Thursday, October 06, 2011

How to make your campaign riveting, Chris Cooley makes the NFL cooler and less excuses for FAT kids

- Isn't Vladimir Putin a mortal lock to win a (rigged) Russian presidential election in March and (officially) return to power that he never actually left behind while stepping aside for a few years due to term limits? And if he is guaranteed to win the election, then why is he staging photo ops in order to make himself seem more manly and impressive? Putin’s hunting and exploring exploits have been hyped to near-Bill Bratzky proportions in Russia, but the latest example of a supposed feat of greatness might be his most ridiculous yet. After video of Putin diving to the bottom of a bay and discovering ceramic jugs from the sixth century surfaced, the Russian government pumped the accomplishment up for all it was worth. But something about the video just seemed odd and the possibility that the prime minister/pink-o commie bastard found them instead of an actual archaeologist seemed remote. Sure enough, the entire expedition was a giant fraud. Putin’s press secretary, Dmitri S. Peskov, admitted in an interview released Tuesday that the jugs had actually been found by archeologists during an expedition “several weeks or days before.” To set Putin up for his kill shot of greatness, the jugs were then placed in six feet of water, where Putin, dressed in a wetsuit and trailed by cameramen, could find them. “Naturally, they either left them there, or they put them there,” Peskov said. “This is completely normal. It is totally not a pretext for malicious joy and so forth.” Completely normal? You usually rig amazing photo and video ops to make your “elected” officials look more impressive rather than allowing them to accomplish amazing things on their own. Many Internet users were skeptical of the video as soon as it surfaced and perhaps that skepticism inspired Putin and his cronies to drop the charade. But when questioned about how manufactured and preconceived the video was, Peskov laughed and noted that he was on vacation when the episode was filmed, so he “could not have thought it up.” He went on to insist that Putin’s public relations operation is less extensive than critics think. “In general, regarding his ‘legend’ and so forth, Putin doesn’t need press secretaries or image-makers or public relations firms or anyone else,” Peskov said. “In fact, most of the time, he does it himself.” In other words, he doesn’t need anyone to stage his heroics because he can phony them up all by himself…………


- The NFL would be a better place if there were more players in it like Washington Redskins tight end Chris Cooley. Cooley, whose blog is always a great read because he’s liable to say just about anything if it crosses his mind. He’ll comment on being pulled into a bathroom at a casino for a random NFL drug test and he’ll do things like light up opposing players with the sort of criticism that most athletes will never levy against a peer. Cooley made an appearance on 106.7 The Fan in Washington earlier this week and was asked about the meltdown by the Dallas Cowboys in Week 4 as they squandered a 24-point, second-half lead and lost 34-30 at home to Detroit. Cooley was posed a question about Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo’s role in the collapse, throwing two interceptions that were returned for touchdowns to help Detroit get back into the game. Cooley responded that it was "amazing to watch him choke like that." Saying another played choked is taboo in most any sport, but Cooley also piled on by joking about slugging it out with Romo inside the cage, MMA-style. He has taken plenty of heat for his words, but Cooley is not only not backing down, he’s firing back. He wrote on his blog that he shows "no remorse in cheering against another team, especially the Cowboys." In a post titled "Reigniting a Rivalry," Cooley riffed that, "In a league full of glad-handing and ass slapping between competing teams, I actually care about the organization and fan base that has supported me throughout my 8-year career. If it sounded like I was delighted by Tony Romo's failure last week, I was." Flat-out awesome, hands down. Even better was his response to the suggestion that he should apologize to Cowboys fans for offending them. “I will never make an apology to any offended Dallas fans and I expect every Redskin fan to cheer at the folly of a Cowboy," Cooley wrote. He reserved his final dose of vitriol for the media members who had taken him to task for his words, chiding them for babying Romo and rallying to his defense instead of having a sense of humor and remaining at least slightly impartial. If only every NFL roster was populated by 53 Chris Cooleys…………


