The Columbia

as sad as it is that those people died, they (the media) has been talking about it all day, i cant get away from it!! aaaa its really bothering me

well they deserve the coverage. they were great human beings risking their lives for science... the experiments that they conducted and trained for were for the advancement of medical and ecological science, and for that I thank them. the fact that 5 of the 7 lived all of 10 miles away from me saddens me even more. living in houston and working at NASA in the past a tragedy like this really hits home... houston takes pride in the fact that we are the heart of NASA and it is a very sad day here.

God bless those brave astronauts, and my heart and prayers are with their family and friends.

They are not special, because i did not know them. They are just like the thousands of ppl that die everyday, i grieve no more and no less for them then i do the ppl that died while i was typing this message and that will be on the news the following week and in the obituaries.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by pan [/i]
[B][I]I change my mind, I don't want to be an astronaut anymore.
[/I][/B][/QUOTE]

I believe that NASA has launched around 130? [correct me if I'm wrong] Space Shuttle missions, and only about two have gone terribly wrong [The one from 1986 with the teachers, and the one today]. That is a really good track record.

I love astronomy, and I really love NASA, but to not want to be an astronaut anymore? That's just plain stupid in my book. [[I]I don't mean to insult you in any way.[/I]] They [the astronauts on the Columbia] died doing something they loved very very dearly.

[QUOTE][I]Orignially posted by Svpernaut[/I]
[B][I]they were great human beings risking their lives for science... the experiments that they conducted and trained for were for the advancement of medical and ecological science, and for that I thank them.[/I][/B][/QUOTE]

I thank them as well, and for all past, present, and future astronauts who risk their lives for the advancement of Science and human knowledge.

Sorry if my initial post made light of the tragedy. Me being me, I always try to find humor in the most morbid things.

One thing to have comfort in is that they knew the dangers, they make them sign wills andsay goodbyes to their families before a mission.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mario [/i]
[B]I believe that NASA has launched around 130?[/B][/QUOTE]

128 to be exact... i don't feel bad for the astronauts, because theyd did die doing something they loved dearly and they probablly wouldn't want to go out any other way. however, i do feel sorrow for their family, friends, and loved ones.

Thanks for correcting me.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mario [/i]
[B]Thanks for correcting me. [/B][/QUOTE]

lol, you had a VERY good guess-timate

i am from Israel, and all this NASA/space program/astronauts thing is new and excited for 99% of the population, since two weeks ago people can't stop talking about it, everything from the astronauts themself, to their mission, and to space in general, everybody are so sad for their loss, it's been a pure mission for the help of men kind, yes... it's sad that people die everyday, and i dont know all the details about the americans astronauts (from what i read, they were all amazing people) but the Israeli one is a big hero here, even before he become an astronaut, he's an amazing person that have done so much, his most famous thing was flying on one of the most important missions in history of destroying the nuclear reactor in Iraq, when Iraq was still a big threat, so personally i am really sad, and i am really sorry for my americans friends...

The way I look at is at least they got to go up in space before they died. I mean who hasn't dreamed of going up in space? And as for their families- there loved ones are now considered heros that died an honorable death. If they had lived most people would not even recognize their name. But, ya, I agree that the media has taken this out of propotion though. I mean I don't remember seeing anything when they were taking off and now that something bad has happened, NOW they have a story.

Uhmm, could someone post the details of what happened? Being in boarding school I was only aware of this when it was mentioned in mass this morning (we're made go before you ask), so I don't actually know what happened.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Wintermute [/i]
[B]Perhaps now NASA will get the funding it needs!! They're flying in 20 year old beaters for Christ's sake [/B][/QUOTE]

actually the shuttle program costs more then other newer alternatives. the shuttles were chosen to stay in flight by NASA, not anyone else.

when I worked at NASA here in Houston (2000-2001) as a Government contractor they were working on new transportation that is like a "space plane" and even did tests with it. however new ideas were scrapped by NASA officials and they decided to keep the Shuttles in operation until 2020... that makes it 40 year old technology. When I was at NASA the other "big talk" was about going to Mars, and them coming up with "Fusion Propolsion" and the first step was to build a new Shuttle type craft that used it... but that never happened because of the choice to keep the current shuttles in service.

check out this Time magazine article... [url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030210-418518,00.html]The Space Shuttle Must Be Stopped
[/url] it goes into more depth of what I was talking about.

I'll be perfectly frank with you... this is why I stopped watching the news. I used to think the news had some significance. I used to think the news was maybe even a little bit important. Now the only thing that really matters is the weather. The rest of every news program is about cats stuck in trees, or astronauts blowing up in space, or more sexual innuendo about a so-called "war on terrorism", or how everyone in a bunch of states is freaking out about a sniper who shoots random victims, just a few examples...

How is any of that newsworthy? It is no more newsworthy than masturbation techniques or product endorsements or football scores or visits from the pope or whatever... it's just entertainment. The news is no different from anything other show on television, in that it provides a way for us to focus not on our own lives, but to avoid thinking about the truly important things. News programs are the equivalent of American Idol, except they news anchors don't sing songs tht nobody except 13-year-old girls care about, and news anchors don't get booted if they don't get enough calls from obsessed fans, who in and of themselves are just looking to avoid life...

