Sports "Journalism" Has Turned Into Reality TV

I once was a huge fan of the talking head shows on ESPN.  From "Pardon the Interruption" to "First Take", I was setting my DVR to "embrace debate".

However, over time, I started to get suspicious of the content that I was viewing on a regular basis.  The debates started to get really outlandish.  The talking heads were not being objective over the topics of the day, but instead, they started showing a bias based on their favorite team/player.  And every day one of the talking heads would make what appeared to be an illogical statement based on how he/she felt rather than anything pertaining to the game itself.

The shows I once enjoyed because of the great points that were being made had turned into reality TV.  They looked to be over-produced prescheduled arguments that cause an MSNBC/FOX News type of divide with the viewers.  The debates are now more heated than some of the arguments I've witnessed in sports bars and sometimes with just as little analytics involved.  It's great for ratings, but bad for sports fans. 

I've had a hard time facing the fact that nothing is sacred any more.  The media only cares about increasing viewership and if that means having someone screaming about "LeBron being better than Jordan" or "Baker Mayfield being the next Tom Brady", then they're all for it.  They don't care if the arguments have been run into the ground or if the points attempted to be made are valid or not.

ESPN, FOX Sports, NBC Sports, and CBS Sports are all trying to out-crazy one another to get the more eyes on their screens and I think that it's working.  Unfortunately, I can no longer lend my eyes to the count.  These shows are no different than "Real Housewives of (Insert City Here)" to me.  Just a bunch of fake outrage over cliche topics.  I guess it's back to reading sports websites because these shows just don't hold any value to me anymore.

Jerrod Carmichael Quits

The Carmichael Show is one of my favorite TV shows.  It is a sitcom that features a family of black people who discuss every day topics from "Plan B birth control" to "the N-word".  They take the topic of the show, no matter how controversial, and do a masterful job of making the topic hilarious, while exposing the audience to different perspectives on it.

Well, the show is coming to an end after 3 seasons.  Not because of ratings.  Not because of protests.  Because the creator and star of the show has decided that 3 seasons is enough and that he wants to quit.

First of all, I totally understand that Jerrod Carmichael has the right to do whatever it is that he wants.  However, this is yet another black-created show, within the past decade or so, that I can recall, that has suffered an unceremonious death.

Chappelle's Show (2003, 2004, 2006)

This show was ground-breaking.  Like "In Living Color" before it, it took stereotypes and racism and turned it into something comical.

Dave Chappelle pushed the envelope on what was offensive and what was funny.  For three seasons, he ruled the airwaves as the funniest man on TV until he walked away from the show and a $50 million dollar contract from Comedy Central.

A lot of people speculated on why he left, but in the end, a very creative show, that opened people's eyes to racism, double standards, and more, was no more.

For years, people waited to see if Chappelle would ever bring the show back, but the closest we got was him reviving some characters from his show on a Saturday Night Live appearance last season.

What could he have done with Obama's election, Tiger Woods scandal, or other things that occurred after his show went off the air.  We'll never know.


The Boondocks (2005-2008, 2010, 2014)

This show started as a hilarious comic strip, that I sometimes wonder how it even got printed in most newspapers.

The show featured a radical, modern day, young Black Panther known as Huey Freeman (named after Huey P. Newton).  The story centered around his family (granddad and little brother) and their new surroundings in suburban America.  From the hood to a white environment, the family dealt with everything from racism to the LGBT community.

This show hit on a ton of topics surrounding the black community, including a number of topics that tend to make black people uncomfortable (our idolization of celebs, gay rappers, etc.).

The show never seemed to get traction as each season always appeared to the last.  The show would take hiatus so much that most viewers thought that it was canceled, when it was indeed not.  Whether it was creative control issues with the creator, Aaron McGruder, or problems finding the right people to voice the characters, the show ultimately disappeared.

I could add another show in Key & Peele, which lasted from 2012-2105 until they decided to move on to bigger and better things.  And now add The Carmichael Show to the list.

Another show greatly appreciated by deep thinking fans that has gone the way of the dinosaur just out of the blue.  I was not a fan of Jerrod Carmichael prior to the show, but I hope to be a fan of his in the future.  All of that remains to be seen as he moves on to his next project.  However, my question is: why are these people quitting?  Why are black creators walking away from their work?  Are we doomed to see Issa Rae drop "Insecure" after three or four seasons?


Looks like I'll be focusing on "Black-ish" again until Anthony Anderson walks away from it.  After all, Season 4 is coming up.

Why Is Sex No Longer Sacred?

I was watching the "Amber Rose Show" just recently.  In all honesty, I was watching the show for all of the wrong reasons.  I just think that Amber Rose is smoking hot, so I decided to tune in.  But the show was so awful that I know that I won't be watching it again.