- Finally, something eliminating a potential excuse for FAT kids and their parents to explain why they are rocking a few dozen extra pounds. Thank you very much, Dr. Christopher Ferguson of Texas A&M International University, for leading a study that concluded food ads influence what children want to eat, but healthy messages from parents may help to mitigate that influence. In the study, children were given the option to o choose a coupon for apple slices or French fries that they saw advertised during cartoons. Their parents were then randomly assigned to read a script that advised the children to select either the healthier food or the food the child wanted the most. Children who viewed the commercial for the fries chose them 71 percent of the time if their parents remained neutral, compared with 55 percent who opted for the fries if their parents encouraged them to choose the healthy food. "Children were clearly influenced by the commercials they saw; however, parents are not powerless," Ferguson said. "Parents have an advantage if they are consistent with their long-term messages about healthy eating." By contrast, 46 percent of children who saw the commercial for apple slices chose the coupon for fries if their parents were neutral, while just 33 percent picked the coupon for fries if their parents encouraged them to choose the apple slices. In other words, if parents will only step up and grow a pair when it comes to ensuring their child makes better food choices, the problem can be solved. The study also examined the amount of time children spend watching TV and being exposed to unhealthy food messages and parents said their children watched at least three hours of TV a day on average. Given their findings, Ferguson and his team stated that the potential impact on healthy eating and the potential for obesity "probably should not be ignored." Unfortunately, the study’s participants were not exactly a cross section of America racially and many were Hispanic, so the results cannot be applied to make broader generalizations. Still, there is no harm in taking its message and using it as - pun intended - food for thought. "Food advertisements directed at children may have a small but meaningful effect on their healthy food choices," Ferguson's team concluded. Just not nearly the impact their parents can have by acting like semi-intelligent adults……….


- NBC is batting for a high average so far in the new TV season…..if the goal is to lead all of network television in new shows canceled before the season even hits the quarter pole. The Peacock already snagged the dubious honor of having the first new show canceled for the fall with the ill-fated “Playboy Club,” a retro look at the 1970s through the eyes of a Playboy-themed night club. That critically panned show crashed and burned after just three episodes and left a sizeable amount of egg on NBC’s face before October was even one week old. But less than a week after axing its first new series, NBC has dropped the hammer on another new show. The next victim is the low-rated new sitcom "Free Agents," starring Hank Azaria and Kathryn Hahn. Its final airing came Wednesday, drawing 3.3 million viewers and finishing fourth in its time slot. Those numbers looked even worse when compared to the new NBC sitcom "Up All Night," which preceded "Free Agents" on Wednesday, was watched by 5.6 million and showed audience growth from the previous week. NBC could ignore the poor performance of “Free Agents” no longer and had to swallow the bitter pill of canceling two new shows before any other network had even canceled one. Now could not be a great time to be an NBC executive in charge of finding new, original programming. In fact, someone associated with the decision to slot “Playboy Club” and “Free Agents” in the network’s primetime schedule should probably find their walking papers tacked to the brim of their urban sombrero when they wake up from their afternoon siesta at their desk (“Seinfeld” fans will get the reference). This would also be an optimal time for all of NBC’s other new shows to turn in solid ratings lest they too face the network’s cancellation firing squad……….


- Elections and campaigns would be much easier and more interesting to follow if they were all like the one featuring Republican Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and Democratic rival Elizabeth Warren. Warren recently ripped Brown during a Democratic debate for posing nude for Cosmopolitan magazine as a law student to help pay for his education. The debate questioner asked Warren and the five other candidates how they paid for college. As part of the prompt, the questioned mentioned Brown's centerfold. As ironic as it may have been for Democrat to rip a Republican for doing something that could be construed as extremely liberal, Warren remarking in part, "I kept my clothes on," led to a direct and terse reply from Brown. In a radio interview Thursday, Brown was asked about Warren’s remarks and didn’t elect for the politically correct reply. Instead, he said posing for the magazine was his best opportunity to pay for school and commented, "Thank God" Warren didn't take her clothes off to pay for college. Hey-oh! Nothing like slamming a potential campaign opponent for being overweight and/or unattractive. Calling a woman FAT is typically grounds for an all-out brawl, but Warren responded by Brown’s retort by saying she would "survive a few jabs from Scott Brown" over her appearance. Right, except that wasn’t a jab from Brown. You took an unprovoked shot at him and he responded with a pretty funny comment of his own, so acting like he did an unexpected drive-by on you and cracked on your appearance for no good reason is disingenuous. But the point of the entire mini-saga is not who was right or wrong, in or out of bounds, but rather than Brown and Warren have shown candidates in every other race at every level of government how to make their race much more interesting and newsworthy. Just make sure one of you once posed nude for a major magazine and that the other is an overweight, unattractive person whose appearance is easy to ridicule…………

No comments: