(no subject)

[shadowkat]

1. Trevor Noah Responds to the Fox Media View that he Can't comment on Gun Control Because He's a Foreigner

After that aired, Fox News contributor Larry O’Connor wrote a piece on Mediaite, which he then discussed on Fox, expressing outrage at the idea that Noah and other “foreign-born” hosts like James Corden would dare speak about a specifically American issue like the 2nd Amendment. (Full disclosure: Mediaite and The Mary Sue both operate under the same parent company of Abrams Media.)

The video, which you can watch above, was a web-only segment, appearing to happen during a commercial break. In it, Noah says that he doesn’t “take that for granted,” and that this isn’t the first time he’s heard this sort of thing.

He goes on to say, “It’s interesting because I remember when I first got to The Daily Show, in the first weeks that I was here, there was a shooting. People were like ‘Oh, I don’t think he cares enough.'” He said he would respond by saying he’s an honest person, and will respond honestly, not with manufactured outrage or emotion. “And when you live in a place for a while, when you call it home, you feel things that happen, because it’s happening to us.” He points out that “there are certain things that connect you beyond just where you’re from.”

But the conversation around immigration and what is deemed appropriate behavior from immigrants is a total catch-22. The same people that criticize immigrants for not committing to life as an American are the same people who condemn immigrants fro “getting too involved,” expressing opinions or “taking” jobs.

In his original article, O’Connor goes into some in-depth apartheidsplaining, ending his history lesson on guns in South Africa by saying, “But those issues are for South Africans to discuss, debate and solve. I wouldn’t presume to tell them what they should do based on my experience as an America.” Except many Americans and others from around the world did protest the South African apartheid. And as Noah points out, South Africans weren’t complaining about that. They weren’t questioning why Americans had a stake in the well-being of those in other countries.

“If anything,” he says, “I would argue most of the problems we face in the world come from the fact that people don’t deal with issues that they ‘don’t have to deal with.'”

I agree with Trevor Noah. I'm sorry the fact that the US doesn't have adequate gun control effects everyone in the world. We export our weapons elsewhere. And there are foreigners who visit Las Vegas, and most likely were injured or shot at. That have their kids in US schools for various reasons. That are living here on Visa or other status.

We do not live in bubble communities. Isolationism is for the foolhardy and those who have read biased accounts of history. If we had continued that course -- Germany would have invaded Great Britain. Actually the US would have if Japan hadn't bombed Pearl Harbor.

The British decision for Brexit affected EVERYONE not just Britain. It affects where I live and my life, because as a direct result NYC may become the financial and banking capital, placing greater financial risks and rising prices even higher. The US election affected the world, we now have Donald Trump who could very well wage war with Korea. You don't think that affects you if you live in Great Britain? Really? Or that Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accords? Or that five Hurricanes hit the islands and the US?

Also - on South African Apartheid? That affected EVERYONE. I spoke out on it in college and wrote to the college alumni to divest from South Africa. It affected us. Our college had investments in that country.

We live on one planet folks, we share the same air, the same earth, the decisions each and every one of us make affect one another in ways we cannot imagine. If we choose to invade another country that affects the world. If we choose to go leave an economic union that affects the global economy.
If we choose to buy a semi-automatic weapon and fight for gun rights -- that has a direct effect on the world around us.

What we watch, eat, do, see, say has an effect. What I say in my blog does. I don't want to see that, but it does.

And no, it's not rude to talk about it, analyze it, or worry about it. It's rude to tell people not to. The Fox guy should be ashamed of himself. He's an ass. But then, that's why I don't watch Fox News.

Sorry, this sort of thing enrages me. I'm trying to be tolerant of the intolerant, ignorant, and biased.. but it is really hard.

2. I'm procrastinating on my writing. Meant to write this weekend, to date all I accomplished was putting together a table and chair. Ate the wrong things. And am weirdly wired as a result.

I think the week discombobulated me somehow.

3. Looked into CBS All Access.

The good news? It's better than it was last year. Has more offerings, including movies and old television series, along with all its current ones.

And there's a free one week trial for the limited commercial option.

Bad news?

Two options.

* Limited Commercials - $5.95 a month. (Free Trial). Apparently limited commercials is similar to On Demand's definition of limited commercials. Four on repeat. Also not HD, apparently.)

* No Commercials and HD - $9.95 a month (same as Netflix but not as much content...sorry, Netflix just has more.)

