How did the U.S. become so pathetic that a sitcom is a topic of national conversation?

[yiostheoy]

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom. Some people don't want to watch it, and that they don't is the topic of conversation. Seriously?

If someone asks you or asks me about it, sure, that either of us watches, or doesn't, enjoys, or doesn't, the show is banal enough banter....maybe at lunch or for a moment at the water cooler. On national TV, though? For what?


Now, don't get me wrong. My beef has nothing to do with Roseanne's content. I know the show has a political bent, and I presume it favors Trump since Trump was touting it, but what be the content of a TV show is of mon import to me. I "grew up" with "Archie Bunker," I can handle "Roseanne," even though I suspect the Roseanne character anachronistically channels "Archie Bunker," but I'd have to watch to say for sure. [1]


One thing I'll be curious to observe is what liberals and conservatives periodically have to say about the writing for Roseanne.

• Conservatives routinely enough say of comedians something like, "Do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it."
  • Will they adopt that posture re: Roseanne?
  • If chided about not maintaining that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?
• Will liberals embrace the "do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it" stance or will they just watch the show and laugh, or just not watch the show?
  • If chided about adopting that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?

Note:

1. I think the Roseanne character is anachronistic because of this.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   (Note: National annual average unemployment rate in 2012 was 8.1%)

Trump and Stormy is the latest sitcom on the news.

Thank you CNN.

 

[usmbguest5318]

A grand irony for me is a portrayal of a working class family that favors a rich elitist. Donald Trump is dishonest through and through and yet he can say the things the working class believes. Go figure. Media has great power as its message becomes common and then reality. Anyone old enough to remember times when blacks and gays were invisible? Times change and in that change is born lots of problems as many do not accept the diversity and complexity of the modern global world. I would love to see Roseanne one day wake and say, 'Donald talks a good show but what he does is another matter'. But shat that wouldn't be entertaining, that would be reality.

Oddly Sandra Bernhard's comments contain a bit of truth on [white?] women. Imagine what a black president would do to the psyche of the nation? Just imagine

And white resentment crosses the gender gap. I Know Why Poor Whites Chant Trump, Trump, Trump

"In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true. ... Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness." Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

A grand irony for me is a portrayal of a working class family that favors a rich elitist.

The appeal of watching a show like that among the working class polity is, IMO, a reflection of aspirational sentiment on steroids.

The working class part isn't something I'd find opprobrious. It's that the show apparently lionizes people who, at the end of the day, are driven by emotionalism and irrationality. One must wonder whether the characters even know they are thus moved. I'd be insulted were a sitcom to portray me or my segment of society such that no matter how one slices it, one's novelty is made into a monolithic fatal flaw. Frankly, that's both disparaging and depressing.

 

[francoHFW]

Murphy Brown much?

Not in the past 20 years at least.

To be perfectly honest, my only recollections of television shows being part of the national conversation and occasionally getting mention on the news are:

• SNL and late night comics, which I sort of get because "everybody" falls asleep watching them. Thank Johnny Carson for that.
• The final episode of M*A*S*H -- but not every episode of it
• Roots
• Dallas -- "Who shot JR?"
• General Hospital -- "Luke" and "Laura" got married and there was song about the show
  
  

The only sitcom in the bunch is M*A*S*H, and, for me anyway, Rosanne, new or old, does not rise to M*A*S*H-level, and M*A*S*H was very definitely a political show.

As I indicated in the OP, it's not people talking about a TV show amongst friends, coworkers, people on the subway, etc. It's why is a TV show part of the news' conversation.

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom.

It's the context of the conversation, not merely that the conversation is happening amongst individuals, that surprises and chagrins me.

Murphy Brown is coming back in the fall already.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Please focus your remarks on the thread topics:

• the Roseanne television show,
• sitcoms, dramas, and other shows germanity as national news topics,
• characters in TV shows and/or their rhetorical/allegorical likeness to segments of society or individuals in it,
• styles of portrayal of various social groups on television and the impact of that portrayal on news and commentary,
• trends depicted on television shows and the nature and extent to which they reflect actual trends,
• temporal, qualitative and/or quantitative interplay of cause and effect between television content/characters and individuals and groups in society
• how TV characters are or are not role models, and/or
• normative thoughts about any of the above.

