September 24
2009
Senator Daniel Perrin has a website.
He's also
on Twitter and talking about investigating Rossum.
Sunfire
| Dollhouse
| 13:59 CET
|
29 comments total
| tags: dollhouse
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to
log in to be able to post comments.
About
membership.
« Older
James Marsters to appear at Boston...
|
Joss Whedon: His Best TV Episodes ...
Newer »
© 2002 - 2017 - WHEDONesque.com
(
e-mail)
Individual posts are copyright their respective authors
This is a non-profit, unofficial website, not affiliated with Mutant Enemy, Inc., 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers or UPN.
... What?
Craig Oxbrow | September 24, 14:56 CET
[ edited by Romo Lampkin on 2009-11-13 23:10 ]
Romo Lampkin | September 24, 14:56 CET
Uh, it is if that's what they want their job to be.
That said, I actually don't particularly disagree on the specific case here, since heading into the show we don't even really know one way or the other what the writers have in store for Perrin's political positions (if anything). All we know heading into the show is he wants to investigate Rossum.
@theonetruebix | September 24, 15:01 CET
wiesengrund | September 24, 15:02 CET
Romo Lampkin | September 24, 15:03 CET
@theonetruebix | September 24, 15:06 CET
Pointy | September 24, 15:12 CET
Sunfire | September 24, 15:13 CET
Look, Joss can write anything he wants. My argument is (and I think Joss has even said this though his exact quote eludes me) it's a fine line between insightful commentary and propaganda. Inclusion of the health care briefing on the website felt like it crossed a line (in a couple of unhelpful ways) so I spoke up (as once instructed by the Master to do so).
[ edited by Romo Lampkin on 2009-09-25 00:15 ]
[ edited by Romo Lampkin on 2009-09-25 00:17 ]
Romo Lampkin | September 24, 15:13 CET
gossi | September 24, 15:21 CET
Of course, surveys show that show's audience is more informed about current events than the average person. If that's Pavlovian, go Pavlov go.
@theonetruebix | September 24, 15:31 CET
wiesengrund | September 24, 15:35 CET
@B!x: OK, if you prefer then, the Pavlovian response of Dittoheads to Rush Limbaugh's daily drivel, the Pavlovian response of Friends of the Factor's to O'Reilly's latest outburst, the Pavlovian response of the Glenn Beck viewers to whatever he's crying over, the Pavlovian response of Keith Olbermann's acolytes to his latest Special Message of Self-Importance, the Pavlovian response of Rachel Maddow's...actually Rachel's just adorable so I'll leave it there. I picked the Daily Show as an example, but you can find lots of others out there were "news" and "politics" mix.
EDIT: and my point about the Daily Show isn't that its audience isn't informed; it's just that where once the Daily Show felt like informed, biting satire, now it feels like, well, partisan masturbation. Still, humorous, but way too self-congratulatory and unwilling to satirize the people it helped elect. That's sort of what i was trying to get at in terms of the difference between commentary/propaganda.
But I've got no brook with Daily Show viewers per se.
[ edited by Romo Lampkin on 2009-09-25 00:42 ]
[ edited by Romo Lampkin on 2009-09-25 00:43 ]
Romo Lampkin | September 24, 15:37 CET
impalergeneral | September 24, 15:51 CET
1. He's for corporate oversight, yet somehow was able to raise enough funds for a campain without corporate interests.
2. He's against progressive science, and found out about Rossum while doing work fighting stem cell research. He's not sure what they do, but he's convinced they're up to no good.
3. He's for health care reform, and sites Rossum as one of the the places where reform is needed. A corporation like Rossum would be getting millions in government grants and his charts included in his press release talked about the great increase in government spending on health care.
4. He's against animal cruelty, and has gotten wind of the animal treatments going on in Rossum facilities.
Of the four, number three is the most believable and topical. But I'm sure you're right, Joss just wants to promote his agenda. Because TV shows are produced by one person, all by themselves, and are reflective of only that persons mind. No one else has had any input as to the direction of Dollhouse.
rocknjosie | September 24, 16:00 CET
Pointy | September 24, 16:05 CET
ETA: Especially since we all know that elected politicians are - as a rule - honest, reliable, and well-informed.
[ edited by brinderwalt on 2009-09-25 01:15 ]
brinderwalt | September 24, 16:11 CET
@theonetruebix | September 24, 16:13 CET
(The HTML reads the Senate image from http://katysconservativecorner.typepad.com/.)
Andrea 2s1 | September 24, 16:15 CET
Uh-oh..........
Well, that's one theory
impalergeneral | September 24, 16:33 CET
Your list is missing another possible factor - that maybe he is against the idea of prostitution.
I think it would be cool if Joss makes him a kind of "family values" politician and a healthcare reformer - that would be kinda brilliant. It would blur the lines between the two parties quite nicely.
Also...Alexis!!!!!
[ edited by ShanshuBugaboo on 2009-09-25 01:49 ]
ShanshuBugaboo | September 24, 16:46 CET
Sunfire | September 24, 17:43 CET
VeryVeryCrowded | September 24, 18:12 CET
baxter | September 24, 18:19 CET
Simon | September 24, 22:02 CET
twinkle | September 25, 01:05 CET
Please elaborate.
wiesengrund | September 25, 01:18 CET
;).
Simon | September 25, 01:32 CET
By representing the worst aspects of both parties, such a character would merely remove the already blurred line between the extremist left and extremist right.
mangydog | September 25, 10:33 CET