“Part of the problem is that if anybody has a gut reaction about an issue, they can go online and have it backed up. That said, they can also find support for their ideas in the mainstream media—because when the mainstream media gives a so-called balanced view, it’s often misleading. The media thinks that because one side says climate change is real and dangerous, the other view is that it’s not real and not dangerous. That doesn’t reflect the fact that something like 98 percent of climate scientists agree that global warming is real and dangerous. And this happens with everything from genetically modified foods to evolution. But, at the end of the day, all that this misinformation does is slow progress—it doesn’t stop it. Antiscientific and pseudoscientific attitudes will get corrected; it’s just a question of how painful that process is going to be.”
— Simon Singh, from interview in Wired regarding long fought libel court case he recently won

Read All of John Hodgman's Hilarious Emmy Announcements | Vulture →

popculturebrain:

“Eric Stonestreet hails from Kansas, and reports that while growing up, he wanted to be a disc jockey, a Marine, a prison administrator and a clown. Apparently that is all one job in Kansas.”

“[Modern Family co-creators] Steven Levitan and Christopher Lloyd became writing and producing partners in 2006. They met at the top of the Empire State Building, and have gone back there every year to create a new Kelsey Grammer sitcom.”

“Economists credit Jane Lynch’s character on Glee with creating over 62,000 new jobs in the polyester tracksuit industry.”

“Ryan Murphy was previously nominated for directing the pilot of Nip/Tuck. Until then, no one in Hollywood had even heard of plastic surgery.”

“As Jim Parson walks to the stage now, nerds across America are taking to the streets in joy, setting cars on fire, and then backing away, using their inhalers.”

“[Edie Falco is] of Swedish and Italian descent, which means both her parents were constantly cooking meatballs.”

“Aaron Paul says his first memory of television was loving Fraggle Rock. For those of you who don’t know, you’ll presume ‘fraggle rock’ was an extremely powerful type of crystal meth.”

“Archie Panjabi…made her film debut in the British comedy East is East, which had a shocking twist ending in which it turned out that east is actually west.”

“[Dexter director Steve Shill’s] first TV memory is watching Doctor Who. Quite frankly, Doctor Who is my only TV memory.”

“On her father’s side, Golden Globe winner Kyra Sedgwick is descended from William Ellery, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. I believe that means that every July fourth, Ms. Sedgwick gets a residual check.”

“[Winter Olympics director] Bucky Gunts majored in hotel management at Cornell, but changed to television after his thesis on ice-making machines was deemed wildly speculative, and probably dangerous. That name again is Bucky Gunts.”

“I’m not sure that the Academy would be so quick to reward The Daily Show if they knew what we used these Emmys for around the office. Executive Producer Rory Albanese will accept for the program because Jon Stewart is too busy resting in his bed of melted Emmys.”

“Before achieving success as an actor, David Strathairn attended the Ringling Bros. Clown college. He majored in balloon twisting, and minored in starring in acclaimed independent movies.”

“[Temple Grandin director] Mick Jackson’s feature film credits include The Bodyguard, L.A. Story, and Volcano. Interestingly, none of these movies was about a renowned animal doctor who was also autistic. Because there are some stories that can only be told on television.”

He concludes with a bland intro to Al Pacino: “This is Al Pacino’s second Emmy win. He previously won an Emmy in 2003 for his portrayal of Roy Cohn in HBO’s Angels in America.” Those who wondered whether he had gone soft were relieved to read the two tweets he quickly sent out:

“I had a note from on high to play it straight with Pacino. I wish you could have heard my Barry Levinson material.”

and then, and example:

“Were you aware of it?: Barry Levinson, David Simon, and John Waters meet in a Baltimore diner every Sunday and eat scrapple together.”

Hodgman out.

Will Hines: This Glenn Beck MLK Rally Bullshit →

I expect one of you smart people to find some essay out there the properly explains to me the true motivation of the people who showed up to support Glenn Beck. Not a snarky one line dismissal. Thousands of people? Why? What is it, truly and fundamentally, that makes them so mad that they want to…

If you do find someone who has this figured out, please let me know. 

Instead of an essay how about I think out loud in comment form?

Will, you once Twittered something like, “Most people are unintelligent jerks.” I’m not sure what the percentage of seriousness was on the backend there, but I sure do find it hard not to feel that way sometimes. That feeling comes to mind.

Someone else in the comments shared the Anne Frank “most people are still good at heart” quotation. The MLK “the arc of human history is long but it bends towards justice” quote also comes to mind. I’d like to believe that both of those things are true, but can we say that there is anything inherently true in either of those statements? I’m not sure.

The commonly held illusion that evolution is progress and improvement comes to mind, too. We’re not necessarily progressing towards a perfect society. I’d like to think that racism and homophobia are on the way out, but honestly, it doesn’t make sense to me rationally that they’re still around at all. Right? Looking at where I’d expect us to be as a society at this point, it is sort of a terrible surprise that we still haven’t moved past that. Chris Kelly’s great post about being “bored” that homophobia is still an issue comes to mind. 