By all means, share observations, analysis, opinions, etc.

Just don't try to convert the conversation to a topic that is not literally or contextually among the topics in the OP.

 

[deanrd]

I've got one.

How did one political party become so embarrassing they elected a TV Orange Clown as President? A man who sees everyone as a sucker?

Vapes and Vodka: White House Personnel Office Exposed as Party Central

 

[JOSweetHeart]

TV is obviously very influential in our culture.

Discussing a show and it's impact and/or what it says about US as a nation, is completely reasonable and valid.

I second this.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. By the way, I read at another website that the new Roseanne show has already been renewed for a second season.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom. Some people don't want to watch it, and that they don't is the topic of conversation. Seriously?

Of course. We're a society driven almost entirely by real and imagined celebrity. It makes perfect sense that a sitcom would have this much attention. We've lowered our standards to the point at which we'll accept pretty much anything.

This is what a sick culture in decay looks like.
.

It makes perfect sense that a sitcom would have this much attention.

1. "Makes perfect sense" as in "given the nature of our current culture, it is to be expected that the show (or any sitcom) would obtain this much national news attention" --> Yes, I agree.
2. "Makes perfect sense" as in "it's sensible that the show (or any sitcom) obtain this much national news attention" --> I don't at all agree. I think it's pathetic. I presume, however, that "we'll accept pretty much anything" alludes to the same sentiment I have about it. Oui?

 

[Mac1958]

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom. Some people don't want to watch it, and that they don't is the topic of conversation. Seriously?

Of course. We're a society driven almost entirely by real and imagined celebrity. It makes perfect sense that a sitcom would have this much attention. We've lowered our standards to the point at which we'll accept pretty much anything.

This is what a sick culture in decay looks like.
.

It makes perfect sense that a sitcom would have this much attention.

1. "Makes perfect sense" as in "given the nature of our current culture, it is to be expected that the show (or any sitcom) would obtain this much national news attention" --> Yes, I agree.
2. "Makes perfect sense" as in "it's sensible that the show (or any sitcom) obtain this much national news attention" --> I don't at all agree. I think it's pathetic. I presume, however, that "we'll accept pretty much anything" alludes to the same sentiment I have about it. Oui?

Yes, the point is that it is only sensible within the context of our decay.

"Unsurprising" would be a more accurate word.
.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

They don't call it the Idiot-box for nothing. And it's one of our President's pet activities.

It is hugely important in our culture. Are you denying this?

It got JFK elected. The rest followed suit.

It got Rump elected too. It gets everybody elected. Such is the legacy of the propaganda machine.
Orwell could see it coming in 1949 already.

I just said that. But it started with JFK. The debate.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It got Rump elected too. It gets everybody elected. Such is the legacy of the propaganda machine.
Orwell could see it coming in 1949 already.

Who do you think is running this propaganda, Pogo? Who is Oceania?

Corporatia, basically. But not with any kind of unified "plan" as the conspiratheorists would fancy, just simple shortsighted GREED using the airwaves that belong to We the People which we hand over to them to do that for no rental fee at all.

I hate commercials. We're stupid to put up with it.

I don't abide commercials ever, on any device. I'll just change the station rather than put up with it.

Where my son lives, there are commercials on the gas pumps now. I nearly flipped when I saw that.

And?
It’s called capitalism. Marketing.
The technology changes, the intent stays the same. No different from radio ads which are no different from billboards which are no different from newspaper ads, etc.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Murphy Brown much?

Not in the past 20 years at least.

To be perfectly honest, my only recollections of television shows being part of the national conversation and occasionally getting mention on the news are:

• SNL and late night comics, which I sort of get because "everybody" falls asleep watching them. Thank Johnny Carson for that.
• The final episode of M*A*S*H -- but not every episode of it
• Roots
• Dallas -- "Who shot JR?"
• General Hospital -- "Luke" and "Laura" got married and there was song about the show
  
  

The only sitcom in the bunch is M*A*S*H, and, for me anyway, Rosanne, new or old, does not rise to M*A*S*H-level, and M*A*S*H was very definitely a political show.

