Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

“Cancel Culture” and “Woke”


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, KarmaPolice said:

Well, you made me click on a Twitter link, so we are even.  ;) 

You don't think that we've made a lot of choices of profit over people/planet that might have had some consequences on the planet?  Isn't that all she is basically saying in the first 1/3?  I didn't understand much of the point of the other 2/3rds.  

Ok, third time watching is a charm

She said that "climate crisis is injustice.  Its a crisis born of the pursuit of profit at any and all human and ecological cost."

What you wrote is...well a lot different.

She has absolutely no nuance, no proportionality, no recognition of the benefits that the dirty energy she hates has created for billions of people.  Energy is rich Exxon shareholders to her.  Energy is not people able to commute.  People able to heat their homes and not freeze to death.  People able to power every single electronic device on the planet.  How much justice would there have been in depriving people of this?  How much justice if a billion people died without heating.  Justice for who?

She is saying that energy is simply profit...AT ANY AND ALL human and ecological cost.

There are an incredible amount of parallels with this thinking and the current climate of no rational thought in our policing and race conversations.

It is bereft of any intelligence.  It in no way acknowledges trade-offs.  Its some nonsense where everything is a utopian absolute.  I'm sure it suits AOC's audience perfectly.

It is only slightly more intelligible than the other 2/3rds where I think she just gave up and started throwing #### against the wall.

Edited by djmich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, djmich said:

Ok, third time watching is a charm

She said that "climate crisis is injustice.  Its a crisis born of the pursuit of profit at any and all human and ecological cost."

What you wrote is...well a lot different.

She has absolutely no nuance, no proportionality, not recognition of the benefits that the dirty energy she hates has created for billions of people.  Energy is rich Exxon shareholders to her.  Energy is not people able to commute.  People able to heat their homes and not freeze to death.  People able to power every single electronic device on the planet.  How much justice would there have been in depriving people of this?  How much justice if a billion people died without heating.  Justice for who?

She is saying that energy is simply profit...AT ANY AND ALL human and ecological cost.

There are an incredible amount of parallels with this thinking and the current climate of no rational thought in our policing and race conversations.

It is bereft of any intelligence.  It in no way acknowledges trade-offs.  Its some nonsense where everything is a utopian absolute.  I'm sure it suits AOC's audience perfectly.

It is only slightly more intelligible than the other 2/3rds where I think she just gave up and started throwing #### against the wall.

So..... I will mark you down as not being an AOC fan.  ;)  

Hyperbolic for sure, but I still don't think it's far off at it's core.  I am probably at my lefty hippy-est when it comes to the environment, so take my opinion in that context.   At our core when it comes to Earth I think we are takers and are doing more harm than good.  Yes, I get what this energy has provided too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KarmaPolice said:

So..... I will mark you down as not being an AOC fan.  ;)  

Hyperbolic for sure, but I still don't think it's far off at it's core.  I am probably at my lefty hippy-est when it comes to the environment, so take my opinion in that context.   At our core when it comes to Earth I think we are takers and are doing more harm than good.  Yes, I get what this energy has provided too.  

I'm a conservation freak relative to the average person.  Waste to me is the easiest compromise.  Waste is nothing but laziness...yet we are so wasteful.

I'm all for clean energy also.  But I'm not going to build national energy policy on the advice of Greta Thunberg and AOC.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting to the point on the internets that just about everytime there's a story about a POC/woman doing something in the realm of entertainment....there's a whole cavalcade of jabronis in the message boards screaming "WOKE" 

To paraphrase Inigo Montoya.....  " I do not think it means what they think it means".....

Edited by Thunderlips
I misspelled a name that I shouldn't have. I know better.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Thunderlips said:

Getting to the point on the internets that just about everytime there's a story about a POC/woman doing something in the realm of entertainment....there's a whole cavalcade of jabronis in the message boards screaming "WOKE" 

To paraphrase Indigo Montoya.....  " I do not think it means what they think it means".....

Did you have an example in mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Thunderlips said:

Getting to the point on the internets that just about everytime there's a story about a POC/woman doing something in the realm of entertainment....there's a whole cavalcade of jabronis in the message boards screaming "WOKE" 

To paraphrase Indigo Montoya.....  " I do not think it means what they think it means".....

It's Inigo, but yep. GOP can't get enough of a simple slogan. Really puts the lotion in the basket.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, djmich said:

Did you have an example in mind?

I'd have to find the link...but there was a recent article about a woman who had written/story editor for the television show WATCHMEN who was going to be the writer for the new Marvel movie BLADE.  There was mention that she was the first woman of color to write a Marvel movie and many of the responses involved that word "woke" and complaints about her getting the job...or them mentioning that she was black.  I know there's a portion of the Right that now uses the word as a "catch all" for anything they don't like that butts up against situations of race or gender....but it just seems they're trying too hard to make some silly point about race/gender themselves.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

Well, you made me click on a Twitter link, so we are even.  ;) 

You don't think that we've made a lot of choices of profit over people/planet that might have had some consequences on the planet?  Isn't that all she is basically saying in the first 1/3?  I didn't understand much of the point of the other 2/3rds.  

He didnt send you to twitter to get some no name's thoughts. He sent you to twitter to watch a quick video of AOC. You should want the link for such a thing to be twitter. It is the most efficient means there is of getting such a clip quickly. No ads. No pop ups. No screen shift up or down forcing you to accidentally click on an ad. 

Sending you to watch courtney antimasker taylor video and pretending it is some powerful video, now that would be a bad use of twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

He didnt send you to twitter to get some no name's thoughts. He sent you to twitter to watch a quick video of AOC. You should want the link for such a thing to be twitter. It is the most efficient means there is of getting such a clip quickly. No ads. No pop ups. No screen shift up or down forcing you to accidentally click on an ad. 

Sending you to watch courtney antimasker taylor video and pretending it is some powerful video, now that would be a bad use of twitter.

I was joking, hense the little wink face.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Thunderlips said:

I'd have to find the link...but there was a recent article about a woman who had written/story editor for the television show WATCHMEN who was going to be the writer for the new Marvel movie BLADE.  There was mention that she was the first woman of color to write a Marvel movie and many of the responses involved that word "woke" and complaints about her getting the job...or them mentioning that she was black.  I know there's a portion of the Right that now uses the word as a "catch all" for anything they don't like that butts up against situations of race or gender....but it just seems they're trying too hard to make some silly point about race/gender themselves.  

I think it’s used so much because companies like to go out of their way to proudly tell us that the hire is black, like they are on the forefront of change.  It reeks of a check the box hire.  Just mention who it is and let the others do the research.  It also puts that person on the defense as they feel they have to do more to be accepted.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sand said:

Math is racist, so Virginia is planning on ending all gifted classes until 11th grade.  

Mediocrity for all, I guess?  I shake my head at the proposed solution here.  Truly mind boggling.  If I was stuck in this educational hellscape I'd have been bored beyond all imagination.  That would not have ended well for me.

The Harrison Bergeron model of equity.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sand said:

Math is racist, so Virginia is planning on ending all gifted classes until 11th grade.  

Mediocrity for all, I guess?  I shake my head at the proposed solution here.  Truly mind boggling.  If I was stuck in this educational hellscape I'd have been bored beyond all imagination.  That would not have ended well for me.

People with the financial means will figure out way to educate their kids beyond what's being offered.

And then the same people that instituted these changes will argue that schooling sucks and are underfunded as part of a scheme of systemic racism because white kids will get a better education elsewhere.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, djmich said:

People with the financial means will figure out way to educate their kids beyond what's being offered.

And then the same people that instituted these changes will argue that schooling sucks and are underfunded as part of a scheme of systemic racism because white kids will get a better education elsewhere.

