Band has improved a far shot from the Friday tragedy! Thank you everybody for your cooperation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, regarding the NACAC's report on the SAT that urged colleges to put less emphasis on such tests, that story was also reported on Monday's edition of ABC World News.
24 September 2008
21 September 2008
The Option of Standardised Testing
As Sunday draws this weekend to a close, I decided to spend it happily and wisely. For those of you who were terrified by my previous diatribe against the symphonic band, I apologise for being so gratuitously angry. Me, you, and Barnhill will forget about that and just move on as a great group of students; I know it.
I woke up around 8 this morning, unlike most Sundays, to watch ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos to watch Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson discuss the government's bank rescue plan. Since August I've been watching the Sunday morning news talk shows regularly to keep up with the latest developments in the White House and the election. Later today I took a practice SAT exam, and I received a 2010 on that, by my own reasonable estimations. My actual SAT score, from May 2008, was 1990, and I think I'll be on the Improvement Road as I keep on trying. For now, I feel that I need to improve on following directions on some of the more deceptive, pesky questions - it's true, all 3 sections (Readin', Ritin', and 'Rithmetic Reading, Writing, and Math) contain "trap answers" to certainly worded questions in order to test our attention span. The most difficult section there is Critical Reading (the full name of the Reading section) due to its testing of obscure English words and the tendency for me to imagine "hidden" elements of the reading passages.
And just now I came upon this New York Times education section article "College Panel Calls for Less Focus on SATs" by Sara Rimer, who reported on a report led by William R. Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions/financial aid at Harvard University. Fitzsimmons's report argued that the SAT/ACT standardised testing is screwing up secondary education and is out of touch with what students need to prepare for life college & beyond. The article page links to the report, titled "Report of the Commission on the Use of Standardized Tests in Undergraduate Admission" and published by the National Association for College Admissions Counseling. Arguments in the report included:
- Colleges should make the SAT/ACT optional if their admissions directors have good reason to believe that the SAT will be useless in determining student merit.
- "Cutscores", minimum SAT scores required for admission, should end; the more advantaged students would have a nearly unfair advantage over others who probably cannot afford tutouring. (Personal note: For the earlier part of 2008 I had tutouring for the SAT Writing Section and AP Calculus AB Exam; the California State University system currently uses "cutscores" system)
- The PSAT seems to be a less-than-reliable way to determine National Merit Scholarships
- SAT/ACT scores should not and cannot be seen to correlate with college's financial resources.
- Such scores can under- or over-predict first-year GPA's, especially for English learners/women/minorities, or "calcify" racial, ethnic, or parental educational gaps.
- It's a better idea to emphasize the SAT Subject Tests/Advanced Placement (AP) Exams/High School Exit Exams instead, since those products will further motivate state educational boards. (Regional note: In my state the public school students get "Early Assessment Program" exams from the CSU system to determine college readiness)
After having read through the 56 pages of the report, I almost have to agree. Even the SAT prep book that I own, Cracking the SAT, admits that the way the SAT evaluates - among other anamolies! - is different from how teachers instruct in the classroom. I really think that this "unfair advantage" system of getting better score on college admission test needs to stop - trust me, I've had coaching, and I still haven't done the best job I thought that I could. As Fitzsimmons's report states, students should be able to prepare for the SAT/college in general through the high school curriculum, not through extra coaching. It's no wonder public schools get so much heat these days.
I woke up around 8 this morning, unlike most Sundays, to watch ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos to watch Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson discuss the government's bank rescue plan. Since August I've been watching the Sunday morning news talk shows regularly to keep up with the latest developments in the White House and the election. Later today I took a practice SAT exam, and I received a 2010 on that, by my own reasonable estimations. My actual SAT score, from May 2008, was 1990, and I think I'll be on the Improvement Road as I keep on trying. For now, I feel that I need to improve on following directions on some of the more deceptive, pesky questions - it's true, all 3 sections (
And just now I came upon this New York Times education section article "College Panel Calls for Less Focus on SATs" by Sara Rimer, who reported on a report led by William R. Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions/financial aid at Harvard University. Fitzsimmons's report argued that the SAT/ACT standardised testing is screwing up secondary education and is out of touch with what students need to prepare for life college & beyond. The article page links to the report, titled "Report of the Commission on the Use of Standardized Tests in Undergraduate Admission" and published by the National Association for College Admissions Counseling. Arguments in the report included:
- Colleges should make the SAT/ACT optional if their admissions directors have good reason to believe that the SAT will be useless in determining student merit.
- "Cutscores", minimum SAT scores required for admission, should end; the more advantaged students would have a nearly unfair advantage over others who probably cannot afford tutouring. (Personal note: For the earlier part of 2008 I had tutouring for the SAT Writing Section and AP Calculus AB Exam; the California State University system currently uses "cutscores" system)
- The PSAT seems to be a less-than-reliable way to determine National Merit Scholarships
- SAT/ACT scores should not and cannot be seen to correlate with college's financial resources.
- Such scores can under- or over-predict first-year GPA's, especially for English learners/women/minorities, or "calcify" racial, ethnic, or parental educational gaps.
- It's a better idea to emphasize the SAT Subject Tests/Advanced Placement (AP) Exams/High School Exit Exams instead, since those products will further motivate state educational boards. (Regional note: In my state the public school students get "Early Assessment Program" exams from the CSU system to determine college readiness)
After having read through the 56 pages of the report, I almost have to agree. Even the SAT prep book that I own, Cracking the SAT, admits that the way the SAT evaluates - among other anamolies! - is different from how teachers instruct in the classroom. I really think that this "unfair advantage" system of getting better score on college admission test needs to stop - trust me, I've had coaching, and I still haven't done the best job I thought that I could. As Fitzsimmons's report states, students should be able to prepare for the SAT/college in general through the high school curriculum, not through extra coaching. It's no wonder public schools get so much heat these days.
19 September 2008
Symphonic band on strike?
Today was a pretty good end of the week, with an easy calculus quiz on integration by parts, followed by the usual 15-minute break, where I got to wish my friend Rachel a happy 17th birthday. All went well until the next period, which was Symphonic Band. The ensemble rehearsed two pieces out of four to be played this 11 December for the school band concert and had been playing them since the week of Labor Day. Most of the days since then, the band has been practicing around an average level, with certain mistakes or anamolies making the conductor stop the band and advise on corrections, which turn out to be usually simple. "That's all you gotta do," he'd say.
But today, 19 September, the ensemble sunk to a new low. Guess what kind of errors happened today? Trombone players were nearly a measure behind, trumpets played too slow, drums were off-beat, and soon the whole ensemble "falls asleep" and literally slows down to ritardando when they are not supposed to. All when I, a mallet player, am keeping my eyes between the conductor and my score and waiting for my turn on the music, having done a competent job all along. Those parts of today's rehearsal sounded so disorganized and chaotic that Soulja Boy's annoying, ubitiquous "Crank That" song even sounds more musical than a high school symphonic band!
So the conductor stops the band and furiously wants to know what has happened with them. He felt that the players were on "last day of school" mode rather than September & "excited for school/concert" mode. Wow. We're really supposed to be superior to the average dumb high school students. Given how much bull$#!7 I had to suffer today thanks to the other morons who were supposed to be concentrating together as an ensemble - two people even lost some of their musical sheets - I feel compelled to turn up Weezer's new song "Troublemaker".
