One Word You Can't Say On Television

Way to start the season with a bang, Saturday Night Live! Or more appropriately, a bomb. That's right, the comedy show that performs skits live on the NBC Channel, let the f-bomb slip during a sketch called "Biker Chick Chat". Newcomer Jenny Slate, who was playing one of the Biker Chicks (along with hostess Megan Fox and Kristen Wiig), let the expletive escape her lips in, ironically, a skit that was based on NOT saying the f-word.

Immediately after letting the word tumble out of her mouth, Jenny Slate puffed out her cheeks, perhaps realizing her mistake...and the show went on with hardly a pause and no humongous "OOOOOOO!" from the audience. (But if you watch the clip, there seems to be a slight awkward pause and brief gasp, though).

Afterward, Slate expressed worries over being fired, but it doesn't look as though she will be. She will probably just have a fine slapped on her from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for using the expletive. NBC declined to comment on the incident, other than to say the word had been restored to the intended "freakin'" for the show's replays in western time zones.

I really think that Slate handled herself well. She finished the skit and didn't let her, ahem, muck-up stop her from performing. That being said, I am not a particular fan of SNL. I really think the show has gone downhill, especially in the last decade. I don't really watch it unless I hear about a particular skit, but when I do watch it, it rarely makes me laugh. The jokes are just not funny. I mean, the most memorable thing about last week's episode was not a particular skit or Megan Fox's bland performance. The most memorable thing about last Saturday's show was someone saying the f-word, which any loose-lipped person can do.

First of all, I want to say that comedy is an art. It is difficult to do. Not every joke will be funny to every person. But I hate to see comics and just everyday people saying expletive after expletive when they talk (cough...Dane Cook). To me personally, it is the easy way out; an easy way to get a laugh just from the pure shock value. The joke might not even require an intelligent observation or even be funny, but throw in an f-word and boom...instant applause.

Comedy aside, let's briefly talk about censorship. As you are most certainly aware, there can't be any f-words on regular television. HBO, yes, but regular television? I'm not against self-expression, but I think that censorship is a very good thing. I think it forces the writers to be creative in the way they word things, to make questionable material more subtle or just a little less vulgar. I also appreciate it when I am watching something with my little 6-year-old brother. I don't want him picking up those words from TV.

What are your thoughts on censorship on television? Do you think that the FCC has the right to fine people for accidentally saying a word? What do you think television would be like if you could say the seven words you can't say on television?

Concerning the Saturday Night Live fiasco: It wasn't the first time something like this has happened. The f-word has accidentally gotten through other live news feeds, such as another slip-up on SNL in 1981 by Charles Rocket, and a veteran New York City news anchor while on the air.

I want to know your thoughts about this entire thing. How do you feel about SNL? About censorship in the media?

Surrogates

Some days I just don’t want to get up for class...okay, every day. But school is something I am paying for and will help me in the long run, so I drag myself out of bed and cowboy up. But what if…I sent my robot counterpart to class in my stead? It could take my notes and record what the teacher says. It would look just like any other human.

What if I had a surrogate?

Yes, I am referencing the Bruce Willis movie coming out on Friday. The plot of the movie, aptly called “Surrogates”, is that the world is nothing but people sitting in their chairs living through their robots, or surrogates. Then, for the first time in years, someone is murdered in a world where no one worries about pain or crime, since those things are all happening to the robots, which are quick to heal.

I know this sounds like an intriguing plot for a movie, but how far is this from becoming a reality? Of course it is science-fiction, but could this “robot world” ever become a daily occurrence? According to an article on CNN.com, armies are already using remote-controlled robots to destroy land mines and attack enemies. There is also emerging technology for handicapped people that allows them to operate robotic limbs and control computer cursors without using a keyboard. There is also “telepresence” technology that is letting people see, hear, walk, talk, and gesture using human sized robots that are across the world.

To quote from the CNN article: "There are a lot of real-world components to this," said robotics expert and author Daniel H. Wilson, "Clearly, there are not fully functional humanoid robots ... but there are a lot of components to telepresence that already exist."

