It’s bad enough that the definition of “news” has come to mean stories about bad jokes from shock jocks and paternity tests. That stories which were once the purview of tabloids are now routinely given as much, if not more, play on major news outlets as stories that actually have some worth.
So what’s the latest “news” off the AOL feed?
Kirsten Dunst says she likes to smoke pot.
Aside from the minor name irony of Mary Jane liking Mary Jane, an LA actress says she likes to smoke pot? My God, how is this REMOTELY news? Tell me a staunch anti-drug advocate is found stoned, and that’s a story, but an LA actress? You’re kidding, right? What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes? Or, as another poster commented on the Imus thread, this just in: Water is wet.
PAD
• 
I think the story here is that Dunst was dumb enough to admit to using drugs about a month before her big summer action film (one that is arguably targeted toward kids, though it is PG-13) comes out.
It will be amusing to see the backpedaling commence. “I.. uh… was talking about pots… you know, I like to cook and stuff.”
Considering that all of the news programs came to a screeching halt yesterday to give us the name of Anna Nicole Smith’s baby-daddy, I’m not surprised anymore about what is considered “news” these days.
BTW, thanks for mentioning my “water is wet” line.
What next? Jerry Seinfeld announces he likes jokes?
Eureka! That statement was a revelation to me! It was the final missing piece of the puzzle.
Jerry Seinfeld likes jokes. He likes them so much that he hoards the funny ones and doesn’t put them in his act.
*whew*
Another of life’s little mysteries solved.
😉
“I think the story here is that Dunst was dumb enough to admit to using drugs about a month before her big summer action film (one that is arguably targeted toward kids, though it is PG-13) comes out.”
First of all, like that’s going to matter. Let some organization just *try* to stage a boycott of SM3 and see how far they get with it.
Second, I doubt she brought it up out of nowhere. Maybe the interviewer asked her about her position on drugs, or even asked, “So how does Mary Jane feel about Mary Jane?” At which point she has three choices: No comment. Lie. Or tell the truth. “No comment” is a red flag. A lie just begs for someone to contradict her (“Kirsten said she doesn’t smoke pot? That’s a laugh. We got high together just last Thursday.” NOW you’ve got an even bigger story.) Generally speaking, the truth is easier to remember, and she obviously genuinely feels it’s no big deal. Given the environment she lives in, to her it really isn’t.
PAD
Too bad for Alberto Gonzales he didn’t take your advice. 🙂
Maybe she’s angling to get excused from the publicity tour for Spidey-3 like Keith Richards has on Pirates-3.
I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
My favorite angle is that she also mentioned how much Carl Sagan liked to toke up. Billions and billions of times, I’ll warrant.
It seemed obvious to me after hearing her in a single interview. She was stoned out of her mind.
Like smoking pot is a big deal with all the botulism that will be injected into her face in the next 15 years…
SOMETHING has to kill those brain cells…well the ones that are still alive.
While I’m not an advocate of drug legalization, when one looks at the government stigma placed on pot it’s nothing short of absurd when alcohol (a depressant that is arguably much more destructive than weed) is so readily accepted in American society.
Journalism is having a fourth estate sale.
Trying to compete with youtubers, the blogosphere and the rumor mill has given MSM no recourse but to lower themselves to that level. There is no Chicago Handbook of style and libel manual for the Internet afaik, and a pooled resource like Wiki is unreliable because anyone can change/edit. “facts” are fictional nowadays.
Lets be honest here. There really is no such thing as a “news” industry in America anymore. The “news” shows that actually traffic in pure news without editorial, spin or a desire to portray Hollywood gossip as more important then the laws being passed that effect our lives are few and far between. The majority of “news” in this country has become entertainment geared in order to bring in the ratings and generate $$$$.
