Since "60 minutes" is doing entertainment now, what did you replace it with?
Asked by
flo (
13313
)
February 5th, 2012
It seems they are covering entertainers related things now.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
103 Answers
They’ve always done a story here or there on entertainment news…however they still have investigative reporting. All news shows here in the US have to get sponsors to cover their costs.
Pizza, Orange Fanta and laughing at pictures of how-to-make-fake-poop. We’re not getting any traffic in the store today and so have resorted to crowding around a laptop, searching for crap on our facebooks.
The Daily Show and the Colbert Report.
I was shocked when I watched 20/20 for the first time after several years. THAT show has changed into a mockery of it´s former self. I am with @ragingloli . I watch The Daily Show online. I find it hard to watch a whole show with Colbert. It feels too real and it hurts my soul.
@cazzie
Actually I think even Colbert’s parody of conservatism is way more tame than the actual thing.
Colbert and Stewart concentrate on politicians and the parties, am I right? Didn’t “60 minutes” and 20/20 used to cover different exposés from of life?
Colbert does placement for Dr. Pepper Doritos etc. Does he mean to be insult the intelligence of his audience or what?
@flo, it is called satire.
@cazzie the show would sure say that. That is what I mean by insulting the audience’s intelligence.
Edit to add into my post before last:
….Didn’t “60 minutes” and 20/20 used to cover different exposés from of life? I don’t remember it doing entertainment stuff.
@SpatzieLover
”... have to get sponsors to cover their costs.” I think they have ads for that don’t they?
I guess some get satire and some don’t. Insulting the audience intelligence comes as a matter of course.
Actually they wouldn’t say it is satire. I don’t know where my head was.
I don’t go by what Stewart says. I haven’t listened to it, @cazzie
@flo, the link is not from the Jon Stewart show, it is from a highly regarded journalist, David Frost from the BBC show ‘Frost on Satire’. I am trying to explain that Stewart, Bill Maher and Rory Bremner all use satire. They are not ‘news shows’. It is a form of comedy used to comment on current affairs in a way that is both humorous, cathartic and thought provoking. Satire and parody have been around for a very long time and like I said… some people get it and other don’t.
@cazzie you declared that your intelligence is not insulted by the Product Placement. Okay, no problemo. You don’t need to refer to these other people, whoever they are. And by the way let me go out on a limb here: they are not referring to Product Placement specifically. (Edit: If they are) that would be crazy beyond crazy, since their job is to expose what people don’t easily notice.
…You don’t need to refer to these other people, whoever they are, unless you worship or almost worship them.
Well, then, @flo, what do you watch instead?
and… um…. worship them? Where does THAT come from? Does not knowing who they are or what satire is frighten you in some way?
@cazzie
Are they saying in the link that Product Placement is satire? No, of course not, right?
Hilarious! Nevermind. I’m currently entertaining myself LOL4RL ;D
Like I said, some people DON’T get it, for whatever reason, and because you are so rude about it, @flo, I feel no real need to try to help you understand.
@cazzie “Just a real reflection of what the hell is going on, which I /think/ was your original point,” that wasn’t my point
In the newspapers they have ads that look like articles. They have the title “ADVERTISEMENT” as a on top. If someohow one day that title got omitted for whatever reason, they would be in trouble. If I call the newspaper and some person from the newspaper tells me that they did it for satire:))) I should say “Oh! I am sorry I beg your pardon!”
Product Placement is advertisement, it is just not during the time for the commercials. The public is supposed to be notified that money exchanged hands.
Your last post about 60 min. and 20 /20 etc. dumbing themselves down is not about Product Placement.
In the newspapers they have ads that look like articles…some person from the newspaper tells me that they did it for satire
@flo There is a satire newpaper. It’s called The Onion <—-I’ve linked their website which also has videos and articles. The entire thing is satire.
Now, you tell me where it says it on their site or their paper.
As for product placement, it’s everywhere. Go outside and take a walk or drive your car. There are ads everywhere you look.
@SpatzieLover ”As for product placement, it’s everywhere. Go outside and take a walk or drive your car. There are ads everywhere you look.” I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing.
