Democrat wins Va. House seat in recount by single vote; creating 50-50 tie in legislature

[u/slaysia]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/democrat-wins-va-house-seat-in-recount-by-single-vote-creating-50-50-tie-in-legislature/2017/12/19/3ff227ae-e43e-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html?utm_term=.82f2b85b50fa

[u/TheReasonsWhy]

Someone could say similar for Fox News, CNN, etc but what I’m saying is - if it brings awareness and thought to someone who otherwise doesn’t have an opinion, then maybe it is worth it. Bottom barrel centrism is still centrism, let the people think for themselves or at least be afforded that opportunity. If this past election isn’t proof that there’s a problem with general awareness in this country, then I don’t know what is. People voting for a man based on the fact they’ve seen him on TV or that they liked The Apprentice. That’s the kind of “awareness” we all need to be weary of.

[u/lashfield → u/TheReasonsWhy]

It's not even centrism, it's pessimistic cynical fatalism. Fox and CNN actually do their job to engage with the issues somewhat, South Park disengages from them. Not by playing the both sides canard, but by actively asserting that both sides are equally worthless. Ideological laziness is not the same thing as ideological sloppiness.

[u/TheReasonsWhy → u/lashfield]

I think a lot of people would rather watch cartoons that are centralistic in nature than 24 news organizations. Though some people wake up to the news and that’s how they live. South Park does disengage in this instance, but it does spark thought and it does create an opportunity for the viewer to draw their own conclusion.

This is what I appreciated about Bill Hicks style of comedy. There’s a video of him being interviewed by reporters from BCC, they ask him “Who would want to actually THINK when they’re at a comedy show”. Which I have always though was quite the question from a media outlet. He used his skills to project minds to actually use their brain instead of getting laughs at the same old wife, husband, race, religious jokes.

[u/lashfield → u/TheReasonsWhy]

but it does spark thought and it does create an opportunity for the viewer to draw their own conclusion.

I think this is a cop-out, to be honest. They don't create a space for discussion, they serve up a conclusion. Just because they talk about something doesn't mean that they are engaging in anything. The giant turd episode should serve to prove that. They pushed a conclusion, which says that the two parties are the same.

To be honest, Bill Hicks did the same thing. Bill Hicks isn't a political thinker. He "encouraged thinking" by yelling platitudes at the audience. I've seen enough South Park and Bill Hicks to know what they're doing. Did Bill Hicks ever encourage people to read Alexis de Tocqueville? Nah. Did South Park ever encourage people to go volunteer or donate money for a political cause they supported? Nah. That's not what they're for. They're entertainers, and they're there to entertain. They're not philosophers, and we are all the worse for not understanding the difference between the two.

[u/TheReasonsWhy → u/lashfield]

I wouldn’t identify either of them as philosophical, I would describe them as “thinking agitators”, in the same way a washing machine agitates clothing rather than produces new clothes. Bill Hicks was definitely not as centric as South Park, he was very anti-religion, very anti-Bush Sr, very anti-war and very anti-consumerism.

Introducing provoking thoughts is what professors, teachers and scientists do consistently.. theories for instance allow for speculation and imagination. To draw a conclusion based on existing knowledge but to have that challenged, for some, I do believe these medias have enough effect to cause reconsideration and thought-provoking outcomes.

[u/theth1rdchild → u/TheReasonsWhy]

I'm just saying that Mr. Garrison angrily raping "Trump" to death wasn't important discourse.