It’s not even that new. Back in the 80’s I ticked off a local news personality that came to my High School to speak to some of our classes. I, being a budding news junkie and having no tact, raised my hand, got called on and asked her exactly why THE LOCAL NEWS was wasting half of its thirty minute broadcast time everyday for weeks on end to tell us that nothing new had happened in the Jim and Tammy Faye saga, but that they would recap the nothingness in case anybody had been in a coma for the previous three weeks of nothing new. I found this rather annoying when there were some serious issues happening in the Commonwealth with employment, crime and our lawmakers on the Hill tripping over themselves. Lets just say that my teacher wasn’t too thrilled with me.
Hëll, even the dumber stories that are more for entertainment then news never die. How many Joey Butacan’tspellhislastname stories did we get after the whole Long Island Lolita thing was over. Local and national news would would give us updates on his music video, his new run ins with the law, his new business ventures, his marital troubles and the anniversary special where they all got to be interviewed at once. ?????????
Was it really news that Bobbit became a pørņ actor? Did it really warrant the coverage it got? Why are we getting ten minutes of Paris Hilton coverage on news programs that aren’t aired on the E Network? Do we really care that P Diddy is selling his home for whatever millions of dollars so that he can by a new home with approximately 12,000 more rooms and 5,000 more bathrooms then his old one?
I don’t, but if you look at the ratings of various news programs you’ll see that I’m in the minority. It’s one of the reasons that I love my DVR. It does tend to make a one hour news program play in twenty-five minutes.
No, not surprised at all that you’re seeing this as a major news story. There are some mornings these days when I’m just surprised that this fluff isn’t the only news stories that you’re seeing.
Rant over.
8(…..
If I need idiot news, I have FARK.com. If I need news, it’s bbc.co.uk. The TV is only on for sound in terms of news, because the only useful person on any news channel anymore (I don’t have actual BBC due to ditching the cable box) is Jack Cafferty, the original crusty old bášŧárd.
WHAT! Water is Wet? OMG you have just changed my life.
I haven’t seen the actual report (a quick search in the Usual Media Suspects didn’t turn it up), but that doesn’t stop me from making a couple of points:
1) Besides the three options PAD presented (lie, “no comment,” truth), the more usual “out” I’ve often seen famous people use is something along the lines of, “I have, in the past, used illicit substances.” (“In the past” could well mean “I don’t have a lit bong crammed into my mouth as we conduct this interview.”)
2) The (admittedly flimsy) “story” is that someone of note actually admits in an interview to committing — presumably with no intent to stop — a fairly serious felony. Regardless of one’s feelings on the law, those who routinely break the law seldom admit to it in any sort of public forum.
3) The other aspect of the “story” is that someone of note admits to doing something that is normally considered private or personal. It’s much the same way that the press would have a field day with an interview that yielded headlines such as, “President Fuebar admits yanking crank thousands of times as teenager” or “President Fuebar admits relief after taking a big stinky dump at least once a day.” No, it isn’t news, but it’s enough of a taboo to print it.
according to this article she did mention Carl Sagan.
“My best friend Sasha’s dad was Carl Sagan, the astronomer. He was the biggest pot smoker in the world and he was a genius.”
She also said:
“I’ve never been a major smoker, but I think America’s view on weed is ridiculous. I mean – are you kidding me? If everyone smoked weed, the world would be a better place.”
Here’s the current list of articles covering this hot news sstory. At this time it is mostly tabloid news.
2) The (admittedly flimsy) “story” is that someone of note actually admits in an interview to committing — presumably with no intent to stop — a fairly serious felony. Regardless of one’s feelings on the law, those who routinely break the law seldom admit to it in any sort of public forum.
Doesn’t she live in California, where it’s actually no a fairly serious felony? Or am I misinformed about the legal state of marihuana there?
Possession of marijuana is still a serious felony on the federal level and AG Gonzo the Great has made it clear that he believes federal law trumps state law.
I fail to see why pot is so controversial in american society, but maybe if more people admitted using it it would become less of a taboo. Western world spends a huge amount of money prosecuting a substance that has much less effect than, say, six shots of tequila or a gun on a house where children live. Money that could be better spent almost any other way.
