There's a study out that says that the younger workforce employees(Gen 'Y') are willing to work for less pay in exchange for more flexible hours. LESS PAY. This no doubt pleases employers who like to have people working all the damn time. I know most people don't have the guts to stand up to their bosses and this is a supposed "demand" of theirs?
Now as of right now this is becoming a trend at insurance companies and such, but we love to follow trends in America, so how long before you have businesses running 24 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week. Especially those trying to keep their head above water, making a wave when they can? Only after it becomes obvious they are falling apart will the workload ease up.
Look, I'm not lazy, but I'm of the belief that unless it's an emergency, or you're a doctor, cop etc. 8 hours is good enough for a work day. You wanna work overtime? Fine. Volunteer, otherwise leave me the f*** alone after my shift is up and I'll see you again tomorrow. Weekends and holidays? No thanks, but the younger generation(which will be replaced by an even younger generation) is willing to work for less pay and odd hours.
Those hours work out well for them I guess, but still, are these people going to go home and play with their baby at 2 in the morning or something?
I think it's a mistake frankly. Be careful what you "demand"
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Ho! Ho! Ho! (Who'd Be A Turkey At Christmas?)
The title of this blog is actually the name of an old Elton John B side, but it felt right for this title as it involves both Christmas & Thanksgiving.
This blog is about the horrible trend of businesses and Black Friday sales, and more importantly when these sales start.
They get earlier and earlier every year til we're at the point that the earliest Black Friday sale now begins at 9 pm (Central time) @ Toys'R'Us where a kid can be a kid and an employee can get screwed out of a holiday like every other person that works in retail.
It's a shame, and there finally seems to be some backlash.
4 a.m. seemed to be the "normal" starting hour for years, but one retail giant decided that wasn't good enough. One retail giant that is number 1 and for all intent purposes will remain #1, while the others are only competitors. Wal Mart. Wal Mart has been calling the shots for years and everyone else follows their lead in an attempt to catch up, at their employees expense.
Hell almost every Wal Mart is 24 hours anyway now, but you used to be able to count on holidays.
Not so anymore, now they start their sales at 10 p.m. (Again, Central-I find it underrated) in order to sell more items.
On top of all this, people like to complain about how we go right from Halloween to Christmas and skip Thanksgiving. I'd like to know how many of them will be lined up at 10 P.M. that night to get the latest must have deals for the holidays. So don't give me that crap, you should think about the employees who have to put up with fighting, complaining and what have you, just to make a few extra bucks which probably isn't worth it in the end for all the hell they go through.
So, if you're worried about Thanksgiving losing it's meaning and have ever worked in retail, or even walked into a store and thought "Christ, I'm glad I don't have to do this for a living" then STAY HOME on Thanksgiving night. Don't worry about that must have deal on a TV that will be obsolete by New Year's day. get up and go at a decent hour the next morning. Don't let the ads dictate how you're going to spend your day. Show the stores that you don't like how their staff is being treated. True, some may choose to work that night to get some extra money, but in this economy, really how far are you going to go with it? Do the math.
The stores won't suffer a damn bit. A little hint for those who have never worked retail: Stores base their decisions mainly on trends and where they were the same time last year, and for a lot of these stores, they weren't open this early last year, so this is extra money here. Once they look back next year and say "Shit, that was a waste" then eventually people will get their holiday back, and you won't have to set your clock to get up so damned early on a day you're lucky to even have off.
You and I, we don't owe this economy anything. We don't owe this nation our money or our time. They'll get it anyway, and when you think "Screw this guy, what does he know" put yourself in the employees position. think to yourself if you had to cut Thanksgiving dinner short, or have it the week before, because you have to go in that night and spend it with some unruly bunch of assholes that think you're responsible for everything that goes wrong. Hell, think about the videos(and I gurantee there will be some) of some guy getting trampled to death by shoppers. and then think about the fat cat CEOs and presidents that are sitting at home enjoying their dinner in their own home with the money you have given them and made their life possible-and the employees who did as well because of YOUR demand and are probably getting time and a half if they're lucky, and really, in this world, it doesn't mean shit. There's plenty of other days to work-all year long if you don't watch out, because Christmas will be next if you keep this shit up. Wait and see.
This blog is about the horrible trend of businesses and Black Friday sales, and more importantly when these sales start.
They get earlier and earlier every year til we're at the point that the earliest Black Friday sale now begins at 9 pm (Central time) @ Toys'R'Us where a kid can be a kid and an employee can get screwed out of a holiday like every other person that works in retail.
It's a shame, and there finally seems to be some backlash.
4 a.m. seemed to be the "normal" starting hour for years, but one retail giant decided that wasn't good enough. One retail giant that is number 1 and for all intent purposes will remain #1, while the others are only competitors. Wal Mart. Wal Mart has been calling the shots for years and everyone else follows their lead in an attempt to catch up, at their employees expense.
Hell almost every Wal Mart is 24 hours anyway now, but you used to be able to count on holidays.
Not so anymore, now they start their sales at 10 p.m. (Again, Central-I find it underrated) in order to sell more items.
On top of all this, people like to complain about how we go right from Halloween to Christmas and skip Thanksgiving. I'd like to know how many of them will be lined up at 10 P.M. that night to get the latest must have deals for the holidays. So don't give me that crap, you should think about the employees who have to put up with fighting, complaining and what have you, just to make a few extra bucks which probably isn't worth it in the end for all the hell they go through.
So, if you're worried about Thanksgiving losing it's meaning and have ever worked in retail, or even walked into a store and thought "Christ, I'm glad I don't have to do this for a living" then STAY HOME on Thanksgiving night. Don't worry about that must have deal on a TV that will be obsolete by New Year's day. get up and go at a decent hour the next morning. Don't let the ads dictate how you're going to spend your day. Show the stores that you don't like how their staff is being treated. True, some may choose to work that night to get some extra money, but in this economy, really how far are you going to go with it? Do the math.
The stores won't suffer a damn bit. A little hint for those who have never worked retail: Stores base their decisions mainly on trends and where they were the same time last year, and for a lot of these stores, they weren't open this early last year, so this is extra money here. Once they look back next year and say "Shit, that was a waste" then eventually people will get their holiday back, and you won't have to set your clock to get up so damned early on a day you're lucky to even have off.