Why is it such a tragedy that these people died? I fail to see the relevance to anyone of us. What has NASA ever done for you? What have you ever done for NASA? Why is any of this important, except for something else to talk about when the latest reality show has been analyzed or soap opera watched...

Television watchers aka news fanatics watch television or read papers or whatever to see real people living real lives while the viewer is sitting there dreaming of a life not so much like their own...

A life that will never happen because they are sitting and watching and crying for dead people they don't know. Viewers will never accomplish anything because they are too busy watching others accomplishing things. It's really fucking sad. I'm not putting anyone down here. It's just, you want a tragedy? Turn off the goddamn news and look in the mirror. That's the tragedy...

The tragedy of a life spent NOT living. The tragedy of a life wasted trying to identify with people you will never meet. The tragedy of not feeling beautiful or normal because you don't meet the standards of people out there. The tragedy of thinking even for an instant that an astronaut is any better than you or anyone else. That's the fucking tragedy...

I'm a caring person and it sucks when someone dies, but you're still alive. Do something with it. You want me to feel bad for something? Believe me, I do. I feel bad for all the wasted lives out there. Fucking sad. I'm no better. I've been there. But like I said, that's why I don't pay attention anymore...

isn't you posting that long drawn out blah-blah post with many examples of the news, paying attention? ironic indeed.

Someone said that 126/128 is a good record. All I have to say is, WHA???

If you crashed your car 2 out of every 128 times you drove it and died, I don't think you'd want to drive your car too much. It may seem like a good ratio considering what the program aims to accomplish, but really, 2/128 is a horrible ratio.

Chichi: "And as for their families- there loved ones are now considered heros that died an honorable death. If they had lived most people would not even recognize their name." That is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. As if it's better to die a "heroic death" than to live out your life with your family?

Svpernaut: What did you do with NASA? How did you get a job working there? What did you major in in college? Why don't you work there anymore?

Brock: I understand that you think the news media is over-broadcasting, but to say that watching the news leads to a misled life is an exaggeration.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B]Svpernaut: What did you do with NASA? How did you get a job working there? What did you major in in college? Why don't you work there anymore?[/B][/QUOTE]

i was part of a team that upgraded their computer networks... LAN and WAN. I worked there from 2000-2001 as a Systems Engineer setting up new servers, routers, hubs, switches, csu/dsu's etc. the reason i'm not there anymore is because it was a two year contract, and we finished the project right on time. 85% of NASA employees are contracted through agencies like lockheed martin and boeing, and "Job Security" isn't something people are used to out there.

because of my title i was basically given the highest security clearences and was in every building at NASA Johnson Space Center at one time or another... even the rooms that were 13 stories below ground. A nice astronaut even took myself and a couple of my team members into one of the flight simulators for about an hour... he did this because we had recently upgraded their servers for it to 112 new Silicon Graphics servers and it ran better then ever.

at NASA they have laboratories with all the deadliest diseases in the world that they take up in space to try to help find a cure, so they definately go up there for all of man kind.

i also worked there during the filming of [url=http://us.imdb.com/Title?0186566]Space Cowboys[/url] and was given an invitation to the premeire at the GulfPoint AMC 30 in Houston Texas at Beltway 8 and I-45 and the premeire party was held at "The Texas Roadhouse" right across the street from the theatre.

would you like to know my anual salary and my supervisor's name? or better yet would you like a picture of my security ID or parking pass?

NASA

'Not Another Seven Astronauts"

Nah, I just think it sounds awesome to work for NASA. Except that that is such a broad statement you can do anything from rocket science to cleaning toilets. It seems like as cool a place as there is to work, to me anyway.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by plasticfiend [/i]
[B], when Iraq was still a big threat, [/B][/QUOTE]

When Iraq was still a big threat? What do you mean "When"? "Still"? President Bush said they still are. President Bush isn't wrong, is he?

Well,
NASA was a blast to work at... It was like working in a giant toy store... fun as hell, and there is always something new to play with. The best part was just going to the different buildings every night or two (was mostly evening hours because can't take servers down in the day) and seeing stuff you saw in movies. Compression chambers, accoustic rooms, the worlds largest indoor swimming pool, etc. Seeing all of the "Future" technologies was sweet too... especially all of the stuff they are working on for a mission to mars. Trust me, I wish I still worked there.

I don't particularly expect you to show interest in my thoughts on the news... especially astronauts, supernaut, especially in a thread about astronauts, as your name includes "naut" and claim NASA experience, however I will just say that I was not 'paying attention' to the news, as I never watch the news or even television for that matter, but I was commentating on this particular situation which seems to be causing quite the buzz with people who surround me, even off the computer as the people in the city I live say they heard the sonic boom of it happening, not all of them mind you are sure, but everyone has an opinion, so in giving my own opinion I am in essence giving a non-opinion about events I never watched nor paid attention to... also it bears to mention that there was nothing ironic in what I mentioned or in the manner it was mentioned...

Like I mentioned before, I have nothing against astronauts, but don't see how they are better than... oh say... you, for instance. If you got blown up in a fatal accident tomorrow, how should we feel about that? Is that newsworthy? Is that as newsworthy as astronauts blowing up? I would argue yes...

"Space Cowboys", eh? That sounds interesting. "The Right Stuff" meets "On Golden Pond", or rather "Geriatrics In Space"... I bet NASA saw some green for that flop... then again I could be wrong, as I'm not much of a fan of films glorifying senior citizens as better than younger folk, just me, ya know, but not only are we divided by race and sex, but most definitely by age... and that film was for the nursing-home tapioca-pudding set...

As always you make sense, well...

I never generalize enough to say that "all" are misled completely by the news in their own lives... but the point, perhaps overstated if anything in an attempt to make it crystal clear, is that the news, as it is referred to even though most is just entertainment and meaningless events, is a contributor to the overall state of well-being of people who watch it... just like any television show, but in the case of the news, it is an even bigger scam because the news media passes itself off as being important, as if it's journalism is any better than watching Jerry Springer... and if watching television makes us each our own "god" in that we watch people living lives and having relationships, etc... and we control, much like "god", the channel and change the lives we watch, how are we doing anything but merely observing? In the petrie dish that is the world in a box, a boob tube if you will, we are the unmoving microscope that focuses in on an empty world... the world of television and as such, the news...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Brock Landers [/i]
[B]I don't particularly expect you to show interest in my thoughts on the news... especially astronauts, supernaut, especially in a thread about astronauts, as your name includes "naut" and claim NASA experience, however I will just say that I was not 'paying attention' to the news, as I never watch the news or even television for that matter, but I was commentating on this particular situation which seems to be causing quite the buzz with people who surround me, even off the computer as I the people in the city I live say they heard the sonic boom of it happening, not all of them mind you are sure, but everyone has an opinion, so in giving my own opinion I am in essence giving a non-opinion... also it bears to mention that there was nothing ironic in what I mentioned or in the manner it was mentioned...
[/B][/QUOTE]

wow, that is one long ass sentence... but anyway, my being named "Svpernaut" has nothing to do with NASA or astronauts. "Supernaut" is a song originally created and recorded by Black Sabbath. It was later covered by a group named [b]1000 Homo DJs[/b] that was made up of [i]Trent Reznor[/i] of [b]Nine Inch Nails[/b], and [i]Al Jourgensen[/i] of [b]Ministry[/b]. So, no real connection there...

as far as Space Cowboys goes, I never said it was a good or great movie... because basically it sucked ass. I was trying to give people who [i]asked[/i] about my time at NASA a frame of reference for the time period I was there..

I don't particularly pay attention to my sentence length, supernaut, but if you want to spellcheck and proof-read my posts, then by all means, do so. I have no experience writing and barely passed any literature or english course, and am not a smart dude, so if you were insulting my writing ability, I wholeheartedly agree... I can't write worth shit...

Perhaps I was wrong about the "naut", then again maybe you subliminally picked the song title as your name because of past experiences in Houston or at NASA... I have no doubt you really believe it has nothing to do with astronauts, but that really remains to be seen, especially with the evidence about your job experience you so eagerly shared with all of us earlier in this thread. It sounded good to me anyway...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Svpernaut [/i]
[B]isn't you posting that long drawn out blah-blah post with many examples of the news, paying attention? ironic indeed. [/B][/QUOTE]

Not an attack on anyone specifically, especially you, 'naut, even though I'm quoting you. That sentence just struck a chord in me.

I don't think it's a matter of "paying attention" or not. Call it what you will: "the news", "the media", "current events"....it's all-pervasive, it sneaks into everyone's lives. No real need to pay special attention to something that shoved right in your face.

For myself, I haven't had a television in 7 years. And yet, I get televison shoved up my ass constantly. A couple of years back, everywhere I went people would tell me about this show "Dawson's Creek", if for no other reason than because of the city name on my driver's license. I know the character names and basic plot of a television show I've never even seen. How fucked up is that?

I'd have to agree with the premise that "the news" should be lumped in with rest of television. This particular topic is a great example. Sure, there are some people here who have a vested interest in the space shuttle: former employees of NASA, relatives of current employees and those who follow space travel as a sort of hobby. But what about the rest of us? Should we be beaten over the head with the most current "news-worthy" catastrophe? And more importantly: should we ALLOW ourselves be beaten over the head with it?

Because this shit NEVER ends. There's always a hot new celebrity trial to follow. And a hot new sitcom to watch. And a hot new disaster to ogle over, in a place far, far from our own homes. This stuff is like a siren song, saying "pay attention to us, not to your own life". It's kind of like a........

Lullabye. It seems that's where this topic is headed.

That's a decent challenge, isn't it? Try to make your own life more interesting than teevee.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Svpernaut [/i]
[B]... a group named [b]1000 Homo DJs[/b] that was made up of [i]Trent Reznor[/i] of [b]Nine Inch Nails[/b], and [i]Al Jourgensen[/i] of [b]Ministry[/b] [/B][/QUOTE]

It's my turn again to be a stickler for pointless trivia.

