BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Baseball protest....

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
grant
12:57 / 11.04.03
In my inbox:

Hey y'all,

This seems sort of trivial in the face of war,
but if you happen to be
a fan of both baseball and free speech, you might
consider taking a
couple of minutes to make a free phone call to
the baseball hall of
fame. It seems that the Hall of Fame president, a
former official in
the Reagan administration, canceled a 15th
anniversary celebration of
"Bull Durham" because of anti-war criticism by
co-stars Tim Robbins and
Susan Sarandon.

You can see the article on espn.com:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0409/1536711.html

I'm not a big fan of "Bull Durham" and I don't
care much about the hall
of fame, but this guy is clearly an asshole who
is using his position
of power not to speak his mind about issues, but
to censor those who
disagree with him. Call up the hall of fame
number (toll free) and dial
0 to get an operator. You can leave a message for
Dale Petroskey with
the operator and let him know that you think this
sucks.
The number: (888) HALL-OF-FAME or 888.425.5633

You can also forward this message if you hate the
idea of baseball
being only for Republicans.

Peace, Dave

 
 
Cherry Bomb
08:29 / 15.04.03
From the ESPN article: "In a free country such as ours, every American has the right to his or her own opinions, and to express them. Public figures, such as you, have platforms much larger than the average American's, which provides you an extraordinary opportunity to have your views heard -- and an equally large obligation to act and speak responsibly," Petroskey wrote.


I'm wondering, if one is against the war, and one speaks out against the war, in what way is that irresponsible? Am I missing something?
 
 
Cherry Bomb
08:39 / 15.04.03
Sorry for the double post, but I was just doing some searching around on this on the net and seems to me that Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon are being painted as the new "Hanoi Jane" & co. Let's not forget ththe United Way cancelled an appearance of Susan Sarandon because they'd allegedly received too many complaints about her flashing the peace sign.

I never knew that flashing the peace sign would one day become controversial...
 
 
fluid_state
01:27 / 16.04.03
it's like a cartoon of the 60's, where that little "V" brands all your opinions invalid (you dirty hippie). A generation or two of armchair soldiers are choosing to "fight" this war by attacking dissenting opinions with any tools at their disposal. About tantamount to going to a sports match and beating on an opposing fan, "for the good of the team", and possibly getting chucked in the drunk tank to prove your loyalty.
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
02:02 / 23.04.03
You know, the US is a free country with free speech. We all have the right to say what we want without persecution by the GOVERNMENT. In the private sector, censorship is ALSO a form of free speech. Then, we have the right to protest that censorship by the private organization. The pieces will fall where they may. Sorry to say, most US residents don't have much use for the commentaries of Sarandon, Robbins, or any other Hollywood, fantasy-land residents.
 
 
fluid_state
02:58 / 23.04.03
I saw an amazing cartoon a little while ago, found at the Prelinger Archives; called "Make Mine Freedom", it was from the late 50s, and the first 5 minutes basically outlined the salient text of the Constitution. It got to the "Freedom to assemble, freedom of speech and belief" and the image was perfect. Two guys hollering and shouting and screaming at one another. It was the perfect representation of operational Constitutional rights, that the right to free speech implied that you would have the uneviable task of illustrating and defending your belief, while at the same time having to allow others to do the same. You talk, you argue a point, you listen to dissenting opinions (that you may defeat them, of course, but you MUST listen, or violence is your only option)...

So my sadness for America comes from the loss of that view. Debate has all but vanished from the U.S. Opinion is maniplated and directed on myriad levels, and very few see can the value in the attempt to understand one's opposition. This attempt is vital, and all but vanished. There are many examples of recent government persecution of free speech, some justified, most not so. And the private sector, well, if you and I are on a mission to spread our opinions to "the masses", and you can afford a megaphone but I cannot, well, you're going to succeed. You certainly have no reason to debate me or the validity of my belief in such a context.
 
 
Cherry Bomb
08:28 / 23.04.03
Sorry to say, most US residents don't have much use for the commentaries of Sarandon, Robbins

I think US residents need such views more than ever, given the current "open" political climate.
 
 
RadJose
08:41 / 23.04.03
all i'm sayin' if that we're so concerned what famous perosn is seeing whom, what they do in their free time, and what outfits they wear to thier Hollywood parties, why do people get upset when they actually talk about what they belive, they have every right as far as i can see!
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
13:00 / 23.04.03
I'm curious as to how many people who posted here are actually from the US. Anyway, my point is, they have the right to speak, we have the right to disagree and not listen to it. And believe me, "conservative" America is very aware of how the dissenting opinion feels about things. Nowhere else in the world would the MINORITY (yes, the LEFT is in the minority) get such a large platform to speak it's views.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
14:24 / 23.04.03
Nowhere else in the world would the MINORITY (yes, the LEFT is in the minority) get such a large platform to speak it's views.

That's exactly the kind of comment that makes me dismiss Americans off hand. Ignoring the unsubtle and traditionalist insult to the left, it's obvious that you, my little piglet, generalise terribly about the role of the US. Are you trying to tell me that the US provides a bigger platform for free speech then Canada, Australia, France or the UK? Ignoring the ridiculously biased media coverage- your police in NYC have been beating anti-war protestors up quite brutally and it just shows that fundamentalist mentality applies because few nations 'with a large platform to speak (their) views' actually have had much trouble. You are doing America a disservice by being so insular and short sighted.
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
14:30 / 23.04.03
Once again, do you live here? I would hold a resident's opinion on this matter higher than a non-resident's, simply because they may have first-hand accounts. And yes, the US has a larger platform for free-speech. We have more media outlets than any other country in the world, not to mention the unfettered access to all types of views through the internet. If these other countries have such massive devotion to free speech, how do you think I'd fare if I went there to spout my own views and propoganda? You guys only support free speech when the speech reflects it's own views.
 
 
fluid_state
16:38 / 23.04.03
Ah, but you don't live with me, so I'm going to dismiss your views about my opinion out of hand, rather than deal with them.
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
17:28 / 23.04.03
And I shall do the same.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:29 / 23.04.03
Sorry, by "you guys" do you mean the Canadians, the French, the UK and Australia? And by "its own views" do you mean "their own views", that is, the single view held by the populations of Canada, France, the UK and Australia? Or do you mean the multinational "us guys" of Barbelith? Just wond'rin'...

It seems to me that the Hall of Fame can cancel whatever events it wishes, it being a private company. Where things get interesting is when trade is restrained, as in Martin Sheen being sacked from the West Wing or Robbins or Sarandon not being able to get backing for their next film. On the one hand, this is, after all, business, and Sarandon or Sheen might be bad box office as a result of their perceived lack of patriotism, on the other vague, uncomfortable thoughts of the Hollywood blacklist do bob up.

Hoom.
 
 
Ganesh
17:34 / 23.04.03
Piglet: I'f you're suggesting that one cannot comment on this (in a valid way) unless one lives in the US, then you, following a similar line of logic, cannot reasonably compare the degree of freedom of speech with "nowhere else in the world" since you do not, presumably, reside there...
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
18:30 / 23.04.03
Fair enough, Ganesh. I didn't say that non-residents hold no value to me, just that I am more likely to hold a resident's opinion to be more accurate, since they may have first hand knoweldge. OK, "you guys" was a sweeping generalization. I would correctly assume that the majority opinion in these countries you listed to be more liberal and typically anti-American, and certainly that appears to be the concensus here at Barbelith. As far as trade restraint goes, again, it is a private industry. Now if one can prove they were denied employment because of their beliefs, they will have a nifty court case on their hands. But the typically liberal Hollywood has been passing over "conservative" actors for years without much fuss. Something like that is hard to prove, but few in Hollywood will deny it.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
18:36 / 23.04.03
The US is rather large and proportionally doesn't have particularly good media resources. Most Europeans would consider an awful lot of your newspapers to be akin to the tabloid press and that includes me and I have read a lot of American coverage prior to the war and during it. Likewise the US news channels that are available via satellite were particularly patriotic and I think that the Internet is hardly American, it simply happens to have some American sites.

I'm not anti-American piglet by any stretch of the imagination but I am anti-nationalism and short sighted patriotism and I couldn't give a shit about the individual that exhibits these traits. Alas the citizens of the US seem to be in the number one slot in the 'civilised world'.
 
 
Ganesh
18:48 / 23.04.03
Well, even the word "liberal" has different connotations from country to country - and I'm not sure there's a straightforward overlap with "anti-American". I'd also hesitate to claim Barbelith is able (or willing) to establish a "concensus" on anything...

And are you a Hollywood actor, Piglet? If not, following the 'do you live there' line of reasoning, I'm not sure I see your opinion on the industry as being especially accurate.
 
 
Linxy Kakenhoff
18:49 / 23.04.03
I will have to agree with Anna de Logardiere on this point. Nearly all of "the rest of us" ie Canada, France etc dismiss most of the American press as being government controlled. The coverage of the "War on Iraq" is a prime example. Stories and information being published as fact have turned out to be false, or glorified at later inspection by less biased sources.
 
 
Hieronymus
19:00 / 23.04.03
Piglet, as someone who does live here in the US, I'm dying to take this to task. How exactly do you surmise that non-American news agencies are 'anti-American' and second, how exactly is not being a fan of this war not being American (whatever the hell that means)? I ask because I've grown weary of this jingoistic tripe of categorizing dissent as 'unpatriotic/un-American/[insert nationalistic demonization here]'. It's as much a part of the American body politic as being gung-ho for war. So why the stinky polarization?

I'm also curious about this liberal conspiracy you seem to be touting that the 'typically liberal Hollywood has been passing over conservative actors for years'. You go on to say that something like that is hard to prove, and yet you prop it up as if you have some sort of evidence. Huh?
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
20:17 / 23.04.03
Doctor, I did not say that dissent = un-American. I also did not say that non-American news agencies were anti-American. I said that the general populations of the countries mentioned have ill feelings about the US. I find it funny that because I disagree with Sarandon and Robbins, and most of you folks here, you automatically label me as a short-sighted, jingoistic stinky polarist. :P And I only point out the theory that conservatives are getting passed over in Hollywood to show that the idea that someone would get denied a job for their political beliefs is likely nothing new, so why the uproar now?
 
 
Ganesh
20:28 / 23.04.03
Hardly an "uproar" here or anywhere else.

Unlike your good self (it would appear), I'm unable to speak authoritatively for anyone other than myself, so cannot comment on the views of "most" people here on Barbelith, much less the "general populations" of entire countries. I certainly haven't concluded that you're a "short-sighted, jingoistic, stinky polarist" - but you do seem somewhat prone to sweeping generalisations...
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
20:33 / 23.04.03
Ganesh, I haven't met anyone in my life who isn't, have you?
 
 
Ganesh
20:41 / 23.04.03
Yes, actually, I have. In my line of work, there's a specific emphasis on examining automatic assumptions and overgeneralisations - so I know several individuals who're careful about this sort of thing, particularly in writing.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
21:15 / 23.04.03
Piglet, I think that lots of people have access to American news media via the web, and in that sense most people here probably have first-hand experience of the American media. It can be hard to make direct comparisons between media in different countries; it seems to me, for example, that in the UK we have a stronger national and weaker local press than you do, probably largely because the smaller area here makes large-scale national distribution more feasible. However, I certainly don't agree that the American media is more open to dissenting views than ours is - we've got a wide spread of opinion in the national press, even in the tabloids - and I'd guess that Canadians and the French would say the same of their media. I do think that it's perhaps easier for Americans of whatever political stripe to get their individual viewpoints out via personal websites, simply because access to the internet is better across the pond - but that's openness to all, not just the opposition. The impression I get from reading the American media and Americans' personal sites is that it is probably correct to say that the American television and radio media are broadly biased towards the Republicans, and that right-leaning radio and television hosts and channels can be extremely intolerant of dissent - more so than television and radio over here, for what it's worth - and can and do deliberately set out to shout down dissent and prevent dissenting viewpoints being aired as much as they can. But then, that's their job, isn't it.

I have no doubt that quite a lot of people over here and in Canada and in France have feelings of antagonism towards the United States, but I think much of that is directed at the current administration rather than at the American population.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:27 / 23.04.03
But the typically liberal Hollywood has been passing over "conservative" actors for years without much fuss

Like Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger?

But seriously, folks - you're probably right, CP, in the sense that politically conservative actors probably don't speak up about their beliefs, and that rabidly conservative actors may find a difficult culture to fit into - rather like a friend of mine, who watched with mild confusion as a Labour Party member applied for a job at Conservative Central Office, claiming that his political allegiance had no bearing on his capacity top do his job.

Actually, what is striking me is that I know very little about the politics of almost any Hollywood celebrity, except for the tremendously outspoken - Robbins, Willis (who, lest we forget, wanted to sign up to go to Iraq), Sarandon, Woody Harrelson, Martin Sheen, Michael Moore if he counts....that's about it. Admittedly, my Celebrity Culture 101 is poor to dreadful, but it seems that, in my experience at least, Hollywood is reasonably quiet about its political beliefs, except perhaps for how it portrays politicians in film and TV - The West Wing and 24 spring immediately to mind on portrayals of apparently left-leaning Presidents being presented in a largely positive light.

However, on the statement I said that the general populations of the countries mentioned have ill feelings about the US....it may surprise nobody that sections of the populations of pretty much every country in the world currently seem to have reservations about current US foreign (and domestic) policy, including the US. To say that a "general population" has "ill feelings" is, however, nebulous to say the least. I haven't seen much anti-American feeling on the streets of London. Anti-Bush, yes. Anti-war, also yes, but even in those groups people seem reasonably successfully to separate the nation from the leadership, and probably the greater part of the population are broadly supportive of the leaderhsip as well - the war has improved the Labour cabinet's popularity, and has been broadly supported by all but two of the major daily newspapers. So, no labelling, but I think your information is at least in the case of the UK a tad off.
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
01:53 / 24.04.03
Is there a census thread for Barbelith around here somewhere? I'd love to see the combined political and religious leanings, as well as nationality, gender, race, etc. Just to get a feel for who all hangs out here.

Anyway, back to the subject. For those that say the American media leans to the right, that shows just how far left YOU lean. Though compared to you folks, I seem extremely conservative, I would say I fall in a middle range politically, at least here in the US. When I have more time to devote to this, I will provide some examples of how the mainstream US media tilts to the left (left of the center of this country would probably be the best description). I will also provide a list of celebrities who contributed money to their favorite political party, when I get a chance. The list for the Republican and Libertarian parties is a fraction of the list for the Democratic and Green parties.

Haus, I'm glad to know that you good folks can separate the country from the administration and/or the war. But what else do you have to separate from us to like us? Cut out the Christians, cut out the pro-lifers, cut out the capitalists, cut out the SUV drivers, cut out the American Idol fans, and you got a lump of people you can love.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
02:43 / 24.04.03
Cut out the Christians, cut out the pro-lifers, cut out the capitalists, cut out the SUV drivers, cut out the American Idol fans

Oh, the unobtainable dream!
 
 
Ganesh
08:26 / 24.04.03
To my knowledge, there is no specific census thread on Barbelith - hence the difficulty in generalising about consensus opinion among 'us folks'. Perhaps you'd like to start one, Piglet? I look forward to your summaries on the political inclinations of US media and Hollywood actors also.

But what else do you need to separate from us to like us?

This seems rather an odd question: who's asking it, and to whom is it directed? Between individuals, it's relatively straightforward: one likes or dislikes individual American people for much the same reasons one likes or dislikes anyone else. Between groups, communities or nations, the situation is far more nebulous (can a nation collectively "like" something? Are we talking polls and majorities?). Who is "you" and who is "us", and what would one liking or loving the other actually entail?
 
 
Cherry Bomb
08:38 / 24.04.03
CP: I am an American but I've been living in London for about a year. Does that count?

Anyhoo, before I get into the issues I'd like to say welcome to the board, good to have you. It's nice to see someone argue "another side" while remaining pretty respectful of others. Personally I love a good argument and it sounds like you may have some interesting views to bring to the table so I hope you stick around.

Now, back to the issue at hand. Having experienced the media of both the U.S. and other countries I would say that the U.K. at least allows more viewpoints via the press than the U.S. You have a choice of about 12 or more newspapers everyday to purchase here, and some of them are liberal and others are more conservative. You simply don't have that much choice in the U.S. I'd say either the New York Times or the San Francisco Chronicle are the most liberal major papers that I know of in the U.S. But so many papers are owned by Rupert Murdoch or the Tribune Co. or Gannett and they are NOT going to be allowing too much of a liberal voice. Though it has been my experience in Chicago at least that after Murdoch purchased the Chicago Sun-Times it became so conservative that compared to it, the Chicago Tribune looked like a copy of The Socialist Worker.

And say what you will about The Washington Post or The New York Times, neither of those papers are as liberal as they once were. And I can assure you that there are stories that NBC, ABC and CBS will not touch because they come across as "Anti-American."

I guess I'm getting off topic a bit here but back to Sarandon and Co. Yes, I'll agree with you that there do seem to be more liberal celebrities than conservative ones but I don't think the reason people like Schwarzenneger and Willis say aren't getting work has anything to do with their views and more to do with the returns on their last movies. Money talks and bullshit walks, as they say.

And I do think that there is a tremendous difference between the American climate during Gulf War I from now, in that in 1990 - 91 people felt that they could and did criticize Bush the First without being labelled "anti-American." I'm not saying you're labelling anyone Anti-American, but now let's look at the Dixie Chicks, Sarandon, Robbins, Sheryl Crowe and anyone else who says anything about Bush 2.

And what I find particularly hypocritical is the fact that the people who cry "Anti-American!" the loudest when someone criticizes the actions or policies of the current Bush administration tend to be the ones who spent the entirety of the Clinton administration bashing him and his presidency at every turn.