You and I, we don't owe this economy anything. We don't owe this nation our money or our time. They'll get it anyway, and when you think "Screw this guy, what does he know" put yourself in the employees position. think to yourself if you had to cut Thanksgiving dinner short, or have it the week before, because you have to go in that night and spend it with some unruly bunch of assholes that think you're responsible for everything that goes wrong. Hell, think about the videos(and I gurantee there will be some) of some guy getting trampled to death by shoppers. and then think about the fat cat CEOs and presidents that are sitting at home enjoying their dinner in their own home with the money you have given them and made their life possible-and the employees who did as well because of YOUR demand and are probably getting time and a half if they're lucky, and really, in this world, it doesn't mean shit. There's plenty of other days to work-all year long if you don't watch out, because Christmas will be next if you keep this shit up. Wait and see.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Ain't That America
This blog is inspired by conversations I have been having with friends over the past few days and is a bit localized in nature, which is fine, since my 4 followers are from around here.
The big talk at this time in Ohio County involves the High School, the ag program and most importantly, MONEY.
Long story short, because you no doubt know the long and the short of the tale is the ag department is basically on the chopping block. Well, one position is, but it's a matter of time before it all goes the way of rural sitcoms on CBS.
Turns out that seemingly not enough kids are interested in farming in Ohio County, which is in Kentucky. What the fuck has happened here, and why do so many people like Farmville?
Yea the kids like to speak spanish now, so that's what the school is gonna give them MORE spanish, because speaking spanish helps you get to college and get a good job and leave town.
And why not leave town? Your old man's farm isn't good for shit anymore. Most farms aren't because we the people sold them to bigger companies and bigger wigs so we could get bigger, and any farmer worth their squash should be trying to kick themselves in the balls for doing it.
It's been said that farming isn't what it used to be, and apparently math isn't either, because this doesn't add up.
You take x amount of teaching positions and you want to add one, so that means you have to eliminate one, so how can the victim of this cut keep his job as he has been promised?
Right, he can't. Or it could be such a shit job that he wouldn't have it anyway, so everyone's happy right?
Well the powers that be are, and we'll get over it and some just don't care because they're as much of a farmer as Mr. Green Jeans.
The writing's on the wall for farming it seems. When you take a small community and claim they don't care about farming and take it away, then you are a slave to the corporation you sold out to, and believe me, someday soon you are going to wish you had some land to grow those tomatoes to share with family and friends and try to save what's left of your money.
I'm no expert, hell I didn't even take ag. But I understand the importance. People bitch about wanting people to give back to the community. Fruits and vegetables would be nice.
Interesting note: Word has it that kids sign up for ag and other classes and get spanish classes given to them anyway. No wonder the numbers are so uneven.
Look, I'm not blaming anyone around here. I'm sure in an ideal world and economy, the school would love to keep the ag class, the teachers and even have a band with more than 2 dozen kids in it, but when the powers that be are pulling the strings, their hands are no doubt tied to those strings.
As far as another spanish class goes, might I suggest you pick a teacher and teach chinese, then we could at least go over there and get our goddamn jobs back.
The End?
The big talk at this time in Ohio County involves the High School, the ag program and most importantly, MONEY.
Long story short, because you no doubt know the long and the short of the tale is the ag department is basically on the chopping block. Well, one position is, but it's a matter of time before it all goes the way of rural sitcoms on CBS.
Turns out that seemingly not enough kids are interested in farming in Ohio County, which is in Kentucky. What the fuck has happened here, and why do so many people like Farmville?
Yea the kids like to speak spanish now, so that's what the school is gonna give them MORE spanish, because speaking spanish helps you get to college and get a good job and leave town.
And why not leave town? Your old man's farm isn't good for shit anymore. Most farms aren't because we the people sold them to bigger companies and bigger wigs so we could get bigger, and any farmer worth their squash should be trying to kick themselves in the balls for doing it.
It's been said that farming isn't what it used to be, and apparently math isn't either, because this doesn't add up.
You take x amount of teaching positions and you want to add one, so that means you have to eliminate one, so how can the victim of this cut keep his job as he has been promised?
Right, he can't. Or it could be such a shit job that he wouldn't have it anyway, so everyone's happy right?
Well the powers that be are, and we'll get over it and some just don't care because they're as much of a farmer as Mr. Green Jeans.
The writing's on the wall for farming it seems. When you take a small community and claim they don't care about farming and take it away, then you are a slave to the corporation you sold out to, and believe me, someday soon you are going to wish you had some land to grow those tomatoes to share with family and friends and try to save what's left of your money.
I'm no expert, hell I didn't even take ag. But I understand the importance. People bitch about wanting people to give back to the community. Fruits and vegetables would be nice.
Interesting note: Word has it that kids sign up for ag and other classes and get spanish classes given to them anyway. No wonder the numbers are so uneven.
Look, I'm not blaming anyone around here. I'm sure in an ideal world and economy, the school would love to keep the ag class, the teachers and even have a band with more than 2 dozen kids in it, but when the powers that be are pulling the strings, their hands are no doubt tied to those strings.
As far as another spanish class goes, might I suggest you pick a teacher and teach chinese, then we could at least go over there and get our goddamn jobs back.
The End?
Friday, April 29, 2011
EXTRA! EXTRA! Superman Denounces U.S. Citizenship!
From the pages of Action Comics #900 comes the news that Superman has denounced his U.S Citizenship, as if that isn't surprising news in itself, the reasoning behind it really is, when faced with the reality of it all.
First, the reasoning from the comic itself: In a short story entitled "The Incident" which finds our hero getting grief from the President's national security advisor, who's pissed that Superman went to Tehran to support the protesters demonstrating against the Iranian regime, which no doubt mirrors for the real-life protests in the Middle East. But, since Superman is viewed as an American icon, the Iranian government sees his actions as the will of the American President, and an act of war.
Comics for years have had storylines that reflect the times and this is no different.
Superman renounces his citizenship, but not America itself, he's just more global now.
And like it or not, this is a trend, but what is it a reflection of?
Superman claims he has been thinking "too small" and the world is more connected now, and it is, so he doesn't need to be tied down so to speak.
The world has gotten smaller thanks to the internet among other things, and not to get political, but maybe America alone isn't the force it once was because those times have simply passed.
"Going global" is a semi new catchphrase and it reminds us not to limit ourselves, but this is tricky when you look at America and patriotism. I'm not saying we're going to do away with Independence day, but what might happen years from now? Will we still sing the same National Anthem at ball games? The very notion that we might not seems preposterous, but I'm sure the idea that kids might not recite the pledge of allegiance in school seemed crazy as well at one time.
Maybe they won't change the meaning per se, but if they bring back the pledge, maybe it'll say "One world" instead of "Nation"
Another theory that I have is with a new Superman movie in the works, they want to make up for the mistakes of the last film, and of course make the most that they can with it at the box office, so in the tradition of G.I.Joe(the used to be Real American hero) and the soon to be released Captain(we're not going to shove patriotism down anyone's throats) America, then with this new film, Superman needs to be "global" although the Superman films weren't really overly patriotic, they now probably want to point out the fact that the film it isn't American at all.
