writers/producers or whoever designed the final challenges and everything. The boats and flags and climbing wall and kayaking in the Phillipines was brilliant because it was all done in close quarters where teams could see each other most of the time and know when they were behind, which made for high drama and spirited competition. It makes me wonder if the game should try some new things next time around. For example, airports always cause everyone to catch up with each other; why not do less with airports and more on one island or in one city or country, leaving teams on their own to decide how to get around? Of course, Survivor is just one island, and is it just me, or is that show losing its luster—especially compared to the Amazing Race? What to say about the other teams? Apparently Colin proposed to Christie on tv this morning, and she accepted because he's supposedly really not the guy he appears to be on the show:Hey, whatever works. They did make it through seemingly happy with each other, so perhaps they're the perfect couple. And there's no doubt editing can really skew how an audience perceives someone on a show like this, so I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. See also: Coverage from RealityTVWorld.
Posted 12:38 PM
Amazing Race Luck
Did you see The Amazing Race last night? Did you see Colin and Christie, possibly the most dominant team ever, almost get booted because of smart play on the part of the other teams? It was a beautiful thing, but alas, the C&C team is still in the race b/c it was a “non-elimination leg.” The finale is next week. On My Own Personal Scorecard^{(r)}^, Chip and Kim are the only team remaining that deserves to win (although the “bowling moms” have done pretty well, too). If C&C win, I will lose all faith in humanity and I will be moving to Canada because it will be a sign that the end of the world is near, Bush is going to be reelected, and a long period of war and misery will soon descend upon the globe.* Mark my words. Oh, and as usual, the Yin Blog has already commented on this episode. Don‘t miss Yin’s Reality TV category for comments on the whole season. * I‘m kidding, of course. It’s a tv show, ferpetesake!Posted 08:21 AM | Comments (3)
Swift Boat Vets for Rewriting History
Now that we've learned that the Bush campaign and Swift Boat Vets for "Truth" share the same attorney, what's next in this debacle? Oh, it looks like a Democratic lawyer is working for both the DNC and MoveOn.org. Great. This is all so ridiculous I've been loathe to comment, but for the record: While the Repubs are wrong to try to smear Kerry just as they did McCain in 2000, they're right that Kerry has made too much of his Vietnam service and should focus more on the rest of his record and his concrete and detailed plans for the future. They're also more or less right that the 527s are fighting hard on both sides. Truth Laid Bear notes that, according to OpenSecrets.org, the 527s on the Democratic side have all the marbles. What's to be done about the 527s? How do we allow people to join together to make their voices heard in a way that we can all agree is good for democracy? Conundrum.
On the other side, Kerry is right that this is a smear campaign (Snopes even says Kerry's medals are all legit), and he's right to fight back on it, but he's wrong to focus so exclusively on it. He's got so much more to run on; squabbling about his war medals is making him look petty and is allowing the Repubs to reduce him to nothing more than that. And why isn't Kerry making a bigger deal out of Bush's war medals?
And yet, the controversy rages. The best overall summary I've heard of what is going on with the Swift Boat Vets comes from Kathleen Hall Jameison who spoke last week on NOW:
He wasn't Senator Kerry or President Kerry, he was just one more person on the boats. I think they went back and recalled their memories of Kerry when he came and protested the war. And I think they were very angry. They came back and thought they heard him accusing them of atrocities. I think this is the explanation for why it is that they believe that he must not have earned his medals even though the evidence would suggest that he did. In order to make their own internal story coherent about Vietnam, they have to somehow reconcile what they heard as an attack on them, what they heard as allegation of atrocities that they had committed, which is different actually I believe from what Kerry said.
But, nonetheless, what I believe they heard and the ads suggest what they heard. They had to reconcile that with Kerry the hero who earned the medals. I believe to make their own story consistent for themselves they believed he couldn't have earned those medals. Hence, he was a liar then. He was a liar when he protested the war. He must be unfit to be President. I think this is an exploration in the process about human memory requires us to create a consistent story, particularly about people we intensely dislike.