1000 Homo DJs was [i]all[/i] of Ministry (Al & Paul, plus Bill and whatever guitar players they were using that week) Plus guest vocals by (among others) Eric Bouchard (AKA Jello Biafra (AAKA Count Ringworm)) and Trent R. Contractual Obligations required that Trent's vocals be removed from the EP before release, so if you have the Supernaut EP, you're actually hearing Al's vocal take. The Trent version, however, has been so widely bootlegged to the point that you are just as likely to hear the one as the other.

Of interest - The 1000 Homo DJs EP was comprised entirely from outtakes from the "The Mind Is A Terrible Thing To Taste" recording sessions (iirc.) Also done at the same time were the first Lard EP (Also with Eric B.), the Lead Into Gold EPs, and something called "Box Set" which I have never seen.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by decalogue [/i]
[B]Trent R. Contractual Obligations required that Trent's vocals be removed from the EP before release, so if you have the Supernaut EP, you're actually hearing Al's vocal take. The Trent version, however, has been so widely bootlegged to the point that you are just as likely to hear the one as the other.[/B][/QUOTE]

not true, the Trent version can easily be bought on the web (i have a couple myself)... and every version i have ever downloaded off of the web has Trent singing, not Al. Trent freed himself from TVT records and started his own label (nothing: interscope) in the early 1990s that allowed the Trent version of the EP to be released.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B]
Chichi: "And as for their families- there loved ones are now considered heros that died an honorable death. If they had lived most people would not even recognize their name." That is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. As if it's better to die a "heroic death" than to live out your life with your family?
[/B][/QUOTE]

I'm sorry I should have said "at least." I was just trying to look on the bright side.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B]I understand that you think the news media is over-broadcasting, but to say that watching the news leads to a misled life is an exaggeration. [/B][/QUOTE]

I don't think it's an exaggeration. If you watch the news, which is biased and selective, your view on reality is biased and selective. You don't see the entire world. Events like these keep people glued to the TV because they tell you it's tragic, whether you feel that way or not. So you must watch the news hours on end to find out whats going to happen next...therefore - wasting a part of your life.

It tells you what to think w/out making you think on your own.

In the past few years I have fallen into it's trap, but now I only watch it to make fun of it (heh). i hate the news.

Originally posted by PsychoKeety:

"It tells you what to think w/out making you think on your own."

You make a very good point, PsychoKeety, one that no one else mentioned... in a way time spent watching television is time spent "unlearning", "unthinking", "un-doing any friggin' thing"... television... shit... invented by the same people who brought you slavery and emasculation and blind faith... hell, I even think that's their motto...

On a side note, PsychoKeety, I like the yay! in your profile next to occupation. Don't feel bad. You are not your job. Hell, one of my jobs is lifting 50 to 100-pound boxes of satellite equipment all day in a warehouse, making minimum wage too, mind you, and I dig it... gives me time to think and stay physical. I've always found there really is something about doing menial, mindless labor that helps me keep concentrated on the really important things, like life... also I remember Chuck P. in an interview talking about when he's not writing at home, he's working around his farmhouse, physical stuff, likes keeping busy. I found that damned motivating coming from my favorite author...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Svpernaut [/i]
[B]not true, the Trent version can easily be bought on the web (i have a couple myself)... and every version i have ever downloaded off of the web has Trent singing, not Al.[/B][/QUOTE]

Right. However, when the two 1kHDJs EPs came out (two vinyl 12", 2 songs ea. late '89, iirc.), you could [b]not[/b] get the Trent version at any price. You certainly couldn't buy them off the internet nor download them.

I do have both versions. The difference is negligable unless you play them back-to-back - both feature a vocal track that is over-driven (recorded far into the red) and then heavily compressed for correction (and that so-popular [i]singing-through-a-tin-can-on-a-string[/i] sound.

I'd venture that any version you downloaded is the Trent version. I did say that it was widely bootlegged. The Trent version, oddly enough, appeared on the Wax Traxx Black Box compilation. Among others.

[QUOTE][b]Trent freed himself from TVT records and started his own label (nothing: interscope) in the early 1990s...[/B][/QUOTE]

1992. He released an EP about his struggles with TVT. It's called [i]Broken[/i]. But, I'm certain that you knew that.

[QUOTE][b]...that allowed the Trent version of the EP to be released. [/B][/QUOTE]

Or, well, [i]re[/i]-released, perhaps, with Trent's vocal intact. I dunno. The most recent pressing of the CD (w/all 4 1kHDJs songs) I've seen features Al's vocal.

* I totally forgot to mention Pailhead in my first post. Also recorded at the same time.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by decalogue [/i]
[B]1992. He released an EP about his struggles with TVT. It's called [i]Broken[/i]. But, I'm certain that you knew that.[/B][/QUOTE]

last time i checked 1992 was considered in the early 90s... but I could be wrong. and Broken was an Interscope release.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Svpernaut [/i]
[B]last time i checked 1992 was considered in the early 90s... but I could be wrong. and Broken was an Interscope release. [/B][/QUOTE]
Right. I was clarifying the year for you. And, yes, Interscope released the album. If that wasn't inferred, then it should have been. Your point?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PsychoKeety [/i]

In the past few years I have fallen into it's trap, but now I only watch it to make fun of it (heh). i hate the news. [/B][/QUOTE]

that's right, psycho K....avoiding "the news" isn't that bad: you end up getting all the major details told to you anyways, from some indirect source or another. It's not like you're going to live in some cultural vaccuum. If you're in the world, you end up hearing about the world.

