[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

And on a side note.

$1:

Hank Williams Jr.'s son -- Hank Williams III -- doesn't think his father should have opened his mouth about Obama yesterday ... telling TMZ most musicians are "not worthy" of a political discussion.

He should expand that to include all the Actors, Atheletes and D rated celebrities who seriously think that their opinions matters and we plebians should be listening to them.

andyt andyt:

And yet we here seem to have no shame in spouting our opinions. Are we really more worthy than the people you describe above?

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Yes.

Despite our political and moral differences I really don't expect you to change your views to suit mine just because I'm able to use a medium that is unavailable to other people.

I guess when you become famous you become more intelligent, morally and socially concious than the rest of the planet and have an obligation to ensure the masses get your special message.

The one thing these asshats forget is that the medium is the message, not them.

So they have no voice on this medium? Who do you deem worthy of having one? The asshats on Fox? The Corporations that own the media? Politicians?

Really if the medium is the message, we need no content at all, just blank TV screens.

[Thanos]

I highly doubt that FOX invited Junior onto that show and weren't expecting him to say something stupid. They probably didn't expect him though to go as far as he his did. That's the problem with a network that caters to this sort of genuinely retarded viewpoint. It doesn't matter if it's a Southern fried piece of shit like Hank Williams Jr, or a paranoid conspiracy-monger like Jon Voight, or some out-and-out statutory-raping asshole like Ted Nugent (how about I shoot the president with one of my machine-guns? hyuck-hyuck-hyuck!). When you troll the lower portions of the Bell curve for the opinions you have a vested interest in promoting you're going to get these kinds of responses.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

So they have no voice on this medium? Who do you deem worthy of having one? The asshats on Fox? The Corporations that own the media? Politicians?

Really if the medium is the message, we need no content at all, just blank TV screens.

Everyone has a voice on this and every other social medium, it's when a person abuses it because of personal vanity or blind faith that it becomes a problem.

Like the old saying goes. Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and that's what these people are offering up, but, because of their station in life they tend to make it look like they're actually experts in the field they discuss.

Would you listen to Paris Hilton if she suddenly decided to start preaching about Darfur, or the need to use nuclear fusion for powering automobiles? Likely not because she has no expertise in these areas.....just an opinion.

So, why should we listen to any of the above mentioned people about anything but what they are, unless they can show unequivocally that they're an expert who is knowledgable about the field they're discussing. If they can't it's just an opinion like yours or mine, which, without the notoriety and access to the mass medium they'd never be able to express to the masses who are supposed to blindly take their word as gospel.

On this forum I offer my "opinion" because in most of the topics I'm not what could be considered an expert and I expect you aren't either, but, I would never be so presumptious as to get on the television and start using my fame as tool to try and get people to believe that my opinion was indeed fact.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

Would you listen to Paris Hilton if she suddenly decided to start preaching about Darfur, or the need to use nuclear fusion for powering automobiles? Likely not because she has no expertise in these areas.....just an opinion.

So, why should we listen to any of the above mentioned people about anything but what they are, unless they can show unequivocally that they're an expert who is knowledgable about the field they're discussing. If they can't it's just an opinion like yours or mine, which, without the notoriety and access to the mass medium they'd never be able to express to the masses who are supposed to blindly take their word as gospel.

On this forum I offer my "opinion" because in most of the topics I'm not what could be considered an expert and I expect you aren't either, but, I would never be so presumptious as to get on the television and start using my fame as tool to try and get people to believe that my opinion was indeed fact.

No

Never said you have to listen to them. You can turn the TV off, or whatever medium you're consuming.

As for experts, you should read some of Dan Gardner's columns in the Sun, when he gets going on why experts are more often wrong than the rest of us. Mostly he's talking about financial prognosticators, I think. But here's an example: Did you listen to the "experts" when you raised your kids? Which ones, since they all contradict each other.

I bet if you were famous, you'd behave a lot differently than you do now - fame does that to people. I just don't see what's wrong with a person who has access to the media voicing their opinion. What's wrong is that some people allow themselves to be influenced by that opinion.

As for opinion vs fact - that's the sort of dynamic that keeps the CKA wheel spinning. People on this forum often want you to back up your opinion with links, but that usually just means that some medium holds the same opinion as the OP. Gunnair wanted me to prove that "rape is a fate worse than death." Slippery slope.

It's become a bit of a right wing trope to say the famous should keep their mouths shut on subjects they're not experts on. I say go for it, left or right. It's up to the media consumers to decide what to do with it. But then that opinion isn't any more valid than yours.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

No

Never said you have to listen to them. You can turn the TV off, or whatever medium you're consuming.

As for experts, you should read some of Dan Gardner's columns in the Sun, when he gets going on why experts are more often wrong than the rest of us. Mostly he's talking about financial prognosticators, I think. But here's an example: Did you listen to the "experts" when you raised your kids? Which ones, since they all contradict each other.

I bet if you were famous, you'd behave a lot differently than you do now - fame does that to people. I just don't see what's wrong with a person who has access to the media voicing their opinion. What's wrong is that some people allow themselves to be influenced by that opinion.

As for opinion vs fact - that's the sort of dynamic that keeps the CKA wheel spinning. People on this forum often want you to back up your opinion with links, but that usually just means that some medium holds the same opinion as the OP. Gunnair wanted me to prove that "rape is a fate worse than death." Slippery slope.

It's become a bit of a right wing trope to say the famous should keep their mouths shut on subjects they're not experts on. I say go for it, left or right. It's up to the media consumers to decide what to do with it. But then that opinion isn't any more valid than yours.

Like I said, thanks for your................................OPINION