Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Thumbs up for hack's final two paragraphs in #6657.

The Geezer-hack thing strikes me as a one of those most internetty things of internetty things. In the old days it would be two friends sharing beers until 5am discussing shit they find interesting before ultimately reaching some sort of friendly conclusion that more or less renders the previous hours of intense debate esoteric. Good times. The process not the outcome.

[Wild Hoss]

Anyway, the original article sort of rated as a "no fucking shit" thing for me. It's only significance is that Vox is a liberal/progressive website that I generally find fatuous, but I was stunned by the relatively serious introspection.

It should also go without saying that Rs have tons of self-examination to undertake, too

Both statements speak to the failing structural integrity of the current 2-party model IMO, and frankly, there is no solution for either. The two entities cannot be all things to all people, as mass communication enables the voting populace to coalesce around small bundles of interrelated issues.

Sooner or later portions of each, which have been relegated to the back of the voting bus, will find the organization and funding to break off. As I have said before though, it cannot happen based on one presidential candidate...lasting change needs to start in the legislative branch. Shake-N-Bake cults of personality do not last.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Thumbs up for hack's final two paragraphs in #6657.

The Geezer-hack thing strikes me as a one of those most internetty things of internetty things. In the old days it would be two friends sharing beers until 5am discussing shit they find interesting before ultimately reaching some sort of friendly conclusion that more or less renders the previous hours of intense debate esoteric. Good times. The process not the outcome.

This.

I've enjoyed these two being honest and forthright about their personal convictions. EntertainINT and informative at the same time.

Hoss ....... I just don't see a multi party system emerging any time soon if at all.

I agree with your assessment it has to start at the legislative level. Polarization has hurt what worked in the past and the Vox article explains some of why that has happened.

Think back to the dynamic of previous administrations in that FDR to Reagan era time frame between the President and members of congress in particular the leadership. That is entirely gone.

Explains why shit just doesn't get done in any meaningful way and instead we have this ridiculous compromise legislation. Typically, it does nothing and is loaded with both pork (nothing new) and subtle changes to the law that reek havoc with its initial intent (that is new and entirely politically motivated for political gain abandoning the national interest in the process).

[Dr. Strangelove]

Did you manage to decry both polarization and 'compromise legislation'? :smile:

[Hannibal]

Talent, are you a fan of Milo Yiannopoulos? This guy is fucking fantastic. Triggers young Liberals into fits of rage.

[youtube]2U3UHonIZBw[/youtube]

[iam416]

Eh. The most I can say is that I like some of the stuff he does. The fact that he sends college students scurrying for safe spaces is a plus and his take on progressive social justice is, IMO, largely correct.

[Dr. Strangelove]

A lot of stuff changed in the 80's. Just looking at the media aspects:

1) Radio. The first FM radio station went on the air in 1961 but it wasn't till the late 70's that they drew a majority of listeners. Nearly all music moved over to the FM band because of its much higher quality. That left AM stations scrambling to fill space with content. Their solution was talk radio. Talk radio had obviously always been around but the 80's are when many many shock jocks, sports host loudmouths, and political commentators really got their start. And how to get people to tune in? CONTROVERSY. EXTREMELY LOUD, DIVISIVE OPINIONS.

In 1987 the US repealed the Fairness Doctrine that had been around since the 40's and required political shows to present both sides on an issue. Regardless of whether you think it was a good (or constitutional) rule or not, eliminating it made extremely polarizing radio shows possible. And those were the ones proven to be a hit and keep AM stations alive.

2) Television. The 80's saw the rise of the 24/7 news cycle. Politicians had used tv to their advantage since WWII, but now you had a rapidly growing number of channels and coverage of the govt that lasted all day long instead of one hour during the evening. The govt allowed, for the first time, channels to report ratings for the news. That meant that the line between news and entertainment was going to get more blurry and also that news programs would now be under pressure to increase ratings like any other program.

On another note here's an academic article discussing the 1996 Telecommunications Act. It was intended to increase tv competition but it actually led to Fox and NBC buying up lots of independent tv stations and consolidating their already-large influence.

https://news.wsu.edu/2015/09/24/study-links-u-s-polarization-to-tv-news-deregulation/

It mentions how, with so many channels, stations can focus on a particular niche audience, with the effect of alienating many others. It's similar to how on Facebook or Twitter, the news articles that appear in your feed aren't chosen by random. Their based on your history of clicking on other articles and those of your contacts. So if most of your friends are liberal, nearly all the articles appearing in your feed will be liberal-slanted. That leads to your brain thinking "ah, everything I see confirms my beliefs, so they MUST be correct. Everyone else is a fool".

That's much more sophisticated than tv in the 80's and 90's but tv sort of pioneered that notion. Forget about attracting a diverse, general audience. Gain a hyper-committed audience of fanboys that will listen/watch every day.

[Hannibal]

Eh. The most I can say is that I like some of the stuff he does. The fact that he sends college students scurrying for safe spaces is a plus and his take on progressive social justice is, IMO, largely correct.

IMHO he understands the Trump phenomenon better than anyone else that I have seen.

[iam416]

No, he's very sharp. I think his efforts at touring college campus and taking their bullshit to task is fantastic. I disagree with other positions of his, but very little when it comes to social "justice."

[Wild Hoss]

Hoss ....... I just don't see a multi party system emerging any time soon if at all.

I agree with your assessment it has to start at the legislative level. Polarization has hurt what worked in the past and the Vox article explains some of why that has happened.

Think back to the dynamic of previous administrations in that FDR to Reagan era time frame between the President and members of congress in particular the leadership. That is entirely gone.

Explains why shit just doesn't get done in any meaningful way and instead we have this ridiculous compromise legislation. Typically, it does nothing and is loaded with both pork (nothing new) and subtle changes to the law that reek havoc with its initial intent (that is new and entirely politically motivated for political gain abandoning the national interest in the process).

Its easy to be cynical, and certainly history is a heavy anchor against change.

We are seeing the ?market? for said change developing right before our eyes however, and mass communication offers the first real opportunity for grassroots to compete against party infrastructure. Couple the right message with enough funding, and it?ll happen. People want it to happen, en masse.

When? Who knows. We are closer now than we have been in generations however.

[iam416]

Heh. No.

[SeattleLionsFan]

That dude is an asshole. So are the folks he's railing against, but he's still an asshole.

[Wild Hoss]

That dude is an asshole. So are the folks he's railing against, but he's still an asshole.

Its also very droll, trolling college kids. For some I suppose it provides a cheap intellectual thrill...a sociopolitical wippet for the ego.

[iam416]

If it weren't such an astounding reality, I'd concur. However, IMO SOMEONE needs to take this particular aspect of campus life to task.

[Wild Hoss]

I?d say that on the grand scale of issues, the social trends on college campuses is a pretty low priority.

Real life will provide the corrective measures that no stuffed shirt in symposium ever can.