Hmm, do you think the explanation is as simple as fear? When humans feel fear, they’re far more willing/likely to forego the better parts of their nature (empathy, cooperation, kindness, generosity) in order to defend themselves against the perceived threat? So someone gets the impression that there is a legitimate threat (even if to some this threat is anything but legitimate) against their way of life and that life as they know it is at risk, so that person is then looking for a way to defend themselves against that threat? So when someone says they have an answer, that is reason enough to flock to them, even if the Palins and the Becks can only provide vague assertions and platitudes? 

Democrats and Republicans use fear to get people to support their side. I feel like Republicans are better at, but I’m biased. I might not see all the ways that the Dems do it. I see some of the ways, but maybe I’m blind to all of them. 

I don’t know. I’m envious of you if Palin and Beck don’t bother you. Even if you do have them figured out (your power maggot sucking on attention analogy seems plausible to me) they still get me so mad. Palpably, heart beating faster, I get so agitated I can’t focus on my work for a few minutes, mad. I guess other people might feel that way about the people I think are doing the right thing? I don’t know. Maybe those Tea Partiers are feeling the same anger I feel? I feel like I’m right, though, and they’re wrong. Back to square one. Damn.

Hal’s comment about how people come to politics with their preconceptions and then filter everything through that seems correct to me. I have this liberal worldview so when people espouse what appears to me to be hatred, my default is to think that they’re evil, bad people. It is harder for me to get to the place where I pause to consider that they consider themselves good people and are doing what they think is right for themselves and their family. David Foster Wallace’s 2005 Kenyon commencement speech comes to mind as something relevant to the discussion at hand. Read the whole thing here. Talks about how real education is the power to choose how you are going to respond to what you see in the world, not just let your default setting control your reactions.

When we boil it down, and forget about all the political terminology, is what I want incompatible with that people on “the other side” want? Don’t we all just want to live in a world where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all is a reality? I can’t speak for the other guys, but trying to put it as simply as possible: I want to live in a world where everyone gets a fair shake, a world where if you are willing to work then you should be able to live in relative comfort, where nobody should be automatically and irrevocably disadvantaged because of the low-income school district or underdeveloped nation they happened to be born into, a world free of prejudice against religion, sexual orientation or race. If you can agree to those things, then cool, let’s talk about our differences in opinion as to how to make that world a reality. But if you disagree with even these basic things, then it is pretty darn hard for me to say, “Well, you still think what you’re doing is right, so hey, more power to you.” 

Once again, please let me know if you come across something that explains it all. 

“To presume that dictionary-making can somehow avoid or transcend ideology is simply to subscribe to a particular ideology, one that might aptly be called Unbelievably Naive Postivism.”
—

“Authority and American Usage”

David Foster Wallace

(via afeastoffriends)

(via themadeshop)

“Some languages, like Matses in Peru, oblige their speakers, like the finickiest of lawyers, to specify exactly how they came to know about the facts they are reporting. You cannot simply say, as in English, “An animal passed here.” You have to specify, using a different verbal form, whether this was directly experienced (you saw the animal passing), inferred (you saw footprints), conjectured (animals generally pass there that time of day), hearsay or such. If a statement is reported with the incorrect “evidentiality,” it is considered a lie. So if, for instance, you ask a Matses man how many wives he has, unless he can actually see his wives at that very moment, he would have to answer in the past tense and would say something like “There were two last time I checked.” After all, given that the wives are not present, he cannot be absolutely certain that one of them hasn’t died or run off with another man since he last saw them, even if this was only five minutes ago. So he cannot report it as a certain fact in the present tense. Does the need to think constantly about epistemology in such a careful and sophisticated manner inform the speakers’ outlook on life or their sense of truth and causation?”
— Mind blown viaNYT (via georgeolken)

natedern.com →

some days i’ll put off actually being productive or making tangible progress towards one of the many personal/professional/creative goals i have for myself by pretending to be productive as I make tiny changes to my website that only i will notice or care about. 

i don’t add more interesting content to the site or make any gains in getting more people to see it, i just play around with the layout. 

compounding the triviality of my efforts is the google analytics data i have that confirms how infrequently visited it is.

and to top it all off, there is really no reason to visit my website. it is just a hub that redirects you to other places that i post content online.

anyway, today was one such day.

ps - in case you couldn’t tell, i want you to visit my website. now please. let me know if any links are funky or anythang.

“

“The comedy community is very friendly right now. I think that’s why you see all the synergy and people doing each other’s movies,” says Bateman.



[…]



”The new paradigm is to be talented and nice,” he says. “It’s considered a little rookie to be a douchebag.”

”
—

-Jason Bateman, from New York magazine article, "Jason Bateman, Act Two" August 15th, 2010

via purns