Random News Stories

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This isn't the same as the Lite Brite scare in Boston, which was just stupid.

And while I appreciate the irony of a stale and over-used conservative joke being played on Florida (which isn't particularly conservative by population, but DOES contain many of the crazier conservatives), starting a panic on the radio IS a crime and SHOULD BE a crime.

A few years ago, they'd be fined up the ass by the SEC, which I think is appropriate.  Post-911, they're gonna get the book thrown on top of them¹.




¹  The Book has gotten larger since the coining of the phrase "throwing the book at".

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This isn't the same as the Lite Brite scare in Boston, which was just stupid.

And while I appreciate the irony of a stale and over-used conservative joke being played on Florida (which isn't particularly conservative by population, but DOES contain many of the crazier conservatives), starting a panic on the radio IS a crime and SHOULD BE a crime.

A few years ago, they'd be fined up the ass by the SEC, which I think is appropriate.  Post-911, they're gonna get the book thrown on top of them¹.




¹  The Book has gotten larger since the coining of the phrase "throwing the book at".

I first heard of the "joke" when Penn and Teller did it a few years ago, and I didn't find it particularly funny THEN, either. It just smacks of looking down on people for not knowing something you know. HAW HAW, IGNORANT PLEBES! HOW FOOLISH OF YOU TO BE UNDEREDUCATED IN SCIENCE!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This isn't the same as the Lite Brite scare in Boston, which was just stupid.

And while I appreciate the irony of a stale and over-used conservative joke being played on Florida (which isn't particularly conservative by population, but DOES contain many of the crazier conservatives), starting a panic on the radio IS a crime and SHOULD BE a crime.

A few years ago, they'd be fined up the ass by the SEC, which I think is appropriate.  Post-911, they're gonna get the book thrown on top of them¹.




¹  The Book has gotten larger since the coining of the phrase "throwing the book at".

I first heard of the "joke" when Penn and Teller did it a few years ago, and I didn't find it particularly funny THEN, either. It just smacks of looking down on people for not knowing something you know. HAW HAW, IGNORANT PLEBES! HOW FOOLISH OF YOU TO BE UNDEREDUCATED IN SCIENCE!

It's been around since the 90s at least, as an email forward, an appeal to ridicule against the EPA, etc, by po'buckers who thought that because it was new to them, it would be new to everyone.

It was stale in 1998, and it's worse now.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Yeah, OK, I see I'm only arguing to defend my initial chuckle at the joke, which isn't worth defending at the expense of being an asshole. I cede my position.

I do want to punish people for not caring more about science, but maybe that kind of thing isn't the way to do it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I do want to punish people for not caring more about science,

That might be the wrong approach. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I do want to punish people for not caring more about science,

That might be the wrong approach.

Maybe we could take their food stamps away if they get bad grades.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yeah, OK, I see I'm only arguing to defend my initial chuckle at the joke, which isn't worth defending at the expense of being an asshole. I cede my position.

I do want to punish people for not caring reform the education and economic system so that people have the opportunity to learn more about science, but maybe that kind of thing isn't the way to do it.

Maybe you meant something more like this?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Yeah, OK, I see I'm only arguing to defend my initial chuckle at the joke, which isn't worth defending at the expense of being an asshole. I cede my position.

I do want to punish people for not caring reform the education and economic system so that people have the opportunity to learn more about science, but maybe that kind of thing isn't the way to do it.

Maybe you meant something more like this?

Yes I did mean something more like that. Thank you.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This isn't the same as the Lite Brite scare in Boston, which was just stupid.

And while I appreciate the irony of a stale and over-used conservative joke being played on Florida (which isn't particularly conservative by population, but DOES contain many of the crazier conservatives), starting a panic on the radio IS a crime and SHOULD BE a crime.

A few years ago, they'd be fined up the ass by the SEC, which I think is appropriate.  Post-911, they're gonna get the book thrown on top of them¹.




