[Cavtanker]

Originally Posted by Tyler109

Well said my smelly striped friend. Not to mention I think the press needs to lay off the doom and gloom side of the world and maybe talk about the positive things in our world for once!

But will that make money for the news corporations? Remember, if it bleeds, it leads.

[chiefs70]

It all rests at the feet of the parents in most respects. Too many parents these days want to be friends with their kids and thus coddle them and support their every stupid move. My dad and I went toe to toe on more than one occassion - never physical but definitely heated - but I ALWAYS respected him as my father not my friend. Once I left my folks' and got a taste of the real world it all made sense. My dad and I are great friends now because he held my ass to the fire and didn't let up until he felt I had learned how to fend for myself. To me, that is the greatest love of a parent - not smoothing over junior's mistakes.

If you look at most of these celebrities with issues they became famous and pampered at a rather young age and the parents failed to do their jobs because they didn't want to lose the money and notoriety that came with being the parent of a talented person. You can call it love but it is cruel in the long-term because every parent knows you can't protect them forever and if you fail to prepare them when you have the chance the wolves will come calling. I feel badly for Britney in this sense but I know a lot of folks who had it a lot rougher growing up and they were able to learn the lesson a lot more quickly.

Shawn - you don't need me to tell you but as some of the others said you are doing EXACTLY what your son needs. Our boys are close to the the same age and the lessons we teach them now keeping them close but exposing them to world at large will serve them well. I constantly expose my boys to our family members and friends who are service personnel because whatever their faults - which we all have - they have the common trait of willingness to serve.

Britney, Lindsey Lohan (settle down MustangDriver, lol) and Paris Hilton don't mean anything if we don't acknowledge their antics.

[skydriver]

Originally Posted by wmosner

Probably showing my curmudgeonly attitude but I really don't give a rat's a-- about any of these so called celebrities and am starting to feel the same way about professional athletes. It's like the United States has invented it's very own brand of inbred royalty.

I couldn't have said it any better.

[Old Crow]

Well said, Skunky. Just goes to show how educational a rant can be.

I wouldn't fret too much, however. This type of "news" has always been around. Think Randolph Hearst's yellow journalism from the 19th century. All that changes is the mode of delivery.

Of course, that's why we parents have our real job: educate your kids. I would say Shawn is a pretty fine example of this.

[PickMattock]

A friend once gave me an old newspaper that was printed during WWII. There was a big headline and map detailing Soviet advances against the Nazis, but the very next bolded headline was about Charlie Chaplin being seen with an underage girl. I remember thinking a similar thing. Here I am looking through a window in on the greatest conflict this world has ever known, and there’s room on the front page for manufactured outrage over Mr. Chaplin’s young lady friends. The world is blowing itself to hell, but forget about that and look at what the police had to say about Charlie! Shame on him! But now we get it on multiple channels 24 hours a day.

[Armour Addict]

Originally Posted by TopHat

I can clearly see the influence of jim in your statement about the schoolgirl outfit, but what does Coke have to do with it....?

Uhm, we tend to drink Jim Beam with Coke and Ice over here.

[FormerViperDriver]

Gentlemen, you all need to learn about the field of Evolutionary Psychology in order to start understanding this issue (Creationists, stop reading here).

In the grand scheme of evolution, our biological brain, and therefore the fundamental basis for our psychological make-up, is still adapted to life in relatively small hunter-gather tribes from a few tens of thousands years ago, struggling for daily survival (this is called the EEA, or Environment of Evolutionary Adaptation). We are not similarly adapted to our current environment culture and society of abundance (in the West anyway), instant communications, and information overflow.

In the EEA, knowledge about specific persons in your inside group (the tribe) is very useful. Knowing who is sick, who's dating whom, who is cooperative, and who is untrustworthy (as examples) can be critical to both personal reproductive chances, and the survival of the group (the two are related).

Now is you transpose this psychology into today's world, it becomes clear why many people (some more than others) will show interest in people whom they feel are part of the "tribe" (since they know their names, faces, and much more, through the ubiquitous media - even though they have never met them personally). It's just the way our psychology has been selected by the process of Evolution, that is, random genetic mutation followed by natural selection, a process that happens to be very slow compared to that of cultural evolution.

An example of this is people being far more scared (instinctively) of snakes and spiders than of automobiles, even though the latter are far more deadly in modern life. But spiders and snakes (and tigers, etc...) where the threat 30,000 years ago. Our brains are set up to deal with them, not inventions only a century old or so.

So yeah, Skunky, worrying about Britney Spears makes no sense to the person who thinks about the world in relatively rational terms, but since most people tend to still react emotionally to their environment (think Dr. McCoy versus Spock. This is a natural tendency for all humans, though quite unfortunate in today's world), and the media cater first and foremost to those emotions (because it sells), you have the observed result.

In other words: what's "wrong with us" is that there is a disconnect between our evolved psychological make-up and the modern environment. The answer is more Reason (properly understood, but that's another subject) and less Emotion (more Spock, less McCoy). The human race is not there yet.

Makes sense?

FVD

[Splashone]

I suspect it's just the usual narcissistic behavior of those that think they can get their own way all the time because they are rich. And when they don't get what they want they act out like the immature and selfish people they are. Our increasing interest in pop culture demands more information concerning the antics of such people and the media are happy to provide this low cost crap, much the same as reality television etc.

[jim]

FVD you certainly hit the nail on the head.
Examples abound all over the world, civilization is a very thin veneer indeed, once the rule of law (good or bad) is gone look at what happens.
A few examples would be Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq,and now Kenya.
It would seem that tribalism is alive and well and lurks just under the surface of humanity.

As I look at the news every day I ponder as to whatever happened to the idea of working for the common good.

[Cavtanker]

Originally Posted by jim

As I look at the news every day I ponder as to whatever happened to the idea of working for the common good.

Is there enough profit in that field, Jim?