Don't worry, my fellow Symphonic Bandmembers. I've been through your kind of trouble before when I joined the ensemble last year to make up for a lack of performing arts class for my college entrance requirement (both the University of California and California State University systems require "at least one year" of Performing/visual arts type of class) I made a lot of effort to learn how to grip mallet sticks properly and follow the conducting. A year has passed, and I've become a welcome member of the family. But now we need to sink so low as to THIS crappy level - which as I mentioned earlier sounds even WORSE than the most annoying pop punk/emo/pop rap/bubblegum MTV corporate radio pop/MMMBop/Britney/NSYNC/Backstreet Boys/Simple Plan/Good Charlotte/Soulja Boy/Fall Out Boy/Limp Bizkit songs out there?!?!?!?! Maybe now it's OK for Michael Savage to trash-talk about Muslims and the mentally disabled. I think I'll just quit life and start smoking all the marijuana and drinking all the beer/alcoholic drinks I want and fail all my classes and eventually end up homeless/single/still a virgin after high school and spend the rest of my life in who knows where. College sounds worthless. Finding a job sounds meaningless. Everyone is an idiot. My local school district is a run by a mob of brainless drunken bastards for failing to fix a dying softball field at one school yet fixing other stuff everywhere else. MY school does things even worse by denying the right of one of my best friends to attend Calculus BC after having passed the Calculus AB exam
Back to the main topic. For this weekend, we all need to rethink this stupid situation and redeem ourselves and prove that we are all TRUE students and authentically-trained musicians and wanting to be among the best students out there. A CHANGE IS GONNA COME. If not, I might probably start ditching band class and later put the blame on whoever is causing me the most problems there, Barack Obama might lose the election simply because we weren't willing to accept change for the better, the world will decompose into a violent anarchy...OK sorry enough with the insane doomsday predictions right there. But seriously. You and I ALL NEED TO F\/|
PS: I thank all members of the Wind Ensemble, the highest level of band at school, for their hard work and making class "fun" for my other friend Jamie, who advised me on the state of that ensemble today after 6th period ended today. I guess that means that the WE was actually being cooperative unlike the Symphonic knuckleheads.
But today, 19 September, the ensemble sunk to a new low. Guess what kind of errors happened today? Trombone players were nearly a measure behind, trumpets played too slow, drums were off-beat, and soon the whole ensemble "falls asleep" and literally slows down to ritardando when they are not supposed to. All when I, a mallet player, am keeping my eyes between the conductor and my score and waiting for my turn on the music, having done a competent job all along. Those parts of today's rehearsal sounded so disorganized and chaotic that Soulja Boy's annoying, ubitiquous "Crank That" song even sounds more musical than a high school symphonic band!
So the conductor stops the band and furiously wants to know what has happened with them. He felt that the players were on "last day of school" mode rather than September & "excited for school/concert" mode. Wow. We're really supposed to be superior to the average dumb high school students. Given how much bull$#!7 I had to suffer today thanks to the other morons who were supposed to be concentrating together as an ensemble - two people even lost some of their musical sheets - I feel compelled to turn up Weezer's new song "Troublemaker".
Don't worry, my fellow Symphonic Bandmembers. I've been through your kind of trouble before when I joined the ensemble last year to make up for a lack of performing arts class for my college entrance requirement (both the University of California and California State University systems require "at least one year" of Performing/visual arts type of class) I made a lot of effort to learn how to grip mallet sticks properly and follow the conducting. A year has passed, and I've become a welcome member of the family. But now we need to sink so low as to THIS crappy level - which as I mentioned earlier sounds even WORSE than the most annoying pop punk/emo/pop rap/bubblegum MTV corporate radio pop/MMMBop/Britney/NSYNC/Backstreet Boys/Simple Plan/Good Charlotte/Soulja Boy/Fall Out Boy/Limp Bizkit songs out there?!?!?!?! Maybe now it's OK for Michael Savage to trash-talk about Muslims and the mentally disabled. I think I'll just quit life and start smoking all the marijuana and drinking all the beer/alcoholic drinks I want and fail all my classes and eventually end up homeless/single/still a virgin after high school and spend the rest of my life in who knows where. College sounds worthless. Finding a job sounds meaningless. Everyone is an idiot. My local school district is a run by a mob of brainless drunken bastards for failing to fix a dying softball field at one school yet fixing other stuff everywhere else. MY school does things even worse by denying the right of one of my best friends to attend Calculus BC after having passed the Calculus AB exam
Back to the main topic. For this weekend, we all need to rethink this stupid situation and redeem ourselves and prove that we are all TRUE students and authentically-trained musicians and wanting to be among the best students out there. A CHANGE IS GONNA COME. If not, I might probably start ditching band class and later put the blame on whoever is causing me the most problems there, Barack Obama might lose the election simply because we weren't willing to accept change for the better, the world will decompose into a violent anarchy...OK sorry enough with the insane doomsday predictions right there. But seriously. You and I ALL NEED TO F\/|
PS: I thank all members of the Wind Ensemble, the highest level of band at school, for their hard work and making class "fun" for my other friend Jamie, who advised me on the state of that ensemble today after 6th period ended today. I guess that means that the WE was actually being cooperative unlike the Symphonic knuckleheads.
13 September 2008
What's going on at the Parents Television Council? (Sept. 13, 2008)
Turning now to the mainstream TV viewer's all-time bete noire: the Parents Television Council. (Brent McKee used to write a semi-weekly column "Who Does the PTC Hate THIS Week?" on his blog I Am A Child of Television, but that column hasn't been written since mid-August, and right now he's focusing on the fall 2008 premieres, so I shall do the business for now until further notice.) Their lead headline as of the time I'm writing this up? "NBC Airs Unbleeped S-Word on Today Show" Holy cow! I took a deep breath and opened up the link, which explained that on the Thur., Sept. 11 edition of the show guest Hans Lange used the S-word uncensored, and Matt Lauer laughed but did not apologize. Lange recently made headlines in the US for surviving a malfunctioned BASE jump. The expletive was shown unbleeped only on the East Coast; everywhere else in the US it was edited out (since the morning shows are usually shown on tape delay in the West unless there's a breaking news story, say for instance the recent Hurricanes Gustav and Ike). The video in question can be seen below but is excised of the profanity.
I happened to be watching the "preview" of the Lange interview that morning but had to leave for school before it came on! Dang, I missed a funny event in morning show history! But oh well since I live in the Western US and wouldn't have heard the profanity anyways. That's the third time this year uncensored profanity made it on morning shows: On the Jan. 15 Good Morning America (ABC): Diane Keaton dropped the four-letter F-word, and on the Feb. 14 Today (NBC), Jane Fonda dropped the C-word that rhymes with a certain word used to describe, err, an action that would be executed in searching for animals for food.
Now I can understand why parents would be concerned over the morning shows - PTC has primarily been concerned with primetime programs - because what if they had those shows on while the kids were having breakfast/preparing for school? In the cases of Keaton and Fonda, their interviews came on around 8:20 AM (Eastern Time); most K-12 schools begin the day around 8-8:30 AM so I do find some reason to be concerned. And Lange's interview had the profanity on about "7:37 AM [Eastern]" as PTC estimated - kids wouldn't be in school yet so there is reason for concern. PTC has filed complaints with FCC for all three profanity incidents, but the thing is that if FCC does decide to fine ABC and NBC then the fines will be small - say around $1 million since it covers all the Owned and Operated stations in the Eastern Time Zone - as compared to the whole nation.