As Lisa Rein noted last week, "The Daily Show"d has pointed out that few if any of the Swift Boat Vets actually served "with" Kerry (as in, going on actual missions with him so they could see how he got his injuries and how he performed in the field), so the best what they're saying now can be is second- or third-hand memory distorted by time. In other words, regardless of their ties to the Bush campaign, the Swift Boat Vets aren't very credible.
Kerry was actually on "The Daily Show" last night, and Stewart put things into perspective immediately:
"That's what I understand, too, but I'm trying to find out what happened," Kerry joked.
All this Vietnam talk has reminded me of an "old" Lou Reed song, Xmas in February. I wonder if there will be songs written like this about the troops serving in Iraq. War, what is it good for? Not for people, that's for sure.
And speaking of the "Daily Show," Monday's episode also had a terrific bit w/Rob Corddey about how utterly worthless the mainstream media have been throughout this campaign, but I can't find it online. The point was that the media just give a "he said/she said" near-verbatim report of what the campaigns are saying w/very little (relatively speaking) investigation as to the value or credibility of each side's claims. They report all right, even if what they're reporting is complete crap. Makes you proud to live in a country w/such a free press, doesn't it?
Posted 02:35 PM
Amazingly Ugly Racers
Hey, look! Another episode of the Amazing Race and another example of Americans Behaving Badly. Maybe that should be the name of this show. If you missed it, there's a pretty good recap here, but the show was all about Colin's anger. He and Christie got a head start on everyone at the beginning of the episode, but their cab got a flat tire and the driver had no spare. Colin basically stole the spare from another team's cab, then refused to pay his driver what he'd agreed to pay. After being threatened with jail, Colin finally paid up, then proceeded to continue blaming Christie for making him have to give in to the demands of the cabbie and the police.
So is it just me, or does Colin have an anger problem? I feel very bad for Christie; she didn't deserve any of the blame for the consequences of Colin's tantrum. She was being the reasonable one, while he was being an insane anger bomb. Sad. Of course, what do we know? Editing means everything, doesn't it?
Even before Colin's craziness in the most recent episode, I've noticed that this season everyone seems more stressed and high strung than in past seasons, and also more aggressively "ugly" (as far as how they treat each other and the people they interact with around the world). Is it a coincidence that this season also seems to be drawing the biggest audience the show has ever had?
Posted 10:56 AM | Comments (2)
Amazing Race Jerky Brothers
Are Russians the most miserable people on the earth? Somehow I doubt that they are. But leave it to the Jerky Brothers, Marshall and Lance from Dallas, TX, to take one look at St. Petersburg and declare Russians both miserable and "angry-looking." The brothers' brilliant theory: The cold makes people unhappy in Russia. My theory: The pollution and heat in Texas makes the Jerky Brothers stupid.
I believe it was someone on L-Cubed who I first saw commenting about what an awful image of Americans the Jerky Boys represent, but I can't find the post right now. Not to worry. I see Professor Yin has already commented on last night's episode and had the same impression. This show will be better when these guys go.
Posted 06:03 AM | Comments (8)
Inside Survivor Vanuatu
Editor's Note: The following is an excerpt from an email forward from a friend of a friend who is working in the South Pacific Island nation of Vanuatu, where the next version of "Survivor" (Survivor 9) is being filmed. It's a good reminder that almost nothing on tv—perhaps especially "reality" tv—is what it seems.
The big news for Americans in Vanuatu these days is about the “Survivor” show. The series that will air in September is currently being shot here, and everyone is excited about it. Since we are Americans, people ask us a lot of questions, as if we were experts on all things American. We have practically no answers at all for the local people, since we have never even seen the show, but we can at least share a little bit with you of how things are going.
When we first heard that the show would be on location here, we tried to guess exactly where it would be filmed. There are some very rugged, very remote areas in Vanuatu, and we each had our favorite candidate for the locale: the ash plain on Ambrym, the crater lakes of Gaua, the rocky cliffs of Futuna. It turns out that the shoot is on our island, just down the road! We have friends at the villages which own the chosen sites, and we drive past them every time we go to the capital city for shopping. We think that perhaps the show tends to exaggerate the wildness of the sites chosen. (The alternate explanation is that Onesua is a lot more remote than we thought!) During the two months of shooting, the cast and crew will spend five days on Tanna, where the volcano scenes will be shot. The rest of the film will apparently be from Efate Island, where we live, and two little offshore islands, where we have visited.