While Dunst is not the tidal changing role model kind, maybe a few hundred like her would erase that ridiculous stigma so taxes can start flowing in the right direction.
It never fails to make me angry, to see how insane and hypocritical our society is, whenever I contemplate anti-marijuana laws (and the lack of legislation forbidding alcohol).
It’s a bit off-topic, but speaking of major hypocrisis and double standards… I’ve read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is, because she acted all šlûŧŧÿ and threw herself at the much older Hal Jordan in “the Brave and the Bold” comic, seeing that she is only 17.
Now just imagine a 17-year old SuperBOY acting all horny and flirting with older superheroines, like Superboy used to do in the 1990s, and people would say how the character is cool and funny.
Our society is simply insane.
Possession and use of marijuana is NOT a serious felony on the federal level, so long as you only have small amounts for personal use. The serious felony level doesn’t get reached until you start dealing. Mere possession is a minor felony at best. Now, driving under the influence of pot is a serious offense most places, but not really more so than driving under the influence of alcohol. Impaired is impaired.
Mind you, that Dunst tokes occasionally would explain statements of hers like opining that Peter should be killed off and the next Spider-Man movie be about Mary Jane as a single mother raising their mutant baby….
This just in, the sun having risen in the east this morning appears to set in the west. Will there be nightfall? Tune in as we keep you up to date on potential outbreak of night. Tonight at 11.
I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
Wow. Is there such a thing as “responsible marijuana use”?
And this just in: Comic book fans hate comic books.
I’m as mad as hëll and I’m not going to take it anymore…
I agree with you on the other stuff, but I think that the Imus story is significant. It would be different if it were some random áššhølë, but Imus has famous news correspondents and presidential candidates on his show. People need to know that by appearing on his show, they’re implicitly legitimizing his language and views.
[digress] PAD, are you going to do a blog for GRINDHOUSE? Amazingly entertaining film. [/digress]
responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking – you indulge and then chill out – you don’t drive, operate heavy machinery, start any fights, etc. – they’re both depressants, so use the downtime, let your mind float, hang with your friends & then go to work the next day sober.
for a pretty clever illustation of what is and isn’t news, read Terry Pratchett’s “The Truth” – people don’t want “news” – what they are interested in is “olds” – as in same old s#%!
responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking – you indulge and then chill out – you don’t drive, operate heavy machinery, start any fights, etc. – they’re both depressants, so use the downtime, let your mind float, hang with your friends & then go to work the next day sober.
for a pretty clever illustation of what is and isn’t news, read Terry Pratchett’s “The Truth” – people don’t want “news” – what they are interested in is “olds” – as in same old s#%!
responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking – you indulge and then chill out – you don’t drive, operate heavy machinery, start any fights, etc. – they’re both depressants, so use the downtime, let your mind float, hang with your friends & then go to work the next day sober.
for a pretty clever illustation of what is and isn’t news, read Terry Pratchett’s “The Truth” – people don’t want “news” – what they are interested in is “olds” – as in same old s#%!
It’s a bit off-topic, but speaking of major hypocrisis and double standards… I’ve read a few days ago many comments in Newsarama about how horrible and annoying the new Supergirl character is, because she acted all šlûŧŧÿ and threw herself at the much older Hal Jordan in “the Brave and the Bold” comic, seeing that she is only 17.
One word for those “fans” – Arisia. Until the massive retcon, she was underage…
(I may have misspelled the name – I’m not a rabid GL fan – but you know what I mean anyway, right?)
“responsible marajuana use is like responsible drinking”
Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity? Really? Try to get that one to fly with the arresting officer, the District Attorney, the Judge and then your new bunkmates in jail. I’m sure they can use the laugh.
Some people seem to think that is something is “the law” then we all should fall in line. Since we all more or less agree on what a responsible use of alcohol is like… would that change if prohibition came into effect again? Responsible use includes any use that doesnt harm others. Period.
