Sunday, July 29, 2007
The Randomness that is the MPAA
i was watching some movies this weekend, and decided to pay attention to the MPAA film rating system. i think a lot of people (read: parents) rely on this system to be able to judge what their children are allowed to watch. however, i don't think that people realize a few things about this system:
1) this in not an independent body
2) there are inconsistencies and no specific guidelines
3) uneven emphasis on sex versus violence
4) inconsistencies between Hollywood major studio motion releases vs. independant films
5) biases towards conservative mainstream views
and there are many more.
the point is this: its a system that allows people to (falsely) feel better about what they or their children are watching. its one versus five "fuck" words; its talks about masterbation vs. brutally killing people, its arbitrary.
If parents want to control what their children watch, they should take the time to see the movie, or let the child see the movie, then see it themselves, and then discuss the content in the movie. don't let the MPAA babysit your children for you. and i know that someone reading this might say "do you know how much time it would take to do that..." To which i say, if you decide to have children, then its your responsibility to do what it takes to make sure that you are doing what you can do. relying on an arbitrary movie rating system is not doing all you can do.
another viable option is actually gathering some independent people, a body of lay persons that represent different classes, political, social, religious groups, parents vs. non-parents alike, into coming up with a standards rating that is unambiguous and has systematic widely encompassing guidelines. not that that will solve anything, but at least its wouldn't be so random.
also, read this for some interesting information
http://blog.oregonlive.com/madaboutmovies/2007/07/never_mind_the_mpaa_rating_wha.html
1) this in not an independent body
2) there are inconsistencies and no specific guidelines
3) uneven emphasis on sex versus violence
4) inconsistencies between Hollywood major studio motion releases vs. independant films
5) biases towards conservative mainstream views
and there are many more.
the point is this: its a system that allows people to (falsely) feel better about what they or their children are watching. its one versus five "fuck" words; its talks about masterbation vs. brutally killing people, its arbitrary.
If parents want to control what their children watch, they should take the time to see the movie, or let the child see the movie, then see it themselves, and then discuss the content in the movie. don't let the MPAA babysit your children for you. and i know that someone reading this might say "do you know how much time it would take to do that..." To which i say, if you decide to have children, then its your responsibility to do what it takes to make sure that you are doing what you can do. relying on an arbitrary movie rating system is not doing all you can do.
another viable option is actually gathering some independent people, a body of lay persons that represent different classes, political, social, religious groups, parents vs. non-parents alike, into coming up with a standards rating that is unambiguous and has systematic widely encompassing guidelines. not that that will solve anything, but at least its wouldn't be so random.
also, read this for some interesting information
http://blog.oregonlive.com/madaboutmovies/2007/07/never_mind_the_mpaa_rating_wha.html
Monday, July 23, 2007
There are certain Rules to be abided by
Gift giving is usually a great thing.
you spend time and energy looking for the perfect gift for that person in your life, be it mother, brother, brother's cute younger boyfriend, friend's boyfriend who she is going to dump but hasn't and its his birthday so you still have to buy something because he doesn't know what's coming.
the point is, gift giving is supposed to be a good thing. it makes you feel good, it makes them feel good. its goodness spread all around. and, more importantly, that's where it ends. after the gifts are exchanged, and the thank yous and the pleasantness, that's it. you walk away, you go home, you feel good about yourself for a few hours, and that's it. FINITO. over.
i'm not that lucky. i apparently do not think through the gift idea to its final conclusion. i think of a gift and think that it would make a great gift, and i do not think through the consequences of the gift. i get stuck in the goodness of the feeling that the gift projects and this has kept me from mastering the gift giving skill that everyone else seems to be so acquainted with.
i gave a computer to someone. and this someone has gone through a lengthy life thus far, never having been exposed to a computer. it is not someone who can solve problems when they occur because they are afraid of something going wrong, or making it worse. so, effectively, when i gave the computer, i forgot about the fact that i would become this person's own, personal, IT person and "help centre" all in one. i now HAVE TO teach, and install, and fix, and fix, and fix everything that happens.
that's it, from now on, i'm getting ties, and socks, and candle stick holders.
you spend time and energy looking for the perfect gift for that person in your life, be it mother, brother, brother's cute younger boyfriend, friend's boyfriend who she is going to dump but hasn't and its his birthday so you still have to buy something because he doesn't know what's coming.
the point is, gift giving is supposed to be a good thing. it makes you feel good, it makes them feel good. its goodness spread all around. and, more importantly, that's where it ends. after the gifts are exchanged, and the thank yous and the pleasantness, that's it. you walk away, you go home, you feel good about yourself for a few hours, and that's it. FINITO. over.
i'm not that lucky. i apparently do not think through the gift idea to its final conclusion. i think of a gift and think that it would make a great gift, and i do not think through the consequences of the gift. i get stuck in the goodness of the feeling that the gift projects and this has kept me from mastering the gift giving skill that everyone else seems to be so acquainted with.
i gave a computer to someone. and this someone has gone through a lengthy life thus far, never having been exposed to a computer. it is not someone who can solve problems when they occur because they are afraid of something going wrong, or making it worse. so, effectively, when i gave the computer, i forgot about the fact that i would become this person's own, personal, IT person and "help centre" all in one. i now HAVE TO teach, and install, and fix, and fix, and fix everything that happens.
that's it, from now on, i'm getting ties, and socks, and candle stick holders.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Too short... then tall.. then fat... then rich...
a judge in Nebraska refused to send a pedophile to jail b/c the man is too SHORT. at 5"1, the judge felt that the man would not do well in jail (meaning that he wouldn't be safe and could be in danger from other inmates) so he gave him 10 years probation.
yeah, ok... not surprising given where America is going with its justice system. remember, Paris Hilton was too rich to go to jail for a while there too. so, this is apparently where the justice system is heading. i want to see this (and too fat, tall, thin, etc) as a defence within the next year, cause it will happen.
HEARD ON THE NEWS TODAY:
when speaking about a particular story, a reported stated the following: "well i got a poll here because we like to get all the information here on MSNBC".
So apparently, gathering random polls, which consist of no empirical control methods to ensure any sort of accuracy, i'm betting, is now considered gathering information. Way to "research" the NEWS. add MSNBC to the list of quasi "news" stations that would likely do better broadcast in an amateur high school news station that reports daily news showing the polls indicate that the quarterback of the football team should go out with Brandy and not Cindy, because "she's like, way cooler".
yeah, ok... not surprising given where America is going with its justice system. remember, Paris Hilton was too rich to go to jail for a while there too. so, this is apparently where the justice system is heading. i want to see this (and too fat, tall, thin, etc) as a defence within the next year, cause it will happen.
HEARD ON THE NEWS TODAY:
when speaking about a particular story, a reported stated the following: "well i got a poll here because we like to get all the information here on MSNBC".
So apparently, gathering random polls, which consist of no empirical control methods to ensure any sort of accuracy, i'm betting, is now considered gathering information. Way to "research" the NEWS. add MSNBC to the list of quasi "news" stations that would likely do better broadcast in an amateur high school news station that reports daily news showing the polls indicate that the quarterback of the football team should go out with Brandy and not Cindy, because "she's like, way cooler".
The End of Privacy - Whitaker