By Dustin Rowles | Trade News | October 2, 2013 | Comments (View)
Xenophobic Fox Cast David Tennant in American Remake of 'Broadchurch' |
Why So Furious? What We Learned From Last Night's 'Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.'
I still can't believe that it's legal to publish pictures of celeb kids without blurring their faces. This is just sick
In LA it will be illegal to do so. Mostly to the hard work of Seraphina Affleck's (the girl mentioned in US Weekly's tweet) mom and Halle Berry. They both testified to get the bill passed.
Ha! This, combined with his tweet that said "If you live next to a member of Congress, please egg their house. If you live next to Nielsen family, tell em to watch Parenthood" makes me like this guy so much.
Here's my problem with that tweet. Why is it that "all members of Congress are to be blamed". How about learning a bit more about the issue and only egging the houses of the ones who are laying waste to the idea of functional government?
I think you might be missing the point of the internet.
Which is to say: I don't disagree with what you're saying, but the tweet was funny, and timely, and I like this guy, so let's just leave it at that rather than unnecessarily expend a ton of energy discussing an opinion of a celebrity and how it could've been better formulated.
Nah, much more fun. And unforuntately I think the whole "point of the internet" is the problem. There are several good books discussing our modern "post fact" society, but one overarching concepts is that there are two sides to each issue, and both sides are automatically equal. The whole "you decide" meme is predicated on both points of view having equal validity, even when one side is fact-free, or worse, intentionally lying.
Imagine if Dax had written "If you live next to a Republican Member of Congress, please egg their house". There would have been a flurry of responses on how "both sides are to blame". This post-fact world isn't a good thing, and his tweet, as clever as it is, worms the falsehood deeper into our conscious.
There's an interesting piece called "the one way hash problem" written by a guy out of CATO about how hard it is to correct factual inaccuracies. It's worth a read.
No, you're absolutely right - had it been directed at one side or the other, it would've lost some of the humor.
I will look for that, because it sounds interesting!
Author is Julian Sanchez (I should note that I often disagree with him, but he's quite smart and our disagreements usually come from different assumptions on outcomes).
Here's a bit from the comments that I really think points out the problem we find ourselves in lately:
Indeed, in a world where there is too much information and not enough time, even highly educated people can be convinced by “one-way hash arguments” if the material is specialized enough. Hence, we look to referents to guide us–the affiliations of the author, the author’s past history and implied motivations, the context within which the debate takes place. These are usually more easily understood. Whether or not they in fact bear on the arguments is irrelevant, for we come to assume that *everyone* deals in one-way hash arguments.
In essence, then, educated people (like myself) become highly tuned to sussing out ulterior motives, rather than evaluating arguments on their merits. We become expert interpreters of references, rather than evaluators of fact and logic.
Julian Sanchez's response:
That’s actually a great follow-up point: The more complexity renders us unable to directly evaluate arguments, the more we let those skills atrophy and instead develop our sensitivity to the credibility of the arguer. But that shift in emphasis itself makes us still more dependent on expertise… nasty little feedback loop.
Some guys just deserve to sleep with Kristen Bell.
I just wish I was one of them. :P She's even from my state dang it.
For the longest time I didn't get what Kristen Bell saw in Dax Sheppard. I mean, we're talking about a guy who was in Punk'd and was the antagonist in a Dane Cook/Jessica Simpson movie (EW!!), and he's dating Veronica frakkin' Mars. But then I started watching Parenthood and he's actually pretty good in it, and then there was the whole sloth video thing, and I realized that I'd judged him too harshly, too soon. This is definitely a case where I'm glad I was wrong. :)
ETA: I also kinda love that he used punctuation properly...
Whoa until now I've thought Dax Sheppard and Dane Cook were the same person! For a while I've been very confused about Pajiba's love for the guy because I remember serious vitriol toward him (who I now realise was Dane Cook) a couple of years ago. Hmm, maybe I will give Parenthood a go now that I know it is a different (non-execrable) guy.
You really should, Soraya. Just make sure you have your kleenex handy. :) Seriously. It breaks me at least once an episode.
He's also fairly adorable in Idiocracy.
Such are the joys of Planet Parent. A person's world perspective has a tendency to change quite a bit!Lincoln didn't just win a war.
Whether intentional/unintentional, I guffawed because Dax/Kristen Bell's daughter is named Lincoln.
But now I feel like I shouldn't know their kid's name?
1. Dax has pretty much won at life for a while now, Punk'd not withstanding. 2. My daughter will not be wearing a shirt upon which my visage rests until she's of dating age. At which point I'll have a mug shot taken and printed on a shirt, with a 'My Dad' title above said photo.
Yeah. Father of the year award. Based on descriptions of yourself, I wouldn't want to fuck with you personally either.
Hence, the safety of the internet.
I'm not that bad. But I do intend to screw with my daughter's potential mates as much as allowed by law. Especially if she ends up straight. I know too well what evil little fuckers teenage boys are.
Eeeh, watch out there peepaw. This could also mean that the person actually ending up with your daughter was someone able to outplay you...
And isn't that a scary thought? (sorry, I just love messing with your head!)
Ah, but if so, I know 2 things: 1. At least the little bastard will be clever. I can admire that. 2. I'll be doing everything I can to make sure she's got enough self-respect to not get rolled over by some smooth-talker. She's a sharp cookie; I'll trust her. As much as any teenager is trustworthy.
Ugh. I shouldn't have mentioned the possibility of my daughter dating. I've got at least a decade before I have to worry about that.
You do know that they've started dating now by the age of eleven, right? So imagine in less than a decade what the appropriate age would be...
Shut yer cakehole.
Now I can enjoy my cake. How was your bday btw? Hope the Mrs gave you the slapping you were wishing for.
Also the guys girlfriend is Veronica Mars so he just plain wins at life
I understand the point you are trying to make and respect it Dustin. I EVEN VERY MUCH AGREE WITH IT.
However, you need to prove to me that neither of Seraphina Affleck's parents had actually themselves CALLED upon the paps and allowed them to take pictures.
Oh, and why does anyone have to PROVE anything to you? (I'm using you here in the royal sense, I know you stand corrected later on on this thread). You have no legal standing to "demand" proof - you just choose to believe that 'the parents are calling so it's ok for me to leer and gawk at a young child'.
The fact is a minor under the age of 13 is being photographed. Granted, her parents are with her and they have what is termed "no expectation of privacy", but from a public decency aspect, I think its' wrong to profit off the image of a minor without direct compensation and some kind of legally binding agreement with the parent - think if your kid is in a movie or has pics taken for the local photography shop.
In an ideal world, even if the parents DID call the paps, pictures of the children would not be shown simply because they are in bad taste.
Hmmm, so the downvotes are people who think it's ok to leer and gawk at young children?
This should dissuade you of any such notion:
That doesn't prove that they don't call the paps when they go out with their children. There is a difference between the paps that the celebs call when they're out who just take pictures at a distance and are respectable and the ones that stalk and stay disgusting things in order to get a reaction.
I then stand corrected. Thank you!
Holy Poop, 2 people on the Internet admitting they were wrong in 2 weeks? Civility is winning, hurray!
Not that I'd ever expect otherwise from you, feltophobia not withstanding.
See, that's why I hang out her instead of another formally "cool" site. If you point out there someone is factually incorrect they tend to call you a child rapist or something.
I conceded in an internet imbroglio just last week,
Me too. Mind you, I was arguing against Meryl Streep, so that should tell you how stupid I was being.
I've always had the balls to admit when wrong!Just not always out loud :p