The entire show was basically Amber Rose asking women questions about sex.  Women were disclosing everything from how many side dudes they've had to being on top during sex.  Some people call it "women empowerment" and other people call it "women being promiscuous".  Whatever you want to call it is totally dependent on your upbringing.

As for my upbringing, I was taught that sex was something sacred.  You didn't share what you did with everyone.  It was deemed disrespectful to your partner to discuss your sexual experiences with them to someone else.

Fast forward to today and everyone is doing it.  People are getting on TV, radio, and social media and discussing their sex lives like they're talking about their day at work or something.  I watched Amber Rose talk about sex for her entire show except for the last segment (which was only a couple of minutes long).  She "interviewed" rapper, T.I., and asked him his favorite sex position, the craziest place he's had sex, and if he masturbated.

I was thinking to myself, "how in the world are kids going to not be teen parents if all they see on TV is how much fun sex is?"

I guarantee you that there are a ton of kids under 18 years old watching Amber's show and shows like hers.  It's not like parents pay attention to what their children watch.  A ton of the girls watching probably want to be Amber Rose and a ton of boys want a girl like her.  She has a glamorous lifestyle and makes a lot of money for basically doing nothing truly talented.  Who wouldn't want that life?

But, back to the topic... Sex isn't sacred any more.  People will tell you all of their business without any thoughts to how you feel about it or how their partner would feel if they found out.  And if you feel awkward discussing it with them, then you're looked at as someone abnormal.  A conversation that may have been reserved to close friends and siblings is now something you can get from a coworker you barely know.

In roughly 30 years, the United States has done a 180 degree turn around in morals.  Sex is "empowering" and not something kept private.  Cursing is simply just talking and not something done out of the public's earshot.  Being reckless with your life is no longer scolded, but it is praised by everyone for you "expressing yourself" (and sometimes rewarded with money and fame).

Nothing is sacred any more.  TV has dumbed down in 30 years what took hundreds of years to create.  The end result is me watching Amber Rose ask a woman if she has a side dude (actually, "dude" wasn't the d-word that she used) and this young lady must have named 10+ guys.  She was applauded for it.

To each their own, I guess.  It makes me wonder what conversations are parents having in households across the U.S. with their children?  Is this type of thing even being discussed?  Based on what I'm seeing on TV, it is being discussed.  Just by celebrities instead of parents.

#T2Q's Toss Up Thursday, 4/10/14 (PHOTO)

Guess Why You Don't Have A Mate or Friends?

I think that it's ridiculous the number of people that I encounter who have entitlement issues.  Being active on Twitter and Facebook will subject you to so many people who no idea what it takes to be a decent human being yet alone maintain a relationship or a friendship.

Since when did "I get what I want or else" become the standard for relationships/friendships?

Reality TV is the epitome of what not to do in a relationship or marriage.  The reality shows that are centered around family basically show one spouse trying to one-up the other.  It's all about leverage.  One person is constantly trying to have his or her way without any regards to the other person's feelings.  It's the most pathetic way for any couple to live.

Sadly, our kids are being brought up in this environment and yes, they will be worse.  Why?  Because it's all they know in regards to how relationships work (unless their parents teach them otherwise).  People around 30 years old and up grew up with shows like The Cosby Show or Family Ties.  They know what a normal family looks like.

People between 20-30 grew up on Martin, Living Single, Seinfeld and other shows that promoted shacking or fast-moving relationships.  You didn't see too many marriages in the 90's in regards to popular sitcoms.

People under 20 watched The Simple Life, Jersey Shore, Real Housewives of (Insert City Here), Love & Hip-Hop, etc.  They've seen nothing but dysfunction in regards to relationships and family structure.  They see constant examples of people disrespecting their mate, family, friends and even themselves.  They think that if someone isn't doing what they want them to do, then it's okay to do things to hurt them emotionally, verbally and in some cases physically.

That treatment has now become the standard for a lot of people.  If someone says something to hurt their mate's feelings, then there are no apologies.  There is no understanding.  Just a "sucks to be you" attitude is all you'll get from the offender.  Because if you don't agree with them then you're their enemy.  It's personal.  You're against them.  "How dare you not see my point of view although I don't care about yours!"

When it comes to friendship, if you find yourself not caring what someone thinks of you, then something is wrong.  I'm not saying that a person's opinion of you defines who you are, but I am saying that something is fundamentally wrong with someone who is okay with having enemies.

How many of these ignorant memes have you seen on IG:

"Trust gets you killed?" Uh, who are you trusting? Scarface?

I'm not even sure if I know what this means, but it had a ton of Likes on IG.

