The Network of Palintology

The state of Alaska best could represent America’s failure in the arena of conservation. Not only have we failed in the “lower 48,” but we raped and pillaged a vast wonderland of natural resources. Now the federal government must subsidize Americans to live in Alaska. Domestic violence is common, although ordinary crime rates are lower than continental North America. Alaska is an uncommon state and Roy Parker Jr., a veteran writer for the Fayetteville Observer, characterizes Alaskans having, “Minds that are as narrow as their landscape is expansive.” He erroneously calls Governor Sarah Palin a “yahoo,” a term usually reserved for Aborigines hunting and gathering food in the outback of Australia. The press is having a field day with Sarah Palin’s ex-bid for the United States vice-presidency, probably because of speculation she might declare herself a candidate for president in 2012. Could nothing be more absurd? Just because she accepted John McCain’s camps offer to be his surrogate running mate in the 2008 campaign does not ascribe Ms. Palin higher political rewards, or does it? Her continued press coverage at the Republican Governor’s convention and on daytime television talk shows does not mean she has such ambitions. It just means her presence in American politics is good fuel for "Reality TV." She should learn from the legacy of Martha Stewart. Whose glasses came first, Keith Olbermann or Sarah Palin’s? It is interesting such a woman can provoke such a vehement response from one political faction in America. John McCain lost. She is out of the race. Let it die. That is not the case. She is an enigmatic figure too ripe for the fodder of American media. They must have subject matter, and who else is there to chose? A woman was awarded the army’s first fourth star general rank, and she has received less media attention than Governor Sarah Palin. Is it because Sarah Palin is sponge, I mean media-worthy, or is it because she is available? Is it because the Republican National Party saw fit to buy her designer clothing? She has become a celebrity, and there is nothing wrong with that. It is just that television media over the last decade has blurred the boundaries between entertainment and news. Cable News Network’s inclusion of D.L. Hugley’s show in prime time is an example of this mistake. How can America take the news seriously, when ten seconds before there is a comedy routine on the same network. Somebody must cry wolf. It is schizophrenic, or in today’s extinct P.C., bipolar. Television is a large part of the problems present in politics and society today. Is this trend in television subconscious or conscious? Is it a childish and irresponsible reaction to what is around us on a daily basis, or is it an attempt to sell soap? In either case allowing television media to become Newspeak is a grave mistake. Google may have changed the standards for news media. They may have rendered the art of television extinct with their idea of selling advertising on the internet. Barack Obama used this internet connection to his advantage exposing the great potential of web-based media. Television still today remains a vital and viable source of news media and entertainment. With the deregulation of media and the selling of television networks on Wall Street, news has become diluted to the point of absurdity. Time Warner’s merger with AOL created a corporate monopoly that has doomed the television industry. The television set has become a pot roast of “feed the masses” losing its once conceptual vision of artistry. Networks have replaced shows diluting the necessary production crucial to the success of a particular program. There simply are too many channels and too little quality programming. What is next, the Sarah Palin network?