And yet, the wars rage on...
First, the reasoning from the comic itself: In a short story entitled "The Incident" which finds our hero getting grief from the President's national security advisor, who's pissed that Superman went to Tehran to support the protesters demonstrating against the Iranian regime, which no doubt mirrors for the real-life protests in the Middle East. But, since Superman is viewed as an American icon, the Iranian government sees his actions as the will of the American President, and an act of war.
Comics for years have had storylines that reflect the times and this is no different.
Superman renounces his citizenship, but not America itself, he's just more global now.
And like it or not, this is a trend, but what is it a reflection of?
Superman claims he has been thinking "too small" and the world is more connected now, and it is, so he doesn't need to be tied down so to speak.
The world has gotten smaller thanks to the internet among other things, and not to get political, but maybe America alone isn't the force it once was because those times have simply passed.
"Going global" is a semi new catchphrase and it reminds us not to limit ourselves, but this is tricky when you look at America and patriotism. I'm not saying we're going to do away with Independence day, but what might happen years from now? Will we still sing the same National Anthem at ball games? The very notion that we might not seems preposterous, but I'm sure the idea that kids might not recite the pledge of allegiance in school seemed crazy as well at one time.
Maybe they won't change the meaning per se, but if they bring back the pledge, maybe it'll say "One world" instead of "Nation"
Another theory that I have is with a new Superman movie in the works, they want to make up for the mistakes of the last film, and of course make the most that they can with it at the box office, so in the tradition of G.I.Joe(the used to be Real American hero) and the soon to be released Captain(we're not going to shove patriotism down anyone's throats) America, then with this new film, Superman needs to be "global" although the Superman films weren't really overly patriotic, they now probably want to point out the fact that the film it isn't American at all.
And yet, the wars rage on...
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Stripped
What a day, man oh man am I pissed now.
There's an ordinance that is starting to be enforced strictly on strip clubs and it's essentially there to kill the industry in general. At least in Kentucky.
First of all, a note on strip clubs. Whether you appreciate the female form or not, strip clubs and even go-go dancers have been a part of most mens' lives for years and years. In some ways it's a rite of passage for a young man to hit his legal age and go out with the guys and drink a little, watch some ladies dance and lose all their ones, but have a hell of a fun time doing it.
No one gets hurt, if everyone plays nice, the club and the dancers make good money,
Where the music stinks, and they water the drinks, at the nudie bar.
Now that is about to become a thing of the past thanks to these "ordinances" which include:
Stopping ALL nude dancing
NO touching, direct tipping or lap dances
A 6 foot distance between dancers and patrons
And eventually cutting out alcohol sales and forcing employees to pay licensing fees
So what's the point in going?
Indeed what is the point and what is the problem all of a sudden?
Well they don't really say, but I'm sure it's an effort to "clean things up" and wring everyone dry of money before they throw them out on their collective asses.
Speaking as a man, I'm pissed and horrified at the same time. Speaking as a citizen, I am just horrified.
We've been losing out on a lot of stuff over the past few years, smoking, lousy eating habits, etc.
Granted things like eating healthy, not smoking, wearing seat belts are, at the end of the day all good habits to get into, but little by little, I notice that we as citizens cannot seem to please the powers that be and they come to us with other areas we need to improve in. And regulating strip clubs certainly isn't there to improve our health or lengthen our lives. In fact for some, it kinda makes things a little more boring.
It doesn't matter if you've ever set foot in a club or you've blown entire paychecks at one, this whole idea reeks and makes me wonder "What's next?"
In the future, after all the bad people have fallen in line, I can see restaurants being fined for serving food with too many calories.
I'm waiting for McRice cakes.
Notice they don't mess with alcohol though that much. Just sayin'
With all these restrictions, modifications, enforcements, regulations, etc. I can't help but worry and wonder what else we've been doing wrong all this time.
So enjoy what you can, while you can, because you never know what could be taken away next.
There's an ordinance that is starting to be enforced strictly on strip clubs and it's essentially there to kill the industry in general. At least in Kentucky.
First of all, a note on strip clubs. Whether you appreciate the female form or not, strip clubs and even go-go dancers have been a part of most mens' lives for years and years. In some ways it's a rite of passage for a young man to hit his legal age and go out with the guys and drink a little, watch some ladies dance and lose all their ones, but have a hell of a fun time doing it.
No one gets hurt, if everyone plays nice, the club and the dancers make good money,
Where the music stinks, and they water the drinks, at the nudie bar.
Now that is about to become a thing of the past thanks to these "ordinances" which include:
Stopping ALL nude dancing
NO touching, direct tipping or lap dances
A 6 foot distance between dancers and patrons
And eventually cutting out alcohol sales and forcing employees to pay licensing fees
So what's the point in going?
Indeed what is the point and what is the problem all of a sudden?
Well they don't really say, but I'm sure it's an effort to "clean things up" and wring everyone dry of money before they throw them out on their collective asses.
Speaking as a man, I'm pissed and horrified at the same time. Speaking as a citizen, I am just horrified.
We've been losing out on a lot of stuff over the past few years, smoking, lousy eating habits, etc.
Granted things like eating healthy, not smoking, wearing seat belts are, at the end of the day all good habits to get into, but little by little, I notice that we as citizens cannot seem to please the powers that be and they come to us with other areas we need to improve in. And regulating strip clubs certainly isn't there to improve our health or lengthen our lives. In fact for some, it kinda makes things a little more boring.
It doesn't matter if you've ever set foot in a club or you've blown entire paychecks at one, this whole idea reeks and makes me wonder "What's next?"
In the future, after all the bad people have fallen in line, I can see restaurants being fined for serving food with too many calories.
I'm waiting for McRice cakes.
Notice they don't mess with alcohol though that much. Just sayin'
With all these restrictions, modifications, enforcements, regulations, etc. I can't help but worry and wonder what else we've been doing wrong all this time.
So enjoy what you can, while you can, because you never know what could be taken away next.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Oscar Predictions
Ok,first of all I haven't seen or want to see any of the movies nominated. I just do not care. I think the only award winning pictures I've seen are "Network" and the "Wizard of Oz" and The Star Wars series if they won anything for special effects, I really don't know.
I watch a movie to be entertained, and if it doesn't look interesting in the commercial, then forget it.
The reason i'm doing some quick predictions is to see how a completely disinterested outsider fares against hard core movie buffs and critics, and I think this will be unique. So here goes...
1.Best actor-Colin Firth for "The King's Speech" I'm still shocked that that many people seemingly care about historic films. God knows we didn't care about it in high school. Makes you look good though, huh? Wonder if he'll stutter when picking up the award.