 

funny I've been saying this for a while. Around here they were trying to tie standardized test scores to teacher evaluations. Meaning if students scored poorly on the test, they were grounds for firing the teacher. IMO they were not taking socioeconomic conditions into play and in the end it would force out many teachers in low income and underserved neighborhoods. Hence the best teachers would seek employment in higher earning districts where traditionally the family unit was together, mom was home full time and they could afford tudors and extra help for certain subjects. Instead we should be incentivizing the best teachers to take positions at underserved districts, but why would the best want to risk their jobs year to year vs taking a cushy job at a better ranked district? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, glvsav37 said:

 and they could afford tudors 

Hiring a Tudor is expensive, no doubt.  Not sure about the educational expense, but the uniforms bill is out of sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sand said:
2 hours ago, glvsav37 said:

 and they could afford tudors 

Hiring a Tudor is expensive, no doubt.  Not sure about the educational expense, but the uniforms bill is out of sight.

You could hire a Windsor I suppose. But apparently they won't even acknowledge you if you mixed race.

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sand said:

Math is racist, so Virginia is planning on ending all gifted classes until 11th grade.  

Mediocrity for all, I guess?  I shake my head at the proposed solution here.  Truly mind boggling.  If I was stuck in this educational hellscape I'd have been bored beyond all imagination.  That would not have ended well for me.

I saw this last night and couldn't get over it, maybe even deserves its own thread.  I mean, do these people have any idea about how detrimental of a policy this is?  How in the world can you expect a teacher to teach a class when you throw the entire educational spectrum into one class - especially one with as high of a spread as math performance?  Either you have to move at what the better students will consider a glacial pace and they will check out, or you will completely lose the struggling students and they will decide that school is impossible and stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Dr_Zaius said:

I saw this last night and couldn't get over it, maybe even deserves its own thread.  I mean, do these people have any idea about how detrimental of a policy this is?  How in the world can you expect a teacher to teach a class when you throw the entire educational spectrum into one class - especially one with as high of a spread as math performance?  Either you have to move at what the better students will consider a glacial pace and they will check out, or you will completely lose the struggling students and they will decide that school is impossible and stupid.

Should we outlaw basketball if it favors one race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sand said:

Math is racist, so Virginia is planning on ending all gifted classes until 11th grade.  

Mediocrity for all, I guess?  I shake my head at the proposed solution here.  Truly mind boggling.  If I was stuck in this educational hellscape I'd have been bored beyond all imagination.  That would not have ended well for me.

I think the more significant thing is they are getting rid of the traditional math courses:
 

Quote

 

During a webinar posted on YouTube in December, a member of the "essential concepts" committee claimed that the new framework would exclude traditional classes like Algebra 1 and Geometry.

Committee member Ian Shenk, who focused on grades 8-10, said: "Let me be totally clear, we are talking about taking Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2 – those three courses that we've known and loved ... and removing them from our high school mathematics program, replacing them with essential concepts for grade eight, nine, and 10."

He added that the concepts courses wouldn't eliminate algebraic ideas but rather interweave multiple strands of mathematics throughout the courses. Those included data analysis, mathematical modeling, functions and algebra, spatial reasoning and probability.

 

Colleges have been able to evaluate students by what classes they take.  For Math, Algebra I means something.  Now, they're creating their own non-standard math classes to replace what has been standard for probably 40-50 years.  That's going to make it hard for colleges to do an apples to apples comparison of students coming from places still using traditional courses.  And that doesn't even get in to the question of WHAT is going to be in the replacement.  I suspect a lot of non-math indoctrination but that's just speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I'm all for reimagining our standard math curriculum.  We've talked about this several times -- the math sequence is built to prepare students for calculus.  That's great for people like me, who needed calculus.  But that's a small minority of students.  We would be much better off directing people toward probability and statistics instead, with the "calculus track" being set aside for people who are on a trajectory toward math-oriented fields.  