The "Worst Show of the Week" was a rather unexpected one, much like McCain picking Palin, the ABC special America United: In Support of Our Troops. The reviewer acknowledged so and admitted freely that the program was rated "TV-14-DL" - due to vulgar performances by not-so-family-friendly celebs like Snoop Dogg, DL Hughley, and Kathy Griffin. It seemed disappointing that this special was supposed to be a moment of unity yet "not everyone could enjoy the show". But then PTC reviewer extends concerns to the kids attending the live audience of the program and uses them as evidence to claim that the program was supposed to be family-friendly. America United was Worst this week because of "targeting families without delivering family-friendly content". That's the same argument PTC uses when condemning such "smut" as Family Guy and Two and a Half Men - the former being animated and starring a family as lead characters and the latter starring a child as a main character and both often being rated "TV-14-DL".
Yet on their weekly "Misrated" report targeting the CW's Gossip Girl, whose first season I've actively followed & enjoyed (esp. Leighton Meester) but whose second season I haven't been able to watch due to problems with receiving the local CW station in my home. Although the CW rated the episode "TV-14-DL" as had ABC with America United, PTC made absolutely no suggestion that Gossip Girl was "intended for families" despite the lead characters of the show being high-schoolers - meaning they'd be minors by age, like the characters of Family Guy and Two and a Half Men. Based on several sex scenes in the episode, PTC believed that the show should've been rated "TV-14-DLS", due to scene of Dan and Blair making out in a bus bathroom and Nate having sex with a 40-year-old woman. Sure, PTC is worried about parents of teenagers whose pure minds have been burned down by watching this episode, but I have another question. Why would parents of teens set up the V-Chip so that teens can hear suggestive dialogue and coarse language at the TV-14 level but not sexual behaviour at the TV-14 level? I mean, the D and L descriptors also warn of sexual content in the verbal sense - as there do exist colloquial English language expressions implying such evils. This "descriptor-harvesting" argument has been used by PTC countless other instances without much thought. What's even funnier? PTC's mainpage for "So You Think You Can Rate a TV Show?" (official title for its Misrated column) has blatant typographical errors in some spots, such as considering a Grey's Anatomy episode to be rated "PG-14" (even in the review itself), and right beneath that lies a "TV-14" graphic in the description for a Misrated ep of Dancing with the Stars that they affirm is actually rated "TV-PG". So flippin' hilarious for an organizaion that claims to be experts on how corrupt the TV Parental Guidelines rating system is.
The "Worst Cable TV Show of the Week" column resumed sometime in August after a seven-month-long hiatus. The previous two columns dealt with Saving Grace (TNT) and The Shield (FX). This week's confronts the 2008 MTV Video Music Awards, solely based on Russell Brand's controversial jokes over "purity rings" worn by Jordin Sparks and The Jonas Brothers to indicate sexual abstinence. That, the most recent "TV Trends" column "Cable Continues Its Downward Crawl", and the July 11 TV Trends column "BET: Bad Entertainment for Teens" show the PTC's heavily biased, one-sided reporting on cable TV. While PTC has been spending most homepage space on hunting down the demons of indecency, nowhere has PTC ever commented on some rather "decent" moves that networks have made:
- MTV hasn't shown Sucker Free, a program that PTC included in its April 2008 rap music video study, since mid-June 2008
- Brand did apologize for the purity ring joke, and it doesn't matter to the PTC if "clean" music videos like Chris Brown's "With You", Linkin Park's "Shadow of the Day", Gnarls Barkley's "Run", and Erykah Badu's "Honey" were winners. Everybody run, a comedian just promoted SEX to teens! (Like anyone over 13 doesn't know the human reproductive system yet.)
- BET has shown Diff'rent Strokes for much of the time before August 2008 and has picked up the former WB sitcom Smart Guy, which PTC ranked among the Best TV Shows of the 97-98 and 98-99 seasons, for syndication. According to the BET website, Smart Guy began airing Mondays 5 and 5:30 PM (Eastern and Pacific) Sept. 8, moving Rap City (also included in PTC's rap study) up to 3PM. And never mind that Smart Guy once was syndicated on the Disney Channel, which got the PTC Seal of approval in July 2007.
- If TNT is such a sleazy network for Saving Grace and countless Law & Order and Without a Trace reruns, has PTC forgotten about its own review for TNT original film The Ron Clark Story, TNT's annual showing of The Wizard of Oz, or ongoing sports events?
It seems that PTC covers certain cable channels only for the "sleaze" they deliver. Once a certain channel carries an evil, red-lighted shows (even at 10PM), it doesn't matter if the channel shows "cleaner" shows other hours - the case of FX, which shows reruns of The Bernie Mac Show, King of the Hill, and Malcolm in the Middle (all of which PTC has rated "yellow" in their traffic light rating system) during the daytime, or Spike, with its Star Trek: Voyager reruns late afternoons. PTC has left the one-sided impression that those channels are all-day smut peddlers, as it's taken extensive action against FX's The Shield and labelled Spike programs MANswers and movie presentation of Sin City as "worst cable shows of the week". (Surprisingly, PTC hasn't commented about Spike's heavy reruns of CSI!)
I do support PTC's efforts to push for "cable choice" - although I don't have cable, if I did, I'd love the luxury of being able to pick-and-choose! But things do look fishy when you have an influential organization that's complained to the FCC like an angry mob to influence broadcasting law.
I happened to be watching the "preview" of the Lange interview that morning but had to leave for school before it came on! Dang, I missed a funny event in morning show history! But oh well since I live in the Western US and wouldn't have heard the profanity anyways. That's the third time this year uncensored profanity made it on morning shows: On the Jan. 15 Good Morning America (ABC): Diane Keaton dropped the four-letter F-word, and on the Feb. 14 Today (NBC), Jane Fonda dropped the C-word that rhymes with a certain word used to describe, err, an action that would be executed in searching for animals for food.
Now I can understand why parents would be concerned over the morning shows - PTC has primarily been concerned with primetime programs - because what if they had those shows on while the kids were having breakfast/preparing for school? In the cases of Keaton and Fonda, their interviews came on around 8:20 AM (Eastern Time); most K-12 schools begin the day around 8-8:30 AM so I do find some reason to be concerned. And Lange's interview had the profanity on about "7:37 AM [Eastern]" as PTC estimated - kids wouldn't be in school yet so there is reason for concern. PTC has filed complaints with FCC for all three profanity incidents, but the thing is that if FCC does decide to fine ABC and NBC then the fines will be small - say around $1 million since it covers all the Owned and Operated stations in the Eastern Time Zone - as compared to the whole nation.
The "Worst Show of the Week" was a rather unexpected one, much like McCain picking Palin, the ABC special America United: In Support of Our Troops. The reviewer acknowledged so and admitted freely that the program was rated "TV-14-DL" - due to vulgar performances by not-so-family-friendly celebs like Snoop Dogg, DL Hughley, and Kathy Griffin. It seemed disappointing that this special was supposed to be a moment of unity yet "not everyone could enjoy the show". But then PTC reviewer extends concerns to the kids attending the live audience of the program and uses them as evidence to claim that the program was supposed to be family-friendly. America United was Worst this week because of "targeting families without delivering family-friendly content". That's the same argument PTC uses when condemning such "smut" as Family Guy and Two and a Half Men - the former being animated and starring a family as lead characters and the latter starring a child as a main character and both often being rated "TV-14-DL".