That said I think questioning and criticizing American policy is about as American as you can get. (And yes I am pretty darn liberal!)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:47 / 24.04.03
Then again, maybe the people are just getting the press they want - I mean, if very few people in the US would buy a paper lkke the Guardian (which, if you were looking for a political position in US terms, would be - what? "Naderesque Neo-New Deal Deomcrat"), then there's no business case to produce one. After all, the Guardian itelf sells far less than many more right-wing papers in Britain, and is associated with being read by teachers, social workers, IT workers - people who stand slightly outside the "business caste", if you like. Good Sports section, mind.

CP is right, albeit not terribly surprising, though. Mainstream US politics are in language at least further right than mainstream European politics, at a huge generalisation, which are probably in turn further right than the politics of many but not all the people here on Barbelith. But that's a series of generalisations. Therefore a left-leaning US media may yet be further right than media in other countries that are not perceived as being left-leaning.

Can any US residents among us think of stories they have come across in the "alternative"
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
14:49 / 24.04.03
Here is a breakdown of contribution money from Hollywood:
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?Ind=B02

Here are some famous Democrats (far from a complete list, but a good start):
Brad Pitt
Danny Glover
Ed Asner (on "Mary Tyler Moore")
Mike Farrel (*M*A*S*H, and "Ed")
Melissa Etheridge
Larry King
Martin Sheen
Alfre Woodard
David Hasselhoff
Jennifer Aniston
Jimmy Smith
Whoopi Goldberg
Rob Lowe
Muhammad Ali
Sugar Ray
Tommy Lee Jones
Warren Beatty
Quentin Tarantino
Sheryl Crowe
Boyz II Men
Babyface
Frank Sinatra
Sisqo
Martin Short
Nelly
Coolio
Jayson Williams (the basketball player)
Mark Twain
Tom Arnold
Jack Nicholson
Christopher Reeve
Aretha Franklin
Bonnie Raitt
Crosby Stills & Nash
Chuck D. Still
Warren Beatty
Steven Spielberg
David Geffen
Jeffrey Katzenberg
Kevin Eubanks

Here is another list, some of the names are repeated:
Robert Altman
Jennifer Anniston
Ed Asner
Alec Baldwin
Marcia Ball
Harry Belafonte
Sandra Bernhard
Bono
Jackson Browne
Gabriel Bryne
George Carlin
Stockard Channing
Cher
David Clennon
George Clooney
Glenn Close
Ben Cohen
Sean Combs
Paula Cole
Sheryl Crow
Rosario Dawson
Ani DiFranco
Mike Farrell
Peter Gabriel
Janeane Garofalo
Richard Gere
Ed Gernon
Danny Glover
Whoopi Goldberg
Larry Hagman
Woody Harrelson
Ed Harris
Dustin Hoffman
Chrissie Hynde
Bianca Jagger
Jessica Lange
Heath Ledger NEW
Spike Lee
Madonna NEW
Natalie Maines
Dave Matthews
John Mellencamp
Tom Morello 4/20
Michael Moore
Viggo Mortensen NEW
Edward Norton
Sean Penn
Julia Roberts
Tim Robbins UPD
Susan Sarandon
Martin Scorsese
Martin Sheen
Oliver Stone
Barbra Streisand
Meryl Streep
Donald Sutherland
Gore Vidal
Harvey Weinstein
Robin Williams

Here is a link to a list of famous Libertarians. You may see some of these names in the Democrat list and the Republican list I will post in a bit, since Libertarianism is sort of a cross between the two:
http://www.stuorg.iastate.edu/libertarians/famous.html

Actually, here is a better article regarding the 2002 election campaign contributions. The republican list pales in comparison to the deomcrat and green party lists.
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v5/alertv5_52.asp

OK, enough for one post, I will work on the media bias post later.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:58 / 24.04.03
Sorry, but since when did giving money to the Democrat party have anything to do with being liberal or left-wing? If it was ever either prior to Clinton, it sure ain't now...
 
 
grant
15:19 / 24.04.03
Actually, within Hollywood, it's pretty well known that the actors ("talent") are generally Democrats, and the producers/studio execs (who pay the talent's salaries) are generally Republicans. (David Geffen bucks that trend. So does Mel Gibson.)

Besides which, Ronald Reagan. Not to mention Fred Thompson & Sonny Bono.

What does this prove?
 
 
Capitalist Piglet
15:22 / 24.04.03
Well, considering that people tend to donate to things that reflect their views, and the Democratic party typically holds views that are left of center (in the US, mind you), I would have to say it is a good indicator of that person's own political viewpoint. It is very likely that you, personally, hold very far left viewpoints, and thus, the current Democratic Party may seem conservative to you. But when talking about the poltical scale from liberal to conservative (don't remind me that there are other political dimensions, I know this) within this country, the Democratic party falls left of center.
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply