Weekly Improving?

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Improving?

tellya one thing they could improve; their tv commercials.

?
They have TV commercials? When and where?
I've never seen 'em.

[Kalihiboy]

Re: Weekly Improving?

Cant imagine a tightwad company like the Weakly doing advertising on tv, unless you mean something like OC-16.

KalihiBoy

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

Cant imagine a tightwad company like the Weakly doing advertising on tv, unless you mean something like OC-16.

KalihiBoy

uh, yea. OC16 appears on my TV.

Why is OC16 not considered "tv" to you?!

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I don't know if it's always been like this, but I notice the weekly has the lowest level journalistic standards I have seen in a while. Their euphemisms are insulting, caustic and just plain low-rent.

Indigo event;
"getting in; no cover"

Willows (referred to as "an upstanding joint") beer tasting event:
"Willows will lay out... the buffett to help soak the swill."
how appetizing!

...and now, to cater to and promote the base nature and prurient interests of the proletariat, this week's issue contains a half page sex survey.
Wherein they justify the sleaze by wondering why the populace does not discuss their private intimate actions between the sheets, behind closed doors.
Here's a clue HW; It is private and personal. And should remain so. And the airing of this is indiscrete and sordid. It sullies and lowers what is commonly previously known as public general conversational material. It cheapens the act, the intimacy, the concept of what should be considered special and again, private between two consenting adults. And to further the Howard Stern mentality and denegration of mature human sexuality and make sex and porn mainstream is to do a great disservice to contemporary society.
I am no prude, but I certainly would not want to raise a child in the setting this media is supporting.

H.W. is starting to resemble some west hollywood rag.
and it's not a pretty sight.

[lorider]

Re: Weekly Improving?

lol...I'm sorry...you're entitled to your opinion, but that is some of the most fatuous and , err, "autoerotic" writing I have seen in a long time.

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I'm sorry...you're entitled to your opinion

I'm not sorry I am entitled to my opinion.

Buit, yea, you are right. The weekly DOES contain much fatuous and, I suppose; "autoerotic" writing. And it has, for a long time. And the more it fills its pages with this drek and lowlife fodder, the less inclined many will be to pick it up anymore.

[lorider]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I guess I've started a thing here, but I'm sure the proletariat will be fine without your sanctimonious supervision. Anyway...it wasn't really the content of your post but the faux-Mather browbeating that I objected to. I have no opinion on the sex survey.

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I'm sure the proletariat will be fine without your sanctimonious supervision.

Ah, but they are all the better for it.

[pzarquon]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I don't know if it's always been like this, but I notice the weekly has the lowest level journalistic standards I have seen in a while.

Well, standards are relative. I'd agree they set the bar lower than the dailies, but then again, Honolulu Weeklyisn't trying to be a mainstream paper. In fact, the only way they can really distinguish themselves is by going out of their way to being "alternative." This certainly means pushing the envelope, crossing lines, and, yes, being juvenile and completely unable to avoid the double entendre.

and now, to cater to and promote the base nature and prurient interests of the proletariat, this week's issue contains a half page sex survey.

This is a staple of "alternative weeklies." In fact, when they wrote "first ever," I had to think about it for a while. I was sure such an excersize had been tried before. The results of the survey will be neither scientific nor journalistic (just as their "Best of Honolulu" is a poll/survey in name only), but - for those toward whom the Weekly aims to entertain - probably worthy of a smirk or two.

It sullies and lowers what is commonly previously known as public general conversational material. It cheapens the act, the intimacy, the concept of what should be considered special and again, private between two consenting adults.

Or three adults, or four, and/or consenting domesticated animals... Okay, maybe not. Still, you've got to be kidding, right? Sex can be special, spiritual, meaningful... and also silly, or scary, or whatever. It's among the most basic elements of human nature. Plenty of folks consider sex to be a big deal, but some don't. I would say the Weekly'sreadership skews more toward the latter than most any other media in town.