Yet on their weekly "Misrated" report targeting the CW's Gossip Girl, whose first season I've actively followed & enjoyed (esp. Leighton Meester) but whose second season I haven't been able to watch due to problems with receiving the local CW station in my home. Although the CW rated the episode "TV-14-DL" as had ABC with America United, PTC made absolutely no suggestion that Gossip Girl was "intended for families" despite the lead characters of the show being high-schoolers - meaning they'd be minors by age, like the characters of Family Guy and Two and a Half Men. Based on several sex scenes in the episode, PTC believed that the show should've been rated "TV-14-DLS", due to scene of Dan and Blair making out in a bus bathroom and Nate having sex with a 40-year-old woman. Sure, PTC is worried about parents of teenagers whose pure minds have been burned down by watching this episode, but I have another question. Why would parents of teens set up the V-Chip so that teens can hear suggestive dialogue and coarse language at the TV-14 level but not sexual behaviour at the TV-14 level? I mean, the D and L descriptors also warn of sexual content in the verbal sense - as there do exist colloquial English language expressions implying such evils. This "descriptor-harvesting" argument has been used by PTC countless other instances without much thought. What's even funnier? PTC's mainpage for "So You Think You Can Rate a TV Show?" (official title for its Misrated column) has blatant typographical errors in some spots, such as considering a Grey's Anatomy episode to be rated "PG-14" (even in the review itself), and right beneath that lies a "TV-14" graphic in the description for a Misrated ep of Dancing with the Stars that they affirm is actually rated "TV-PG". So flippin' hilarious for an organizaion that claims to be experts on how corrupt the TV Parental Guidelines rating system is.
The "Worst Cable TV Show of the Week" column resumed sometime in August after a seven-month-long hiatus. The previous two columns dealt with Saving Grace (TNT) and The Shield (FX). This week's confronts the 2008 MTV Video Music Awards, solely based on Russell Brand's controversial jokes over "purity rings" worn by Jordin Sparks and The Jonas Brothers to indicate sexual abstinence. That, the most recent "TV Trends" column "Cable Continues Its Downward Crawl", and the July 11 TV Trends column "BET: Bad Entertainment for Teens" show the PTC's heavily biased, one-sided reporting on cable TV. While PTC has been spending most homepage space on hunting down the demons of indecency, nowhere has PTC ever commented on some rather "decent" moves that networks have made:
- MTV hasn't shown Sucker Free, a program that PTC included in its April 2008 rap music video study, since mid-June 2008
- Brand did apologize for the purity ring joke, and it doesn't matter to the PTC if "clean" music videos like Chris Brown's "With You", Linkin Park's "Shadow of the Day", Gnarls Barkley's "Run", and Erykah Badu's "Honey" were winners. Everybody run, a comedian just promoted SEX to teens! (Like anyone over 13 doesn't know the human reproductive system yet.)
- BET has shown Diff'rent Strokes for much of the time before August 2008 and has picked up the former WB sitcom Smart Guy, which PTC ranked among the Best TV Shows of the 97-98 and 98-99 seasons, for syndication. According to the BET website, Smart Guy began airing Mondays 5 and 5:30 PM (Eastern and Pacific) Sept. 8, moving Rap City (also included in PTC's rap study) up to 3PM. And never mind that Smart Guy once was syndicated on the Disney Channel, which got the PTC Seal of approval in July 2007.
- If TNT is such a sleazy network for Saving Grace and countless Law & Order and Without a Trace reruns, has PTC forgotten about its own review for TNT original film The Ron Clark Story, TNT's annual showing of The Wizard of Oz, or ongoing sports events?
It seems that PTC covers certain cable channels only for the "sleaze" they deliver. Once a certain channel carries an evil, red-lighted shows (even at 10PM), it doesn't matter if the channel shows "cleaner" shows other hours - the case of FX, which shows reruns of The Bernie Mac Show, King of the Hill, and Malcolm in the Middle (all of which PTC has rated "yellow" in their traffic light rating system) during the daytime, or Spike, with its Star Trek: Voyager reruns late afternoons. PTC has left the one-sided impression that those channels are all-day smut peddlers, as it's taken extensive action against FX's The Shield and labelled Spike programs MANswers and movie presentation of Sin City as "worst cable shows of the week". (Surprisingly, PTC hasn't commented about Spike's heavy reruns of CSI!)
I do support PTC's efforts to push for "cable choice" - although I don't have cable, if I did, I'd love the luxury of being able to pick-and-choose! But things do look fishy when you have an influential organization that's complained to the FCC like an angry mob to influence broadcasting law.
Surviving senior year and the real world so far!
Time is moving along from Week 3 to Week 4 of school, and the countdown to probably the golden age of my life is coming up!
- Oct. 4 - SAT (I will got above 2100; I KNOW it; the UC/CSU systems require finishing the SAT by December)
- Sometime later in October: Training for poll working! I shaltriggeth thee election in favour of Barack Hussein Obama serveth the publick voters and earneth $120 - just on time for the holidays!
- Nov. 4 - ELECTION DAY! G0BAMA!!!!
- Various dates between October and November - writing up college apps & essays & all that business. So far SJSU, San Francisco State, and University of Washington (Seattle) are on my mind, although I as of late have been receiving invitations to attend local admissions presentations by Boston University and Washington University (St. Louis). Given my disappointingly scarce GPA and extracurricular record, I think I'll more likely be admitted to a public university (UoW is public too) or probably a private one - not all private universities equal Stanford given that they can set all their own standards whatever they please.
Today I had cross country tryouts up at the hill near my neighbourhood; it's my first year trying athletics at high school, and this is my attempt to pump up my transcript for the admissions officers. Given that I've never been a hardcore athlete in my life, the uphill runs were torturous. Although I finished at last place among all runners, chances are that I could still make the team by lucky chance given that the coaches count other factors like attendance & behavior - I've kept my attitude clean and attended all but one day of practice since they began back around late June of this year.
After cross country I sat down to watch the last of Charles Gibson's interview with Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin. Not just ABC, but ALL the news networks have been hyping the Gibson/Palin interview - it's been "Palinmania" ever since the surprise dark horse entrance of Palin, gov. of Alaska, as John McCain's running mate. Gibson did have some tough questions for Palin in the beginning but later became easier on her as he got to know more about her, as issues like the "Bridge to Nowhere" and Troopergate were brought up. Is this media bias? Maybe not, as when Joe Biden was confirmed as Barack Obama's running mate, the media was quick to point out Biden's 1987 plagiarism and more recent criticisms of Obama, such as the "first articulate African-American" comment and general claims that Obama didn't have enough experience. Oh well, but I'm in favor of Obama/Biden since they have shown the best potential to reunite the nation and help those who have been betrayed by 8 years of a less-than-stellar Bush administration. Still, I'm pretty open-minded and keeping watch at the McCain/Palin ticket and exploring the election from both the Democratic and Republican sides.
- Oct. 4 - SAT (I will got above 2100; I KNOW it; the UC/CSU systems require finishing the SAT by December)
- Sometime later in October: Training for poll working! I shalt
- Nov. 4 - ELECTION DAY! G0BAMA!!!!
- Various dates between October and November - writing up college apps & essays & all that business. So far SJSU, San Francisco State, and University of Washington (Seattle) are on my mind, although I as of late have been receiving invitations to attend local admissions presentations by Boston University and Washington University (St. Louis). Given my disappointingly scarce GPA and extracurricular record, I think I'll more likely be admitted to a public university (UoW is public too) or probably a private one - not all private universities equal Stanford given that they can set all their own standards whatever they please.
Today I had cross country tryouts up at the hill near my neighbourhood; it's my first year trying athletics at high school, and this is my attempt to pump up my transcript for the admissions officers. Given that I've never been a hardcore athlete in my life, the uphill runs were torturous. Although I finished at last place among all runners, chances are that I could still make the team by lucky chance given that the coaches count other factors like attendance & behavior - I've kept my attitude clean and attended all but one day of practice since they began back around late June of this year.