Excuse the language on the photo, but I wanted to show the pure ignorance that exists in cyberspace.  IG is a place where people with absolutely nothing to say have an audience.  It just reinforces the bad attitudes that we see in society.  If your friend seems to be spending more time with other people than you, then you call them "fake."  If your mate doesn't do the things you want them to do, then they're disrespecting you.  Relationships and friendships grow harder and harder to maintain every day because people just can't see that their attitude is the problem and not the people around them.

I spend a lot of time chatting with people online and talking to them on radio shows and podcasts.  They all ask the same questions about having friends or a significant other yet refuse to believe that everything starts with them.  Whenever I ask about what they bring to the table they go into defense mode.  It's always someone else's fault.  SMH.

What brings about that sense of entitlement that makes a person think they're always right?

I Hate Social Media Oversharers

West Coast fans have it bad thanks to social media.

(steps on soapbox)

I'm sick of it to the point that I have to blog about it..

Stop it... Just stop it...

Stop thinking that what you have to say is somehow more important than anyone else. 

Stop thinking that putting something on Facebook or Twitter somehow turns you into Anderson Cooper or Rachel Maddow. 

Wait. You may be confused. Let me explain:

First of all, when I say "overshare," I'm not talking about the people who put too much information on their timelines. TMI is a problem in social networking, but it can usually be ignored easily. Besides, seeing an older co-worker discuss increasing the fiber in his diet doesn't really impact me.

The people that I can't stand are the spoilers. The people who watch sporting events, movies, and/or TV shows and choose to disclose every single plot point or game score on their timeline. Those are the people that I wish I could ship off to a remote island with no cell phone signal or Wi-Fi.

The reason that I hate them is because they force me to live in a bubble because they can't keep their mouths closed! They're so selfish and arrogant that they feel as if they have a right to reveal information to you and ruin your experience! They're too self-centered to ponder if you may want to watch the show and enjoy the revelation of each storyline just as they did. No, you don't get to have that luxury because they typed out the entire show on their timeline!

(takes a deep breath)

The perfect example of this is the ABC hit show, "Scandal."  If you don't watch that show as it airs, then you may as well turn off every electronic in your home until you do.  Everywhere you look, someone will post important information about the show that will ruin your viewing experience.  "Fitz got shot!"  "Mellie got raped!"

Dag, at least give me a week.  SMH.  People on the West Coast must really hate the time difference because they literally have to disconnect from social media for two hours prior to any relevant show.  If not, they will have someone spoil the show appear on their timeline.

Another example is sports.  There were two college bowl games that I wanted to see this week.  One on Monday and one on Tuesday.  Both came on in the mid-afternoon prior to me getting off of work.  To be able to go home and enjoy the recording of the game, I had to eliminate Facebook and Twitter from my afternoon.  Despite the fact that I don't follow ESPN or any TV sports personalities on social media, I still have to disconnect because everyone else on my timeline doesn't care if I want to enjoy the game or not.

I failed to make it home both days without knowing the scores to the game.  Despite the fact that I disconnected from social media, an associate felt the need to "share" the score with me and ruin my evening.  Although I chose to avoid Facebook and Twitter, she didn't.  And with all of that technology at her finger tips, she couldn't wait to reveal the score of the game as if I had some sort of appreciation for it.  As if I had no way of ever being able to watch the game once I got home.  Like DVR's haven't been invented.

I came home both evenings and deleted the recordings of the games without watching them.  Why would I watch?  I already knew the final score.  What's the point?  The opportunity to watch the game unfold was taken from me by some selfish individual.

Look, I get that watching TV with a bunch of followers/friends is exciting.  I chat during shows, too, but I never reveal anything in my tweets because I don't want to ruin it for anyone.  Social media has options for people to create private groups in which to discuss things.  Why not create a private group so people who are watching the show live can chat it up with you?  Wouldn't that be better than spoiling it for people who have to work or maybe live on the West Coast?

Then again, if you do that, then that would mean that you actually have to put forth an effort to consider other people's feelings, huh?  Please just choke yourself to sleep.  Wake up.  Repeat. 

(steps off soapbox)

I Chose #Scandal Over #BUFvsCLE

I'm embarrassed to say what I did, Olivia. SMH.

(SMH)

Those who have followed me for a minute know that I'm a huge football fan.  Especially the NFL.  (Sigh)  I almost feel dirty typing this, but tonight, I did the unthinkable.  Tonight, I did something that could possibly get my Man Card revoked.  Tonight, I chose to watch the hit show "Scandal" over Thursday night football.

What intrigues me so much about "Scandal" is the writing.  The show writers do an excellent job of taking you down a path, getting you comfortable, and then blindsiding you with something completely out of left field.  Top that off with a cast of amazing actors who surprisingly left the Emmy's trophy-less and you have something rare for prime time TV these days... an amazing show.

But, the NFL on Thursday night is a no-brainer for a sports nut, right?  Despite the fact that the game involved two un-sexy teams in Buffalo and Cleveland, it's still the NFL.  (BTW, the game was pretty entertaining).  I started watching the game at 7:25 PM Central Time and once 8:59 PM CT rolled around, I found myself changing the channel to ABC.

I still love the NFL, but with the magic of DVR's, I can pause the game, flip over to "Scandal", and watch the game during commercials.  Although it makes sense to most men to record "Scandal" and watch it after the game, it's virtually impossible to do due to social media.

If I don't watch "Scandal" live, then one of my Twitter or Facebook followers will be sure to tweet something that spoils the show.  That's not what you want in a show like this where the writing is so superior to 95% of the things airing on TV these days.  Shows like "Scandal" spawn copycats like "Deception" or "Betrayal" and all of those other shows with edgy names, but empty stories.  It's one of those trendsetters that every other station wishes they could duplicate.

I got on the Scandal bandwagon on Day One.  It's very rare to see an African-American as a lead character on network TV and for it to be a woman made the show more interesting to me.  I wasn't familiar with show creator, Shonda Rimes, also African-American, and my knowledge of actress, Kerry Washington, was very limited, too.

Despite all of that, I knew after only watching the first few episodes that this show would go down in history as one of the classics.  The ever-changing plot is great and the cast of characters is even greater.  It's the best cast of actors that I've seen on a show since ABC aired "Ugly Betty."

Dag, I may lose my man card for admitting that I watched that show in its entirety, too.

SMH.

Don't feel so bad, guys.  I'll be back!

Why I Hate Disney & Teen Nick

This isn't anything new and I've actually blogged about this before, but sitcom kids have got it made.  I'm watching (not by choice) some Disney movie called "Girl vs. Monster" and this girl is talking to her parents like she's "running things."  She's calling her mom "ridiculous" and telling her parents that they're "ruining her life."

I think this type of action has been rubbing off on kids for a decade or two now.  Kids absolutely do not respect adults like they should, especially their parents.  I've seen parents literally go without so that their kids can enjoy themselves, yet it's never enough for the children.

Now, it's unfair of me to completely blame Disney or Teen Nick because they're just trying to make a buck.  They have no interest in raising your kids and I get that.  Sure, they may act like they care or they may market themselves towards kids, but they just want to be a successful business.  I blame parents for allowing them to watch these channels ad nauseam.  

Parents sit their children down in front of television for hours at a time without a clue to what they're watching. They think that the Cartoon Network is showing harmless cartoons, but instead they're showing adult cartoons. They think Disney is all Mickey Mouse Club, but instead, it's a intermittent display of disrespect being shown to grown ups. They think that Teen Nick is actually benefiting teens when all I tend to see is an inspiration to rebel against parents.

I find it hard to watch some of the shows on these channels because I grew up actually respecting my parents.  Imagine that.  It doesn't mean that at some point of my teen life I didn't rebel.  However, it was few and far between and still tactful when it occurred.  I never referred to my parents as "ridiculous" or said that they "were ruining my life" because I knew the sacrifices they made for me and my brother.  I also knew the consequences for showing disrespect.  Not just to them, but to any adult.  Consequences are a thing of the past now.

I knew that my father would rather be hunting instead of watching me at soccer practice.  I knew that my mom would have rather been fishing instead of working overtime to insure my brother and I got what we wanted for Christmas.  Because of this perspective, I never lost sight on who was in charge and I never ever intentionally disrespected either of them.

I'm so thankful to have wonderful god kids and I'm also glad that my lady has very respectful children.  It's very refreshing to be in their presence and feel the level of respect that they have for me.  To not have to go back and forth with them to get them to respond to the task at hand.

If you want to teach your kid to be worth something in society, then truly monitor what they watch.  If they watch something that isn't conducive for a young mind, then explain to them that Hollywood is make-believe. You may assume that they know this already, but trust me, many don't.

Do you think that today's kids are disrespectful because of unmonitored TV viewing?

Coochie or Power? #Scandal #OliviaPope

Okay, so I'm watching "Scandal" a few weeks ago and I'm tripping over what I'm seeing.  For those not familiar, this show is one of the more popular shows on primetime TV and it's very interesting.  Creative and twisted writing has made it a show that I would advise anyone to watch.

The show makes you wonder what exactly goes through a man's mind to make him cheat.  For those who haven't watched the show (or Season 2 - SPOILER starts), the President of the United States is "whipped" has fallen deeply in love with his side chick (main character of the show).  The side chick no longer wants anything to do with him unless he "earns" her.

The 2013 side chick's motto: "earn me."

