Posted on 08/26/2002 8:42:45 AM PDT by robowombat
by L. Brent Bozell III
TEEN CHOICE AWARD LESSONS?
Another summer of freedom for teenagers is again tumbling to a close. After months of being late to bed and later to rise, children are agonizing over another year of organized learning about to begin. So the commissars of teen culture have thrown one last TV party -- the "Teen Choice Awards," voted on by the readers of Seventeen magazine and broadcast on that antonym of wholesomeness, Fox.
If you're a boy or girl of 12, and you're about to take a plunge into the world of teenagerdom, what would television teach you about this miraculous time?
1. Dress light. No doubt in keeping with the awards' beach theme -- after all, the award isn't a trophy, it's a surfboard -- the teen girls in the audience must have been required to wear bikini tops, halter tops, tube tops -- whatever showed a lot of young flesh. Seventeen magazine is supposed to help teen girls negotiate those difficult developing years, but this TV showcase seemed less about female socialization and more about guaranteeing teenage boys wouldn't turn the channel over to preseason football. Even the female presenters and award winners seemed required to bare arms and midriffs. "Choice female athlete" and Olympic figure skater Michelle Kwan came in a glittery bikini top and expressed how nice it was to get out of the ice rink and get skimpy for the cameras.
2. Obsess about sex. The "choice summer song" award went to the uncommonly melodic rapper Nelly for his song "Hot in Herre" [sic], in which he implores his woman "It's getting hot in here, so take off all your clothes," and the woman quickly echoes "I'm going to take my clothes off." Now there's a summer anthem for all the kids to sing.
If that tribute to nudity wasn't enough, former Fox star Jennifer Love Hewitt performed her new single, "Barenaked" -- what Ms. Hewitt would want us to think is a deep meditation on emotional nakedness, feeling vulnerable in a crazy world, and blah, blah, blah. In reality, it's a cheesy gimmick to get the actress into the top-40 countdown.
The new soul star Tweet was also in the house, but she didn't complete the titillating trilogy with her hit single, "Oops (Oh My)," in which the self-described "Southern hummingbird" keeps mysteriously, oops, dropping her shirt and pants on the floor around her man of the moment.
At least the program didn't repeat last year's "highlight," four drag queens impersonating the musical foursome who revived the call-girl hit "Lady Marmalade."
3. Do things because your parents won't like it. It's sad, but not surprising, that when it came to "Choice Movie Comedy," the light, classy Disney film "The Princess Diaries" (rated G), would get crushed by "American Pie 2" (rated R). Seventeen and Fox couldn't just applaud a film that Hollywood has rated as inappropriate for the very children watching these awards. They also gave it an award under the equally inappropriate category of "Choice Movie Your Parents Didn't Want You to See." If the film inspires teenagers into the joys of reckless sexual abandon, perhaps next year, Seventeen will go a step further and create a category for "Choice Birth Control Clinic Your Parents Didn't Want You to Attend Without Their Consent."
4. Scream, don't listen, while others are talking. This isn't as weighty a lesson, but if these awards were about artistic merit instead of just a popularity contest, you'd think the producers at Fox would encourage the teen-crammed audience to stop screaming at the top of their lungs throughout the acceptance speeches. OK, so no one's going to deliver a Gettysburg Address, but one ought to be interested in what these role models have to say. For example, Reese Witherspoon was humble, even embarrassed to win the "Extraordinary Achievement Award" at the tender age of 26. Actor Adam Sandler used his acceptance speech to make nocturnal-emission jokes.
It would be unfair to suggest that all of the award winners typified a teenage wasteland of cultural rot. Singer-actress Mandy Moore won an award for the film "A Walk to Remember," a two-hanky weeper about an upright preacher's daughter who dies young. WB's family-friendly "7th Heaven" won for best drama, and Fox's relatively clean "Bernie Mac Show" won for breakout comedy. Sarah Michelle Gellar won for her phoned-in performance in "Scooby-Doo." (See earlier sentence on popularity contest over artistic merit.)
But these were the exceptions. The special merited airing, not as entertainment for children, but as a documentary for their parents to explain where, and how, their children are learning all those awful messages.
L. Brent Bozell III is the founder and president of the Parents Television Council. To find out more about Brent Bozell III, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2002 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC. Originally Published on Thursday August 22, 2002
Which I wish he would stick to. When he goes off on his morality tangents he sounds like the caricature tight-ass the left always makes conservatives out to be.
Somehow you've assumed that the stuff Bozell writes about here is not also part of liberal bias. You probably ought to think about that a little more carefully.
You know if it really is pretty hot in a place, this isn't such an unreasonable suggestion . . .
r9etb wrote -
Somehow you've assumed that the stuff Bozell writes about here is not also part of liberal bias. You probably ought to think about that a little more carefully.
According to the expert analysis provided by you two folks, I am apparently an unthinking, spineless, "Looneytarian". Hmmmm, that's pretty strong stuff. Maybe I should look at what I said to understand where you would get that-
Which I wish he would stick to. When he goes off on his morality tangents he sounds like the caricature tight-ass the left always makes conservatives out to be.
Gosh, it looks like I'm saying that Bozell should stick to what he knows, because this particular topic is not his strong suit. Perhaps some examples might be instructive here. If Dan Patrick (ESPN) wrote an article about politics, I wouldn't expect that to be particularly interesting or insightful. If Brit Hume wrote an article about football, I wouldn't expect anything of interest to be in that tome either. Those articles might not be factually wrong, but since they were stepping out of their respective elements, I would expect the efforts to be amateurish and clunky.
When Bozell covers bias in the media, he does it very, very well. Had he covered the show in question from the perspective of liberal bias, it probably would have been more readable. Unfortunately, he covers it from a morality standpoint, and comes off sounding like a Bible-thumping preacher. Actually, a Bible-thumping preacher probably would have been an easier read. This is not the first time he's fallen into this trap, and he comes off the same way every time. Bozell has credibility as an observer/commentator on the excesses of the left in news reporting. He lacks credibility as a moral barometer, and whether you like it or not, he does sound like a caricature.
This only gives our enemies ammunition and a club to beat us over the head with. You can probably already here them squawking about Brent Bozell getting all worked up about some insignificant TV show. Since I realize neither one of you will agree with me, perhaps you could at least point out to me where I said he was wrong. At least then you could justify either of your characterizations of me.
I simply can't wait to hear them.
Despite your kneejerk accusation to the contrary, I didn't "characterize" you as anything. I simply pointed out your underlying assumption, and suggested that you might look more deeply into that assumption to see whether or not it's a correct one.
The sort of stuff Bozell writes about does indeed seem to be a staple of what passes for entertainment in the very mainstream media that is otherwise known for its liberal bias. And the message being put forth here is certainly consistent with the "60s liberal" mindset of "if it feels good, do it." I'd say that Bozell is well within his area of expertise here.
OTOH, I note that by telling Bozell to stick to what he knows, you have put yourself forward as some sort of oracle on the subject of tight-assedness. Perhaps you might consider following the advice you so freely gave to Mr. Bozell....
Isn't it possible that the light, classy Disney film "The Princess Diaries" got crushed because every critic in the country warned people what a piece of crap it was?
How silly of me. When you wrote -
"You probably ought to think about that a little more carefully.", my assumption that you were calling into question my ability to read, comprehend, discern fact and make a logical conclusion based on my opinion should have been the last thing that popped into my head. And now that you have followed it up with -
"OTOH, I note that by telling Bozell to stick to what he knows, you have put yourself forward as some sort of oracle on the subject of tight-assedness. Perhaps you might consider following the advice you so freely gave to Mr. Bozell....", how should I take that? If stating our opinions on this forum is akin to "setting ourselves up as oracles", I can't see that as fertile ground for debate. Unless of course, your idea of a debate is a barb-slinging contest.
In which case, I'll load up and get ready. In the meantime, you still haven't managed to point out where I said Mr. Bozell was wrong in his analysis. Was that too hard?
LOL!
(snip) And even I can see that what he says is factually correct. When you insinuate that the things he says are not true you are denying the reality that is social rot and decay (end snip)
I didn't think it was possible to miss a point by as far as you have missed mine. Please show me where I said Bozell was wrong.
I'll save you the trouble. You can't. You can not point out one sentence where I said Bozell was wrong, and the reason is because he's not wrong. He is 100% correct.
I said the topic, and the perspective he covered it from was not was he does best. Do yourself a favor, a re-read the thread. As a favor to you, I've ignored most of your rant.
I was merely trying to say that while Bozell may be technically correct, he's not the right guy for this particular topic. When he delivers the "liberal bias in the news" message, he's fine.
When he delivers the "morality" message, he sounds like a caricature. Saying that doesn't mean the morality message is not worth delivering or doesn't need to be delivered, it just means I don't think he's the right messenger.
Does that clear it up?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.