If the law decides to mess around with how people spend their time, it doesnt change whats responsible and whats not. It only changes the legal status of it. But its not smoking pot what puts you in jail or gets you fined, make no mistake. Its the law.
If acting against a law you consider unfair by doing something that harms no one is irresponsible, then no one would have fought to change so many unfair laws. Because the laws change and that doesnt change the ethical meaning of your actions.
“Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity?”
well, yes, if one is addressing the idea of how one conducts oneself while intoxicated and not the legality of the means – which was my point – absolutely.
“Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity?”
well, yes, if one is addressing the idea of how one conducts oneself while intoxicated and not the legality of the means – which was my point – absolutely.
“Responsible illegal activity is just like resposible legal activity?”
well, yes, if one is addressing the idea of how one conducts oneself while intoxicated and not the legality of the means – which was my point – absolutely.
I go out with some friends one night. I have a couple of drinks, cut myself off and switch to tea two or three hours before we leave. On the way home, I get stopped at a checkpoint that RPD has set up. They ask if I’ve been drinking and I tell them I had two beers over two hours ago while at dinner with friends. They give me some roadside tests and a PBT. I pass the tests and I only blow a .01. I’m fine, I’m legal and I’m unimpaired.
I go home to my preggers wife and the next day I’m back on the job. I drank legally and in a responsible manner.
John Q. Public goes to his friend’s house. They smoke some weed. A couple of hours later, John is on the way home and gets stopped at the same police checkpoint. They smell the weed on his cloths and ask him to step out of the car. Between the smell, the glassy eyes and other indicators, they feel that they have enough there for an arrest. They take John to the magistrate and get a warrant to have blood drawn at the local hospital. The lab boys send the officers the good news a few days later. John gets tried and convicted pays a hefty fine and/or does jail time.
If John had a wife, kid or anybody else that depended on him in any serious way, then John let them down. He’s likely no longer there and they’re as screwed as he is. I see it all the time.
John did something illegal in an unresponsible manner purely because it was illegal. He’s messed up his future ability to earn a good living and he’s left the people that count on him now hanging in the wind.
Like I said, I get to see it all the time. It’s not pretty. And it’s not even close to responsible.
Marijuana is passe. If Dunst wants to remain an “A-lister” she needs to get hooked on heroin.
// I think the story is that admitting responsible marijuana use is still controversial in this country.
My favorite angle is that she also mentioned how much Carl Sagan liked to toke up. Billions and billions of times, I’ll warrant. //
Carl Sagan’s pot use has been widly reported in lots of places, he was apparently quite open about it, saying it helped him think. Those who support legalizing pot always seem to bring up Sagan, apparently thinking it adds some respectabilty to thier point.
Speaking of smoking pot being controversal in this country, Bill Marh had a great comment on his show a week of so ago about illegal vs legal drugs,
“The Beatles took illegal drugs and wrote Sgr Pepper, Anna Nichole Smith took legally prescribed drugs and couldn’t remember to call 911”
On the other hand, illegal drugs made John Lennon think Yoko Ono was attractive and could sing.
I think that’s the most powerful “just say no” message of all.
[digress] PAD, are you going to do a blog for GRINDHOUSE? Amazingly entertaining film. [/digress]
I second your digression, though I don’t know if the movie is PAD’s cup o’ tea. I loved it. Looks like the two of us are in the minority though, Sasha.
I have absolutely no interest in seeing “Grindhouse.” Perfectly content to wait until it shows up on one of the hundred or so movie channels I subscribe to.
PAD
yeah, I kind of figured…it’s definitely not for all tastes.
hey everyone–forget the big Kirsten scoop. Check out http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32250 for the supposed first look at the grey Iron Man suit from the upcoming Iron Man movie. Booyah!
Ðámņ–hërë’s real news; Kurt Vonnegut dead at 84. One of the great ones.
In further developments, Jenna Jameson not a virgin, fire hot, rap music isn’t, and wasn’t there war or something going badly somewhere?
Sorry, gotta apologize about my previous post landing where it did right below Bill Mulligan’s. No disrespect was intended.