You just don't get professional presenters trying to pull your strings, telling you how to feel. And playing the same images over and over and over....

Indoctrination's not the right word, but... you know.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B][i]Someone said that 126/128 is a good record. All I have to say is, WHA???

If you crashed your car 2 out of every 128 times you drove it and died, I don't think you'd want to drive your car too much. It may seem like a good ratio considering what the program aims to accomplish, but really, 2/128 is a horrible ratio.[/i][/B][/QUOTE]

A car is [b][i]way[/i][/b] different from a spacecraft. The differences are very huge.

[b]1.[/b] A car doesn't have as many "stuff" [I don't know what to call it] holding it together than a spacecraft.

[b]2.[/b] A car has been around since the 1880s [or close to it], while the spacecraft since the Cold War [1950-1960?].

[b]3.[/b] A car is driven on the road, with other cars, on [b]Earth[/b], while the spacecraft is launched vertically through the ozone layer, into the space. [Much more risk of something going wrong than a car.]

[b]4.[/b] Not many people can just go on a spacecraft as you can with a car.

[b]5.[/b] A person will need years of training to control a spacecraft, but yet, one will still need help by other crew members and the people down on earth.

[b]6.[/b] The checklist for launch is much more profuse than a car.

I can go on and one explaining the differences between a car and a spacecraft, and proving to you, [b][i]well[/i][/b], why only two mishaps is a very good ratio.

But no harm, no foul. I see where you were coming from.

As I said before, I'm not comparing a car with the space shuttle. A ratio of only 2 "mishaps" out of over a hundred flights may seem impressive considering all that the shuttle program aims to undertake, but we're not talking about "mishaps". These were tragedies. Catastrophes. People died--FOURTEEN people DIED. REGARDLESS of what the program's goals are, or how complicated the process is, that's just NOT a good ratio.

I'm not trying to say that we should stop manned missions to space, or that the space shuttle program is a failure. I totally support the entire program and everything it hopes to accomplish. But the success ratio is not something to brag about.

I understand that a lot of people feel this is being over-broadcast by the media. But really, it's not just about seven strangers who tragically lost their lives.

The space shuttle is the backbone of modern space exploration. It's not just a high-tech airplane ride for astronauts to fly around on in space. It's the most complicated machine of our time, a labarotory whose experiments have such a wide range in purposes as researching quantum physics to finding possible cures for cancer and heart disease, and it's the only way to get astronauts to and from the International Space Station.

As for avoiding the news because it's "biased and selective," then you better avoid everything else in the world, too. Why don't you just go live by yourself in the woods if you're afraid of something that "tells you what to think." I hate to tell you, but a message board on the Internet isn't the best place to come if you don't want to be told what to think.

If you relate only the news media to Lullaby, you're missing the point. Because if you get the major news from your friends and neighbors, you're getting an even MORE biased viewpoint of what happened. No matter where you get your information, the flaws in the system will only be magnified by going to a third, fourth, or fifth source. No matter what you hear, read, or learn, it can be said that it's another "lullaby." Everyone wants you to think like they do. Not just "the media". It's not just television, the radio, the news. Everything and everybody everywhere.

The world is biased, get over it.

Success comes through sacrifice.

By [i]mishap[/i] I mean a fault on part of NASA. They failed to recognize a problem on the shuttle before lift-off, just like the one in 1986.

I never said [i]tragedy[/i] because I purposely avoided the subject. I know seven people died on Saturday, as well as the seven people from 1986, but that was not the point of my post. Nothing is perfect. A 98% success rate is very good. It's remarkable. Nothing is 100% successful. Besides, nothing compares to the magnitude of a shuttle going into space.

How many people had to die for this to be a democratic country? How many people had to die for us to have our freedom? [Although our government [i]is[/i] corrupt, we have a lot more freedom than any other country in this world.] How many people had to die...you get the point.

[b]***[/b]

I agree, the media is taking this "[i]tragedy[/i]" too far. I also agree that the world is biased. But one thing I don't understand, I believe it was brought up by Brock, is [i]why[/i] do people watch the news? Why?

I still disagree with the ratio of success being a good one, but I think we both understand eachother's opinions and I think debating further would be overkill. So anyway.

I don't understand why people *don't* watch the news. That is, I understand what they think or at least what they say is the reason, but the logic never really makes sense to me. I think it's important to understand as much as you can about the world around you, and unlike history class or science fiction, the news presents (as accurately as it can) what is going on RIGHT NOW.

I'm not saying to go and get "addicted to the news" like some of you have said earlier in this thread, but rather to have an understanding of how the rest of the world will affect YOU. (And yes, I think a lot of the things on the news do affect all of us, although I'm sure a lot of you disagree with that.)

