wordpress visitor

The Donald and Other Channel Changers

Donald Trump enters the Oscar De LA Renta Fash...

Image via Wikipedia

 

I’ve been searching for a reason to explain why WNLO-TV’s “Winging It!” saw a sudden spike in the ratings last Friday.

Then somebody asked, “Was Donald Trump (see right) making the rounds of the national morning shows?”

Funny thought.

If anything gets me to instantly change the channel, it is seeing Trump getting more attention for possibly running for president in 2012 as a Republican. According to some polls, he is currently the GOP’s top choice.

You can’t escape Trump in the morning.

I woke up Tuesday and saw Trump on two network morning shows.

Of course, NBC, home of the Donald’s reality show, “The Celebrity Apprentice,” was one of them.

I woke up today and there was yet another story about Trump on “Today,” this time ridiculing his candidacy with the help of other Republican candidates and consultants.

Trump is one of the prime examples of the dangers of television’s influence on politics. TV loves people who throw out stupid verbal bombs even if they don’t have an ounce of truth to them.

While almost every other serious Republican candidate has stopped the “birther” lunacy surrounding President Obama, Trump keeps playing that card to get attention.

He is even taking away attention from Sarah Palin, the former vice presidential nominee who is another dangerous product of TV’s obsession with focusing on people with name recognition who proudly say stupid things to get attention.

I almost wish there was a FCC rule prohibiting the networks from interviewing potential presidential candidates until they actually declare they are running.

But back to the success of last Friday’s “Winging It.”

It has made me think of a few other people in the news who instantly make me change the channel.

Prince William and Kate: “Today” has a countdown to the big wedding. I just don’t care enough to know when it is and I certainly don’t care enough to know what designer Kate has picked for her wedding gown.

This is coming from a man who vaguely remembers getting up early in the morning to watch and write about the wedding of Prince Charles and Diana.

Of course, we eventually learned that was hardly a wedding or marriage made in heaven. We’ve become much more cynical about the Royals and their romances.

The networks seem much more interested in the latest wedding than anyone I’ve run into. So as soon as the morning shows start talking about The Wedding, I’m out of there as quickly as Katharine Ross left the chapel in “The Graduate.”

Lindsay Lohan: I teach at a couple of colleges. Recently, I asked one class if they cared what was going in Lindsay’s life. Not one did. If kids in their late teens or early 20s don’t care about her latest legal issue, why should their parents or the morning shows?

Britney Spears: Apparently, she has a new album or CD or whatever you call it these days. One national reviewer spent an enormous amount of copy recently that basically said the album is about as stylish as Donald Trump’s hair. If it is that bad, why waste more than four or five paragraphs on it.

Charlie Sheen: Okay, he was amusing for a while. Now he’s just like a politician. He says some ridiculous things, like the studio behind “Two and Half Men” wants him back. And the “Today” show actually ran it like it was truth. The studio has since denied it. Sheen is living in his own world and we no longer should have to listen to be a part of it.

Jane Corwin and Kathy Hochul advertisements: I live in the congressional district they want to serve and can’t wait until the special election in late May so all these flame-throwing ads stop. The only people who can be enjoying these ads work at the local TV stations, which are getting an unexpected advertising windfall.

Someone should tell both candidates to drop their negative ads and just keep running their positive ads. Corwin started the negativity and immediately lost me. Hochul initially took the high road and then was convinced that she had to respond.

Most educated people realize by now that negative ads contain half-truths and outright lies. In the race for Chris Lee’s former seat, you would think class would triumph over lies. Check that. You would hope that class triumphs over lies. I’d vote for the first woman who stops running negative ads. In other words, I might have to sit this one out.

Russell Brand: He hosted “Saturday Night Live” and was featured in a lengthy CBS profile. After seeing both, I have one question: Can anyone tell me why he is getting all this attention? I’d almost rather watch the Royal Wedding than his new version of “Arthur.”  Almost.

pergament@msn.com     

Enhanced by Zemanta
filed under: Uncategorized Tagged with:

5 responses to "The Donald and Other Channel Changers"

  1. GMan says:

    The Yankees broadcast on WNGS is deplorable at best. The audio was awful,and the picture was worse that I ever saw while watching early Bills home games in the 60′s, with my coat hanger acting as my antenna. Why are these low class outfits allowed to purchase these rights?

  2. Pergy's friend says:

    I could see Trump getting bored of the President’s job (or just campaigning for it) very quickly.

  3. Jlessord says:

    “I almost wish there was a FCC rule prohibiting the networks from interviewing potential presidential candidates until they actually declare they are running.”

    So, then, should there be some government agency prohibiting newspapers from doing the same thing? Man, of all the dumb things you’ve written here, that’s possibly the dumbest.
    Remember? “Congress shall make no law…..”
    And you’re teaching kids?
    Scary!

    • alanp says:

      Jill: It was a joke. Scary that you didn’t realize it. But, oh, well, as Johnny Carson often said if you have to explain them, then they aren’t funny. BTW, the FCC has regulations. It isn’t Congress.

      • Jlessord says:

        Gee, thanks for the “tip” Professor, but those regulations don’t include regulating the editorial content of news programs (thank GOD).
        And don’t be so quick to separate Congress from the FCC.
        Congress created the FCC and controls it to this day. And if certain members get their wish and re-instate a souped up Fairness Doctrine, it’ll be the FCC policing it. See the connection?
        But, after all, you were just joking. (I should have known from the guffaws echoing through cyber space).
        BTW: Johnny Carson was right.

Leave a reply