Wait. What?  The side chick is making demands?  Only in 2013, where the sense of entitlement is at an all-time high in the U.S., would a "jump off" say that you need to "earn me."  The fact that she's a side chick means that she came cheaply anyway and now she wants to go to the negotiation table?  "Child, please."

Anyway, the Prez decides the only way to "earn her" is to show the side chick that he loves her more than anything.  The First Lady threatens the Prez by telling him that if he doesn't repair their marriage that she's going to expose his affair on national television.  What does the Prez do?  He lets her do just that.  In fact, the Prez not only allows his wife to expose his marriage on national television, but he allows the First Lady to do it while he's banging the side chick.  He basically throws away his presidency over the side chick.  (SPOILER ends)

Wow.  When presented with the choice of "coochie or power," he chose "coochie."  Now that's some strong stuff right there!  I don't want to meet anyone capable of putting that on me to make me throw away my career.  Yeah, you can argue that he loves her, but a married man who cheats doesn't have a lot of credibility when it comes to love, if you ask me.

I remember when I was in high school, rapper, Ice-T, had a song entitled "Power."  One of the lyrics from that song is quoted as followed: "The power of sex, if man could overthrow it he'd be king in a day; No way. We'd get rich, hard, and give it away."

He was basically talking about how men would throw away everything for sex including being a king.  When I heard that song as a teen-ager, I didn't understand it the depths of that lyric.  However, I now understand it completely as a 41 year old.  I've seen countless politicians, numerous co-workers and even friends throw away their marriage because they were dwelling on the "in-between."

Yes, everyone says that it's a "man's world," but those who are educated know that is the farthest thing from the truth.

Bill was almost a real-life "Scandal" episode.

Tiki left his wife 8 months pregnant with twins and threw away his job for the side chick.

Can love/sex make you leave it all behind?

Flashback to Vampires

At least once a month, I'm going to flashback to previous posts for my new followers who may have missed out.

Two years ago today, I posted about how I absolutely despise modern-day portrayals of vampires. I thought that vampires should eat people and not co-exist with them. I still feel that way today. I tried watching "True Blood" back on Season 1 only to feel confused. I finally watched the first "Twilight" film and wondered how it made more than $20 at the box office. I just couldn't figure out the allure of these shows... Oh, wait!  I know now! Everyone takes their shirts off on these shows! It has to be the sex appeal because I cannot see any other reason to partake in either of these phenomenons.

Well, I like my vampire movies with a little more bite. Click on the link to open another window and journey back with me to this post to see why I once said that today's "vampires suck."


Vampires co-existing with humans: fair or foul?

Scandalous!

"You wanna tweet me, don't you?"

I know that I may upset some of my followers on Facebook and Twitter, but "some things just need to be said."  I use Facebook and Twitter on a regular basis. Twitter more so than Facebook, but I check both of them multiple times per day. However, there is a time that I absolutely despise them both: when a popular television show is on.

(begin rant) 

I absolutely can't stand when people reveal plots from television shows as they air! In the age of DVR's, not everyone watches live TV. If you don't have a friend who will come over and watch the show with you, then don't go running to your 500 friends on Facebook and ruin their chance of enjoying a show!

The other night, the season finale of "Scandal" aired. As you can tell by the title, the show is full of suspense and controversy. The last thing you need before watching a show like this is someone on Facebook or Twitter giving you the play-by-play on what's happening!

Now, I won't embarrass any of my Twitter followers or Facebook friends by printing screenshots of my timelines.  I eventually had to close out of both pages because I could not risk the chance of seeing something that would ruin the suspense for me in the season finale.  I just wish that if they choose to tweet/post about a show that they use discretion and not reveal key components.  No tweets like, "I can't believe (insert character) just got killed" or "I knew (insert character) was the father of her child!"

Memo to people who use social networks as a TV companion: some people are at work, running errands or just like to save shows to watch on the weekends.  It would be appreciated if you DM'd or inboxed your friends rather than blab the entire show plot to the world.  Yes, I could just ignore Twitter and Facebook until I watch the show, but why should I be held hostage by a couch commentator?

I guess I'll be forced to learn more about creating Twitter groups so that I can isolate the tweets that I want to see and ignore the scandalous talk about every prime time show that matters to me.  I'm sorry if this hurts someone's feelings, but try considering someone else's feelings before you send that status update.  No one wants their evening plans to watch a show they love ruined by someone who resist the urge to tweet spoilers.

(end rant)

From the Courthouse to the White House

@DivorceCourt, Judge Joe Brown, Judge Mathis, People's Court and Judge Judy are all staples in my late night / weekend TV viewing. I have a background in law from college and I've always been fascinated with court TV. Although some of the court TV shows are staged with fake cases, some of the older ones are real cases with a little bit of a "reality show" production to add drama.

