So what do our imminent television programmers give the most time to as they enlighten us about the happenings of the world? Michael Jackson. You know, that looney entertainer who some entertainers have said, on your family oriented TV no less, is a nice guy and even a good role model. And it raises a valid question: outside of their skills in music or the movies or show business, why should ANY entertainer be given a platform to speak about anything unless they have also earned credence in that field, also. Some have run for, and been elected Mayors, for instance. If so, they have a right to speak about city matters. But I'm tired of celebrities being given a national platform to tell us how to live our lives, and how to run our government, just because they are noted entertainers.
Give you another example: A bunch of Hollywood types, one of whom has played the President on TV, are putting big money in, and speaking out against, going into Iraq. They have every right to speak up as individuals, but what right do they have to speak on a national platform such as network television.
Then the other day the rock group, The Rolling Stones, had a big concert in Los Angeles to encourage the government to do something about Global Warming. The fact is Global Warming is a highly controversial theory, and liberals have picked upon one set of scientists beliefs that it is a severe danger created by humans. Another set of scientists, just as qualified, say that isn't the case. So how come Mick Jagger, an entertainer, is getting headlines and news coverage saying he is doing wonderful things to "help clear the air." Or was it because of the speaker they had at that event, the noted environmentalist, Bill Clinton. Come to think about it, that's a good threesome to represent liberal causes: Michael Jackson, Mick Jagger and Bill Clinton.
This is Gordon Sawyer, and may the wind always be at your back.
http://accesswdun.com/article/2003/2/183159