As I indicated in the OP, it's not people talking about a TV show amongst friends, coworkers, people on the subway, etc. It's why is a TV show part of the news' conversation.

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom.

It's the context of the conversation, not merely that the conversation is happening amongst individuals, that surprises and chagrins me.

Murphy Brown is coming back in the fall already.

Did her illegitimate kid die from an
opioid overdose?

 

[usmbguest5318]

It is hugely important in our culture. Are you denying this?

It got JFK elected. The rest followed suit.

It got Rump elected too. It gets everybody elected. Such is the legacy of the propaganda machine.
Orwell could see it coming in 1949 already.

Who do you think is running this propaganda, Pogo? Who is Oceania?

Corporatia, basically. But not with any kind of unified "plan" as the conspiratheorists would fancy, just simple shortsighted GREED using the airwaves that belong to We the People which we hand over to them to do that for no rental fee at all.

Ignoring how much of television is no longer broadcast over airwaves, what do you think should be done with those airwaves?

​

What?

Free OTA TV is 24/7/365 these days. There's more content on the airwaves, not less. To wit, free OTA television broadcasting didn't become 24/7 until sometime in the late 1980s or thereabout. Then there's satellite television, which also is OTA, albeit not generally free.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Where my son lives, there are commercials on the gas pumps now. I nearly flipped when I saw that.

There are a variety of things broadcast on gas pumps:

• Weather-tising
• Major-news-imercial
• Traffic-amercial
• Comedy-mercial
• Infomercial (usually something about the oil company)
• Standard Commercial

 

[Montrovant]

It is hugely important in our culture. Are you denying this?

It got JFK elected. The rest followed suit.

It got Rump elected too. It gets everybody elected. Such is the legacy of the propaganda machine.
Orwell could see it coming in 1949 already.

Who do you think is running this propaganda, Pogo? Who is Oceania?

Corporatia, basically. But not with any kind of unified "plan" as the conspiratheorists would fancy, just simple shortsighted GREED using the airwaves that belong to We the People which we hand over to them to do that for no rental fee at all.

Ignoring how much of television is no longer broadcast over airwaves, what do you think should be done with those airwaves?

​

What?

Free OTA TV is 24/7/365 these days. There's more content on the airwaves, not less. To wit, free OTA television broadcasting didn't become 24/7 until sometime in the late 1980s or thereabout. Then there's satellite television, which also is OTA, albeit not generally free.

The point was that a good deal of television today goes out through land lines, rather than over the air broadcasts.

 

[usmbguest5318]

It is hugely important in our culture. Are you denying this?

It got JFK elected. The rest followed suit.

It got Rump elected too. It gets everybody elected. Such is the legacy of the propaganda machine.
Orwell could see it coming in 1949 already.

Who do you think is running this propaganda, Pogo? Who is Oceania?

Corporatia, basically. But not with any kind of unified "plan" as the conspiratheorists would fancy, just simple shortsighted GREED using the airwaves that belong to We the People which we hand over to them to do that for no rental fee at all.

Ignoring how much of television is no longer broadcast over airwaves, what do you think should be done with those airwaves?

Exactly what we already do with them: let firms lease pieces of the EMS from the government and pay recurring fees for the ongoing use of them.

• Fees

Once the fee is paid, let broadcasters deliver content via the EMS.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom. Some people don't want to watch it, and that they don't is the topic of conversation. Seriously?

If someone asks you or asks me about it, sure, that either of us watches, or doesn't, enjoys, or doesn't, the show is banal enough banter....maybe at lunch or for a moment at the water cooler. On national TV, though? For what?


Now, don't get me wrong. My beef has nothing to do with Roseanne's content. I know the show has a political bent, and I presume it favors Trump since Trump was touting it, but what be the content of a TV show is of mon import to me. I "grew up" with "Archie Bunker," I can handle "Roseanne," even though I suspect the Roseanne character anachronistically channels "Archie Bunker," but I'd have to watch to say for sure. [1]


One thing I'll be curious to observe is what liberals and conservatives periodically have to say about the writing for Roseanne.

