I think that the 1980s and into the early 1990s television and radio were pushing the envelope. Both were very entertaining and incredibly provocative. You always hear about some movie, television show or radio show that could not be produced, shown or heard today, since everyone is so sensitive, apparently. I think back then there were more “shock jocks” and late-night shows on regular cable that were very risqué. It was all entertainment, meant to entertain. They never attempted to appeal to everyone, they only exploited their own strengths. The ratings game back then was incredibly volatile, in order to stay on top, you had to do your best work everyday. There was no YouTube or other media library that anyone could just access. So, in order to make a name for yourself, you had to be creative.

The problem with entertainment today, is that they only play to their audience. They no longer attempt to reach the audience that doesn’t particularly care for their “act”. Whether its opinion or talk shows, the audience always claps, on both sides. I think an entertaining and informative show would be for a performer to preform infront of an audience that despises their act. It seems that more and more the concept of you are either with us or against us has taken hold and that hold can seem very comforting. That is until you begin to realize that you are being included or involved in a lot of things that you may not necessarily agree with or like. But you chose a side and now you have to live with it, right?

Maybe and maybe not, I think it all depends on how fed up you are. The problem with having any panel be true blue or true red is that there is no controversy and there is no real dialogue, it’s just agree with this or that and the other side is crazy. The audience claps at appropriate intervals, it almost seems orchestrated (it probably is). But what if instead of the right going right and the left going left, what if they intersected and crossed paths to be an audience member in rival territory?

I think that would be very interesting and I believe it would bring more understanding and respect from all sides. Just hearing someone out, you do not have to agree, but taking the time to listen to the other side, you may find that perhaps mutual interests are shared between us. Again, maybe and maybe not, but who knows. If we are not willing to hear them out, then why should they hear us out?


7 thoughts on “Controversy

    1. Yeah, I think it is highly undervalued and often ignored. Too many expect success with no regard for risk. Failure is the trail to happiness, without failure, there is no appreciation for exceptionalism.

  1. I’m a huge fan of long-form unedited podcasts/videos. Joe Rogan, for example, has 2-3 hour podcast episodes with 0 audience.

    I love the 0 audience aspect as it allows both parties to converse and argue without the influence of a large crowd ready to throw stones for one side or the other. Ideas can be further elaborated upon and explanations can be made clear.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      Definitely, talk it out regardless of stance, we all have our views, why do we need to agree on anything?

Leave a Reply to bottomlesscoffee007 Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.