That's not to say that news media is somehow sacred. The news media gets by, by reporting conflict (EVERYTHING from Iraq to Opinions to the fucking Sports Page seems to be centered on conflict). And when people watch the news, or read the papers, we read about conflict. I think it encourages the idea that the world, our society, our generation, is defined by conflict--which is totally wrong. But still, I think a certain degree of understanding is beneficial to an individual, regardless of how distant the news may appear. The ultimate goal of education is life-long learning. No matter how you do it.

What I'm trying to say is, everything's fine in moderation. Don't worry about TV brain-washing you, unless you have no brain to begin with.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[
Because if you get the major news from your friends and neighbors, you're getting an even MORE biased viewpoint of what happened. No matter where you get your information, the flaws in the system will only be magnified by going to a third, fourth, or fifth source."

Using this specific example of the Columbia, isn't it too simple of a story to become "biased"? The shuttle crashed, there were no survivors. End of story. I suppose if I were to believe my Uncle Clancy's addendum to the story (that it "got blowed up by commies and space aliens"), I could be misled.

I agree with you, the problem isn't that the news media is telling you how to think, but I do believe they try hard to push every one of your emotional buttons to keep you watching. It's insulting for someone/thing to be so openly trying to manipulate. We wouldn't put up with it in a face-to-face conversation, why should we settle for it on teevee? I'm assuming every network has special graphics and titles for this story like "Tragedy in the Sky", and they've shoved cameras in the faces of the astronauts family members so that we can watch SOMEBODY ELSE'S emotional breakdown while we eat dinner.

I'd really have to be a nihilist to think that the space program did nothing for the world, wouldn't I? No question, it has positive benefits. There's not too much info on it in the mainstream press, though, I don't think. What I'm objecting to is the media's pandering to the absolute lowest common denominator. Give thirty seconds at the end of one news broadcast to every successful shuttle mission, and twelve hours of disaster coverage. Is it wrong to want to raise the standards and broaden the perspective of news "journalism"? Because then it might become watchable.

Maybe I'm an insensitive jerk, but this isn't honoring the deaths of some exceptionally talented people, is it? It's like putting them in a zoo. It's like spotting a car wreck and circling around the block so you can see it again and again and again.

"If you relate only the news media to Lullaby, you're missing the point."

I'm not relating it ONLY to the news media, just in this specific instance.

"I hate to tell you, but a message board on the Internet isn't the best place to come if you don't want to be told what to think."

I don't know. This is my first message board. So far, I haven't gotten the impression anyone's trying to win me over to their side. I haven't been preached to yet. I certainly hope I haven't been preachy. Certainly not my intent. Isn't it just people offering their own views and opinions?

" No matter what you hear, read, or learn, it can be said that it's another "lullaby." Everyone wants you to think like they do. Not just "the media". It's not just television, the radio, the news. Everything and everybody everywhere."

Very true. And quite disturbing. It's a good thing we have the faculty for independent, critical thought.

Originally posted by well:

"The world is biased, get over it"

Ignoring a biased world is the same as endorsing a biased world. Example... if you are not a racist yet sit around and say nothing or do nothing while your friends use racist remarks or racist names, etc... then you are a racist, and if not a racist, then you are a weak person who has no self-respect or a will of your own. If you truly believe racism is wrong, and you truly believe in what you say you believe in, then you will do something about it. If not, then you don't believe in anything worth defending, and any belief not worth defending, is a belief not worth having... in and of itself a form of self-hypocrisy. A person who behaves in such a way has no mind of their own because the things they believe in aren't important enough to fight for...

Good question, Mario... Why do people watch the news? Because they don't know any better, I would assume. Most people don't take the time to look at the facts about the news, or rather what is fact about the news... which is nada, nothing, zilch, zero...

Then again these same people watch television to fill time instead of living and doing. Most people don't read unless they have to. Most people don't write unless they have to...

Have you ever stopped and thought about it really? When you watch television, you are watching something that is not even there. You are watching a box with a screen and images from out of nothing. There's no telling if what you are seeing is even real half of the time if not more. You believe it because you are told to believe it. You believe what you see on the screen because you want to believe they are telling you the truth, but they're not, at least never the full truth. You are in fact not in control of your television. It controls you...

It is the equivalent of wishing you were getting laid, but doing nothing about it. It is like wishing you were in good shape, yet eating nothing but crap and never exercising. It is yet another way society tranquilizes people, makes them sedentary, makes them not be out there doing what needs to be done. Television is a way to hold off the masses.

Imagine a world with no television. We would survive. Life would go on, and I assure you it would be better because people would be forced out of boredom to face the issues they avoid with television... television is merely a mass-produced drug to lull us to sleep, not necessarily literal sleep, but to put our minds to sleep... and I for one will not be a part of it. Do as you like. Your ideas and thoughts are as good as mine. I respect your opinion. I just have my own, and I like it that way...

