On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Jon Delfin <[email protected]> wrote: >> If that isn't a textbook definition of an idiot, I don't know what is. > > Well, if you're going to put it that way ... It isn't. "Asshole," > maybe, or "troublemaker," or "hypocrite" (if she knows better), but > not "idiot," since clearly she knows how to use these people to draw a > crowd.
You say potato... It is a matter of opinion, obviously, but I do not consider the ability to hold up shiny objects and get people to watch them to be a sign of intelligence. Any not-so-clever yutz can deduce that dressing Pam Anderson in a red bathing suit and having her bounce up and down a beach would get viewers. In a like manner, Oprah puts on bleeding hearts, celebrities, and self-help snake oil salesmen. These guests make her audience cry, make them buy books, CDs, or DVDs, and make them think they have power while eating bon-bons in their lay-z-boy. There is no intelligence behind holding up shiny objects. The intelligence is getting people to watch a show without resorting to such gimmickery. How many times in the last couple decades did Oprah make some sort of announcement like "I'm done with FILL IN THE BLANK" or "This show will no longer resort to "FILL IN THE BLANK"? I lost count. Wait a few episodes and the gimmicks return, because she doesn't know how to keep viewers without them. -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
