Category: Media

If you want to get in on a little moment in media history, watch the Dennis Miller Show on CNBC before it’s canceled. It’s a valiant attempt to skewer the Bush-hating left with humor that’s failing to find an audience. The problem is that Dennis’ hip humor, laden with pop-culture references, is lost on the conservative audience most drawn to his unvarnished support of the President and his conduct of the war on terror. Not that there aren’t plenty of people who get the humor and support the President – the South Park audience is full of us – but I’m not sure they’re in the mood for another daily news/talk/politics/humor show, and they’re certainly not in the studio audience; those stiffs sit on their hands when Dennis makes the most hilarious jabs, just not getting any of it.

One of the show’s unique moments was an interview with Eric Alter-the-facts-man, where Dennis just quit talking and pretended to doze off after his guest exhausted his quota of received opinion, knee-jerk response, and scripted claims. See the Observer’s account:

[Miller] pretended to be asleep.

When Mr. Alterman finished his spiel, Mr. Miller went bolt upright and snapped at the camera: “All right, you’ve been great. Come back anytime.”

Mr. Alterman left stunned.

Alterman flogged the heck out of the story on his blog, and was livid with the Observer’s account.

Whether the incident was a melt-down for Miller or a brilliant move probably depends on where you sit. It’s clear that there’s not much point in trying to engage someone as dishonest as Alterman (or Chomsky or Moore) in a point-by-point debate, so yawning is probably the best move. Mocking would be another angle, but Alterman himself wouldn’t know he was being messed with, and neither would the dimwitted audience. So yeah, maybe it was brilliant, but if it was it was too brilliant for TV.

I like Dennis Miller and want him to succeed, but the show clearly needs work.

Here’s the new URL.

(note: PW was one of the wittiest of the old-school blogs)

Those who want to believe that Howard Stern is being persecuted for his criticism of the President may want to brush-up on their history:

A 1988 Howard Stern broadcast of a “Christmas Party” over three stations including WXRK-FM, New York prompted the F.C.C. to fine each station a paltry $2,000 because of indecent programming broadcast at times when children would likely be listening. Then, in 1995, Infinity – the company that fired “Opie and Anthony” – paid $1.7 million dollars in fines for Stern’s “indecency”.

The big fine levied against Stern by the Clinton Administration served to raise the bar for shock jocks, essentially providing Stern with the franchise for tasteless radio programming. Nobody could compete unless they were able to pay such a fine, and nobody who didn’t already have a huge audience could get a syndicator.

So now Stern has climbed upon a cross and declared himself a victim of Bush and the Religious Right, weaving a web of lies to cover himself, such as the claim that he can’t go to XM radio because it’s 30% owned by Clear Channel (the correct figure is somewhere between 4 and 8%; see comments here.).

How far will this idiot go to promote himself, and how gullible are his supporters?

Jeff Jarvis suggests that Howard Stern should go to satellite radio, Dave Winer thinks Jarvis is reporting rather than suggesting, and Stern himself discusses it on his show:

He said that if he went onto satellite, they’d sell 12 million receivers immediately; “they wouldn’t be able to make them fast enough.” It would change the entire radio industry, making broadcast stations worth a helluva lot less, he said, and he’s right.

Never in history has a man been more full of crap than the talentless Howard Stern. His whole schtick is dependent on standards of decency setting the boundaries of good taste so he can position himself outside them. He’s like the little kid who’s learned that he can get attention saying bad words who then works the gimmick to death. He didn’t even invent this gimmick himself, he stole it from Alex Bennett.

In a setting where adolescent content isn’t circumscribed, his show would have no audience. He was created by the FCC, and he knows it, so all this whining about the government cracking down on his free speech rights is just crocodile tears. He benefits from being pushed out of the 6 markets that Clear Channel has banned him from by generating buzz for his tired formula.

If Stern was to go to satellite radio, which he won’t, he’d lose his audience because the 13-year-old boys who dominate it don’t have the cash for an XM radio and the monthly fee. Who’s he trying to kid?

Mike Sanders makes an interesting observation on the Echo Chamber question:

It seems to me that an Echo Chamber is a group that ignores other opinions to their own detriment. I keep on thinking that David’s defense of the EC is rooted in an idea from Arnold Kling’s Downfall of the Annointed post in which he pointed out that some feel that trying to change people’s minds is a waste of time. Instead they just rally their supporters and wait for those who disagree to see the light

The essay he links is right on as well. Weinberger’s sticking to his guns on this issue, despite the fact that nobody agrees with him.

How ironic.

Megan McArdle will be on your TV set tomorrow:

I’ll be on CNNfn tomorrow at 9:00 am. If you are among the three cable subscribers who gets CNNfn, and you happen to be homebound, check it out.

I’ll betcha she doesn’t talk about blogging.

Our favorite loon, Dave Winer, is on the soapbox again seeking support from politicians for his media-hating jihad:

Over the weekend I sent a simple idea to Cameron Barrett, who works for the Clark campaign, and to Jim Moore who works for Dean. The message: I would love to see their candidates make an impassioned plea to keep the Internet free of interference from the entertainment industry…I would happily give money to candidates for ads that warn that the media industry is trying to rob us of our future, and explains how important it is to protect the independence of the Internet.

Winer’s political sophistication is less than remarkable; his analysis holds that any organization he can describe as “big” is necessarily a force for oppression and probably out to get him personally, and he’s even invented a word (BigCos) to express this profound view. So he naturally takes it as given that Big Media Cos are out to destroy the Internet because it’s his livelihood, and for no other reason.

So we need only ask for the evidence that media companies are out to destroy the Internet to put this silly complaint to bed, sure in the knowledge that Winer can’t produce, just as Lessig can’t support his claim that the Original Internet was a free-for all, first-come first-served, random access network. These myths are extremely popular these days, but there’s not much to them.

See also Doc Searls and Jeff Jarvis.

Gallup Poll Analyses – Are the News Media Too Liberal?

PRINCETON, NJ — Forty-five percent of Americans believe the news media in this country are too liberal, while only 14% say the news media are too conservative. These perceptions of liberal inclination have not changed over the last three years. A majority of Americans who describe their political views as conservative perceive liberal leanings in the media, while only about a third of self-described liberals perceive conservative leanings

A reader points out that the Davis recall was opposed by virtually all the print media in the state, yet the people passed it overwhelmingly. Are the media out of touch with the people?

You could say so.

Check out the Sunday funnies at Begging to Differ, on Sunday. Here’s the announcement:

We are pleased to announce that this Sunday, September 14, Begging to Differ will present our first-ever Sunday Comics feature. Several of the funniest and most provocative online comics will be presented in this space.

The selection includes, but is not limited to: Day By Day, Achewood, and Squaresville.

The RIAA has finally started suing major music thieves, starting with a few hundred people who’d each “shared” over a thousand tunes. One file thief’s reaction was typical:

Another defendant, Lisa Schamis of New York, said her Internet provider warned her two months ago that record industry lawyers had asked for her name and address, but she said she had no idea she might be sued. She acknowledged downloading ?lots? of music over file-sharing networks.

?This is ridiculous,? said Schamis, 26. ?People like me who did this, I didn?t understand it was illegal.?

?I can understand why the music industry is upset about this, but the fact that we had access to this as the public, I don?t think gives them the right to sue us. It?s wrong on their part,? said Schamis, who added she is unemployed and would be unable to pay any large fine or settlement.

OK, perhaps she was genuinely in the dark and didn’t know that what she was doing was wrong. Perhaps those of us who know better can help those who don’t understand this behavior by calling it by its name. So from now on, instead of calling it “file sharing” let’s call it “song stealing” the better to educate the masses. It’s the responsible thing to do.

Here’s a statement from songwriter Hugh Prestwood on song stealing:
Continue reading “Song stealing suits commence”