Originally posted by well:

"As for avoiding the news because it's "biased and selective," then you better avoid everything else in the world, too. Why don't you just go live by yourself in the woods if you're afraid of something that "tells you what to think." I hate to tell you, but a message board on the Internet isn't the best place to come if you don't want to be told what to think."

Don't be mistaken, well, no one said they were afraid of anything, especially the news media. Disliking corruption and misinformation is not fear of it... it is just the opposite, it is pointing out how completely full of shit it is and how it doesn't have any merit for anyone...

Your whole line about living in the woods is ludicrous and you obviously think anyone who doesn't buy into consumerism and everything fake and cheap and false about society is a hermit or should be one, which is taking a very narrow-minded approach.

The part about a message board on the internet holds no significance whatsoever either, as what better a place to discuss such things... besides a discussion board allows for personal thought, unlike television which doesn't converse, only manipulates like a dictator who wants no feedback.

Talking on a message board for an author [Chuck P.] who also doesn't buy into the news media and television and society's weaknesses is probably one of the best places to compare and contrast thoughts with others concerning such topics...

Chuck Palahniuk is constantly criticizing such mediums as television and the media [just look at interviews on this very site], and rightly doing so. In doing just that in all of his books and essays through lyrical insight and through pointing out the phoniness of so-called truth in entertaining and original ways, he asks us each a question about where we stand on thes issues, and in doing so allows us to think on our own and of our own...

Being around biased people or people who buy everything they are told is the answer, not avoiding them, for in their delusionment we can find a stronger conviction in ourselves... sort of like learning a lesson from others mistakes. Once we see the hypocrisy in the world around us, in our own personal lives, we have the freedom to change ourselves, our minds. It does not require like-minded thinkers to think for yourself. It just requires the ability to discern between reason and nonsense, truth and lies, reality and fantasy...

It is better to see for yourself and decide afterwards, and well, I've seen plenty of news to last me a lifetime. I've watched it, given it a chance, judged it and in the end rejected it as nothing more than propagandized entertainment. If that's what suits you, if buying everything you're told because you believe the people doing the telling are better than you, which they're not, then that's your own decision. As for me, I choose otherwise...

Because if being "informed" involves watching the news or reading newspapers or doing things that take away from my own existence, my own life, then I don't see the point as I am living this life, my life, not someone elses, nor do I want to live someone else's life. I care about others. I share my life with them as they do with me. Selfishness is not the issue. It's more about giving instead of taking, like television does when it takes your mind for the moments you watch it. Maybe just me. I don't know about anyone else. Once we forget who we are and what our lives have become, we have no reality, we don't even exist outside what others tell us. Keeping "informed" should be about doing what is right for you, taking action when it's necessary, and constantly striving to reach your potential, no matter what that potential might be...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B]As for avoiding the news because it's "biased and selective," then you better avoid everything else in the world, too. Why don't you just go live by yourself in the woods if you're afraid of something that "tells you what to think." I hate to tell you, but a message board on the Internet isn't the best place to come if you don't want to be told what to think.

The world is biased, get over it. [/B][/QUOTE]

I avoid the news because I can. I don't avoid the world because I can't. I don't say I don't see it to see what's going on, but I don't watch their "in-depth" five month long story on it where they try to "analyze" everything. I'm smart enough to not take much as absolute truth. Plus the news just makes me mad. Fox's "fair and balanced" no...they aren't kissing Bush's ass...are they? it's mostly the network/cable news that I can't stand. There's nothing wrong with saying what's going on (like the newspaper..sort of) it's how they do it, and what else they're doing at the same time.

A message board is where you discuss things...you say what you think and talk about what another person thinks...it doesn't tell you what to think (unless you ask a question i guess)

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B]I don't understand why people *don't* watch the news. That is, I understand what they think or at least what they say is the reason, but the logic never really makes sense to me. I think it's important to understand as much as you can about the world around you, and unlike history class or science fiction, the news presents (as accurately as it can) what is going on RIGHT NOW.
[/B][/QUOTE]

By not watching the news I don't mean stick your head in the sand. My point is explained much better by Bowling for Columbine. I don't trust CNN/Fox/etc to tell me what's going on in the world. I only expect them to tell me what will make them money...what their sponsors will agree with...and for Fox, what Bush will agree with.

I'm mostly talking about their shows where they go into the news. Their headline/update things are okay.

I just hate the fact that what they air is based more on money and other influences than just informing their viewers.

"The part about a message board on the internet holds no significance whatsoever either, as what better a place to discuss such things... besides a discussion board allows for personal thought, unlike television which doesn't converse, only manipulates like a dictator who wants no feedback. "

A message board is opinions. Individual people's opinions, biased. You don't need to over-analyze this any more.

"Your whole line about living in the woods is ludicrous and you obviously think anyone who doesn't buy into consumerism and everything fake and cheap and false about society is a hermit or should be one, which is taking a very narrow-minded approach."

Christ, I'm saying that you can't avoid biased opinions no matter where you go, I'm not talking about consumerism or "everything fake and cheap and false about society."