Other problem? They want your name, email address, birthdate, and I think phone number or address.
Also want permission to distribute this information to their affiliates and marketing partners, so they can contact you for various offers. Eh, no. I didn't have to give Netflix, HBO NOW or Amazon that level of info, why should I give it to you? Nor did they ask permission to sell/share my information with marketing companies. You need to change your game CBS, if you want to be competitive with the big boys. Your tv shows are good, but they aren't the level of Netflix, Amazon and HBO.

Evil marketing people came up with this one.

So that stopped me from doing the trial.

Damn. I wanted to see Discovery. But I've worked hard to keep the stupid marketing calls at bay.

Comments

[ex_peasant441]

There is a big difference between foreigners who live outside a country and immigrants inside a country expressing an opinion on delicate internal political matters. For me it is largely a case of common courtesy and much of that arises from how familiar the person is with the facts and how much personal experience they have. I have an opinion on American gun laws - of course I do - but for me to express it now would be like turning up at the funeral of a traffic accident victim and lecturing on road safety. It would be rude. It would also probably be very misinformed - I have not grown up steeped in the culture. I don't understand in a cultural way the meaning and significance of the second amendment to the people involved. I certainly don't know the exact legal position or the desired outcome of those who wish to change things. I could ask my American friends for an explanation but then I would just be echoing their opinions, not really expressing my own.

You also say that these issues affect everyone on the planet. True, to a slight degree, but it is only slight in most cases. For example, when you complain that Brexit affects you, it is a tiny thing you are describing. If you had said that to me before the referendum I would have torn into you fiercely because you would in essence have been pressurising me to give up my democratic rights and chance of future economic prosperity on some theoretical risk that you might have to experience a slight change in the New York property market. The idea that you are affected by Brexit in any meaningful way compared to how I am affected by Brexit is just laughable. It is the same in reverse - gun laws will affect you a great deal throughout your life, they are very unlikely to affect me, so it really isn't my place to express an opinion on them to you. But it is different for the commentators you mention, who do live in the US and so are directly affected by the gun laws, and who are presumably much better informed than I am.

[colls]

As a maker of vids, I've had to get creative when trying to get my hands on DRM-free material. The method many TV shows in particular choose to use to release their material is so outdated - mostly it's been the region to region differences, the CBS thing is new. Over the years I'd finally gotten a method that makes me comfortable (ethically) in that I BUY the show on iTunes or Amazon, even if it was something I could freely watch. Because I felt strongly that I was using someone else's material and that I should purchase it, or "own" my copy.

But.... Star Trek Discovery isn't available to purchase in the U.S. by ANY other means than a subscription service I don't want. I can't purchase the individual episodes yet - although I assume they'll be available in some format sometime in the future. If I like the show, which I do so far, I will most likely purchase for watermark-free source material with which I can make vids.

I know several cable-free people have tried very hard to go legit with TV watching over the past few years and combinations of Netflix, iTunes, Amazon, Hulu, etc. have made that possible, but this CBS thing is just ridiculous. Every other network allows the purchase of the show via some outlet at the time it's airing. If I want to watch something before it's available on something like Netflix, at least I can BUY it without subscribing to a service - this entire principle is why I don't have cable, FFS. I know CBS is looking for this to boost their subscription service but I dislike the way they're doing it - they're limiting consumer options and I feel it's a step backwards.

Anyway, long story short, I will PM you in case you want to watch now and buy later. I usually don't as I figure if people want that sort of thing they can figure it out themselves - but this CBS decision irks me.

[shadowkat]

Thank you!

I know several cable-free people have tried very hard to go legit with TV watching over the past few years and combinations of Netflix, iTunes, Amazon, Hulu, etc. have made that possible, but this CBS thing is just ridiculous. Every other network allows the purchase of the show via some outlet at the time it's airing. If I want to watch something before it's available on something like Netflix, at least I can BUY it without subscribing to a service - this entire principle is why I don't have cable, FFS. I know CBS is looking for this to boost their subscription service but I dislike the way they're doing it - they're limiting consumer options and I feel it's a step backwards.

Exactly! No one else does this. Starz offers a free trial but doesn't require that level of data and also, you can buy Outlander on DVD or see it on Netflix DVDs. Same deal with HBO and Game of Thrones...my mother who isn't an HBO subscriber is able to get GoT via renting DVD's from Netflix. She doesn't have to buy them, she can rent them along with a lot of other options.

Add to this --- anyone living outside the US can get access to Discovery and the Good Fight via Netflix or other channels. It's just people in the US who can't.

This hurts Discovery -- less people have access to it. And it hurts those trying to sell the product. CBS is launching a distribution channel at the detriment of its content. Content should come before distribution not the other way around.