2. Best actress-Natalie Portman on buzz alone. I saw the 3 minutes I wanted to see of "Black Swan" I can't see sitting through the whole thing though. It's kinda like getting to sleep with the girl and not buying dinner. As an aside, I can't imagine anyone winning anything for "The Kids Are All Right" been out way too long.
3. Best Supporting actress. kinda tough. I'm thinking Amy Adams mainly cause I think she's cute. Yes, that's my basis here. She could lose out to the girl from "True Grit" though. That'd give the night a real Tatum O'Neal/Justin Bieber kinda feel.
4.Best Supporting Actor-Geoffrey Rush for "The King's Speech" He just will.
5. Best Director-Probably the guy that did "The King's Speech" Come on man, the biggest challenge is the FB movie. no offense.
6. Best Film-Again, "The King's Speech" it's more respectable than "The Social Network"
So anyway, that's my predictions. Again I don't care and I put little to no thought into this. If you love movies, fine. I'm not picking, just predicting I can pick some major winners with only commercials and a couple names out of Entertainment Weekly to get me by.
Just remember, it's not whether you win or lose, but it's that little sticker that says Nominee/Winner that will sell/rent hundred of thousands of dvds and then be forgotten by this time next year (Except The King's Speech")
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Will that be paper or plastic or what???
It's a new year and I'm inundated with a lot of annoying little pieces of news. The latest is at least 3 "new" proposals brought to us involving plastic bags.
You know, the ones that groceries and major retailers have been providing us with for years ever since they decided it would be a better idea than paper.
Anyone remember how or when we stopped using paper in most grocery stores? I'm guessing it was the mid 90's when we stopped caring about "Earth Day" again. I didn't know there was an Earth Day til 1992 and after that I assumed it was a one time thing, because no one mentioned it again.
Maybe it when Wal Mart rose to prominence in the grocery department and "provided" us with plastic bags.
Now, there is a new proposed tax for those of us that dare use the plastic bags that major retailers are providing us. From three different states.
First up:Conecticut.
Sen. Ed Meyer has proposed a 5 cent tax on us for using plastic bags. Per bag. This would be used as a deterrent for us to inspire us to not use these bags that the store provides us and are so handy.
Washington D.C. already does this and it has helped raise money and the amount of people using plastic bags has dropped dramatically.
Good for them. So Mr. Meyer, you didn't come up with this on your own.
Same goes for Indiana. At least Oregon wants to ban them altogether and prevent taxes completely.
Look we all know that plastic is a problem, but what about those of us that recycle? That take our bags back to Wal Mart? Do I get a deposit back like I used to on glass bottles before they were replaced by plastic?
Look, I don't know what you consider America to be anymore, but I no longer think that this nation is above pushing their beliefs off on the rest of us.
If you don't want us to use plastic bags, QUIT MAKING THEM. Same with cigarettes. Just be done with it. It's what you really want, though I'm sure you'll enjoy these out of control heathens that insist on killing our environment with those plastic bags you set right at the edge of the check out counter and they pay a nickel apiece for them(which varies by state)
Or maybe, just maybe you can just order your stuff from Amazon and have it delivered in a big cardboard box. That way the state won't be bothered(or make any money either)
So make mine cardboard. I need to save back for my retirement, cause I know things aren't going to get any better at this ridiculous rate.
You know, the ones that groceries and major retailers have been providing us with for years ever since they decided it would be a better idea than paper.
Anyone remember how or when we stopped using paper in most grocery stores? I'm guessing it was the mid 90's when we stopped caring about "Earth Day" again. I didn't know there was an Earth Day til 1992 and after that I assumed it was a one time thing, because no one mentioned it again.
Maybe it when Wal Mart rose to prominence in the grocery department and "provided" us with plastic bags.
Now, there is a new proposed tax for those of us that dare use the plastic bags that major retailers are providing us. From three different states.
First up:Conecticut.
Sen. Ed Meyer has proposed a 5 cent tax on us for using plastic bags. Per bag. This would be used as a deterrent for us to inspire us to not use these bags that the store provides us and are so handy.
Washington D.C. already does this and it has helped raise money and the amount of people using plastic bags has dropped dramatically.
Good for them. So Mr. Meyer, you didn't come up with this on your own.
Same goes for Indiana. At least Oregon wants to ban them altogether and prevent taxes completely.
Look we all know that plastic is a problem, but what about those of us that recycle? That take our bags back to Wal Mart? Do I get a deposit back like I used to on glass bottles before they were replaced by plastic?
Look, I don't know what you consider America to be anymore, but I no longer think that this nation is above pushing their beliefs off on the rest of us.
If you don't want us to use plastic bags, QUIT MAKING THEM. Same with cigarettes. Just be done with it. It's what you really want, though I'm sure you'll enjoy these out of control heathens that insist on killing our environment with those plastic bags you set right at the edge of the check out counter and they pay a nickel apiece for them(which varies by state)
Or maybe, just maybe you can just order your stuff from Amazon and have it delivered in a big cardboard box. That way the state won't be bothered(or make any money either)
So make mine cardboard. I need to save back for my retirement, cause I know things aren't going to get any better at this ridiculous rate.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Changes
If it ain't broke, fix it anyway-ancient business proverb
Well it's been quite awhile, and this blog is actually a letter I sent to Pantene, that I decided I'd share here, since it's been awhile since I posted, and I wanted a copy to keep for myself.
It may seem petty, but really this is a blog and a letter for anyone that faces an unexplainable and often annoying change in a product that they've dedicated themselves to, whether it's shampoo or a make of car. So here goes, I'll keep you posted on my impending form letter reply.
I'm writing to express my dissatisfaction with your recent changes to your line of shampoos and conditioners. I realize that nothing really stays the same in life, and businesses feel they need to change with the times, but was it really necessary to change a product that dedicated users were comfortable with?
A new logo or something along those lines I can understand (I never cared for it, but I get it) but to revamp your entire line? Whats it accomplish? You have a little more color on the bottle, along with overblown descriptions of your product that a 3 year old could see through.
I don't mean to belittle your work. I know I couldn't make my own shampoo myself, so that's why I and so many others rely on companies like you to do that for us, and we're appreciative., but this new line and updated style is no good.
First of all, I spend more than enough time in certain stores that like to move things around every day, and now I have to spend time figuring out exactly what the hell has happened to my shampoo. By the way, from what I can gather, the exact formula I used for curly hair is gone,gone gone. (I don't like the moisturizing stuff, never needed it, so I'm not buying into that noise)
Aussie pulled the same thing a few years back, more than likely a cost cutting measure and I said "au revoir" to them as well.