• Conservatives routinely enough say of comedians something like, "Do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it."
  • Will they adopt that posture re: Roseanne?
  • If chided about not maintaining that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?
• Will liberals embrace the "do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it" stance or will they just watch the show and laugh, or just not watch the show?
  • If chided about adopting that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?

Note:

1. I think the Roseanne character is anachronistic because of this.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   (Note: National annual average unemployment rate in 2012 was 8.1%)

I thought you wrote for Roseane, dawg.

 

[Pogo]

Where my son lives, there are commercials on the gas pumps now. I nearly flipped when I saw that.

There are a variety of things broadcast on gas pumps:

• Weather-tising
• Major-news-imercial
• Traffic-amercial
• Comedy-mercial
• Infomercial (usually something about the oil company)
• Standard Commercial

They COULD do that but the onliest things I've ever seen on those things is the same lame who-cares crap about celebrities they monger on the standard broadcast media. And of course relentless who-cares commercials. In other words a complete interruption of my thoughts for no good reason whatsoever foisiting intellectual diarrhea that I'd never in a million years watch on purpose.

As noted these embedded telescreens usualy appear on pumps in cheapo discount gas stations. They seem to think since they gave you three cents less a galon on the price that gives them the right to pump obnoxious schlock at you while you're handling a volatile fuel that you've already paid for.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The content of the show isn't nearly as noteworthy as the fact that it is allowed to exist. The surprise is that toxic Hollywood even allowed production. After all, the much more mild Last Man Standing was taken off the air because it did not follow the dogma.

 

[Meathead]

I turned up the volume on the news to hear a segment about the new version of the Roseanne sitcom. Some people don't want to watch it, and that they don't is the topic of conversation. Seriously?

If someone asks you or asks me about it, sure, that either of us watches, or doesn't, enjoys, or doesn't, the show is banal enough banter....maybe at lunch or for a moment at the water cooler. On national TV, though? For what?


Now, don't get me wrong. My beef has nothing to do with Roseanne's content. I know the show has a political bent, and I presume it favors Trump since Trump was touting it, but what be the content of a TV show is of mon import to me. I "grew up" with "Archie Bunker," I can handle "Roseanne," even though I suspect the Roseanne character anachronistically channels "Archie Bunker," but I'd have to watch to say for sure. [1]


One thing I'll be curious to observe is what liberals and conservatives periodically have to say about the writing for Roseanne.

• Conservatives routinely enough say of comedians something like, "Do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it."
  • Will they adopt that posture re: Roseanne?
  • If chided about not maintaining that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?
• Will liberals embrace the "do your comedy. Leave your politics out of it" stance or will they just watch the show and laugh, or just not watch the show?
  • If chided about adopting that posture re: Roseanne, will they resort to a hackneyed tu quoque retort?

Note:

1. I think the Roseanne character is anachronistic because of this.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   (Note: National annual average unemployment rate in 2012 was 8.1%)

Good Lord, I recall hearing about SNL skits endlessly. Was that somehow less pathetic?

 

[Montrovant]

Where my son lives, there are commercials on the gas pumps now. I nearly flipped when I saw that.

There are a variety of things broadcast on gas pumps:

• Weather-tising
• Major-news-imercial
• Traffic-amercial
• Comedy-mercial
• Infomercial (usually something about the oil company)
• Standard Commercial

They COULD do that but the onliest things I've ever seen on those things is the same lame who-cares crap about celebrities they monger on the standard broadcast media. And of course relentless who-cares commercials. In other words a complete interruption of my thoughts for no good reason whatsoever foisiting intellectual diarrhea that I'd never in a million years watch on purpose.

As noted these embedded telescreens usualy appear on pumps in cheapo discount gas stations. They seem to think since they gave you three cents less a galon on the price that gives them the right to pump obnoxious schlock at you while you're handling a volatile fuel that you've already paid for.

Actually, what "gives them the right" would be that they are a private business, I would think.