"When you watch television, you are watching something that is not even there. You are watching a box with a screen and images from out of nothing. There's no telling if what you are seeing is even real half of the time if not more. You believe it because you are told to believe it. You believe what you see on the screen because you want to believe they are telling you the truth, but they're not, at least never the full truth. You are in fact not in control of your television. It controls you..."

People here always seem to say things like that, as if everything is so controlling, yeah, SOCIETY IS OUT TO GET US. Such general words are used like that, but really it's all an exaggeration of what isn't. Let me change about three words from the paragraph above.

When you read books, you are seeing something that is not even there. You are watching a book with a paper and text from out of nothing. There's no telling if what you are seeing is even real half of the time if not more. You believe it because you are told to believe it. You believe what you see on the pages because you want to believe they are telling you the truth, but they're not, at least never the full truth. You are in fact not in control of your books. It controls you...

Let's generalize.

Ehh, this is tiring... why don't you go and disect this post too, so that this will never EVER end.

God fuckin' damn! Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuckity fuck fuck!

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B][i]why don't you go and disect this post too, so that this will never EVER end. [/i][/B][/QUOTE]

Lets just end this post right now. No more heated debate, lets just end this post calmly.

Viva la consumerism!

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Svpernaut [/i]
[B]Viva la consumerism! [/B][/QUOTE]

Hee hee. Shouldn't that be [i]consumerism[b]e[/b][/i]?

Yeah, yeah, TV is biased - it wants to sell you products and services you don't really need. Books are biased. Michael Moore is biased. Chuck (Heston or Palahniuk, who cares?) is biased. Wandering Star is biased. Brock is biased. Your mom is biased. And [b]I[/b] am most certainly biased. Every[i]one[/i] and every[i]thing[/i] you encounter from ferns to General Motors has an agenda, whether it be the survival of its DNA through breeding most prolifically (sp?) or [b]Total World Domination[/b]. The trick is to be aware of this bias and adjust your internal filters accordingly. I don't believe *anything* I read on the internet - out of hand. Doesn't mean I don't surf or that I can't glean valuable information within.

Trust [i]no one[/i]. Figure it out for yourself.

(Yeah, I know that ferns don't breed. [i]And[/i] that they don't, technically speaking, pollinate either. They spore. It was a stupid example. Deal with it.)

fnord.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mario [/i]
[B]
Lets just end this post right now. No more heated debate, lets just end this post calmly. [/B][/QUOTE]

Why is that exactly? Aren't there plenty of lighthearted topics already? No one's actually getting angry or offended, are they?

At one point, [B]well[/B] expressed bewilderment at the "logic" of those who didn't watch the news. And now some people are choosing to give an opinion on that.

[B]Well[/B] , you seem to keep suggesting that people who don't watch the news (or those who don't give much merit to the news) are a bunch of simpering, paranoid delusionals who are taking themselves waaay too seriously. Some sort of future UNA-bombers. Or not even that. More like Ted Kacsinky clones who are too riddled with fear and persecution complexes to even risk opening the door of their tar paper shacks. I think that's too narrow and dismissive of a viewpoint.

But then again, maybe you think I'M being too narrow. So let me clarify: is it possible to be smart, healthy, clear-thinking, critical AND a nightly news-watcher? Of course. I think I can see why you chose to respond to this topic. It was like "hey, I watch the evening news, and I'm not some fucking mindless, obedient automaton!". Fair enough. You've certainly proven that with your articulate posts. Nobody is telling anyone what to do.

For me personally, I just think it's settling for less. That's all. I don't think it's a good way to spend my time. Instead of watching the local news, I prefer to be out in the actual community. I'd rather deal with my own life than see a nationally broadcast news show. I really don't think I'm suffering. Quite the opposite.

Settling for less is like herpes. It's mega hard to get rid of once you've got it in you.

And finally, when you use strong phrases like "why don't you just move into the wilderness" ( and yes: I realize that was in all likelihood a rhetorical question) and "life is biased, get over it", expect to get strong replies in return. Nobody worth their own backbone is going to roll over and play dead on that one: "yeah, you're right...I'll shut up now".

Perhaps the other side of the coin might not seem so "illogical" anymore.

Like I quoted below:

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by well [/i]
[B][i]why don't you go and disect this post too, so that this will never EVER end. [/i][/B][/QUOTE]

Something that will "[b][i]never EVER end[/i][/b]"? I believe this topic does have a lot of potential for an abundance of debate, but is it really necessary?

Who cares if the world is biased. [b][i]well[/i][/b] [i]will[/i] think one way, while [b][i]Haggard[/i][/b] thinks another, and so on and so forth.

I believe [b][i]Brock[/i][/b] stated it correctly when he said:

At first this thread was supposed to express our gratitude toward the seven astronauts that died on Saturday. But then it turned into a thread about newswatching, biased worlds, etc.

But you guys can keep posting your opinions. Frankly I don't really care anymore.

But i'm not telling you something you don't already know.

SO, let us start again then...
man another space shuttle. I change my mind, I don't want to be an astronaut anymore.
Too bad that guy from N'sync missed his chance.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by decalogue [/i]

Dude... your last post reminded me why I like reading what you have to say. For serious.

Also:

who else knew J-lo was influenced by Orwell?