¹  The Book has gotten larger since the coining of the phrase "throwing the book at".

I first heard of the "joke" when Penn and Teller did it a few years ago, and I didn't find it particularly funny THEN, either. It just smacks of looking down on people for not knowing something you know. HAW HAW, IGNORANT PLEBES! HOW FOOLISH OF YOU TO BE UNDEREDUCATED IN SCIENCE!

It's been around since the 90s at least, as an email forward, an appeal to ridicule against the EPA, etc, by po'buckers who thought that because it was new to them, it would be new to everyone.

It was stale in 1998, and it's worse now.

There's a Wikipedia page for it, apparently: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yeah, OK, I see I'm only arguing to defend my initial chuckle at the joke, which isn't worth defending at the expense of being an asshole. I cede my position.

I do want to punish people for not caring reform the education and economic system so that people have the opportunity to learn more about science, but maybe that kind of thing isn't the way to do it.

Maybe you meant something more like this?

Yes I did mean something more like that. Thank you.

Awesome! In that case, I agree completely.

[LMNO]

Nigel, I admit I laughed and had a bit of "LOL dummy" at the expense of the panicked masses, though when you pointed out the problem, I had to agree with you.

I am wondering if felony charges are appropriate, though.  Would you say the potential punishment fits this crime?

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

People thought the Martians were invading when Orson Wells said so on the radio and he wasn't even trying to prank anybody, AFAIK.
Never underestimate gullibility, I guess, and it WAS fucked up.

Nigel, I admit I laughed and had a bit of "LOL dummy" at the expense of the panicked masses, though when you pointed out the problem, I had to agree with you.

I am wondering if felony charges are appropriate, though.  Would you say the potential punishment fits this crime?

Wouldn't this have been just a bigass FCC fine not so long ago?

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

BREAKING: EYEBALLS CONTAIN BRAINS AND BAYBEES

TOPEKA, KANSAS — Wednesday morning Kansas state legislators in the senate took a vote on the definition of where life begins in hopes of stopping all abortions from occurring. HB2254 declares "life begins at a twinkle in a father's eye" and won nearly unanimous approval with one dissenting opinion saying "life should also begin in a mother's eye as well."

This bill would basically give permission to any man who ever thought about having a child at any time to declare this thought as a "valid form of life conception." Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook (R-Shawnee) described the bill saying, "once a child is thought about in the eye of its father it has taken on a true existence. We need to protect and defend that life to the fullest extent of the law. Thoughts can't just protect themselves, you know."

Oops, I got Poe'd.

Hard to tell anymore. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Nigel, I admit I laughed and had a bit of "LOL dummy" at the expense of the panicked masses, though when you pointed out the problem, I had to agree with you.

I am wondering if felony charges are appropriate, though.  Would you say the potential punishment fits this crime?

Oh, it's definitely got the old "taste of horrormirth" going on. It's not that it isn't funny, it's that it's a combination of funny and HORRIFYING.

And yes, I think that for something like that, felony charges could be appropriate, depending on the degree of panic and the public cost. Plus, a hefty fine on the station, for not training its broadcasters.

[Junkenstein]

I've been pondering this the past couple of days.

On one hand, I tell outrageous lies to any who I think would believe them. It's caused a few laughs over the years, and I doubt anyone was seriously hurt. Felony charges seem a bit strong for what was clearly intended to be a prank (The date helps that defence) and surely in good humour.

I'm giving the benefit of the doubt for good humour because I think that DJ's would technically be classed as news broadcasters. Now if you start handing out felony charges to news broadcasters that have caused panic and alarm with false information.... you have to start making a big list.

There's also the thing that the only people really allowed to be pissed about this in my opinion is the listener base, which I doubt is that large in the scheme of things. Complaints will be coming from everywhere. Seems kind of unfair as they weren't advertising revenue before and are even less likely to be now. I could see a hypothetical situation where they get more letters of support than complaint from their actually listener base and still get sacked. That seems kind of shitty.