So I'm not automatically opposed to restructuring away from Algebra I, Algebra II, Trigonometry, etc. toward something less calculus-y.  This doesn't sound like the right approach though.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

For the record, I'm all for reimagining our standard math curriculum.  We've talked about this several times -- the math sequence is built to prepare students for calculus.  That's great for people like me, who needed calculus.  But that's a small minority of students.  We would be much better off directing people toward probability and statistics instead, with the "calculus track" being set aside for people who are on a trajectory toward math-oriented fields.  

So I'm not automatically opposed to restructuring away from Algebra I, Algebra II, Trigonometry, etc. toward something less calculus-y.  This doesn't sound like the right approach though.

Totally agree, I'm not opposed to reworking the math curriculum.  I think the fetishizing of Calculus (and also Physics) as what the Smart PeopleTM take is on the whole counterproductive.  Why jam derivatives, etc. down the throat of a student who doesn't want to learn it and will most likely never really use it again?

It's the elimination of trying to put kids who are on the same level in the same class that I am vehemently against.  Like much in modern society, it identifies a problem (Johnny has really fallen behind Jimmy in Math) and tries to impose a solution that has no hope of working (let's try to teach them in the same class even though one is the equivalent of 3 grades ahead mathwise).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dr_Zaius said:

Totally agree, I'm not opposed to reworking the math curriculum.  I think the fetishizing of Calculus (and also Physics) as what the Smart PeopleTM take is on the whole counterproductive.  Why jam derivatives, etc. down the throat of a student who doesn't want to learn it and will most likely never really use it again?

It's the elimination of trying to put kids who are on the same level in the same class that I am vehemently against.  Like much in modern society, it identifies a problem (Johnny has really fallen behind Jimmy in Math) and tries to impose a solution that has no hope of working (let's try to teach them in the same class even though one is the equivalent of 3 grades ahead mathwise).

This post has given me pause.  I think you're on to something here.  🤔

  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr_Zaius said:

I think the fetishizing of Calculus (and also Physics) as what the Smart PeopleTM take is on the whole counterproductive.  Why jam derivatives, etc. down the throat of a student who doesn't want to learn it and will most likely never really use it again?

We're getting off topic, but I couldn't agree more.  Calculus is fine, but it has zero practical value for most people.  By way of contrast, basic statistics has incredible practical and philosophical value.  Just getting people to understand stuff like Bayes Rule, why correlation isn't the same as causation, the nature of random noise, the law of large numbers, etc. is really valuable.  Moment generating functions?  No.  Confidence intervals?  Yes.

  • Like 4
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

We're getting off topic, but I couldn't agree more.  Calculus is fine, but it has zero practical value for most people.  By way of contrast, basic statistics has incredible practical and philosophical value.  Just getting people to understand stuff like Bayes Rule, why correlation isn't the same as causation, the nature of random noise, the law of large numbers, etc. is really valuable.  Moment generating functions?  No.  Confidence intervals?  Yes.

I'm a Computer Science major.  I only say major because I never graduated college but I'm about 30 credits short.  Those 30 credits comprise Geometry, Physics and some other BS math/chemistry courses they want me to take.  I've taken all of the CS courses required so I literally have ZERO CS courses to take but I'm required to get these BS math/chemistry courses out of the way to get that paper degree.  Needless to say, that's never stopped me from advancing in my profession.  In fact, I have companies actively trying to recruit me to join them EVERY week (heck, even Facebook reached out to me).  I'm blessed to have such opportunity and I do not take it for granted.  It could be a lot worse and I thank my lucky stars every day.  I mean, I originally started college as a film major before switching to CS.

I've been working in the industry for 20+ years now and I have not once used any of those math/chemistry courses in my profession.  It's a waste of money and time.

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you can't do statistics without teaching a little bit of calculus fundamental - area under a bell curve.  Number theory is also powerful for teaching people how to solve problems.  Physics describes the laws of the universe.  It think people are completely lost without at least an understanding of why you die if your car drives off a cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tonydead said:

Well you can't do statistics without teaching a little bit of calculus fundamental - area under a bell curve.  Number theory is also powerful for teaching people how to solve problems.  Physics describes the laws of the universe.  It think people are completely lost without at least an understanding of why you die if your car drives off a cliff.

Don't get me wrong, physics was my favorite course in high school (insert joke here).  And while I agree with you to an extent, there's a world of difference between A) explaining to young Jebediah that when your car drives off a cliff, a force called gravity causes you to pick up speed until you either approach terminal velocity or come in contact with the ground which will impose a tremendous  amount of force on you that increases the faster you are going vs. B) asking young Jebediah, who just wants to graduate so he can marry Suzie, to solve for the number of seconds it will take for him to hit the ground after driving off said cliff, as well as how far his body will travel in the horizontal direction while it falls (bonus points if he identifies ways to reduce his velocity at impact).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr_Zaius said:

Don't get me wrong, physics was my favorite course in high school (insert joke here).  And while I agree with you to an extent, there's a world of difference between A) explaining to young Jebediah that when your car drives off a cliff, a force called gravity causes you to pick up speed until you either approach terminal velocity or come in contact with the ground which will impose a tremendous  amount of force on you that increases the faster you are going vs. B) asking young Jebediah, who just wants to graduate so he can marry Suzie, to solve for the number of seconds it will take for him to hit the ground after driving off said cliff, as well as how far his body will travel in the horizontal direction while it falls (bonus points if he identifies ways to reduce his velocity at impact).

He should get a job before he marries Suzie so he ought to be able to figure out how long it will take him to drive to his job interview.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personal, way OT: If you've seen my work in Shark Pool, you know why I've taken Intro to Probability and Statistics three times. The same course, not in ascending order. The three is not a good thing. I graduated from college with the most Gentleman C of Gentleman's Cs in stats after taking it twice. Only after watching Khan academy was I able to get probability, and then, to a degree, stats. I went back and took it again after I graduated school at UConn (where I live) so I could understand it. I still don't. And I got in A+ in Trig/Pre-Cal junior year in high school (we also didn't have a gifted program nor a great directional guidance counselor to make sure we took the right courses) and didn't take calculus, but I'm sure I would understand it better than stats, which everyone says is easy. For some of us, it's not. :(

Policy, back OT: And as for Virginia's new proposal for math, they're stupid to do that. That's essentially what we did. After having an accelerated gifted program in middle school, our high school dropped off into simple college prep/non-college prep divisions, and even that was a fight to have. The seventies and the curriculum egalitarians had wreaked havoc upon our town. They'd basically wiped out grammar classes and had replaced those with writing courses, whereby the theory was to get kids to learn how to write by the process of writing rather than understanding grammatical concepts. Bad move. I'd give anything to go back (I tried to take a writing and editing course at UCLA, only to find out it was adjacent to queer theory and composed of developing characters for a specific line of literature -- I took out a thread in the FFA about it) and totally deconstruct and then reconstruct how I write. I think that would be awesome. So I resent the '70s educational movement towards egalitarianism and newfangled ways of learning. I loathe them both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

For the record, I'm all for reimagining our standard math curriculum.  We've talked about this several times -- the math sequence is built to prepare students for calculus.  That's great for people like me, who needed calculus.  But that's a small minority of students.  We would be much better off directing people toward probability and statistics instead, with the "calculus track" being set aside for people who are on a trajectory toward math-oriented fields.  

So I'm not automatically opposed to restructuring away from Algebra I, Algebra II, Trigonometry, etc. toward something less calculus-y.  This doesn't sound like the right approach though.

My fear here is that the calculus based curriculum would eventually go away or become difficult to access, particularly in lower achieving schools.  We already have a dearth of those pursuing the hard sciences.

My profession is the hardest of hard sciences.  I hire coops and engineers.  I'll be honest - coming across POC that are capable of doing the job isn't quite unicorn status, but it's rare.  When I do coop hiring it's two coop days (30 interviews) and have had occasions of zero POC to interview.  None.  (I usually have some excellent female applicants).  These are at our two biggest state schools.