To think the sex survey bothers you, when you'll see ads for the Dungeon S&M party several times a year... Or, to put another way, you'd have to have not been reading very long in order to see the sex survey as evidence of a decline in taste and standards.

I am no prude, but I certainly would not want to raise a child in the setting this media is supporting.

"Why won't anyone think of the children!" Well, okay, don't let your children read Honolulu Weekly.

Actually, I always find the Weeklyan interesting animal. On one hand it tries to appeal to the intellectual, the spiritual, the politically aware, but on the other, it tries to be freewheeling, irreverant, and provocative. So you've got to have something for the libertarian vegetarian lesbian and the stoner college drop-out.

H.W. is starting to resemble some west hollywood rag. and it's not a pretty sight.

I half expect the similarity is intentional. The first time I picked up an L.A. Weekly, I knew immediately that thatwas what the Honolulu Weeklywas aspiring to be. On one hand, the L.A. Weeklyis ten times as thick and is probably making someone a fortune... yet on the other, at least the Honolulu Weekly isn't overwhelmingly dominated by ads for strip clubs and plastic surgeons. And they publish stuff that would make a Penthousereader blush (but they can, because it's a fine line between "trash" and "art").

If you think the Honolulu Weekly is appealing to base interests, the L.A. Weekly will give you a heart attack!

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

Still, you've got to be kidding, right?

Nope. Not kidding, right.

"Why won't anyone think of the children!" Well, okay, don't let your children read Honolulu Weekly.

Oh, c'mon pzarq. This is not worthy of you.

OK; I will elaborate...
I have no offspring. And that is one of the points of this... ummm... how did our Hon. Weekly tout/employee put it?; "sanctimonious browbeating"... (which implies no one else could possibly have more refined, mature standards or sexual mores higher than THEIR own at peepee-kaka level).

I'm not inclined to litter the planet with little versions of myself in an age and culture that deifies such a personage as Howard Stern and his "message", tho' apparently too many do. And all the worse, they subsist on it. And justify it. And anyone who raises any irk or ire or posits a novel direction; "let's raise ourselves a little above the gutter, here, general public" is the one reviled, and then labelled akin to Mather.
And it's a depressing thought to see the Philistines claim one is affecting piousness, ...when one naturally asks in overdue exasperation; "C'mon, people! How low must we go here in the media!? Where WILL they draw the line?! (if ever...)"
It's a pathetic, unfortunate state of affairs.
(although, being equated to an ersatz Mather... well, I mean; why bother!)

To quote the old Bard,
"I say this more in sorrow than in anger."

If you think the Honolulu Weekly is appealing to base interests, the L.A. Weekly will give you a heart attack!

I dun thing sew. I have had a healthy dose of the LA Weekly for decades and it not in the least has reduced any aspect of my physical health one iota. LA Weekly quite often, has good articles written by writers imbued with pretty damn high journalistic standards and a decidedly better grasp and command of the written word and the English language than much of what is out there.

I simply ignore the ads for outcall services at the back.

The Honolulu Weekly, tho' is, now that you mention it, giving me a purrbad case o' heartburn. maybe that's what you are confusing it with...??? yea. muzzbeeee...

"what should be considered private between two consenting adults" Or three adults, or four, and/or consenting domesticated animals...

Ohhh, man!
ya had ta go an go there now, dinjah!?

dayum.
Oh, huh huuuuuh. duuuh. I get it, now:
tryin' ta sell this site to the honoruru weekly, are ya?!
haaa. cleh-vah.

To think the sex survey bothers you, when you'll see ads for the Dungeon S&M party several times a year... Or, to put another way, you'd have to have not been reading very long in order to see the sex survey as evidence of a decline in taste and standards.

I have been reading all Oahu based weekly publications since be-FORE the hon-weekly was a glint in its father's eye. ...and have been published in them from time to time.
I have been veeerrry familiar with each and every issue of all local periodicals, newsprint and otherwise, since before Sunbums. (Which I incidentally did some photography for...)