The places where the actual shooting is being done are not untouched jungle; they are village gardens in the fallow phase of slash and burn agriculture. Of course, they look like jungle to Americans, since the bush just grows up wild. When you see the show it will probably give you a good idea of what our area looks like, but you should remember that you are seeing the Pacific equivalent of stubble in a wheat field.
There have been some hard feelings created. Villages still mostly run on a gift economy; you ask a favor and it tends to be granted, but you incur an obligation in return. America does not share this approach, and evidently the Survivor folks didn’t really bother too much to adapt. They struck deals with the local villages, including paying them not to fish on the reefs and not to sail their canoes from the offshore islands to Efate. They didn’t want the film to have Ni-Vanuatu in the background, going about their daily business, so the agreements were signed and that was that. American contracts do not allow a lot of flexibility, and the villagers don’t understand that. “Survivor” evidently tried to benefit local businesses by contracting food supplies with them, but when the first delivery was late, they cancelled. All supplies are now being imported, even eggs and vegetables, and the local people are not earning the income that they had expected, but they are still required to keep from fishing or going to market.
Meanwhile, security is very tight. The area is patrolled by men wearing camouflage and carrying radios, and they are enforcing a no-go zone, which was quite illegal at first, since they didn’t go through the proper channels of giving advance notice for shipping. Some New Zealander friends of ours, just as obnoxious and confrontational as Americans are, made a point of sailing a flotilla of yachts into the bay in the middle of filming, just to protest the point. ‘Survivor’ responded by getting everything properly announced and publicized, and the yachts went on their way.
Another issue has been the fact that this is an oral culture, where you sit and talk about everything before you even start to get down to business. A local newspaper columnist writes,
“People in Survivors are acting as though they own the place. They should be told this is Vanuatu and not the USA. They have advised the Tourism office that if local media want to get any news or interviews we will have to pay for it. Talk about arrogant.”
The front page of the newspaper of July 3 carried a political cartoon where a crewcut, sunglasses-wearing director says, “In order to win that one million dollars, you “Survivor” contestants must survive 39 days without electricity, running water, hot showers and telephones – completely cut off from the modern world!” In the background, a Ni-Vanuatu woman says, “What’s so special about that? We island women live every day of our lives that way!”
This could give a person a whole new perspective on ‘reality’ TV. What’s ‘real? The carefully edited contests or daily lives? In my opinion, there will be nothing in the contestants’ games as challenging as this whole thing is for the villagers. They try to understand a world where frivolous wastes of wealth exist side-by-side with people who could use those wasted resources, and they try to reflect on a world where cultures clash.
There is some monetary benefit for Vanuatu from the American money being spent here for these two months, and there may be some long-range benefit in increased tourism from the publicity. I’m not sure that it will offset the ill will caused by the filming. Vanuatu is a great place to be an American, since we saved the islands from slavery by stopping the Japanese offensive in World War II. The New Hebrides, as Vanuatu was called then, was a major staging area for the critical battles of the Coral Sea and Guadalcanal, and thousands of US soldiers were stationed here. The old people remember American friendliness, American generosity, and American sacrifice. That is a nice list of values to export! The current generation of Ni-Vanuatu, thanks to “Survivor,” is getting a very different picture. I’m afraid that they see us more like millipedes [a big nuisance in Vanuatu].
Go ahead and watch the show if you like. Maybe it’s fun entertainment. But maybe it would be better to think about the real issues involved, side-by-side with the villagers. The TV producers could have done a lot better job; why not have contests in making cement blocks and building a new clinic? Why not see which contestant can learn the largest local vocabulary or the most intricate traditional dance? Why not compete in teams of illustrators/authors/translators to produce the best textbook for the local primary school? That would be reality TV. I could cheer those heroes.
