Disney Not Family Friendly

Posted on December 20, 2016. Filed under: Journalism, Religion | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

The source for this article is Newsmax.com, a blog that keeps sending me links that I did not request.  The author of the referenced article (Disney is no longer family friendly) is Robert E. Richey of the Catholic organization America Needs Fatima, which is a sponsor of Newsmax.  The blog’s disclaimer notes that it does not necessarily endorse their advertisers’ messages.

Your words for the day:

  • The Real O’Neals = a television series aired by ABC
  • newsmax.com = a news blog that has little to say but directs readers to other sources

I learned some 20 or more years ago that Disney studios had expanded into more non-child based themes; I always checked the rating to see if I would be interested in viewing a new offering.  Apparently, Bobby E. is either under 20 years old and has just graduated from restricted viewing imposed by Parental Controls or he missed the train out of Never Land.

Said little Bobby in his articleRemember when “Disney” meant “safe” — if Disney made a film, it would be o.k. for your kids or grandkids to watch?  The Real O’Neals ends all that!  Alarming!  And it is up to you and me to protest this brutal attack on our Catholic Faith.

Let’s clarify that overstatement from my perspective:

  • For me, the reader, this is not a brutal attack on OUR Catholic faith.
  • I am not Catholic, and, it is NOT up to me to protest this “alarming” and “brutal attack” on the Catholic Faith.
  • In fact, the religious denomination I was raised in has a very long history of bad-mouthing Catholicism.

But, this little article of mine is not a criticism of Catholicism, rather of the manner in which Mr. Richey has presented his exception to what he considers the prostitution of a movie maker who once specialized in G-rated productions.  Rather, it is my old bug-a-boo — journalism — that has spurred this response.

A summary of Mr. Richey’s plaint about “The Real O’Neals,” a Disney sitcom:

  • Watching pornography on a laptop is made to appear normal for Catholic brothers in the series.
  • The Catholic mother encourages her 16-year-old Catholic son with gender conflicts to get physical with a girl (if non-Catholics don’t understand that admonition, it means the Catholic son with gender conflicts should go out and get laid like a NORMAL 16-year-old Catholic son without gender conflicts).
  • The Catholic daughter tries to prove in her science-class project that there is no god, misses Mass, and shows disrespect for a pastor who is presented as inept.
  • There are lots of sexual innuendo and mockery of Catholicism.
  • (Censored stuff, here)  “I just can’t bear to print up the really bad stuff on the show.”
  • While decent Catholics strive every day to make sense of the crazy world we live in, Disney/ABC is mocking the Faith we hold dear.
  • It is not right, and we need to tell them so!
  • Someone struggling against pornography, same-sex attraction, divorce or doubting their faith could possibly watch this program — which Disney/ABC promotes as “just your typical, all-American, Catholic, divorcing, disgraced, law-breaking, gay family — and their struggle would be more difficult.  They would feel more alone than ever, perhaps fall into despair, and just follow the culture like those around them.

C’mon, man!  No one is going to watch that show seeking spiritual guidance; they are going to watch it for the laughs.

Lighten up, Richey.  That show’s promo (as quoted by you) is just hyperbole to heighten the sarcasm inherent in the production.  But, like many converts to anything, the need to chew on every disagreeable tidbit tossed before them is overpowering.  You, too, feel the need to overact to demonstrate your degree of commitment to your stated tenet…   somewhat like a child banging on pots with a spoon to attract attention.

Open your eyes, Richey.  It is a parody of ALL Christian teachings, not just your favored brand, Catholicism.

Richey claims that Disney implies “nasty” Catholics.  Would little Richey have just sat back and chuckled had the show portrayed “nasty” Episcopalians?  Zealots of a cause are not light-hearted — they just can’t take a joke.

I am also curious, Mr. Richey:

  • Did you write a scathing review of those prime time cartoon shows, The Simpsons and that ilk, as destroying the unity of families by disrespectful children and dysfunctional parents?
  • How about all those murder and dismemberment series that ooze like slime off the flat screen?
  • ??You do NOT have a complete library of interactive gaming videos depicting crime and murder as just normal aspects of human culture, do you?

I guess, since none of that stuff uses the word “Catholic” in them, they are perfectly safe as instructional tools for Catholic children “trying to make sense of this crazy world.”

Little Bobby the Journalist could have expanded both his heart and his message — and, thereby, his audience — by saying, “All Christians should be offended by this, and not just Catholics.”  Righteous Richey only had room in his heart for his beliefs, what with all the rest of humankind being outside his sphere of consideration.  I guess anyone choosing, for whatever reason, to be non-Catholic can just go to hell…   after they help him protest Disney Studios and ABC.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Yellow Journalism

Posted on May 6, 2012. Filed under: Journalism, language, Piss Ants | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Yellow journalismSensational news-reporting.  A style of journalism that makes unscrupulous use of scandalous, lurid or sensational stories to attract readers.  Media using this style, collectively, are referred to as Yellow Press

Well, the definition speaks for itself.  Out of today’s enormous field of journalistic enterprises, those dealing in “sensation” stand out like a tart at a nuns’ convention.  They are too easy to spot, but, then, it’s not like they’re really trying to hide, since being noticed is the goal.  Today we call them tabloids… celebrity updates… the evening news…

Not just fringe media.  Even the big boys of broadcast lean to the lurid, pretend “news.”  Most recently, down in a big city on the Gulf Coast, there was this hit-and-run thing;  actually, it was an alleged sideswipe of a parked car (not a collision, not a fender bender, not an injury) at low speed in a parking zone as one driver, allegedly, tried to leave a bar.  How many hundreds of those happen every month without making the local evening news? 

But the owner of the scraped car said he saw who did it, and, it was mmffmnfm lxrrmfs, a well-known conservative talk show host.  Hot dog!  NOW, we got some news.

After the story broke, by  golly, we got some bona fide video that (allegedly) places our subject at an establishment in the area.  Look, there he is,  alone, carrying a bottle (beer?) and making his way toward the exit.  That’s all that’s in the video.  Can’t tell which, or what kind of, establishment.  So, all we got so far is a scraped car and a witness who says he saw who did it, video footage apparently showing the named suspect leaving someplace (his only companion a… beer?… bottle) with the time-stamp just before the alleged time of the alleged damage.  Those are the facts, ma’am.

BUT WAIT!  THERE’S MORE!  The security footage, according to the voice-over, is said to be from a nearby bar.  Not impressed?  Get this:  it is a bar frequented by GAY persons.  Thus, the moniker “gay bar.”  Every time we (remember?… we…   the stupid masses?) were updated on the “ongoing investigation,”  we also got to hear the term GAY BAR vigorously delivered at least 5 times per update in association with the name of this alleged heinous perpetrator.  Never did  find out if the subject was:  gay, married, a father, a Catholic, agnostic, football fan, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, evolutionist, a brother, an Elk, marathon runner, vegetarian, or even if he was hungry a lot.  Any and all of those  are as relevant to the alleged property damage as the fact that there was a gay bar nearby.  Not relevant, but, by golly, loudly proclaiming GAY BAR just had to keep audiences glued to the television.  It must have been the first high for those ALLEGED reporters since they got to say “penis” over and over some years ago on the morning, afternoon , and evening news hours.

Remember cars rigged by a documentary producer to explode when impacted by another vehicle to “prove” car manufacturer negligence?  How about the super market chain selling out-of-date meats, only, it was the “reporter” who switched labels on the packaging?  [Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”   -Sir Walter Scot]

Next:  Does the yellow ever go away?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...