The main draw for me towards these shows (aside from Judge Lynn Toler being hot) is how each judge is unbiased and fair. That's something that I'd argue we don't get from the U.S. Supreme Court being that their political affiliation is their most important credential to most people. But, the court TV judges don't use politics to influence their rulings. They use the law. Everything is cut and dry and problems get resolved. The end-result may not be pleasing to the litigants, but it's fair and based on the law.

Why can't we move this mentality from the courthouse to the White House? Why is it that we can't make decisions based on what's fair instead of what's beneficial to an agenda? We continue to elect a Congress who invents new ways each day to not work together. Their only focus from the time they get elected is to get re-elected. It's not to help the people who actually put them in office (unless your donations to their campaign are large).

I say we elect some TV judges to the White House! Just the basic concept of fairness would be enough to turn this country around in one term. It's too late for 2012, but come 2016, I want to see these judges get together and run for office. With as many viewers as Judge Judy has, I know she could pull down some votes.

Okay, seriously, for those who read my blog, you know that I believe in fairness. I try to avoid any bias, hypocrisy or double standard that may arise from a topic. I don't think it's that hard for people to live in this country and be successful and happy as long as everyone is doing their part. The problem is: that rarely seems to be the case. So, when someone steps out of line and infringes upon the rights of others, don't you think that the resolution should be swift and unbiased?

Think of how many problems Judge Marilyn Milian could resolve in just an hour. Maybe even in 45 minutes if you take out the commercials! LOL!

If Congressional rulings were based on the Constitution and fairness instead of personal opinions, do you think the U.S. would be better off?

Sitcom Kids

Sitcoms are a very big part of my TV viewing. I watch quite a few of them: "Modern Family," "Suburgatory" and "The Middle." I enjoy these shows quite a bit, but I crack up on the kids on these shows. Sitcom kids have it made. They can talk back to their parents with no consequences whatsoever. Watching these since I was a kid made me wonder if other people truly lived like this. I knew it wasn't necessarily a white thing (like most black people assume) because I went to a predominantly white school and met some tough-nosed parents. If their kids talked back to them, they got "dealt with."

So, I started to wonder if it was a regional thing? Maybe out west or up north they allow the kids to have some privileges including calling their parents by their first names or being able to say "no" when asked to do something. Those were things that my friends and I refused to even try with our parents. Well, I take that back. I tried it once.

After watching an episode of "The Brady Bunch," I thought that I could get away with calling my parents by their first names. Besides, if that Brady kid could get away with it, then why could't I? Although the Brady kid was chastised for doing it, because his parents, Mike and Carol, were so easy on him, I figured it was no big deal. Boy, was I wrong.

I sat down at the breakfast table (I think I was around 8 years old) and said "good morning" to my parents using their first names. I had the biggest smile on my face, not even looking at them as I said it, because I was so proud to be "grown enough" to pull that off.

My father snapped. To him, it was a severe sign of disrespect and after he and my mom gave me one of the most intimidating lectures I've ever received, I remember wanting to fight Greg Brady because I felt like he was responsible for me going the rest of that day with no TV. It didn't take me long to learn that TV was fiction and real life actions resulted in real life consequences.

I couldn't just walk into someone's home without ringing the door bell like sitcom kids do. I couldn't talk back to my parents without paying the price like sitcom kids do. And declaring that I deserved some privacy would have only resulted in my father taking a hammer and screwdriver and removing my bedroom door from the hinges all together.

Not sitcom kids though. Bud Bundy, Axl Heck, Tessa Altman, Stewie Griffin, etc. They have it made on television.

History 101

I'm sure some of your hip-hop fans have heard the phrase: "It's not where you're from, it's where you're at."

Well, that's not true. If it were true, then rappers would act like people who understand the concepts of social responsibility and money management (where they're at) rather than acting like the "hood rich" people from their block (where they're from). But, that's not what my blog post is about (this time).  I want to get into how a person's history can shape their future. Not with the history we learned in school, but from the history we learn from television and movies.

I've noticed that a lot of 20-somethings today don't know a lot about things that happened prior to their first memories.  I have younger relatives who have little-to-no knowledge of movies / TV shows prior to 1990.  They don't remember when Michael Jackson was black.  They think LeBron James is the best basketball player ever because they were too young to remember Michael Jordan or never even saw Larry Bird or Magic Johnson play.

I am so thankful that my parents saw to it that I appreciate everything that life has to offer...  even if it occurred before I was born.  We had two or three televisions in my household when I was growing up, but one was in my parents' bedroom and the other two were in our den and our living room.  The only connection in my bedroom to the outside world that I had as a child was an AM/FM radio.  Because of this, if I was going to watch TV, it was usually in the company of my parents.  And since they had control of the TV except for on NFL Sunday, I watched what they watched.  Something as simple as that gave me an appreciation for shows that came before me.

Some of my favorite TV personalities as a child: Bob Hope, Sammy Davis, Jr., Lucille Ball, Clint Eastwood, The Marx Brothers, The Three Stooges and Tim Conway.  Now, some of you who are 30 years old and under maybe only recognize a couple of those names.  All of these people were making movies long before I was born.  Some of them were actually dead a few decades before I was born, but I still learned to appreciate their work. It's because of that, I can watch "Planet of the Apes" with Mark Wahlberg (2001) or Charlton Heston (1968) and be entertained by either.

Things are different today. Kids have options. Too many options, if you ask me. They have TV's in their bedrooms, iPods, iPads, iPhones, laptops, game consoles, etc. So, instead of maybe taking in a nostalgic episode of "Seinfeld," "Three's Company," "Miami Vice" or "The Incredible Hulk" with mom and dad, they're free to watch what they want which is generally mainstream TV.

This is why a lot of them only live in the "here-and-now" which can lead to problems in the adult world for some.

- They get confused when confronted by discrimination because maybe they never saw "Do The Right Thing" or "Philadelphia." They only saw "Paranormal Activities" or "Shark Night 3D."

- They don't know how to grow into a good family person because they never saw how families interacted on "The Waltons" or "The Cosby Show." They only saw "Keeping Up with The Kardashians" or "The Osbornes."

- They don't understand expressions of love because they never listened to "James Ingram" or "Chicago." They only heard "Soulja Boy" or "Ke$ha."

And how many times have you heard some young person complain about how long a microwave takes to warm up food?  Those my age remember almost starving before a bag of popcorn would pop.  Younger generations need to at least know how things were in order to appreciate how things are now.

If your kids can't appreciate the values and traditions of your childhood, then how can they truly appreciate you?

I've never seen a lioness follow her cub. I've never seen an eaglet teach an eagle how to fly. Even when you're driving, you can't do so effectively without checking in the mirror behind you from time-to-time.

Your child doesn't have to do what you did as a child or like everything you liked, but it's up to you to at least give them a blueprint of "where they're from" so they can appreciate "where they're at."

Bounced Out of Contention

Bounce TV is a new television station scheduled to launch on September 26th. It is majority-owned by and will cater to black people. Being that I'm black, you would probably think I wouldn't have a problem with this, now would you?

Well, I don't. Kinda.

First, let me get out the good things about the station: it claims that it will feature positive programming for black people which is something that is lacking on television now. Pretty much every show on TV that stars a majority black cast is usually a comedy. They did try a crime-time drama on NBC last year called "Undercovers," but let's be honest, that show just sucked. I've seen better writing on bathroom walls than what their script contained. At least they tried, right?

And let's not talk about B.E.T. That station is junk and has been for over a decade as far as I'm concerned. B.E.T. was once a reputable media outlet for black people to be entertained, but it eventually turned into an outlet that is detrimental to the black community (along with mainstream radio). Their only focus now is broadcasting as much violence, materialism and sexual exploits as possible because of its selling power. So, although they're very successful in pushing crap into the black community, they fail to understand the concept of ethical responsibilities. But, I do think that black parents (or lack thereof) are the true failures when it comes subjecting our children to the media's poison. So, I'm not placing blame on B.E.T. for their selection of greed over cultural responsibility when I rant about them. And I also think Bounce TV can pick up the slack and possibly make B.E.T. even more irrelevant.

BET's meal ticket TV show, "The Game."

Having a TV station featuring movies like "The Wiz" and shows like "Judge Hatchett" isn't a bad thing at all. Mix in documentaries, specials, sports from HBCU's (historically black colleges/universities) and you have something positive for black people to watch, right?

Here's where the "kinda" comes in. I don't like media that is strictly marketed to black people and I'll tell you why and give you an example:

BlackPlanet.com
Over ten years ago (along with AsianAve.com and Migente.com for Hispanics), BP started and greatly contributed to what we now know today as social networking. Before MySpace, Facebook and Twitter, BP allowed you to have friends in a community in which to connect with on a regular basis. In fact, the creators of MySpace have even credited BP for influencing their site.

Now, MySpace, FB and Twitter each more than double BP's current subscription base. Why? I think it's because they didn't limit their marketing to one race.

That's what I dislike about black-owned medias. Why limit yourself to only one race? Imagine if BlackPlanet would have just been "The Planet." Could they have been the first Facebook? Could the story of Mark Zuckerburg been replaced by the story of BP founder, Benjamin Sun? It doesn't mean that the site could not have catered to and promoted black material, but why announce that a media outlet is for black people by black people and reduce the incentive for other races to join?

ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX don't carry what I would call "black programming," yet black people watch these stations just like everyone else. But, what if ABC changed its name to W.E.T. (White Entertainment Television)? How many black people would even bother to flip to that station to see what's on? I doubt that many would even give the station a chance. They would think that the station doesn't contain programming of their taste thus eliminating viewers who may have found something that they liked or at least given it a chance. Think of how many white people would have never seen "Sanford & Son," "The Jeffersons," "The Cosby Show," "The Fresh Prince of Bel Air" or "The Bernie Mac Show" had they all aired on B.E.T.

Do you see my point?

"Hey, Uncle Phil!  Follow my man, Q's blog!"

So, Bounce TV, I wish you so much success. You're launching in quite a few households across the country, so a lot of people will have access to you. But, with the marketing targeting only black people in a country full of so many nationalities, how many people will watch? I hope that your early promotions catering to only blacks don't bounce you out of contention before you even get started.

Now that I think about it, I just don't see how we can ever find equality if we're still promoting exclusion.

The Bliss That Is NFL Sunday

So many women became widows today. Not from something tragic as a death, but from the first week of the 2010 NFL season.

So many men have imprinted their butt cheeks on their couches or recliners as they enjoy the first of 20 football-filled weekends. Of course, I'm included in that group.



The Mrs. is a wonderful woman. She allows me to be me (which is very important in a marriage). When we got married, she didn't compete with football. Instead she embraced it. She knew that it was my favorite hobby and she's accepted that. She's learned more about the sport, watches it with me from time-to-time and if she doesn't feel like watching, she allows me to do so in peace.

So many of my friends have wives who wish to compete with the NFL. Now, of course, if it comes down to a decision, the wife should always gets the nod in that situation, but at what cost? Is there really a benefit to a woman who finds a way to remove her man from the couch? What exactly do you win?

Definitely not happy thoughts from your spouse. You basically turn your guy one step closer into "Al Bundy". An empty shell of a man who winds up holding your purse in the mall. Then again, maybe some of you want a lifeless man 'til death do you part.



Ladies, let me offer a bit of advice (and this applies to more than football):

If your boyfriend/husband had a football habit before you, then it's not in your best interest to attempt to change him. A smart man will double his efforts Tuesday through Friday if it means that he can get a bit of freedom on Saturday through Monday. I'm not saying he should abuse it and disappear for the entire weekend, but throw him a bone. Let him be the man you married and not the man you want him to be.

If he wasn't the man you wanted when he proposed to you, then why did you marry him?

Do Vampires Suck Now?

I know that I'm in the minority, but if I never see another commercial for a new TV series or movie about a vampire love story, then I'll be perfectly okay with that.

What has happened to vampires? They used to be so cool and mysterious, but now they're love-sick chumps who will drink synthetic/animal blood to avoid draining humans. Huh?

I know I constantly remind you all that I'm old school and I have a difficult time liking things today just because a bunch of other people like it. I get that. But vampires are so pathetic now! They fall in love with some human and basically risk dying over them every episode/sequel.

Some of you are probably already thinking, "but Q, Dracula was a love story because he wanted a bride". No, Dracula wasn't in love, that dude was selfish. He didn't want to spend eternity with lonely nights in his coffin, so he went to find someone to hook up with for a few centuries. He didn't care if the woman he chose wanted him or not. He made her want him. Even if it meant hypnosis. That's how the Count got down.

Not now though. A series like "True Blood", where vampires live amongst humans and try to fit in, make no sense to me. I watched two episodes and found myself scratching my head. Sookie loves some vampire and he defends her from other vampires. I don't watch the show, so I know little more than that. All of my FB friends plead with me to give it a try, but I simply refuse to do it (Sorry, O. My apologies, Z).

I've never seen a "Twilight" movie (or at least more than 10 minutes of one), but I'm surprised at how many people flock to see these pale, teen-aged guys, with their shirts off, changing into animals. I guess if people can watch four or five movies about a boy wizard, then vampires aren't a far cry from that. Come to think of it, instead of blogging, maybe I should be working on a sci-fi love story about Bigfoot falling in love with a talking unicorn or something. Hmmmm.... No sense in me not getting paid.

Now there are undead shows spawning left and right: "Vampire Diaries", "The Gates" and whatever other vampire soap operas I'm forgetting. A complete 180-degree turn from "Blade" or "Underworld" or even "From Dusk Til Dawn" where vampires are all about the killing. Aren't people supposed to run from vampires instead of trying to co-exist with them?

To each their own. You vampire soap opera lovers have a right to like anything you want just like I have a right to hate on it. Just stop trying to convince me that it's the best show or best movie ever. As far as I'm concerned when it comes to modern-day vampires, I think they suck.

.