After cross country I sat down to watch the last of Charles Gibson's interview with Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin. Not just ABC, but ALL the news networks have been hyping the Gibson/Palin interview - it's been "Palinmania" ever since the surprise dark horse entrance of Palin, gov. of Alaska, as John McCain's running mate. Gibson did have some tough questions for Palin in the beginning but later became easier on her as he got to know more about her, as issues like the "Bridge to Nowhere" and Troopergate were brought up. Is this media bias? Maybe not, as when Joe Biden was confirmed as Barack Obama's running mate, the media was quick to point out Biden's 1987 plagiarism and more recent criticisms of Obama, such as the "first articulate African-American" comment and general claims that Obama didn't have enough experience. Oh well, but I'm in favor of Obama/Biden since they have shown the best potential to reunite the nation and help those who have been betrayed by 8 years of a less-than-stellar Bush administration. Still, I'm pretty open-minded and keeping watch at the McCain/Palin ticket and exploring the election from both the Democratic and Republican sides.
24 August 2008
The state of modern American hip-hop: Part 1: Morality
With just two days left before The Last Year of High School, I'm desperately trying to spend time as dutifully as possible. I woke up this morning to watch Sunday morning news coverage of the upcoming Democratic National Convention and Barack Obama's pick of Joe Biden as VP. I later went to Barnes & Noble to buy Chris Matthews' book Hardball: How Politics Is Played--Told By One Who Knows the Game, which supposedly inspired his current cable TV news/talk show Hardball. I read a library copy of the book already and liked it; for AP U.S. Government & Politics class I'll be referencing that book. When I got home, I just watched the documentary California Schools: America's Future and later the movie Prom Night that I rented from Netflix. That film was one of the oddest films I've seen: a crime drama merged with high school story, as it's about a serial killer who wreaks havoc on a high school prom. It's odd how so many critics disliked it. Was it because that concept was too stupid? Maybe. I must be a maverick in thought...(and I love Brittany Snow, the lead actress of the film; I don't know why there aren't any girls as cute as her who go to my high school) In a striking conincidence, there was a character named "Howard K. Ramsey" who was murdered in Prom Night, while the man arrested for sending threatening letters to a John McCain campaign office in Denver was Marc Harold Ramsey.
Now to the main topic that I promised to my readers from Friday night's report: the Parents Television Council's The Rap on Rap, its April 2008 report on "adult content" on rap music videos shown during daytime hours on cable programs Sucker Free (MTV), Rap City (BET), and 106 & Park (BET). The Rev. Delman Coates, organizer of the Enough is Enough Campaign, requested that PTC organize this report. Among its core claims: those programs are so much raunchier than even the worst prime-time TV shows! Why? In their own words:
"The PTC documented 1,647 instances of offensive/adult content in the 27.5 hours of programming analyzed during the December 2007 study period, for an average of 59.9 instances per hour, or nearly one instance every minute.
"In March 2008, there were 1,342 instances of offensive/adult content in a mere 14 hours of programming, or 95.8 instances per hour, 1.6 instances per minute, or one instance of adult content every 38 seconds.
"To put this data in perspective, in the PTC’s most recent analysis of prime time broadcast TV Family Hour programming, the data revealed an average 12.5 instances of violent, profane and sexual content per hour. This is equivalent to one instance every 4.8 minutes."
Next, the press release drones on over the excess amounts of sex/violence/drugs/lack of morality just like Lois Griffin puts in on the theme song to Fox's cartoon sitcom Family Guy: "It seems to me that all you see is violence in movies and sex on TV..." But now here's some more amazing findings:
"All episodes of Sucker Free on MTV included in this analysis were rated TV-14. By contrast, almost every episode of 106 & Park and Rap City on BET carried only a TV-PG rating. An exception was found with one show that aired in December, which was rated TV-14 and included descriptors for suggestive dialogue, foul language, and sex.
"During the two-week December 2007 study period, children under 18 made up approximately 40% of the viewing audience for 106 & Park, 41% of the audience for Rap City and 39% of the audience for Sucker Free on MTV. Because all of these programs re-air throughout the day, study results underestimate the percentage of unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total."
Oh noes! MTV and BET deliberately mis-rate their programs in an effort to brainwash our children into thug life! And their schemes have actually worked!
But let's get a bit more serious now. Again I shall emphasize that PTC asserts: "Because all of these programs re-air throughout the day, study results underestimate the percentage of unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total." How does it back up this claim? For the time periods included in its study here were the timeslots of each program: (times are Eastern & Pacific time zones; adjust back one hour for everywhere else in the US)
- 106 & Park (BET) (TV-PG): Mon-Fri 11AM-12:30PM & 6PM-7:30PM; Saturdays 11AM-12:30PM
- Rap City (BET) (TV-PG): Mon-Sat 5-6PM (but for some reason PTC says that RC "airs each Saturday" on BET yet quickly points out there exists a weekday broadcast, without having asserted so previously)
- Sucker Free (MTV) (TV-14): Tues-Thu 8AM-8:30AM (an example of MTV's odd, arbitrary scheduling: This show used to be shown 7PM, then 3PM, 8AM, 4:30PM, then was pulled from the MTV schedule around early June but is still shown on MTV's [more competent] sister channel MTV2)
So given that PTC freely suggests that some of the shows were shown during school hours, "unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total" might mean kids who cut class to watch these shows, who happen to be able to watch cable TV at school, or unsupervised kindergarteners who are flipping through their cable-equipped TV set before afternoon session.
As noted here, PTC has claimed to have found numerous dirty words in these programs - which would give a sailor a heart attack perhaps? But how honest is their ability to view things through the perspective of the average viewer of these programs? On page 8 of the PDF: (I had to type this out since the whole darn PDF apparantly was printed off a scanner rather than converted from something like Microsoft Office, so I can't cut & paste text)
"Each episode was viewed by a trained analyst who conducted a detailed analysis of both visual and verbal content. Programs were analyzed in their entirety...
"For all categories of offensive content the analysis was determined by what aired in the video. This is significant given many instances in which a song's lyrics are changed from what is heard on the album to what is heard on the music video. In the event of a muted profanity or reference, the word was verified either by reviewing lyrics from a third-party webpage or listening to an uncensored version of a song.
"Language was coded for specific words uttered throughout programming and certain related euphemisms - such as the word 'screw' when used as a euphemism for 'fuck.' Also coded were cases of bleeped and otherwise obscured language. This included words that were partially obscured but identifiable, as well as obscene gestures."
Wow...they freely admit that they had to look beyond the program just to uncover the sleaze with which BET and MTV are planning to indoctrinate the innocent children of America! This is getting ridiculous now; I've seen enough "edited" rap music videos in my adolescence to know that I, the hip-hop fan, need to do my own verification before I can know what Standards & Practices wanted to block from my ears. It's true that kids can go on the Internet and find out what got censored - but parents have the ability to filter kids' Internet access given all the filtering software out there, thus putting PTC's profanity argument into scrutiny. But next PTC claims that in March 2008 some expletives that were censored from Dec. 2007 were not censored. The words in question? (VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED) "ass" and "hell" Ironically PTC fails to point out that in March 2008 there were no unedited uses of (VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED) "bitch" while in December 2007 there were 5 logged uses of "bitch" on Rap City...making the network standards stricter than NBC Universal Television Distribution's standards for the Jerry Springer, Maury, and Steve Wilkos daytime tabloid talk shows (whose uncensored B-words outnumber those from the rap music shows by a truckload, based on my viewing experiences this summer, I'll get to those shows later). And in December 2007, PTC couldn't find any use of "hell" (censored or not), so their claim is pure puffery.