I wasn’t referring to satire newspapers by the way. And noone is supposed to be above the law.
Product Placement is advertisement, it is just not during the time for the commercials. The public is supposed to be notified that money exchanged hands.
The View does ads during the show…so does David Letterman. I must be missing your point somehow. Yes, shows have product placement.
She still doesn’t get it… forget it.
and she seems to forget what her original post was about and is STILL going off about something unrelated she brought up.
She can learn about satire on her own time. (however, a sense of humour can not be learned)
however, a sense of humour can not be learned
So true @cazzie. I will watch some satire in honor of this thread today.
I chuckle as I type this…If I don’t make myself laugh, who will?
And adult film actors are just acting.
@SpatzieLover so we should all fool ourselves? That is the definition of humor?
I think we really upset Stephan Colbert. He has cancelled his show now for two nights. I hope @flo is proud of herself.
To add to one of my posts ”Product Placement is advertisement, it is just not during the time for the commercials” ”...and that it is not obvious at all that it is an ad. It is made to look like part of the sketch part of the story line, etc, therefore sneaky, and insidious”
It is made to look like part of the sketch
It is part of the sketch. It’s humorous.
OK… obviously this has to be explained…. He , Mr. Colbert, is a satarist… a cartoon of a character, he plays, to make fun of what he is portraying. ANYTHING he does on that show is to examine something. When he brings chips on the desk and starts talking about it, you will notice the audience laughs… that is because he is making fun of product placement and how insidious it is and how stupid people look when they do it. The audience laughter should tip you off as a clue.
@SpatzieLover the ads that you don’t notice to be ads are Product Placements.
And the View ladies are doing Promotionals, not Product Placements because you can see they are paid for.
@cazziehe so when the audience laughs you laugh? They must have bets amongst themselves “let’s say some gibrrish things and let’s see if they laugh” Sad enough they laugh. And they are not lauging at the product placement, they are laughing because they’re prompted to laugh And I don’t mean with “applaud” signs.
@cazzie what do you consider an insult? Give me an example.
What would I, personally, be insulted by? I don’t know. You want to have a go?
No, not personally. What is an example of an act of insulting a peoples’ intelligence?
.
@flo Are you personally insulted by anything I have written here?
But that isn’t the same thing as the ads thing at all.
…because there is nothing to figure out about “some people do get satire”. You don’t get it because you’re not bright enough there is nothing to figure out, it is right there.
What I wrote was that some people don’t get satire. I seem to get it. You don’t seem to appreciate the humour behind it. Does not appreciating satire make you feel ‘not bright’? Is that what you are trying to say?
”Are you personally insulted by anything I have written here?” Were you not referring to ”some people don’t get it. @flo has demonstrated she is one of those people”. If not why did you ask then?
So, what is your definition of insulting peoples’ intelligence, if you look at look at the public arena?
(And I know plenty of smart people who don’t like satire as a form of humour. I was simply saying, you are a person who doesn’t get satire. I never said you were stupid because you didn’t get it.)
@cazzie There is not explaining away “she doesnt get it”. I only brought it up because you asked me the question, ”Are you personally insulted by anything I have written here?” which by the way, you still haven’t answered why you asked me that. For example if I answered “no”, then what? Where were you going with that?
When someone calls another “dumb” or words to that effect that is just rude, uncilvil etc., That is not insulting the intelligence of a person.
I am sorry if not getting satire makes you feel dumb. I didn’t call you dumb.
@cazzie Insulting our intelligence: “When someone tries to deceive us or trick us in a way that would only be convincing to somebody with low intelligence or someone who is paying no attention.” a good definition.
I meant in relation to getting you to buy things subliminally.
By the way Fox News fans would point at a democratic party friendly network as insulting.
The existance of the link you gave a few posts back exists to pull wool over our eyes. So, it is just another insult.
Now, if someone is working on me subliminally, how would I know?
We wouldn’t. That is why people find it objectionable.
Subliminal messages also do not work.
They do, that is why they keep doing it and spending a lot of money.
They also spend a lot of money on graphologists. Yet graphology is complete bollocks, in the same vein as astrology and homeopathy.
