the fact he's an actor makes it easier for him to get on TV -- particularly fox, which likes people to think it has some connection with performing arts. in terms of his career, overall his values can hurt him professionally more than help him, unless some clown says "oh yeh, i saw him on fox" without stopping to think what it was farrell said.
appearing on fox is a lousy job but somebody's got to do it. they don't let heavy hitters like chomsky, doug, palast, monbiot and pilger, or hightower, on, so ....
R
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck0" <chuck at mutualaid.org> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 8:42 AM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] More Fox Lies & Spin
Dennis Perrin wrote:
> I don't watch Fox, so I rely on others to endure the shit for me.
>
> <http://www.antiwar.com/orig/steinreich1.html>
>
> And why oh why do liberals like Mike Farrell go on these shows? Exposure?
Rancid thrills?
Sheer dumb stupidity. Or perhaps that American urge to seek media attention so you can say "Look, ma, I'm on TV."
Actually, we should cut Farrell some slack because he is an actor who routinely goes on TV. What's really stupid are the liberals and activists and radicals who go on Fox News and other right wing shows. If you know going in that O'Reilly is going to tell you to "shut up," why bother obliging him? Why did Leslie Cagan go on Fox News where they were able to make her look bad? Other than the fact that she is a media slut?
At least very few Americans actually watch Fox News, so these ill-advised appearances don't cause us that much damage.
<< Chuck0 >>
Homepage -> http://chuck.mahost.org/ Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ Monumental Mistake (blog) -> http://chuck.mahost.org/weblog/index.php Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ Infoshop Portal -> http://portal.infoshop.org/ Infoshop Science -> http://science.infoshop.org/ AIM: AgentHelloKitty
If people eat their ballots, then that nut-case Stockwell Day will get in. Right-wingers aren't angst-ridden about voting. Don't we have to vote strategically, even if that means voting for the Liberals?
Having to decide between Tweedledum and Tweedledee -- that's not a choice -- that's a threat. Our electoral system favors a two-party race, and we should reject it. We have to start working towards a democratic system that doesn't force people to vote for the lesser of two evils (or the evil of two lessers). We can't keep jumping from election to election, voting for one moron because we're terrified that there's something worse. Now's the time to stop legitimizing this process and take a stand for fundamental, long-term change. It's more important to call attention to the farce of electoral politics than to split-hairs by choosing between Tweedledumb andTweedledee (or The Mad Hatter, the Queen of Hearts and the Doormouse for that matter).
- The Edible Ballot Society <http://edibleballot.tao.ca/faq.html>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk