Xbox servers are restarting in:
.
They should be back up in approximately .

The beautiful country of Kazahrus

So I learned from "Blindspot" /TV show/, in Kazahrus speak Russian, there is evil monarchy dictator who uses chemical attack to eradicate resistance /as usual/.

Where dafuk is this Kazahrus?

For awhile I watch Western TV shows. And I notice the more time passes, the more childish the propaganda in them become. Since they know what they do, its obvious that they consider the viewers to be more and more stupid and illiterate each year to swallow almost everything. To the point they build an episode on fucking Kazahrus. Of course Russians are evil and there are chemical weapons. But come on, tell me, aren't you offended by the Kazahrus? Am I considered to be so hopelessly lost, they don't even bother to put some sugar on it? This is a sinister sign.
Last bumped on Sep 24, 2018, 7:07:01 PM
The "h" is all wrong.

Of course it is. Otherwise all perfect.
Heavy-handed social agenda aesops in muh popular premium TV shows?

NOO!!

Why would I be offended by a fictional country? They made up a country so they could have an evil country without explicitly calling a country evil.
"
Heavy-handed social agenda aesops in muh popular premium TV shows?

NOO!!


I would call your "Heavy-handed social agenda" cheap manipulative brainwash.

"
Why would I be offended by a fictional country? They made up a country so they could have an evil country without explicitly calling a country evil.


I think you missed the point. It is probably my mistake because I didn't make it clear. I will try do so. Clearly I was extra irritated because the same "cheap manipulative brainwash" goes in every western pop media for years and I'm fed: Americans save the world each time from evil Somali pirates, evil Serbian gangs /only in 3 Blindspot seasons, I counted 4 evil Serbian gangs/, evil mad dictators who bomb their population with chemical weapons /Syria, Assad, fictional chem weapons, so you be prepared for it/, evil Russian deranged generals, criminals of Balkan and Slavic origin.

Its all funny and just. I only observe this and laugh, but I note it progresses. Each year it becomes more and more simple by design to the point they make up a fictional country. I watched a video where from 5 adult Americans on the world map without signs none could even point the continent where they live in. So it makes sense to make up a fictional country, where the evil thugs speak, guess what, of course Russian language. So fucking cheap, dude.

My point is, the degrading "manipulative brainwash" means degrading intellectual level of the viewers. For me, the conclusion is that the people in general are LESS educated and LESS smart as they were say 30 years ago.

But I can't bear this anymore. No more idiotic TV shows for me.
I tried watching Mr. Robot Season 3. In the first episode at some point I had a revelation: the writer(s) feel as if Season 1 led to the rise of Trump, and they feel profound regret for this.

I paused it, laughed for two minutes straight, then stopped watching. It's not worth watching even smart TV if it's too scared by what it can do, so hesitant to rock the boat, that it refuses to explore the possibilities.

They all tow the line now.

Edit: Not saying vaguely rightwing content is any better. Outside of arguably some Japanese stuff, it's people vaguely tied to the left who were, but are no longer, putting out the thought-provoking TV entertainment. Now there's nothing.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Sep 14, 2018, 5:00:40 PM
"
poor_hobbit wrote:

My point is, the degrading "manipulative brainwash" means degrading intellectual level of the viewers. For me, the conclusion is that the people in general are LESS educated and LESS smart as they were say 30 years ago.



"
The third approach to stereotypes – and the one we follow – is the “social cognition approach”, rooted in social psychology (Schneider 2004). This approach gained ground in the 1980’s and views social stereotypes as special cases of cognitive schemas or theories (Schneider, Hastorf, and Ellsworth 1979). These theories are intuitive generalizations that individuals routinely use in their everyday life, and entail savings on cognitive resources. Hilton and Hippel (1996) define stereotypes as “mental representations of real differences between groups [. . . ] allowing easier and more efficient processing of information. Stereotypes are selective, however, in that they are localized around group features that are the most
distinctive, that provide the greatest differentiation between groups, and that show the least within-group variation.” A related “kernel-of-truth hypothesis” holds that stereotypes are based on some empirical reality; as such, they are useful, but may entail exaggerations (Judd and Park 1993).
We show that this approach to stereotypes is intimately related to another idea from psychology: the use of heuristics in probability judgments (Kahneman and Tversky 1972). Just as heuristics simplify the assessment of complex probabilistic hypotheses, they also simplify
the representation of heterogeneous groups, sometimes causing errors in judgment...


Lost the page, damn. Well, basically, we need to have mental shortcuts or we couldn't function.

"
We all make snap judgments about people even if we haven’t met them. This is called stereotyping, and depending on the context, our stereotypes can either be good or bad. A new study finds that people with higher cognitive abilities are more likely to learn and apply social stereotypes. However, they also have the ability to more easily unlearn them when presented with new information.

The researchers say that these individuals are more adept at picking up subtle patterns that aren’t obvious to the average person. However, their stereotyping associations can be challenged when new patterns arise.

“Superior cognitive abilities are often associated with positive outcomes, such as academic achievement and social mobility,” said the study’s lead author David Lick, a postdoctoral researcher in New York University’s Department of Psychology. “However, our work shows that some cognitive abilities can have negative consequences—specifically, that people who are adept at detecting patterns are especially quick to learn and apply social stereotypes.”

...However, those with superior pattern detection were found to more easily update their stereotypes based on new knowledge, making them particularly susceptible to changing their bias.

“Finding that higher pattern detection ability puts people at greater risk to detect and apply stereotypes, but also to reverse them, implicates this ability as a cognitive mechanism underlying stereotyping. Our findings may help pave the way for future research that leverages pattern detection or other cognitive abilities for reducing social biases,”


article

So maybe, the intelligent people are unwilling to unlearn, and also actively manipulating stereotypes.

People making TV shows in America are trying to make money and win awards. Going against TV tropes too much will make their audiences not understand the programs. No audience, no money, no Emmys.

It sucks, and it fits with the dominant military/industrial agenda - which Leni Rifenstahl might have a thing or two to say on.




There's lots to say but because I get excited and also have to run off for now -seizing on this

"
鬼殺し wrote:
... and I might go back and finish The Americans just because I liked the twist of it being about a normal family.


Holy shit yes. It ended ... last month, the one before. Just ... incredible arcs and the last episode, wow. Yes, finish it.



"After six seasons, The Americans will conclude at the end of May—but the show’s most beloved character will live to beep another day. That would be the mail robot, the rectangular relic that charmingly and inefficiently roams the halls of the series’s 1980s-era F.B.I. office—and has gained a surprisingly fervent fanbase throughout the otherwise very serious Russian spy drama’s run. Among the mail robot’s devotees is FX executive Jonathan Frank, who has devised a surprising afterlife for the prop: if Frank’s plot comes to fruition, the fake mail robot that stars on the show will be transformed into an actual mail robot, which will be programmed to beep around FX’s Los Angeles office in perpetuity. “My hope is that it teeters on the line between making people happy and not quite annoying them,” Frank said.

That would be a fitting tribute for this mechanical goofball, which took its final on-screen bow a few weeks ago by forcing its way between Noah Emmerich’s Stan Beeman and Brandon J. Dirden’s Dennis Aderholt—making an awkward elevator ride even more uncomfortable. The mail robot is a deceptively talented performer: it’s brilliant at comic relief, but has also been called on for heavy drama in episodes like “Do Mail Robots Dream of Electric Sheep?”..."


Still more to say on the more serious aspects of page one, but not just now. Perhaps someone else will pick up there.

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info