Off with the swear words now; other issues that PTC evaluated included illegal and sexual and violent activities, including the usual suspects as drugs & drinking. But I was surprised to find out that some rap videos promoted "underage drinking"...I thought that was the stuff of other of the PTC's "bete noire" shows The O.C. and Gossip Girl! I've never seen a rap video that promotes "u can drank b4 age 21"...indeed a lot of rap songs do promote drinking but I doubt that they promote blatantly underage drinking. Seems that PTC wants to argue that no media aimed towards minors should ever depict drinking in a positive light.
And finally there comes the list of videos that PTC used for the report, which also brings up insight about which videos were popular during 12/07 and 3/08. The top two "full-length" videos played (only Rap City plays full-length videos, according to the report) were "Superstar" by Lupe Fiasco and "Playas Rock" by Hurricane Chris. But third in line is "100 Million" by Birdman, one of the more "gangsta/edgier" types that Rev. Delman Coates (who was an advisor to the study) discussed on NPR back in May. And then is "Speedin'" by Rick Ross. Both videos play out like CSI: Miami, only told more from the criminals' (rappers') point of view. At least they show the "police" portion of the story as well but obscure them in a "Fuck tha Police" tone with all the cash-throwing and escapism. As I go down the list, I find that some videos that get a lot of "full-length" plays get few "excerpted" plays, and vice versa. Which means that a video like "Speedin'" or "100 Million" would've been played a lot on Rap City but few times on 106 or SF. So it can possibly assert that Rap City plays out videos for a certain amount of time, and voting on 106 & Park (which is BET's version of MTV's Total Request Live, a top-10 countdown show voted on by viewers) can increase airtime on television.
It should be noted that 106 and SF show both rap and R&B videos, while Rap City plays only rap videos (hence the title), something PTC won't point out, thus putting the report further into question. So that means that the R&B videos in the PTC's study could be seen only on BET if a viewer were to watch all three of the said programs habitually. Now I'm seeing that BET gave R&B videos "Just Fine" by Mary J. Blige and "Suffocate" by J. Holiday were shown only once in full length and about ten times in excerpt - apparantly I guess that is how 106 & Park makes a point when showing newer videos.
So this is ironic. Turns out that although the "cleaner" R&B videos are given more rotation than "dirty" rap videos, overall there are more rap videos in the "rap fan habitual pattern" that I shall refer a viewer who watches all three said programs.
Rap music, ever since the late 80s when some rappers like 2 Live Crew and N.W.A began using profanity and other explicit content in their lyrics than other rappers had, has always been controversial for that content. So have other genres of music: for example some 80s heavy metal music that came under criticism by the Parents Music Resource Center - which the PTC might as well be paying tribute to with The Rap on Rap. Indeed, it seems that the networks are taking PTC more seriously, as MTV isn't showing Sucker Free for the time being this summer (but still shows some rap videos within other general programs Friday Night MTV (FNMTV) and Total Request Live, and BET did rate the July 11 episode of 106 & Park "TV-PG-DLS". I've tried looking up specific, descriptor ratings for other BET programming but can't seem to find any. Finally, BET had this to say after NPR hosted Rev. Coates and PTC president Tim Winter:
"BET Networks takes our responsibility to our viewers seriously, and that's why we voluntarily established a standards process that reviews all the programming we air, including music videos. We routinely reject videos that do not meet our programming guidelines, and we have an ongoing dialogue with the labels and artists to find a balance between free and responsible expression. We encourage the Enough is Enough Campaign and the Parents Television Council to do the same."
So BET appears to accept that it's been accused of hurting our generation and gives a thumbs up to PTC.
As more people come to realize that "Enough is Enough" indeed, they'll probably stop accepting gratuitous sexual and "gangsta values" and start demanding more positive, competent hip-hop. I'm glad that at least BET chooses to side some more positive artists like Lupe Fiasco and Alicia Keys and Chris Brown besides the other junk and has approved PTC's complaints. Back before NWA/2 Live Crew most rap was less profane/vulgar than the PTC's worst nightmares; examples straight out of my MP3 player include Pete Rock & C.L. Smooth, LL Cool J (before 2000, his newer stuff sucks), Lupe Fiasco, Kanye West (who cares if he once said "George Bush doesn't care about black people?"), Eric B & Rakim, Talib Kweli, and Mos Def. Some of the mentioned artists fall under the "socially concious hip hop" banner. I hope that someday you'll join us and unite as one against excess sleaze - yes I admit I do listen to some gangsta rap but it's not to be enlisted in the vast corporate conspiracy, it's to open my mind to see "the other America".
Next time on "The state of modern American hip-hop", I'll look at how there's way too many cliches and "copyright infringement" in some of the newer rap songs...I thought that us music fans had more trouble for illegal downloading! Stay tuned...
Now to the main topic that I promised to my readers from Friday night's report: the Parents Television Council's The Rap on Rap, its April 2008 report on "adult content" on rap music videos shown during daytime hours on cable programs Sucker Free (MTV), Rap City (BET), and 106 & Park (BET). The Rev. Delman Coates, organizer of the Enough is Enough Campaign, requested that PTC organize this report. Among its core claims: those programs are so much raunchier than even the worst prime-time TV shows! Why? In their own words:
"The PTC documented 1,647 instances of offensive/adult content in the 27.5 hours of programming analyzed during the December 2007 study period, for an average of 59.9 instances per hour, or nearly one instance every minute.
"In March 2008, there were 1,342 instances of offensive/adult content in a mere 14 hours of programming, or 95.8 instances per hour, 1.6 instances per minute, or one instance of adult content every 38 seconds.
"To put this data in perspective, in the PTC’s most recent analysis of prime time broadcast TV Family Hour programming, the data revealed an average 12.5 instances of violent, profane and sexual content per hour. This is equivalent to one instance every 4.8 minutes."
Next, the press release drones on over the excess amounts of sex/violence/drugs/lack of morality just like Lois Griffin puts in on the theme song to Fox's cartoon sitcom Family Guy: "It seems to me that all you see is violence in movies and sex on TV..." But now here's some more amazing findings:
"All episodes of Sucker Free on MTV included in this analysis were rated TV-14. By contrast, almost every episode of 106 & Park and Rap City on BET carried only a TV-PG rating. An exception was found with one show that aired in December, which was rated TV-14 and included descriptors for suggestive dialogue, foul language, and sex.
"During the two-week December 2007 study period, children under 18 made up approximately 40% of the viewing audience for 106 & Park, 41% of the audience for Rap City and 39% of the audience for Sucker Free on MTV. Because all of these programs re-air throughout the day, study results underestimate the percentage of unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total."
Oh noes! MTV and BET deliberately mis-rate their programs in an effort to brainwash our children into thug life! And their schemes have actually worked!
But let's get a bit more serious now. Again I shall emphasize that PTC asserts: "Because all of these programs re-air throughout the day, study results underestimate the percentage of unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total." How does it back up this claim? For the time periods included in its study here were the timeslots of each program: (times are Eastern & Pacific time zones; adjust back one hour for everywhere else in the US)
- 106 & Park (BET) (TV-PG): Mon-Fri 11AM-12:30PM & 6PM-7:30PM; Saturdays 11AM-12:30PM
- Rap City (BET) (TV-PG): Mon-Sat 5-6PM (but for some reason PTC says that RC "airs each Saturday" on BET yet quickly points out there exists a weekday broadcast, without having asserted so previously)
- Sucker Free (MTV) (TV-14): Tues-Thu 8AM-8:30AM (an example of MTV's odd, arbitrary scheduling: This show used to be shown 7PM, then 3PM, 8AM, 4:30PM, then was pulled from the MTV schedule around early June but is still shown on MTV's [more competent] sister channel MTV2)
So given that PTC freely suggests that some of the shows were shown during school hours, "unique children who are exposed or have been exposed to these programs in total" might mean kids who cut class to watch these shows, who happen to be able to watch cable TV at school, or unsupervised kindergarteners who are flipping through their cable-equipped TV set before afternoon session.
