A good use of time at work

I kind of love the internet.

Let me tell you why.  It's because people, when blessed with complete anonymity, create some pretty fantastic things.  Not fantastic in that they're aesthetically pleasing or helpful to anyone, but fantastic in that they're gut-wrenchingly hilarious.

Behold, a timeline of memes.

Memes, by the way, are those things the media picks up every so often.  They are hilarious things that are readily available for free on the internet, therefore it's a pretty awesome investment for any media outlet.  They're little cute trends that spread around the internet and usually make absolutely no sense.  Which is why they're funny.  Anyone who tries to make a more scientific explanation of this is wasting their time.

I might, from time to time, talk about one or the other of these memes, just because they're amusing to me, which means they're amusing to everyone else.

This little foray into internet culture comes from a bit of research into Net Neutrality.  Prompted by this article in the National Journal.  Apparently Congress is aiming to take away the FCC's ability to keep ISPs from having even MORE control over a commodity they're already ripping everyone off for.  It's funny because, kind of like the media reporting on memes, they develop none of the content that people want to access, yet they make money off people accessing it.

I'm not going to get long-winded about this, because it's unnecesary.  Congress has tried this before.  The RIAA has tried this before.  Microsoft has tried this before.  No matter what they try and do, the elements these people are trying to suppress are a lot smarter and a lot more numerous than them. 

Whether or not Net Neutrality gets preserved, it will be preserved.  If you have any doubts about that, I'd recommend you ask Apple how many iPhones have been jailbroken.  Or Microsoft how many illegal copies of Windows are out there.

In the words of Al Gore:

You're right. It's not funny.

April, 2006.  Stephen Colbert, a comedian and, at that point, recent host of a show bearing his name, appeared in front of a rabid flock of media personalities to poke fun at the loveable little scamp, His Excellency, George W. Bush.  He was invited by Mark Smith, president of the White House Press Corps Association.

Mr. Smith apparently admitted later that he hadn't actually seen much of Colbert's stuff.  I count this as a good thing.  If he had, he probably wouldn't have invited Colbert in the first place.

The fact is, the WHCA brought him in like they've always brought in comedians, to poke fun at the President and maybe, just a little, some of his policies.  Heck, even presidents join in on the fun, managing extraordinary feats of mocking themselves without actually making themselves look bad at all.  This year, Obama managed to sidestep every major issue and instead poke fun at the Birther Controversy.  Oh, Obama, you rascal.  It's a good thing you didn't mention BP! That wouldn't have been as slick, ha ha ha.

But this time, instead of standing up there and joshing around with one of the worst presidents in recent history, Colbert decided the whole thing was a little farcical, even for him.

To the media:
"Over the last five years, you people were so good—over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out..."

To Dubya:
"But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias."

Of course, like with all things that are new, exciting and pertinent, the media filtered it out.  An article on WaPo covers it perfectly.  A number of news outlets didn't even mention it.  The ones that did explained that it was terrible and out-of-line, which is another way of saying "we're just upset that we didn't do it first."

And if there's one thing we can count on the government for, it's a complete inability to learn from their mistakes.

Colbert goes to Washington

I should explain.  Having the first post in my blog be dedicated to a pretty overrated character who is just as much in the pocket of capitalists as the Congress he was addressing is not what I intended.  But the fact is, both he and Stewart represent something that the media could be if they weren't so busy nestling their cameras between Katy Perry's breasts.

But instead, they reply to Colbert like this:
(Politico reports)

"REALLY not sure this is funny," - Rick Klien, ABC News


"Colbert is making a mockery of this hearing," - David Corn, Mother Jones


"Colbert's testimony made a mockery of Congress," - Aaron Blake, WaPo

You know what, Mr. Klien? You're right.  It ISN'T funny.  It isn't funny that a COMEDIAN, a man trained in laughter and performance, can show you all up at your job.  He can stand in front of Congress and tell them their policies are backward, that they don't make sense, and recommend a change.  He can do what David Frost did in his interview with Nixon, what Upton Sinclair did with his report on the meat-packing industry, what regular people in Iran did on twitter and blogs during the revolution: Report.

It's not funny.  Colbert took the committee to task and, in so doing, took the media world to task as well.  This is why your newspapers don't sell, your websites are crashing and your medium is losing out to the people with their blogs and their tweets.  Because if you don't have the balls to stand up and say what needs to be said, someone else will.

Oh, and welcome to my blog.