Banned for Life: Call Sarah Palin names and it’s no big deal, but if you’re an English bloke who is plastered (who isn’t?) and called the President a prick you’re going to be banned for life.
The furious FBI asked local cops to tell college student Luke Angel, 17, his drunken insult was “unacceptable”. Luke yesterday admitted he fired off a single email criticising the US Government after seeing a TV programme about 9/11.
He said: “I don’t remember exactly what I wrote as I was drunk. But I think I called Barack Obama a p***k. It was silly – the sort of thing you do when you’re a teenager and have had a few.”
I’m sure Obama would love to ban Americans from doing things, like choosing their own health insurance or Sarah Palin. Unfortunately, there’s the Constitution or something. Fortunately, this kid in England didn’t do something truly heinous like burn the Koran.
In It to Win It: I can’t really tell you much about the political atmosphere in Delaware. However, GOP Senatorial primary candidate Christine O’Donnell seems to have fallen out of favor with the Republican establishment. Perhaps, there’s good reason, but simply passing on her because she may be “too conservative” for Delaware isn’t good enough for me. Let’s look at the Northeast… Why should conservatives back Democrat Lite? If I’m John Smith, Delaware citizen, and I’m fed up with the idiots running my state what does Democrat Lite have to offer? I can tell you, more Democrat crap. So quit endorsing these guys and let the ship sink. When they’re ready for real change we’ll send them a real conservative to clean up the mess.
Bieber Fever is the New Progressive Strategy: Add this to the list of thing that would drive James Madison crazy. Progressives are planning on using the power of el Justin Bieber to drive the get-out-the-vote. Apparently, 12-year-old girls will be so annoying that parents all over the nation will vote for Democrats. How, you may ask? I have no clue. Grasping at straws? Yes! No coherent plan to right the fiscal wrongs of the United States? Yes!
“We’re trying to leverage Bieber fever,” Campus Progress’s Sara Haile-Mariam told POLITICO. “Most of his fans are 12 years old — we acknowledge that.” Still, they hope that Bieber fans will “tell their parents. … The hope is to create something that goes viral and gets young people to be aware of the election.”
Perhaps it’s time for a Constitutional amendment banning boy bands and teen heartthrobs. It’s become apparent that they pose a threat to the republic. The Galactic Republic, that is. This scene from the Star Wars saga sums it up:
Can someone explain to me how dealing with “absolutes” is evil? Is stating the fact that 2 + 2 = 4 evil? Did Jedis ban math? Is that why Anakin Skywalker attacked Obi Wan when he had the higher ground? Wait, wasn’t that an absolute statement by Obi Wan? Or, is that a relative statement about Anakin’s life choices? George Lucus is a genius. What does this have to do with Justin Bieber? What does Beiber have to do with elections? Think about that one….
16 year old Canadian Justin Bieber wears a dog tag because it’s apparently cool
I don’t know who Justin Bieber is, I wouldn’t know him if I ran into him at a Gamestop store, and it doesn’t really matter. Bieber fits perfectly into the David Cassidy pop circuit. There’s nothing wrong with that. The only reason I’m writing about Justin Bieber is because the title of his latest album reminds me of everything wrong with corporate marketing.
Bieber’s debut album was titled My World. What clever title did the brilliant marketers come up with for his second album release only one year after his debut? The answer: My World 2.0. They pulled this straight from the marketing jargon bin. Damn you marketing nonsense! Can we kill this trend once and for all? They might as well have called the album iBeiber, but I’m sure Apple would have sued them.
2.0 is the jargon that won’t go away. It cranked into high gear with the idea of Web 2.0. Now it seems like when every marketing department of ad agency runs out of ideas they trot out a 2.0 at the end of the product. There’s Classroom 2.0, Business 2.0, Gas 2.0, Green 2.0, Domino’s Pizza 2.0, Marketing 2.0… the list goes on and on and on. How about Originality 2.0? Instead of just beating a term to death why not come up with a new idea? Nowhere is this more prevalent than in the seemingly endless reboots of movies.
Movie reboots used to mean “remakes.” This kind of made sense. A movie made in 1938 could be remade because the audience wasn’t familiar with the story. A more cynical person might even argue that the modern audience isn’t even aware that the 1938 version of the film is far superior than the pale imitation. Unfortunately, it’s becoming common place to “remake”, or reboot, movies less than a decade old.
The last Spiderman movie came out in 2007, and there’s already a plan to “reboot” the franchise. I guess this kind of makes sense if the franchise is terrible (see: Batman and Robin), but the three recent Spiderman movies were very well received. Large corporations suffer from the same fate as all large bureaucracies. They’re unable to innovate, they’re stuck in the past, and they’re reluctant to change.
The main reason this type of marketing bothers me is because it’s lazy. Coming up with new ideas is difficult. Many times it’s just easy to slap on a My World 2.0 sticker and call it a day. It didn’t matter what Justin Bieber called his second album; it was always going to be a success. The title suggests that type of thinking is exactly behind the uninspired name.
Recent Comments