Posted 08:24 PM
Reality TV Peeps Should Blog
Last night Bravo aired an episode of Queer Eye UK, which is eerily like the American version—especially the opening trailer, which features the British queer eyes doing exactly what the American ones do in that little montage. Does it have to be so identical?
But that aside, the show's subject was a guy who wanted to become a television personality, so the Queer Eyes gave him a website to help him look more professional to potential employers. That's cool, but I think the queer eyes dropped the ball a bit when they didn't give their project a blog. Today, if you go to Barra Fitzgibbon's site, it doesn't look very up to date. The Queer Eye episode on which he appeared was probably filmed weeks or months ago, and it ended with the strong suggestion that his tv career was about to really take off, yet Fitzgibbon's website offers no updates about what has happened to his tv career since. I'm guessing that's because Fitzgibbon doesn't know how to update the site, but if it had been built around a blog, he could have been updating it regularly with ease. Next time, Queer Eyes, give your guy a blog!
More generally, I suggest to anyone who goes on a reality tv show who would like to "capitalize" somehow on the 15 minutes of fame it provides: Get yourself a blog! Fans of the show you were on—your fans!—might love to get to know you better, and to follow your post-show progress. I'm not talking some PR site where you just promote yourself relentlessly, but a real, honest blog where you talk about your life, and where part of your life happens to be that you were on a reality tv show. And even if you don't want to parlay your reality show experience into some sort of film or television or celebrity career, you could still connect w/fans and possibly have some fun w/a blog. With Fox set to kick off an all-reality-tv channel, I'm betting the reality folks w/blogs will be the ones w/the greatest post-show success.
Posted 05:52 AM | Comments (1)
TiVo Home Media Trial
The Memorial Day weekend has given us a chance to catch up on a little televisual entertainment, and while playing with the TiVo we discovered that TiVo is currently offering a free trial of its "home media option"—the feature that allows you to stream your mp3s and photos from your computer to your tv via a wireless network. It also lets you schedule recordings via the web if you've forgotten to set your TiVo to record your favorite show (I've never felt a need for this feature, but there it is). Before trying it out, I didn't think the Home Media Option was really necessary, but now that I can sit on my couch and use the TiVo remote to thumb through every one of the thousands of mp3s and photos on my computer, I'm starting to think $100 isn't a bad price.
Cool things you should be able to do with this but currently can't:
- Stream your photos/music to any TiVo you choose. Then you could share your photos/music w/your family and friends.
- Watch photo slideshows while listening to your favorite mix of mp3s. Currently, you can either look at photos or listen to your mp3s, you can't do both at the same time. Lame.
- Stream your iMovies or any other video on your computer to your tv. I'm guessing there are hacks to enable this, but I can't see what TiVo (or anyone else) would have to lose by making this possible right out of the box. (Perhaps worries that this will encourage people to download divX movies and stream them to their tvs?)
Times like this I realize that while the mac may be the most cruel of techno-mistresses, any technology can make you its impoverished plaything if you're not careful. I mean, one thing leads to another. You get cable and then you find new shows you must see. You're not around to see them all and you can't manage tapes in the vcr, so you get a tivo. Tivo saves lots of televisual entertainment, so you watch more and realize you need a better tv. And a sound system. And a home media option. And some home theater seating. And, and and....
Posted 09:56 AM
Adrianna!?
Every time I watch The Sopranos I wonder why. I hate the show. It's got to be about the most depressing hour on television every week. And it's Sunday night, too; could there be a worse night? As if you're not already bummed enough that the weekend is over and you have to go back to work, if you're a Sopranos fan you also have to cope with another heart-wrenching episode, on the edge of your seat for an hour wondering who's gonna stab who in the back (literally and/or metaphorically). But that's also why it's so great—it's probably the most compelling, possibly the best written and acted show on tv. The characters are so well developed by now that I care way too much about what happens to them. Ah, Adrianna! Sure, the writing was on the wall, but that doesn't make it any easier.
Posted 09:24 PM | Comments (4)