Frankly I don't put a lot of stock in polls either. For all I know, you interviewed a bunch of people (which I never heard about) and they said "Why yes, I love your product, but what would be really cool is if your staff shared their writing talents with the world and made your shampoo sound more like a science project than a hair care product"
So I guess that's that. I hate that it had to end this way, but you did what you felt you needed to do, and now so am I.
Au Revoir, Pantene
name held upon this being my own blog
Friday, February 12, 2010
Oh, TV what happened?
This Blog is rated M for Mature.
"I have never yet met a man that I dident [sic] like,"-Will Rogers, 1926
"I never met a tv I didn't like"-Me, circa 1988
Boy, a lot has changed over the years, and nowadays I'm more likely to call my old friend an asshole(the tv, not Will Rogers)
The idea for this blog came to me in the shower, a place where a lot of my ideas come to me, when I'm doing something mundane and not paying any attention, these things pop in my head.
This also happens while I'm driving, eating and shock of shocks-watching television.
This was really inspired by an article concerning the final episode of "The Jay Leno Show" on NBC.
You remember that so called colossal failure (That still drew decent ratings, but not the absolute highest) that got the ax this past Tuesday.
Apparently it didn't even draw the ratings that a encore presentation of Law And Order:SVU did on Wednesday-an episode that had already been aired TWICE.
It garnered 2 million extra viewers than Jay's show(on a given night-don't forget to read the fine print, folks)
In actuality it just grazed past Leno for his finale-but the headline doesn't want you to know that.
Who sent out this release? NBC?
What really irks me is that when this episode originally air on October 21, 2009, it was repeated 3 NIGHTS LATER on October 24th, 2009.
3 FUCKING NIGHTS LATER.
So while Jay looks to be the loser, what does it say about us as viewers who get Law & Order episodes spoon fed to us with alarming regularity and we eat them like candy?
Can't get enough Law & Order:SVU on NBC? Don't forget to tune into USA Network for the Big Law & Order:SVU Marathon this weekend! For 16 HOURS OF LAW & FUCKING ORDER! Don't Forget this is just one series in a franchise of LAW & ORDER.
How about some LAW & ORDER for television programming in general?
You can bet your bippy that someone, somewhere is going to watch EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of this show. I don't care if you like it. I like NCIS, but Dear Lord, we're battling obesity in America and they blame it on the food?
You can eat all the granola and rice cakes you want, but it won't save your big ass if you watch Television for 16 hours-Don't give us a reason guys.
The networks are as lazy as we are.
Every Summer, there is now a "Worldwide Day of Play" usually in September, where the tv execs have decided that we the people, need to get off our ass and go outside and do something!
You know it's getting bad when they have to run that across the screen and go dark for 3 hours.
Now we don't want to wear the little tikes out, since this is only a once a year thing, so let's make it 3 hours.
Trouble is, when they come back in-Spongebob Squarepants Marathon!! Thank God! I almost broke a sweat out there!
The point is, that with repeats, threepeats, marathons and what have you, television is really becoming that "vast wasteland" the snobs spoke of back in the day.
This is of course a cost cutting measure because a couple of pricks got the green light to go out and buy every damn station they wanted.
Who says you can't have it all?
So when one or two companies own everything, then you get programming aimed at getting the absolute highest demographic out there and influenced by the same handful of people.
Sure, television has always been about ratings, but how on earth did the stations survive when a Full House repeat only aired once a day?
It's a surprise Disney is still in business huh?
While it may seem trite, with everything else going on in the world, I think someone that cares and has power should break up these monopolies and put the networks up for grabs to anyone that cares about what they do.
Think about all the jobs it would create, people actually going back to work and producing, editing, programming and making magic.
You think Disney gives a Mickey Mouses ass if their channels are entertaining you? No, we apparently watch anyway.
I say, By God, if you're gonna make Lucky Charms good for me, then make VH1 good for me-if anyone still knows how.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm gonna go watch just 1 episode of Benson, and go out and play.
"I have never yet met a man that I dident [sic] like,"-Will Rogers, 1926
"I never met a tv I didn't like"-Me, circa 1988
Boy, a lot has changed over the years, and nowadays I'm more likely to call my old friend an asshole(the tv, not Will Rogers)
The idea for this blog came to me in the shower, a place where a lot of my ideas come to me, when I'm doing something mundane and not paying any attention, these things pop in my head.
This also happens while I'm driving, eating and shock of shocks-watching television.
This was really inspired by an article concerning the final episode of "The Jay Leno Show" on NBC.
You remember that so called colossal failure (That still drew decent ratings, but not the absolute highest) that got the ax this past Tuesday.
Apparently it didn't even draw the ratings that a encore presentation of Law And Order:SVU did on Wednesday-an episode that had already been aired TWICE.
It garnered 2 million extra viewers than Jay's show(on a given night-don't forget to read the fine print, folks)
In actuality it just grazed past Leno for his finale-but the headline doesn't want you to know that.
Who sent out this release? NBC?
What really irks me is that when this episode originally air on October 21, 2009, it was repeated 3 NIGHTS LATER on October 24th, 2009.
3 FUCKING NIGHTS LATER.
So while Jay looks to be the loser, what does it say about us as viewers who get Law & Order episodes spoon fed to us with alarming regularity and we eat them like candy?
Can't get enough Law & Order:SVU on NBC? Don't forget to tune into USA Network for the Big Law & Order:SVU Marathon this weekend! For 16 HOURS OF LAW & FUCKING ORDER! Don't Forget this is just one series in a franchise of LAW & ORDER.
How about some LAW & ORDER for television programming in general?
You can bet your bippy that someone, somewhere is going to watch EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of this show. I don't care if you like it. I like NCIS, but Dear Lord, we're battling obesity in America and they blame it on the food?
You can eat all the granola and rice cakes you want, but it won't save your big ass if you watch Television for 16 hours-Don't give us a reason guys.
The networks are as lazy as we are.
Every Summer, there is now a "Worldwide Day of Play" usually in September, where the tv execs have decided that we the people, need to get off our ass and go outside and do something!
You know it's getting bad when they have to run that across the screen and go dark for 3 hours.
Now we don't want to wear the little tikes out, since this is only a once a year thing, so let's make it 3 hours.
Trouble is, when they come back in-Spongebob Squarepants Marathon!! Thank God! I almost broke a sweat out there!
The point is, that with repeats, threepeats, marathons and what have you, television is really becoming that "vast wasteland" the snobs spoke of back in the day.
This is of course a cost cutting measure because a couple of pricks got the green light to go out and buy every damn station they wanted.
Who says you can't have it all?
So when one or two companies own everything, then you get programming aimed at getting the absolute highest demographic out there and influenced by the same handful of people.
Sure, television has always been about ratings, but how on earth did the stations survive when a Full House repeat only aired once a day?