So, you are saying my "arguement" is greatly diminished since I also did NOT mention the S&M adverts?!
sheeeeee... eeeee.... eeesssh!

well, I guess I gotta go into it!
Here's how it works.
ok; we are actively talking online about a weekly newspaper. I happen to see the latest issue. I also happen to see, within the same hour of reading this paper in question, the online subject. I respond to something I JUST read. OK? It is hot in my mind. I share my thoughts and immediate reaction online in the appropriate, current thread.

now, the rest, ya gotta figgah out.
and NO more playing ingenue!

I half expect the similarity is intentional. The first time I picked up an L.A. Weekly, I knew immediately that thatwas what the Honolulu Weekly

well, you can equate it to that but I was alluding to, as i said, a west hollywood rag.

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

it wasn't the content of your post but the faux-Mather browbeating that I objected to. I have no opinion on the sex survey.

hmmmmm....
curious.
One is tempted to highly recommend you prioritizing your opinion making... and sharing...




But JUST tempted to. No one would really bother to actually say it to you.

[Kalihiboy]

Re: Weekly Improving?

This is a staple of "alternative weeklies." In fact, when they wrote "first ever," I had to think about it for a while. I was sure such an excersize had been tried before. The results of the survey will be neither scientific nor journalistic (just as their "Best of Honolulu" is a poll/survey in name only), but - for those toward whom the Weekly aims to entertain - probably worthy of a smirk or two.

I always found the "Best of Honolulu" polls a sham considering all of the ballots are sent to the publisher's home and not the Weekly's office itself, that along with the fact that some of the "Best" awards often go to the companies that advertise often with the paper.

KalihiBoy

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I have no opinion on the sex survey.

As someone who joined for the exclusive purpose of getting people to tell you your weekly is improving, I will not understand how you would NOT have an opinion on this vile waste of newsprint.

I don't like being witness to the media catering to the lowest common denominator. It is supremely depressing, especially when one considers there is so much more intelligent provocative material to turn to. (IF... one has the mental wherewithall to even consider it...)

This was not to any degree an intelligent "sex survey". Simply a sensationalistic throw away piece of vom not created toward any end other than to titilate prurient interest of the high school level punks it was written by and for.
The beavis and butthead direction that newspapers and periodicals are turning to, is abhorrent, and not to be celebrated, defended or justified.

[lorider]

Re: Weekly Improving?

That's good stuff. It's not "my" Weekly, but your presumptuousness is true to form. I joined because I was tired of lurking, and because I wanted to contribute something positive to what is an interesting but overwhelmingly negative dialouge about local journalism.

As for my lack of an opinion: why must everyone have an "opinion" on everything? Leaving aside the fact that most of what passes for opinion is just blustery reaction, I wonder what about that part of my post got your goat. Is there no room for "I don't know everything?" Apparently not.

I am not crazy about the survey, but I can't imagine that it will have the terrible social toll you're worried about. As far as the rest of my response to you, it was motivated mostly by my sense that you're trying to do a lot of people's thinking for them.

[kimo55]

Re: Weekly Improving?

I am not crazy about the survey, but I can't imagine that it will have the terrible social toll you're worried about. As far as the rest of my response to you, it was motivated mostly by my sense that you're trying to do a lot of people's thinking for them.

aaaahhhaaa. nice try. but ya can't think for me here. I am not assuming this particular example, in and of itself will be the decline of western "civilization".
...just raising ... what do you call it? "negative dialogue" so to allow, hopefully, others to question the dictum of the media which says: "Hey! The public will eat junk, so why not serve it to them!?"
And to maybe instigate a trend among the masses to start doing more of their own thinking. Which is not really a socially acceptable exercise in contemporary america.
This being the age of the lemmings.
And those that have no thoughts of their own, well, I prefer offering some of them in batches gratis, rather than they turn to the aforementioned Howard Stern for to fill their empty cranial capacity...

That's good stuff. It's not "my" Weekly, but your presumptuousness is true to form.

well... the pieces all seemed to fit.