Which leads to the question, “Who’s gonna be red assed and pìššëd øff for us now?”
“Kurt Vonnegut dead at 84.”
Ðámņ.
Posted by Jonathan
One word for those “fans” – Arisia. Until the massive retcon, she was underage..hëll did they get away with that?
And if you want Just Plain Weird – how about Hank Pym, Ultron (who has sometimes referred to Pym as “Father” as he tries to kill him) and and Ultron’s robot “bride” (with her steel garter riveted to her thigh), Jocasta. (And if that doesn’t ring a bell, look up the Oedipus…)
Some interesting commentary, definitely demonstrates the racial and social divide.
Yes, a big deal is being made out of the Imus issue, not so much that it should any moreso than Anna Nicole’s “baby daddy,” but because of the public figures which he draws to his program and whose very appearance suggest an acceptance of this type of behavior. This story is also a testament to how far the news media have fallen.
I and a good majority of other black people would agree with the assessment that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are attention seekers to the nth degree, and I doubt that the average black person cares whether or not Imus is a racist. Minorities are probably accustomed to racist attitudes, opinions, and sentiments being shrouded beneath the surface. Its the manner in which this issue came about that is causing all of the drama for the masses.
What makes this whole dialogue interesting to me are the comparisons, misinterpretations and misunderstandings about black culture.
(And to clarify, the ‘nappy headed’ portion of the statement is the racial aspect, the ‘ho’s’ is more disdainful for women, but ho’s can be found in any race.)
When you have Mr. Mulligan here making statements such as, “Some were quite well spoken and one surprized the hëll out of me,” I’m left scratching my head wondering what did you expect them to sound like? Thats as backhanded a compliment as ever. And I seriously doubt his intention was to be derogatory but its an offhand comment such as this that speaks to the social and cultural divide.
When you try to use rap in your comparisons Peter, you should be mindful of the fact that not every rap song involves someone degrading a woman or killing a cop or any other such foolishness. To make such a blanket generalization reveals a strong level of ignorance, and this is something that is typical of individuals in the news media as well. There are a wide variety or styles, genres and sub-genres of the hip-hop culture that you can pick and choose from if you so desired. And probably quite a few that you would enjoy, recognize and relate to as storytellers and wordsmiths.
A rapper (Snoop Dogg) also made an excellent point about the distinction of what is being spoken upon when a ‘bìŧçh’ or ‘ho’ is addressed in a song versus the situation with the Rutgers basketball team. “Rappers are not talking about collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We’re talking about ho’s that’s in the ‘hood that ain’t doing šhìŧ, that’s trying to get a n—a for his money. These are two separate things.” For many black people who see and live with that distinction comes the issue with Imus and how he addressed the Rutger’s women’s team.
Just as our news has sunk to the level of the tabloids, the ability for individuals to say and do extremely stupid stuff and then try to ‘apologize’ for it after the fact is out of control. A great many Black people and other races take issue with the fact that incidents involving non-minorities are often swept aside or overlooked once anapology is issued but when the situation involves a minority negatively it is somehow a major controversy – especially if its a minority celebrity which definitely means that the issue will seemingly forever be addressed by the news media and the individual never allowed to move on with their life (quite different from the likes of say Tim Allen, Robert Downey Jr., or George Bush and their drug issues), and if its a situation that reflects positively the chances of it being addressed in the news media are slim.
When you have individuals like Bill O’Reilly going after an individual such as Ludacris (an extremely witty party style rapper who’s also capable of creating some profound songs such as “Runaway Love” with Mary J. Blige) and trying to ruin his career by attempting to paint a picture of him as something he is not (gangster, killer, drug dealer) versus what he was: a college educated man who also was an on-air radio personality before his rap career took off; and now is: a successful rap artist and actor,
it demonstrates exactly the type of gross generalization that occurs in the news media and that has been occuring in some of the posts listed here.
— Yuri
very
nice thank you…mr suma
very
nice thank you…mr suma