It's a surprise Disney is still in business huh?
While it may seem trite, with everything else going on in the world, I think someone that cares and has power should break up these monopolies and put the networks up for grabs to anyone that cares about what they do.
Think about all the jobs it would create, people actually going back to work and producing, editing, programming and making magic.
You think Disney gives a Mickey Mouses ass if their channels are entertaining you? No, we apparently watch anyway.
I say, By God, if you're gonna make Lucky Charms good for me, then make VH1 good for me-if anyone still knows how.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm gonna go watch just 1 episode of Benson, and go out and play.
Friday, January 29, 2010
What's In A Lousy Band Name?
So I was inspired to write this week's blog by reading another website where I get most of my music news. The site name isn't important, as this is not a cheap plug, but the band names I have learned about are sometimes as interesting as the news itself.
I won't say a lot about these names as they speak for themselves. Everyone has an opinion on if "Beatles" was brilliant, or meant nothing as a name. Keep in mind, the name is not a reflection of the music, you can love a band and still think it has a God awful name. For instance:
God Lives Underwater-now taking a quick peek at another site that is basically an online encyclopedia (again, no names here-or help from the audience) we know the name was derived from a previous band called GLU and those initials were used as a backronym to form that name. Whatever. It struck me as stupid from the moment I heard the name, and sorry, but I think the Stones woulda been screwed if they had used it first.
Flaming Lips-I've heard worse, but this sounds like a venereal disease.
The Red Jumpsuit Apparatus-Really was EVERY other name taken? If I started a band and for some reason God himself assigned us this name, I would break them up immediately and give up my dreams of fame and fortune-and risk facing his wrath.
As Tall As Lions-What are you trying to say with this name? Are you quirky? Ironic? In a competition with The Red Jumpsuit Apparatus?
Every Time I Die-Yea, sounds kinda "Metal" but when it comes to naming a band, use a name, not a part of a sentence.
Finger Eleven-They were originally called "The Rainbow Butt Monkeys" and dare I say it, that name made more sense.
Chickenfoot-Before you get mad, I didn't say that their music sucked. This is indeed a supergroup in every sense of the word, so why give it a crummy name? The origins of the name come from the fact that there were originally three members and there are three talons on a chicken's foot. I guess if there hadn't been three brothers named Jonas then they wouldn't have to settle for this.
I could go on and maybe someday I will again. But for those that read this and say "What difference does it make? What's in a name and why should it affect who listens to them?"
To that I say, How do you think all those girls named "Bertha" feel?
I won't say a lot about these names as they speak for themselves. Everyone has an opinion on if "Beatles" was brilliant, or meant nothing as a name. Keep in mind, the name is not a reflection of the music, you can love a band and still think it has a God awful name. For instance:
God Lives Underwater-now taking a quick peek at another site that is basically an online encyclopedia (again, no names here-or help from the audience) we know the name was derived from a previous band called GLU and those initials were used as a backronym to form that name. Whatever. It struck me as stupid from the moment I heard the name, and sorry, but I think the Stones woulda been screwed if they had used it first.
Flaming Lips-I've heard worse, but this sounds like a venereal disease.
The Red Jumpsuit Apparatus-Really was EVERY other name taken? If I started a band and for some reason God himself assigned us this name, I would break them up immediately and give up my dreams of fame and fortune-and risk facing his wrath.
As Tall As Lions-What are you trying to say with this name? Are you quirky? Ironic? In a competition with The Red Jumpsuit Apparatus?
Every Time I Die-Yea, sounds kinda "Metal" but when it comes to naming a band, use a name, not a part of a sentence.
Finger Eleven-They were originally called "The Rainbow Butt Monkeys" and dare I say it, that name made more sense.
Chickenfoot-Before you get mad, I didn't say that their music sucked. This is indeed a supergroup in every sense of the word, so why give it a crummy name? The origins of the name come from the fact that there were originally three members and there are three talons on a chicken's foot. I guess if there hadn't been three brothers named Jonas then they wouldn't have to settle for this.
I could go on and maybe someday I will again. But for those that read this and say "What difference does it make? What's in a name and why should it affect who listens to them?"
To that I say, How do you think all those girls named "Bertha" feel?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
I'm with L-oco
So here I am, a couple of days removed from the final broadcast of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien, and it's still a sad situation.
Kudos for Conan for a great final show and his positive spin on things, I especially enjoyed his remarks on cynicism. There's a fine line between sarcasm and cynicism, and cynicism continually crosses that line these days, or at least blurs it.
I started a blog, just to get things off my chest, whether anyone reads it or not isn't the point really, but everyone's got something to say, it's just nice to keep a record of our thoughts.
I will say though, speaking of having something to say, that I have mixed feelings about the "I'm with Coco" campaign that has taken the internet and media by storm these past couple of weeks.
It started out as a show of support for Conan, and you can tell when he speaks of it that it really is overwhelming to him.
Now, in light of Conan's remarks on cynicism, I can't help but wonder what Conan thinks of a portion of his supporters now. With his tenure now over, it has given fans time to reflect-and bash Jay Leno.
Sure, that was always going on, but this is the kinda stuff that Conan doesn't want, and certainly doesn't condone.
You're free to think how you want, but come on, Conan has got new things in the works, how about everyone else?
The subject of my first blog concerns this situation and now, it's more of the same stuff.
We have had enough problems over the years getting along, whether it's disagreements with others over race, religion, sexual preference, politics, etc.
Now we have moved past some of these issues (somewhat) it's 2010 and we're dividing ourselves on the issues of late night talk show hosts.
Do I really have to choose?
Do I really have to be a Leno supporter, or a Conan-ite?
Do I automatically support EVERYONE except Leno if I like Conan?
Bottom line is I'm really starting to get annoyed with some of these "supporters" who are the cynics that Conan isn't.
In September, Conan will be on another network, no one's sure where just yet, I'll check him out, just as I will Leno, Letterman and whoever else I feel like, but to cut one or two people out of the picture out of some show of "support" is a dumb ass move in my book.
There's not much enjoyable television these days, enjoy what you can, and only after you truly move on, should you follow Conan wherever he moves.
More To Come
Kudos for Conan for a great final show and his positive spin on things, I especially enjoyed his remarks on cynicism. There's a fine line between sarcasm and cynicism, and cynicism continually crosses that line these days, or at least blurs it.
I started a blog, just to get things off my chest, whether anyone reads it or not isn't the point really, but everyone's got something to say, it's just nice to keep a record of our thoughts.
I will say though, speaking of having something to say, that I have mixed feelings about the "I'm with Coco" campaign that has taken the internet and media by storm these past couple of weeks.
