It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why the bad girls?

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 05:25 AM
Every so called news channel, especially CNN is reporting on Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and Lindsey Lohan and whatever other actress in trouble and calling them the bad girls of Hollywood, this of course gets a huge amount of press. I've heard more about these girls than I have heard about the war in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Is there anyone here who thinks this should be in the news? I understand this stuff being reported on entertainment shows, but not the so called real news channels.

Do you think that it is to influence young girls who might be watching to be bad? Have there been a lot of women prisons built lately that needs filling up? Or do you think it is just to present eye candy to the guys watching to keep them watching and also to avoid reporting actual news?

What do you think when they report on one subject 24/7 like they did on the Terry Schiavo issue?

What"s your take on what has happened to the major news channels and how they have repeatedly failed the people expecting some real news and investigative journalism?

[edit on 2-11-2007 by goose]

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 05:58 AM
We're a race of gossips and that's basically it. I actually wonder at the intellect of the folk reporting this stuff though. In the UK they're in the process of destroying Heather Mills (Paul McCartney's ex) for the fun of it, it appears. She demanded some TV interviews the other day to try to sort it out, broke down a few times, and has made it worse for herself in the process. It's a real shame. Having a job in the media is a powerful thing to have and if you're in it to bring someone down, as some of them appear to be doing, then there should be some changes in the law. But I'm sure it's mostly just down to, we love gossip, and the juicier the better. There was a story the other day about a man who's been put on the sex offender list because he was caught in his hostel room having sex with a bike. It made a great story because it was so bizarre, and that's probably why there was a court case. But in reality who or what folk have sex with, in private, should stay private. When was masturbation with a toy banned? A wierd thing to do but does he deserve a public humiliation? Media IS a great way to control the masses. Make an example of certain folk and we'll all be scared it might be us.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by wigit]

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 06:40 AM
I agree we all like to gossip, but there was a time when this kind of stuff would never have even been considered being put on the so call hard core news channels, it just would not have happened.

This kind of stuff was left to the National Enquirer.

Right now I have the tv on and CNN on in the L.R. and I am hearing the news about Britney Spears over and over, it's ridiculous.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 07:38 AM
"You are my dandy, oh, oh ...sugar candy ... etc"

Distraction is the oldest trick in disinfo, and ...yeah, it adds some candy to the gloom of the news stream. They know very well what they're doing.

As long as they don't show the caskets coming home or the real action, like bodies blown a part by IEDs, they get away with it.

Chicks make more pleasent news than Iran and Iraq.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 08:23 AM
reply to post by khunmoon

Yes and keeping the population "dumb" is high on the priority list. They want to ensure that the number one goal of teenage girls is to be like the "bad girls".

Keep in mind that anything you see in the mainstream media is either lies, distractions, or some twisted form of the truth. The truth will only be reported when it's absolutely necessary (like some bad truth has finally come to light and it can no longer be hidden). Of course then they will twist it into some half-truth so it doesn't appear nearly as bad as it really is).

I don't trust anything I see on TV. And I don't buy any products that are advertised on TV.

Actually the best thing you can do is turn it off and/or remove it from your home.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 06:08 PM
It's quite simple, in my opinion. The general public is, quite frankly, stupid. The general public is also quite apathetic towards things like wars in countries they have never been to, and probably couldn't even find on a map. These type of people, however, are the most numerous in society and, by and large, are interested in a lot of things that just don't matter, like what Paris is wearing or what boy Lindsay made out with, or Britney's latest marriage problems. The news channels show what the majority of their audience wants, just like the sports channel show hockey and football, the scifi channel shows star trek reruns, and the home shopping channel tries to sell you stuff. I think it comes down to marketing and economics. If a news channel reported on events that mattered, most people would go to the competitors to get the low-down on the latest celebrity gossip.

I'm not sure that it is intended as mass distraction, but that's what it is. In other words, I'm not sure whether the media is providing this crap because the people want it of their own choice, or whether the people want it because the media conditions them to want it.

I never, ever use a TV to get the news. I'd much rather go to a newspaper or the internet where I can pick and choose to read the stories that matter, and get multiple viewpoints, rather than wade through all the crap that I just don't care about.

If these 'bad girls' do something really bad, like kill somebody, okay, that's news, but I really don't care if they are in rehab for the tenth time or sleeping around with everyone they can, or got into a car accident or whatever, any more than I care what some average joe in New York or Tokyo or London is doing.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 06:13 PM
This thread has a link in first post that explains why are media is the way it is. I found it a match for what is happening today.

Look at how the news treats celebrity, they put them on a pedestal so we will strive and envy the empty status of wealth and celebrity.

Then they knock them down so we can revel in angry bitter judgement of these normal people, that many times, have the same issues many of us have.

I did a thread that looked at what films people buy, versus what is put on TV, there is a huge difference. I believe TV has an agenda, condition people into black/white thinking of right and wrong, and break down the ability for people to care about others by assaulting the emotion with violence and horror.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by Redge777]

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by DragonsDemesne
It's quite simple, in my opinion. The general public is, quite frankly, stupid.

That's right and the MSM gives the general public exactly what they want.
It's business, ratings and profit.

Blood, and flag draped coffins is certainly not the vehicle for selling beer, cars or Viagra.

However I still believe that the "news" is a distraction from the things that really matter.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 07:15 PM

Originally posted by whaaa
That's right and the MSM gives the general public exactly what they want.
It's business, ratings and profit.

I don't think it's all necessarily what the public wants... the news media mostly reports on the stories that the advertisers want because they are paying for it.

posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 11:32 PM
The bad girl stories (not NEWS, just stories) appeal to the self absorbed, mindless culture which hollywood has created. Sex sells. Is this new?

Get some sexy, empty headed bleached blondes talking about themselves incessently, their sex lives, drug use, who they got pregnant by and pretend to 'expose' their self centered idiocy and boom!
It's not news, never has been.
But it is all part of the dumbing down program.
And boy, are we dumb.
I see it every day. Girls talking about P or L or B as tho they actually matter.
What is appalling is how blatant the MSM is in presenting this mindless drivel as though it matters in the least. It's like watching a slow motion car wreck. You don't want to watch, but you're facinated with what stupidity will follow next.
I am so glad remotes were invented, I can not even articulate... Click. Away with you self centered blondes! Gone! Poof!
I love it.
All part of the dumbing down program.

posted on Nov, 3 2007 @ 04:22 PM
Some people actually identify with stars like Spears and Lohan and Hilton. They like to see rich and famous people who have problems just like their own. Then there's the envy factor: for some there is pleasure in watching those who seem to have it all fall down. There are many viewers who are obsessed with others, both the famous and their own coworkers or neighbors; maybe it's a way of not dealing with their own lives. For the media it is a question of ratings, which are a big factor in where the advertising dollars go. If one were inclined to see a conspiracy here, you might say that it's a way to distract and pacify the masses in order to prevent political unrest.

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 05:49 AM
No conspiracy? do you think the anomoly in Neilsons, and Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars are both wrong?

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 06:08 AM

Originally posted by khunmoon
Distraction is the oldest trick in disinfo, and ...yeah, it adds some candy to the gloom of the news stream. They know very well what they're doing.


Chicks make more pleasent news than Iran and Iraq.

I believe you hit the nail on the head, my friend. It keeps minds busy and not intentioned to delve into the more serious issues confronting everyone today. Eg - the wars and relations between countries which will most definately affect one's life. Not what Paris Hilton is wearing or yada yada blah blah blah.

Take care and peace,
- Naz

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 06:12 AM
reply to post by goose

Whats even worse is that people are falling for it. I regularly see news about Britney being amongst the most popular articles read, both on the CNN and Reuters website.

They are reporting on it because most people tend to either idolize or look down on beautiful people. Either way, we tend to focus a lot on the exterior. Its in our genes, I guess, so we are easily distracted by this.

I dont look up to anyone and I see everyone as just human beings. I have problems with authority based on exterior ranks instead of naturally earned respect. Nobody is better than me, and Im not better than anyone else.

Also I think people who work all the time and hardly have the time to take care of their children or family wont have the energy to look into anything complicated, such as the reasons for a war. Its much easier to just ignore it.

We as humans today are working so much that we dont have time to reflect over what we really want, where the world is going, why it functions the way it does and so on. And this is exactly what the guys running the show wants.

posted on Nov, 5 2007 @ 08:17 PM
I also agree with the whole "dumb 'em down, distract 'em from the real news" theory. But again, I ask, why always bad girls/women? Do the guys find this crud titillating? If they reported on the bad boys of Hollywood as much as Brittney/Paris, would anybody care? Why always the females? Why always such public shock at these "wayward young women?" Sounds a lot like the ol' virgin/prostitute stereotype meaning a woman is one or the other, but never anything in between. If a young male actor gets drunk/coked out of his mind in public or has sex with 20 women nobody bats an eye. I don't know, but I feel something else is afoot with the media agenda towards it's portrayl of young women. Guys, if you were a woman, what would you think?

top topics


log in