My place of work aggressively does STEM outreach (we have a whole dept. doing STEM training of HS students and teachers) which I hope will pay off down the line.  But, still, I worry that diluting our math education will have seriously deleterious effects a decade down the road.  I'll need some sharp people to take over my job, after all!

BTW, physics is awesome.  I have dueling pistols here for any that disagree.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My teacher take here is

A. I understand the issue with separating the advanced kids from the average or poor students. Kids learn from each other, not just content but context. Good students model good work ethic, behavior, etc. Also having strong students in class puts success for everyone into context (for better and worse). However, it's ridiculous not to offer separate tracks. I get that the Dept of Ed is saying the teacher will just differentiate so the more advanced kids get tougher problems, etc. That's great in theory but it is difficult to actually run a class where the kids are learning different things. 

B. I don't have any issue reworking math to change the focus away from endless calculations of theoretical problems and basing things more in how math is used in reality. Most math teachers I know don't like what they have to teach because it is dry and they don't think it is what most of the kids need to learn from math. My opinion is that stats should be the basic foundation of HS math. Not complex statistical calculations but understanding stats. We are bombarded with stats in every aspect of our life but most people never really get a solid foundation for how to use them,  understand them or when to call them into question. 

Edited by Ilov80s
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this was discussed earlier, but U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of a Shawnee State University professor, Nicholas Meriwether, to allow him to sue the university for first amendment violations for disciplining him for not using student preferred pronouns.  Seems like a positive development.  

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sand said:

My fear here is that the calculus based curriculum would eventually go away or become difficult to access, particularly in lower achieving schools.  We already have a dearth of those pursuing the hard sciences.

My profession is the hardest of hard sciences.  I hire coops and engineers.  I'll be honest - coming across POC that are capable of doing the job isn't quite unicorn status, but it's rare.  When I do coop hiring it's two coop days (30 interviews) and have had occasions of zero POC to interview.  None.  (I usually have some excellent female applicants).  These are at our two biggest state schools.

My place of work aggressively does STEM outreach (we have a whole dept. doing STEM training of HS students and teachers) which I hope will pay off down the line.  But, still, I worry that diluting our math education will have seriously deleterious effects a decade down the road.  I'll need some sharp people to take over my job, after all!

BTW, physics is awesome.  I have dueling pistols here for any that disagree.  :P

I agree that this proposal is likely to exacerbate the "pipeline problem" that exists for POC in STEM.  It's a weird variant of systemic racism.  I just wanted to focus on a slightly different tangent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

Not sure if this was discussed earlier, but U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of a Shawnee State University professor, Nicholas Meriwether, to allow him to sue the university for first amendment violations for disciplining him for not using student preferred pronouns.  Seems like a positive development.  

That's awesome.

What really needs to happen is we need to destroy cancel culture completely and with extreme prejudice.  People need to fight back against the Marxist/Commie mobs, because that's exactly what this is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2021 at 3:03 PM, BladeRunner said:

That's awesome.

What really needs to happen is we need to destroy cancel culture completely and with extreme prejudice.  People need to fight back against the Marxist/Commie mobs, because that's exactly what this is.

So, cancel cancel culture? 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is being "Woke" getting old?  Oscar ratings down 56%, NBA ratings down.

 

Sunday's 93rd annual Academy Awards, held at Los Angeles' Union Station, plunged to 10.4 million viewers, according to final Nielsen estimates.  That's down 56% from last year's  23.6 million viewers, that was a record-low that was down by 6 million from 2019. 

The Oscars claimed just 2.1% of adults ages 18 to 49 age group advertisers covet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

Is being "Woke" getting old?  Oscar ratings down 56%, NBA ratings down.

 

Sunday's 93rd annual Academy Awards, held at Los Angeles' Union Station, plunged to 10.4 million viewers, according to final Nielsen estimates.  That's down 56% from last year's  23.6 million viewers, that was a record-low that was down by 6 million from 2019. 

The Oscars claimed just 2.1% of adults ages 18 to 49 age group advertisers covet.

Turns out watching rich, self-centered, sheltered hypocrites shower themselves with awards while preaching to us is a turn off.

I urge all of you to watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aRGYPxoZQY

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Summer Wheat said:

Is being "Woke" getting old?  Oscar ratings down 56%, NBA ratings down.

 

Sunday's 93rd annual Academy Awards, held at Los Angeles' Union Station, plunged to 10.4 million viewers, according to final Nielsen estimates.  That's down 56% from last year's  23.6 million viewers, that was a record-low that was down by 6 million from 2019. 

The Oscars claimed just 2.1% of adults ages 18 to 49 age group advertisers covet.

How many people watched new movies last year? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Summer Wheat said:

Is being "Woke" getting old?  Oscar ratings down 56%, NBA ratings down.

 

Sunday's 93rd annual Academy Awards, held at Los Angeles' Union Station, plunged to 10.4 million viewers, according to final Nielsen estimates.  That's down 56% from last year's  23.6 million viewers, that was a record-low that was down by 6 million from 2019. 

The Oscars claimed just 2.1% of adults ages 18 to 49 age group advertisers covet.

The term woke has certainly gotten old

I’ve never been one to watch the Oscars but I would imagine that the decrease in ratings has a lot to do with Covid and people not being able to actually go to the movies like they have in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, timschochet said:

How many people watched new movies last year? 

Year before was a record low as well.

Newsweek:  NBA ratings have declined again over the current season, a new poll shows that more than 34.5 percent of Americans say they have watched less sports over political and social justice messaging.

The poll, which was conducted by Yahoo News/YouGov, found 34.5 percent of respondents saying they have watched less sports due to social justice campaigns. According to the poll just 11 percent of people said they have watched more sports as a result of the social justice messaging, and only 56.3 percent said they have watched the same amount.

Edited by Summer Wheat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards shows in general are seeing lower ratings. The ratings for the Grammys were way down as well, and it’s not like people are not listening to music these days. Political lecturing by celebs definitely doesn’t help the Oscars, for sure though. 
 

Doesn’t surprise me about the NBA. Between everything of the last year and LeBron’s idiocy last week, I suspect they will continue to see sliding ratings. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Summer Wheat said:

Year before was a record low as well.

Newsweek:  NBA ratings have declined again over the current season, a new poll shows that more than 34.5 percent of Americans say they have watched less sports over political and social justice messaging.

The poll, which was conducted by Yahoo News/YouGov, found 34.5 percent of respondents saying they have watched less sports due to social justice campaigns. According to the poll just 11 percent of people said they have watched more sports as a result of the social justice messaging, and only 56.3 percent said they have watched the same amount.

I know someone who canceled his NBA season tickets because of the social justice campaign. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if speaking out for social justice hurts the bottom line for the NBA and other sports associations. Perhaps the motive is actually promoting social justice rather than seeking increased profits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Yenrub said:

The term woke has certainly gotten old

I’ve never been one to watch the Oscars but I would imagine that the decrease in ratings has a lot to do with Covid and people not being able to actually go to the movies like they have in the past.

The awards were boring as hell and I hadn’t seen any of the movies. I’m not even sure why I watched this thing. 

That said, I’m glad to have a few new films on my “to watch” list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigbottom said:

I know someone who canceled his NBA season tickets because of the social justice campaign. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if speaking out for social justice hurts the bottom line for the NBA and other sports associations. Perhaps the motive is actually promoting social justice rather than seeking increased profits?

Wut?  The NBA would rather promote social justice than increased profits?  Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigbottom said:

I know someone who canceled his NBA season tickets because of the social justice campaign. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if speaking out for social justice hurts the bottom line for the NBA and other sports associations. Perhaps the motive is actually promoting social justice rather than seeking increased profits?

IMO its all about the workers (players) and keeping them in line.  If they get sideways with the players then a few season ticket holders canceling (which can be filled back) is small potatoes.

Not judging, just what I think the primary motive is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...