That they spend a lot of money on it bears no relation to its actual validity.
I am not referrinng to its validity, just that it works on people who are unaware, and refuse to become aware. Astrologists who practice this bullock are fraudsters. They make money by convicing guillible people that it is a valid thing. Advertiisements work for the companies they make more money, it doesn’t work for the poor customers who are roped in.
It does not work on anyone. That is what I mean by “validity”.
It does work on the customers who buy it, if it didn’t work they wouldn’t buy it” is a better way of putting it.
They are not spending all that money for nothing to create ads for no return. The figures speak for themselves. .Millions for the superbowl ads for 30 second ad for nothing. Yeah.
That they spend a lot of money on it bears no relation to its actual validity.
I think I already said that.
There are other, actual reasons why people buy things. Subliminal messages are not among them.
@ragingloli Why do you need the word “Validity”? See if you can do without it. I don’t need it.
They advertisers give the ad agencies all the money to create the ads because
they don’t want to give themselves huge raises.
they don’t want to give it to homeless shelters.
they don’t want to give them to worthy humanitarians organizations.
What else?
All you advertising agents, you get paid for producing nothing. It is a racket then?
I think @flo is confusing product placement with subliminal advertising perhaps? What exactly do you mean my ‘subliminal.’
subliminal messages mean that in a film clip of 24 frames a second, one frame will be a message like “suck dick”. You are not consciously aware of it, but this 1 frame message that exists on screen only for 1 / 24th of a second is supposed to suddenly make you crave dick.
It just does not work.
@ragingloli I know you understand what it is, but I don’t know if @flo is aware. Thanks for the definition.
“Subliminal messages come in more than one form @ragingloli.
You never answered the other stuff I pointed out/asked. If it doesn’t work then, it follows the advertisers are dumb and dumber, and dumbest. And that ad agencies are a racket. That they are just handing all that handing it all to them, because they are fools.
I’m not sure what to make of what you are trying to say @flo. You seem to be judging the ad agencies (paid to creatively sell stuff) the advertisers (want to make a profit selling their wares) and the consumers (want to buy things they need and want to make life easier/more fun).
As long as the consumers educate themselves (which can easily be done via the Internet) on the products they buy, they won’t get suckered into buying crap they don’t need.
This thread began discussing the entertainment news 60 Minutes airs. I stated above, that they have always done a segment or two on entertainment. I still don’t get what it is you are thinking about advertisers and programs. TV stations have to make money. TV producers have to keep their show audiences tuning in. TV is entertainement. It is a want, not a need.
@SpatzieLover what Colbert is doing is not satire.because he is giving the products the visibility the companies crave no matter how big they are. So it is not satire.
It is satire. The products are made fun of.
You seem to have a very black & white viewpoint on comedy. Comedy is not a black & white/right or wrong thing.
Why are you taking the comedy seriously? If it doesn’t interest you, or you don’t find it humorous, you are the consumer. Change the channel.
‘Subliminal messages come in more than one form?’ Gee. If she keeps making up her own terminology, no wonder there is so much misunderstanding. I’m done playing in this sandbox. The game is getting sad and boring.
@cazzie
”subliminal messages mean that in a film clip of 24 frames a second, one frame will be a message”
Here is the definition of Subliminal
http://www.wordcentral.com/cgi-bin/student?book=Student&va=subliminal
’‘existing or functioning below the level of conscious awareness…’’
”...1 frame message that exists on screen only for 1 / 24th of a second is supposed to suddenly make you…” is just one example of methods of subliminal advertising.
@SpatzieLover ”if you don’t like the If it doesn’t interest you, or you don’t find it humorous, you are the consumer. Change the channel.”
So, does it mean if you follow your logic you would just go to another OP and not respond to my post? That would not be good, this is a place of dicussion. There should be no discussion of things on TV people don’t like? Hmmm.
You don’t appear to want a discussion. It appears you want some agreement.
Your position on this and the other thread still isn’t clear to me.
I’m not getting why you think satire is advertising. Satire is a type of comedy. The products shown are being made fun of.