It started out as a show of support for Conan, and you can tell when he speaks of it that it really is overwhelming to him.
Now, in light of Conan's remarks on cynicism, I can't help but wonder what Conan thinks of a portion of his supporters now. With his tenure now over, it has given fans time to reflect-and bash Jay Leno.
Sure, that was always going on, but this is the kinda stuff that Conan doesn't want, and certainly doesn't condone.
You're free to think how you want, but come on, Conan has got new things in the works, how about everyone else?
The subject of my first blog concerns this situation and now, it's more of the same stuff.
We have had enough problems over the years getting along, whether it's disagreements with others over race, religion, sexual preference, politics, etc.
Now we have moved past some of these issues (somewhat) it's 2010 and we're dividing ourselves on the issues of late night talk show hosts.
Do I really have to choose?
Do I really have to be a Leno supporter, or a Conan-ite?
Do I automatically support EVERYONE except Leno if I like Conan?
Bottom line is I'm really starting to get annoyed with some of these "supporters" who are the cynics that Conan isn't.
In September, Conan will be on another network, no one's sure where just yet, I'll check him out, just as I will Leno, Letterman and whoever else I feel like, but to cut one or two people out of the picture out of some show of "support" is a dumb ass move in my book.
There's not much enjoyable television these days, enjoy what you can, and only after you truly move on, should you follow Conan wherever he moves.
More To Come
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Interview With My Hair
Here's an interview I did awhile back with my hair. I thought I'd share it so you might get to know me a little bit better....
Note:This is not a vanity project.
Sam: Hey hair, what's up?
My Hair: Eh, just hanging around
Sam: You do want me to call you "Hair" right?
My Hair: Well, calling me "Ass" would be silly wouldn't it?
Sam: Yea, I guess you're right, so the first question is you've been through a LOT of changes over the years, anything in particular stick out to you?
My hair: Yea, that cowlick you had when you were six.
Sam: I see what you did there, but what I meant was, any particular style?
My hair: Oh, well that time you got a mohwak, what were you pissed off at me?
Sam: Not at all, I really liked it actually.
My hair: Yea, it was cool and all, until you decided to trim it yourself.
Sam: Yea, that's true, live & learn.
Sam: Hair, ever since you've grown out, you've been quite the conversation piece, some people have even accused you of being a wig....
My hair: Now hold it right there, where the hell, do you get off asking that cra..
Sam: I'm just saying, do you take that as a compliment?
My hair: Well it depends, on if they think I look like some kind of discount wig, or one of those like Zsa Zsa Gabor used to hock.
Sam: I'm assuming it's one of the finer quality wigs.
My hair: Now you're making me blush.
Sam: Speaking of changing colors, how do you feel about dye?
My hair: I fully endorse it.
Sam: Why's that?
My hair: Well, you want to look you're best, you know what they say: No play for Mr. Gray
Sam: Yea, but some people think it makes them look distinguished
My hair: Sam, an asshole is an asshole no matter what color their hair is.
Sam: Okay, what do you think about balding?
My Hair: Shit happens, just God don't let it happen to me!
Sam: You'd freak out?
My Hair: Yea.
Sam: Is it vanity?
My Hair: Vanity's got nothing to do with it.
Sam: Do you stare at bald people or feel sorry for them?
My Hair: No, that's what toupees and surgery are for.
Sam: What if they can't afford it?
My Hair: Then they should do it anyway, call it a beautification project. Government blows money on that shit all the time.
Sam: What do you think of ponytails?
My Hair: I'm not into bondage, man.
Sam: Did you have any idols growing up?
My Hair: John Stamos, I was crushed when he got his hair cut, I didn't curl for days, I just laid there.
Sam: That was some sad shit.
Sam: Now, you've been compared to some pretty famous hairstyles haven't you?
My Hair: Well you'd know about that, let's see, Jimmy Garvin, Jim Morrison, Cactus Jack, Bob Seger..
Sam: Are you influenced by these men?
My Hair: Oh, absolutely. I'd have to say one of my biggest influences would have to be The Beatles.
Sam: Interesting. Hair, one last question, what kind of legacy would you like to leave the world?
My Hair: Well, Sam I know how you can do things on a whim, so I wanna ask you, if the day ever comes and you decide to cut me loose, I'd like you to donate me to "Locks of Love"
Sam: Wow, I'm impressed, hair. That's very giving and selfless of you.
My Hair: I do what I can.
Sam: Well hair, I want to thank you for your time & being there for me, and I hope we're together for many more years to come.
My Hair. Word!
Note:This is not a vanity project.
Sam: Hey hair, what's up?
My Hair: Eh, just hanging around
Sam: You do want me to call you "Hair" right?
My Hair: Well, calling me "Ass" would be silly wouldn't it?
Sam: Yea, I guess you're right, so the first question is you've been through a LOT of changes over the years, anything in particular stick out to you?
My hair: Yea, that cowlick you had when you were six.
Sam: I see what you did there, but what I meant was, any particular style?
My hair: Oh, well that time you got a mohwak, what were you pissed off at me?
Sam: Not at all, I really liked it actually.
My hair: Yea, it was cool and all, until you decided to trim it yourself.
Sam: Yea, that's true, live & learn.
Sam: Hair, ever since you've grown out, you've been quite the conversation piece, some people have even accused you of being a wig....
My hair: Now hold it right there, where the hell, do you get off asking that cra..
Sam: I'm just saying, do you take that as a compliment?
My hair: Well it depends, on if they think I look like some kind of discount wig, or one of those like Zsa Zsa Gabor used to hock.
Sam: I'm assuming it's one of the finer quality wigs.
My hair: Now you're making me blush.
Sam: Speaking of changing colors, how do you feel about dye?
My hair: I fully endorse it.
Sam: Why's that?
My hair: Well, you want to look you're best, you know what they say: No play for Mr. Gray
Sam: Yea, but some people think it makes them look distinguished
My hair: Sam, an asshole is an asshole no matter what color their hair is.
Sam: Okay, what do you think about balding?
My Hair: Shit happens, just God don't let it happen to me!
Sam: You'd freak out?
My Hair: Yea.
Sam: Is it vanity?
My Hair: Vanity's got nothing to do with it.
Sam: Do you stare at bald people or feel sorry for them?
My Hair: No, that's what toupees and surgery are for.
Sam: What if they can't afford it?
My Hair: Then they should do it anyway, call it a beautification project. Government blows money on that shit all the time.
Sam: What do you think of ponytails?
My Hair: I'm not into bondage, man.
Sam: Did you have any idols growing up?
My Hair: John Stamos, I was crushed when he got his hair cut, I didn't curl for days, I just laid there.
Sam: That was some sad shit.
Sam: Now, you've been compared to some pretty famous hairstyles haven't you?
My Hair: Well you'd know about that, let's see, Jimmy Garvin, Jim Morrison, Cactus Jack, Bob Seger..
Sam: Are you influenced by these men?
My Hair: Oh, absolutely. I'd have to say one of my biggest influences would have to be The Beatles.
Sam: Interesting. Hair, one last question, what kind of legacy would you like to leave the world?
My Hair: Well, Sam I know how you can do things on a whim, so I wanna ask you, if the day ever comes and you decide to cut me loose, I'd like you to donate me to "Locks of Love"
Sam: Wow, I'm impressed, hair. That's very giving and selfless of you.
My Hair: I do what I can.
Sam: Well hair, I want to thank you for your time & being there for me, and I hope we're together for many more years to come.
My Hair. Word!
Friday, January 15, 2010
Leno, Conan etc.
Ok, I wanted to write this and get this all out-my thoughts on this situation with Late Night programming. A lot of people are down on Jay Leno for what appears to be him taking back The Tonight Show from Conan O'Brien. But there's more here than meets the eye.
Let's go back a few years to the decision NBC made to give the Tonight Show to Conan. Now Conan has been loyal to NBC and put in a lot of work and after a shaky start, made his version of "Late Night" a hit, and kudos to him for that.
Here's the thing most of us forget though, Jay was enjoying doing the Tonight Show-who wouldn't?
And Jay didn't want to just give up and retire, so he received offers from other networks that would be thrilled to have him.
NBC, not wanting to lose Jay to another network, made him an offer: A 10 p.m. slot. Make no mistake about it, this was a VERY bold move. This way, Conan gets the Tonight Show, Jay gets a show, and NBC not only keeps them both, but they also have a program that's cheaper to produce than a scripted show 5 nights a week.
NBC also offered Jay 2 years-regardless of ratings. Now, suddenly NBC is worried about poor ratings and claims that their affiliates aren't happy.
Now think about this for a minute: You're a newscaster at a small station(I don't care if you're in California, everyone is small time compared to a major network like NBC) Are you seriously going to go to NBC and complain about one of their biggest names dragging down your ratings? maybe you're ratings suck because you're on NBC-just an idea.
Anyway, I really don't think anyone has balls(or an ego) big enough to go running to NBC to complain, but that's NBC's excuse. So suddenly Jay's 2 year deal is off.
Whose fault is that? Certainly not Jay's, he's just doing his show, which NBC had him take, because they were afraid Conan might get impatient waiting for Jay to retire so he can host The Tonight Show.
Did Conan get a raw deal? Yes. Did Leno? Yes. I really don't care for this belly aching David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel are dishing out, Dave has been pissed ever since he got passed over nearly 18 years ago, and frankly I've always felt Jay should have gotten the show, he was the permanent guest host after all, and conceivably Garry Shandling was next in line after him, and if you really want to get down to it, had Joan Rivers not walked away from her permanent guest host gig subbing for Johnny Carson, she could be hosting the show at this very moment.
When you get right down to it, this was probably a move done by NBC so they didn't have another situation like back in 1993, when Letterman jumped to CBS. I'm just sayin'
Jimmy Kimmel, really doesn't come into play here, besides him throwing his 2 cents in, he's really inconsequential in this whole deal.
So what we have here is a mess started by NBC and the facts are these:
They tried to push Jay Leno out of a job he wasn't willing to leave.
They offered him a show with a 2 year contract and changed their minds.
They never gave Conan a chance and quite frankly you'd have a hard time convincing me they really care about Conan at this point.
So, I suppose jay will return to the Tonight Show, since Conan is walking away from it, and Conan might go to Fox, and we'll have 3 channels to flip through somewhere down the line, but for the record, this comes down to NBC, not Jay Leno and if you can't understand why Jay won't retire, then you my friend, have never had a job you actually enjoyed.
And we'll be right back......
Let's go back a few years to the decision NBC made to give the Tonight Show to Conan. Now Conan has been loyal to NBC and put in a lot of work and after a shaky start, made his version of "Late Night" a hit, and kudos to him for that.
Here's the thing most of us forget though, Jay was enjoying doing the Tonight Show-who wouldn't?
And Jay didn't want to just give up and retire, so he received offers from other networks that would be thrilled to have him.
NBC, not wanting to lose Jay to another network, made him an offer: A 10 p.m. slot. Make no mistake about it, this was a VERY bold move. This way, Conan gets the Tonight Show, Jay gets a show, and NBC not only keeps them both, but they also have a program that's cheaper to produce than a scripted show 5 nights a week.
NBC also offered Jay 2 years-regardless of ratings. Now, suddenly NBC is worried about poor ratings and claims that their affiliates aren't happy.
Now think about this for a minute: You're a newscaster at a small station(I don't care if you're in California, everyone is small time compared to a major network like NBC) Are you seriously going to go to NBC and complain about one of their biggest names dragging down your ratings? maybe you're ratings suck because you're on NBC-just an idea.
Anyway, I really don't think anyone has balls(or an ego) big enough to go running to NBC to complain, but that's NBC's excuse. So suddenly Jay's 2 year deal is off.
Whose fault is that? Certainly not Jay's, he's just doing his show, which NBC had him take, because they were afraid Conan might get impatient waiting for Jay to retire so he can host The Tonight Show.
Did Conan get a raw deal? Yes. Did Leno? Yes. I really don't care for this belly aching David Letterman and Jimmy Kimmel are dishing out, Dave has been pissed ever since he got passed over nearly 18 years ago, and frankly I've always felt Jay should have gotten the show, he was the permanent guest host after all, and conceivably Garry Shandling was next in line after him, and if you really want to get down to it, had Joan Rivers not walked away from her permanent guest host gig subbing for Johnny Carson, she could be hosting the show at this very moment.
When you get right down to it, this was probably a move done by NBC so they didn't have another situation like back in 1993, when Letterman jumped to CBS. I'm just sayin'
Jimmy Kimmel, really doesn't come into play here, besides him throwing his 2 cents in, he's really inconsequential in this whole deal.
So what we have here is a mess started by NBC and the facts are these:
They tried to push Jay Leno out of a job he wasn't willing to leave.
They offered him a show with a 2 year contract and changed their minds.
They never gave Conan a chance and quite frankly you'd have a hard time convincing me they really care about Conan at this point.
So, I suppose jay will return to the Tonight Show, since Conan is walking away from it, and Conan might go to Fox, and we'll have 3 channels to flip through somewhere down the line, but for the record, this comes down to NBC, not Jay Leno and if you can't understand why Jay won't retire, then you my friend, have never had a job you actually enjoyed.
And we'll be right back......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