As noted here, PTC has claimed to have found numerous dirty words in these programs - which would give a sailor a heart attack perhaps? But how honest is their ability to view things through the perspective of the average viewer of these programs? On page 8 of the PDF: (I had to type this out since the whole darn PDF apparantly was printed off a scanner rather than converted from something like Microsoft Office, so I can't cut & paste text)
"Each episode was viewed by a trained analyst who conducted a detailed analysis of both visual and verbal content. Programs were analyzed in their entirety...
"For all categories of offensive content the analysis was determined by what aired in the video. This is significant given many instances in which a song's lyrics are changed from what is heard on the album to what is heard on the music video. In the event of a muted profanity or reference, the word was verified either by reviewing lyrics from a third-party webpage or listening to an uncensored version of a song.
"Language was coded for specific words uttered throughout programming and certain related euphemisms - such as the word 'screw' when used as a euphemism for 'fuck.' Also coded were cases of bleeped and otherwise obscured language. This included words that were partially obscured but identifiable, as well as obscene gestures."
Wow...they freely admit that they had to look beyond the program just to uncover the sleaze with which BET and MTV are planning to indoctrinate the innocent children of America! This is getting ridiculous now; I've seen enough "edited" rap music videos in my adolescence to know that I, the hip-hop fan, need to do my own verification before I can know what Standards & Practices wanted to block from my ears. It's true that kids can go on the Internet and find out what got censored - but parents have the ability to filter kids' Internet access given all the filtering software out there, thus putting PTC's profanity argument into scrutiny. But next PTC claims that in March 2008 some expletives that were censored from Dec. 2007 were not censored. The words in question? (VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED) "ass" and "hell" Ironically PTC fails to point out that in March 2008 there were no unedited uses of (VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED) "bitch" while in December 2007 there were 5 logged uses of "bitch" on Rap City...making the network standards stricter than NBC Universal Television Distribution's standards for the Jerry Springer, Maury, and Steve Wilkos daytime tabloid talk shows (whose uncensored B-words outnumber those from the rap music shows by a truckload, based on my viewing experiences this summer, I'll get to those shows later). And in December 2007, PTC couldn't find any use of "hell" (censored or not), so their claim is pure puffery.
Off with the swear words now; other issues that PTC evaluated included illegal and sexual and violent activities, including the usual suspects as drugs & drinking. But I was surprised to find out that some rap videos promoted "underage drinking"...I thought that was the stuff of other of the PTC's "bete noire" shows The O.C. and Gossip Girl! I've never seen a rap video that promotes "u can drank b4 age 21"...indeed a lot of rap songs do promote drinking but I doubt that they promote blatantly underage drinking. Seems that PTC wants to argue that no media aimed towards minors should ever depict drinking in a positive light.
And finally there comes the list of videos that PTC used for the report, which also brings up insight about which videos were popular during 12/07 and 3/08. The top two "full-length" videos played (only Rap City plays full-length videos, according to the report) were "Superstar" by Lupe Fiasco and "Playas Rock" by Hurricane Chris. But third in line is "100 Million" by Birdman, one of the more "gangsta/edgier" types that Rev. Delman Coates (who was an advisor to the study) discussed on NPR back in May. And then is "Speedin'" by Rick Ross. Both videos play out like CSI: Miami, only told more from the criminals' (rappers') point of view. At least they show the "police" portion of the story as well but obscure them in a "Fuck tha Police" tone with all the cash-throwing and escapism. As I go down the list, I find that some videos that get a lot of "full-length" plays get few "excerpted" plays, and vice versa. Which means that a video like "Speedin'" or "100 Million" would've been played a lot on Rap City but few times on 106 or SF. So it can possibly assert that Rap City plays out videos for a certain amount of time, and voting on 106 & Park (which is BET's version of MTV's Total Request Live, a top-10 countdown show voted on by viewers) can increase airtime on television.
It should be noted that 106 and SF show both rap and R&B videos, while Rap City plays only rap videos (hence the title), something PTC won't point out, thus putting the report further into question. So that means that the R&B videos in the PTC's study could be seen only on BET if a viewer were to watch all three of the said programs habitually. Now I'm seeing that BET gave R&B videos "Just Fine" by Mary J. Blige and "Suffocate" by J. Holiday were shown only once in full length and about ten times in excerpt - apparantly I guess that is how 106 & Park makes a point when showing newer videos.
So this is ironic. Turns out that although the "cleaner" R&B videos are given more rotation than "dirty" rap videos, overall there are more rap videos in the "rap fan habitual pattern" that I shall refer a viewer who watches all three said programs.
Rap music, ever since the late 80s when some rappers like 2 Live Crew and N.W.A began using profanity and other explicit content in their lyrics than other rappers had, has always been controversial for that content. So have other genres of music: for example some 80s heavy metal music that came under criticism by the Parents Music Resource Center - which the PTC might as well be paying tribute to with The Rap on Rap. Indeed, it seems that the networks are taking PTC more seriously, as MTV isn't showing Sucker Free for the time being this summer (but still shows some rap videos within other general programs Friday Night MTV (FNMTV) and Total Request Live, and BET did rate the July 11 episode of 106 & Park "TV-PG-DLS". I've tried looking up specific, descriptor ratings for other BET programming but can't seem to find any. Finally, BET had this to say after NPR hosted Rev. Coates and PTC president Tim Winter:
"BET Networks takes our responsibility to our viewers seriously, and that's why we voluntarily established a standards process that reviews all the programming we air, including music videos. We routinely reject videos that do not meet our programming guidelines, and we have an ongoing dialogue with the labels and artists to find a balance between free and responsible expression. We encourage the Enough is Enough Campaign and the Parents Television Council to do the same."
So BET appears to accept that it's been accused of hurting our generation and gives a thumbs up to PTC.
As more people come to realize that "Enough is Enough" indeed, they'll probably stop accepting gratuitous sexual and "gangsta values" and start demanding more positive, competent hip-hop. I'm glad that at least BET chooses to side some more positive artists like Lupe Fiasco and Alicia Keys and Chris Brown besides the other junk and has approved PTC's complaints. Back before NWA/2 Live Crew most rap was less profane/vulgar than the PTC's worst nightmares; examples straight out of my MP3 player include Pete Rock & C.L. Smooth, LL Cool J (before 2000, his newer stuff sucks), Lupe Fiasco, Kanye West (who cares if he once said "George Bush doesn't care about black people?"), Eric B & Rakim, Talib Kweli, and Mos Def. Some of the mentioned artists fall under the "socially concious hip hop" banner. I hope that someday you'll join us and unite as one against excess sleaze - yes I admit I do listen to some gangsta rap but it's not to be enlisted in the vast corporate conspiracy, it's to open my mind to see "the other America".
Next time on "The state of modern American hip-hop", I'll look at how there's way too many cliches and "copyright infringement" in some of the newer rap songs...I thought that us music fans had more trouble for illegal downloading! Stay tuned...
22 August 2008
How will senior year go?
So today I picked up the revised version of my senior year schedule because of an error in class placement. I at least got into symphonic band rather than orchestra (I don't play string instruments; I play only piano and mallets) but did not get AP Computer Science. Which leaves my schedule as follows:
2nd - Teacher's assistant
3rd - AP Calculus BC
4th - Symphonic Band
5th - AP U.S. Government (1st sem.)/Economics (2nd sem.)
6th - English 4 (possibly might change to AP English Language if I can work something out with the counselors)
As far as this goes, it might be a lightly scheduled yet difficult senior year. Besides the complexity of the AP classes, there are other things I must deal with, including college apps, SAT's, and preparation for independent living. After having surfed CollegeBoard.com for the past two weeks, my college lookout so far aims at: San Jose State University, University of the Pacific, University of Washington (in Seattle, not DC), Reed College, Washington University (in St. Louis, again not Seattle or DC), UC Irvine, UC Riverside, and some others in certain areas of the US I'm eager to "temporarily" reside in.
Now that I'm lacking in AP Computer Science yet I still plan on majoring in a computer science/IT-related field in college, the question is: How will I be able to "prepare" myself for my major? I doubt that colleges would want a candidate for such a major who lacked any high school experience in the field. Luckily I still have other academic interests like business and mathematics (I got a 5 on the AP Calculus AB exam!) which I think I might as well advance my interests in in the time to come. This summer I've been exploring Java programming with the APCS homework (which the teacher recommended for ALL the potential APCS students) and the editing of Wikipedia.
Next year, I hope to be able to learn from the mistakes I made the past three years of high school and reverse them so that I can perform better this year, possibly even straight A's (something I so far haven't been able to get to in high school)! Luckily my "light" schedule will give me more time to practice for the SAT's and polish an impressive application - unintentionally increasing my acceptance chances. I've done many more practice problems for SAT thanks to the Princeton Review using a passcode provided in an SAT prep book I bought from Barnes & Noble. The same "learning from my mistakes" philosophy I shall use for SAT and everything else in life.
Anyways, after having picked up my schedule, I went home, had lunch, watched some Inuyasha, and practiced the piano.
And just a few minutes ago, I decided to revisit the Parents Television Council's April 2008 report The Rap on Rap that complained that the impressionable children watching the hip-hop video shows on BET and MTV are being corrupted by images of thug life, gratuitous images of women's body parts, foul language, and basically everything you dislike about rap music. This isn't a surprise given that rap music has always been controversial - even back in the late 80s/early 90s with N.W.A and 2 Live Crew. As a longtime fan of hip hop music I won't deny that a lot of it is morally incorrect. I certainly agree with the PTC's position that those programs are not "kid-friendly" and was quite surprised to notice that a sizable audience of kids age 2-11 watch such shows! But here's the thing: the PTC is an organization that many claim insist that TV be "politically correct" in the field of tradition values and accuse of dubious research, blatant deceit, and inflation of FCC complaint numbers. As I read through the PTC's report (which I've already done a few times) I also have some suspicions. Sure, I'd agree that the average viewer would be offended by much of the content on those shows, but the report doesn't note exactly which videos are "really" offensive and which aren't. The report also includes a table of videos included in the research, which ranged from gangsta rap ("100 Million" by Birdman, "Speedin'" by Rick Ross, "I'm So Hood" by DJ Khaled), rap "ballads" ("Fly Like Me" by Chingy, "Girl You Know" by Scarface, "I Won't Tell" by Fat Joe), R&B (various videos by Mary J. Blige, Chris Brown, etc.) among others. I've already gone on YouTube and previewed two of the "not-so-raunchy" choices: "Superstar" by Lupe Fiasco and "Independent" by Webbie, and I doubt that they'd match the PTC's fear-mongering impression of rap music. Furthermore, as pretty much all the videos shown on BET/MTV were edited for content, PTC freely admitted that its researchers referred to the "uncensored" versions to find out what got muted out - to get around the censors, maybe? As I have far much more to say afterwards, I'll continue this tomorrow.
2nd - Teacher's assistant
3rd - AP Calculus BC
4th - Symphonic Band
5th - AP U.S. Government (1st sem.)/Economics (2nd sem.)
6th - English 4 (possibly might change to AP English Language if I can work something out with the counselors)
As far as this goes, it might be a lightly scheduled yet difficult senior year. Besides the complexity of the AP classes, there are other things I must deal with, including college apps, SAT's, and preparation for independent living. After having surfed CollegeBoard.com for the past two weeks, my college lookout so far aims at: San Jose State University, University of the Pacific, University of Washington (in Seattle, not DC), Reed College, Washington University (in St. Louis, again not Seattle or DC), UC Irvine, UC Riverside, and some others in certain areas of the US I'm eager to "temporarily" reside in.
Now that I'm lacking in AP Computer Science yet I still plan on majoring in a computer science/IT-related field in college, the question is: How will I be able to "prepare" myself for my major? I doubt that colleges would want a candidate for such a major who lacked any high school experience in the field. Luckily I still have other academic interests like business and mathematics (I got a 5 on the AP Calculus AB exam!) which I think I might as well advance my interests in in the time to come. This summer I've been exploring Java programming with the APCS homework (which the teacher recommended for ALL the potential APCS students) and the editing of Wikipedia.
Next year, I hope to be able to learn from the mistakes I made the past three years of high school and reverse them so that I can perform better this year, possibly even straight A's (something I so far haven't been able to get to in high school)! Luckily my "light" schedule will give me more time to practice for the SAT's and polish an impressive application - unintentionally increasing my acceptance chances. I've done many more practice problems for SAT thanks to the Princeton Review using a passcode provided in an SAT prep book I bought from Barnes & Noble. The same "learning from my mistakes" philosophy I shall use for SAT and everything else in life.
Anyways, after having picked up my schedule, I went home, had lunch, watched some Inuyasha, and practiced the piano.
And just a few minutes ago, I decided to revisit the Parents Television Council's April 2008 report The Rap on Rap that complained that the impressionable children watching the hip-hop video shows on BET and MTV are being corrupted by images of thug life, gratuitous images of women's body parts, foul language, and basically everything you dislike about rap music. This isn't a surprise given that rap music has always been controversial - even back in the late 80s/early 90s with N.W.A and 2 Live Crew. As a longtime fan of hip hop music I won't deny that a lot of it is morally incorrect. I certainly agree with the PTC's position that those programs are not "kid-friendly" and was quite surprised to notice that a sizable audience of kids age 2-11 watch such shows! But here's the thing: the PTC is an organization that many claim insist that TV be "politically correct" in the field of tradition values and accuse of dubious research, blatant deceit, and inflation of FCC complaint numbers. As I read through the PTC's report (which I've already done a few times) I also have some suspicions. Sure, I'd agree that the average viewer would be offended by much of the content on those shows, but the report doesn't note exactly which videos are "really" offensive and which aren't. The report also includes a table of videos included in the research, which ranged from gangsta rap ("100 Million" by Birdman, "Speedin'" by Rick Ross, "I'm So Hood" by DJ Khaled), rap "ballads" ("Fly Like Me" by Chingy, "Girl You Know" by Scarface, "I Won't Tell" by Fat Joe), R&B (various videos by Mary J. Blige, Chris Brown, etc.) among others. I've already gone on YouTube and previewed two of the "not-so-raunchy" choices: "Superstar" by Lupe Fiasco and "Independent" by Webbie, and I doubt that they'd match the PTC's fear-mongering impression of rap music. Furthermore, as pretty much all the videos shown on BET/MTV were edited for content, PTC freely admitted that its researchers referred to the "uncensored" versions to find out what got muted out - to get around the censors, maybe? As I have far much more to say afterwards, I'll continue this tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)