@SpatzieLover I mean there is no place for that statement “if you don’t like it change the channel”, unless the person is continuing to watch it while suffering.
It seems you don’t find satire with products funny. Is this true or false?
If true, change the channel.
I still am at a loss as to how all of this pertains to 60 Minutes.
@flo prefers her definition: ’’‘existing or functioning below the level of conscious awareness…’’ I guess she considers product placement in this group. Perhaps that is below her level of conciousness, who am i to argue with her?
damn… I just can’t help myself… I really have to leave this alone. Such an unfair battle.
@SpatzieLover ”It seems you don’t find satire with products funny. Is this true or false?”
It is about pointing out that some of them function as ads. so whatever he says is
”If true, change the channel”
I already responded to that, didn’t I?
Anyway, if you don’t like something you saw on TV, whether you continue to watch it or you change the channel, I encourage you dicuss it here or anywhere. There is nothing that makes me not want you to discuss it.
It is about pointing out that some of them function as ads No. No matter what, the satire is not advertisement. It is comedy.
@SpatzieLover The Colbert one for example is not, to me. The other one (with the women and cleaning product) is.
@SpatzieLover even if there is some satire out there about the insulting ones, these ad agencies should stop being objectionable/insulting. You are arguing against that, just so we are clear right? It is okay to keep being insulted?
I don’t care how insulting or stupid there ads are. I simply change the channel (or in my case fast forward the DVR) and never buy their products. Not surprisingly, none of the products I buy have insulting ads. I rarely purchase trendy cleaning or food products.
@SpatzieLover OMG! ”I don’t care how insulting or stupid there ads are”? That doesn’t even make sense to me. If your spouse keeps beating you up, and you keep saying that you don’t care about that as long as he is a good provider, or she is a good mother, that still doesn’t change that the beating shoud stop.
You want the people who are insulted by these sexist insulting ads, to stop talking about them? You could have been saying none of the ads should be insulting, so noone has to keep changing the channel or keep closing close their eyes and ears, or write and complain to the companies or anything.
I don’t pay for their ads. I don’t buy their stuff. I live in a country with free speech. I am pro-free speech. Let them talk all they want.
I’m done now, as clearly, this has nothing to do with 60 Minutes, satire or ads, but some sort of agenda to control speech
@SpatzieLover some sort of agenda to control speech You make me laugh, I am the one who referred you to free speech by my ”You want the people who are insulted by these sexist insulting ads, to stop talking about them?” See?
Re. your: ”Let them talk all they want.” but not the public they are insulting? They should either like it or change the channel and be quiet?
and be quiet
I never said that, nor implied it.
@SpatzieLover What would be the point of getting people to change the channel? So they will make no noise about them.
Maybe you’d prefer living in a communist country. I prefer freedom. That freedom includes me being able to change the channel…and the owners of the channel running any ads they choose.
@SpatzieLover we are running around in circles. —You are firmly on the side of ads that insult no question about that.
is now mumbling in a corner to herself, ranting….. Oh, YES! I want even MORE ads that insult!! I want to be insulted until my skin peels off! I want to take offense at EVERYTHING and then just yell loudly about about!
this exchange has been the dumbest I have seen on Fluther and that is saying A LOT!
@SpatzieLover
”“I prefer freedom. That freedom includes me being able to change the channel…and the owners of the channel running any ads they choose.”
Let’s do some team work:
”....and the freedom not to have endure insulting ads, not have to close my eyes and ears.
Unless freedom is meant only for the bad guys.
What you did by the way is associate communism with respect and freedom with disrespect.
@cazzie and @SpatzieLover What are you fighting for? For finding insulting ads acceptable:) If you want funny there it is.
@flo I think, personally, I am fighting for less cognitive dissonance in this thread, but in your case, I think I am wasting my time.
@cazzie There is no excuse for fighting for insulting ads. Period. ”I am fighting for less cognitive dissonance in this thread” is not going to help anyone who fights for insulting ads.
@cazzie in fact I do make perfect sense. This is one of those times when you don’t even need to look up anything.
I had to look up “cognitive dissonance”
Answer this question 