The director of the “Surrogates” movie, Jonathan Mostow (Terminator 3:Rise of the Machines), also shared his thoughts on evolving robotics, “To me, it's not even a question of the technology. Technology always catches up. The question is, is some universal human urge being met by this invention? It seems to me we have a fundamental human desire to be lazy, to sort of not have to do things in person and to do it remotely.”

Indeed, robotics at Anybot, a company founded in 2001 by Trevor Blackwell, already has “anybots” in the development phase that can run, jump and climb stairs, and come with fully articulated hands designed to perform increasingly human-like tasks. The robot even resembles a human. (However, they cost $30,000 right now. Anybot is working on lowering the price).

Blackwell said he's not sure the technology will ever advance to the level imagined in "Surrogates"

Concerning the movie “Surrogates”, Anybot founder Blackwell said, "I don't know if we'll ever get quite to that level, of being that realistic.”

Immediately after seeing a trailer for this movie I was thinking about how people are so busy “living” in the different worlds of the internet that they aren’t really living in real life. Maybe we’re already living in a world of “surrogates” and this movie is just embodying that concept in a different way.

Just a deep moment I had there.

What are your thoughts? Do you think surrogates could actually happen in the future? Do you want them to? What would you have a surrogate do for you? :)

Ring Ring! Who Is It?...Facebook!?

Just when you think that Facebook can't pack any more into the world of social networking, it finds a way. Sometime in the few weeks, Facebook, a popular social networking site that allows users to share comments, pictures, and statuses, is getting voice chat. That's right! You'll be able to have high-quality voice conversations with your friends. You'll even get the chance to incorporate your voice into your applications.

However, Facebook did not come up with this new technology it is offering. That honor goes to Vivox, a Boston-based company that provides the integrated voice services for virtual worlds like EVE Online and Second life, whic have more than 15 million users around the world.

This new voice chat service will be available to everyone who has a Facebook account. However, each user will have to download Vivox’s plug-in, but once it is installed, voice chat is supposed to work “almost seamlessly” (CNN.com) with Facebook. It is for either one-on-one chatting or large group discussions.

One surprising thing about the voice chat is that even non-Facebook users can have a chance to participate, because Vivox is planning to offer free dial-in numbers that allow anyone to call into a conversation, reminiscent of call-in phone conferences. The Vivox company is also making its technology available to third-party Facebook application developers, which means that almost any application (like games and utilities) can record your voice.

As of right now, Facebook is not involved in promoting this new service, and it is not certain how much interest there will be in this new service.

I personally don’t think that I will use this feature much. I am trying to simplify and monitor how much I use the internet, and this new Voice Chat will definitely distract me from other things going on.

There is a lot of discussion to have on this. What do you think? Is this Voice Chat something that you would think about getting for your Facebook account? Do you think it is necessary or that it is “about time” that Facebook began a service like this? Do you think that social networking should stick to simply to the written language? How do you think this will affect Skype, the video-to-video phone call application and its components on the internet?

Ellen DeGeneres Joins American Idol

Paula Abdul, one of the original judges from the popular TV show American Idol, officially announced a few months ago that she would not be returning to the show. Although some people thought that a new judge brought in last year, Kara DioGuardi, was replacing Abdul, that doesn't seem to be the case. It has been released that Ellen DeGeneres, popular talk show host, will become a fourth judge on the show, alongside DioGuardi, Simon Cowell, and Randy Jackson. "I'm thrilled to be the new judge on American Idol," DeGeneres said Wednesday. "I've watched since the beginning, and I've always been a huge fan. So getting this job is a dream come true, and think of all the money I'll save from not having to text in my vote." (CNN.com)


DeGeneres will not be joining the judges until the new year, however, according to a Fox spokeswoman. Until DeGeneres takes the coveted American Idol judges seat in January, there will be some guest judges, including Mary J. Blige, Kristin Chenoweth, Joe Jonas and Neil Patrick Harris will fill the empty slot, Fox said.

"We are thrilled to have Ellen DeGeneres join the “American Idol” judges' table this season. She is truly one of America's funniest people and a fantastic performer who understands what it's like to stand up in front of audiences and entertain them every day," said Mike Darnell, president of Alternative Entertainment for Fox.

The Emmy Award-winning talk show host faces the task of winning over Abdul’s supporters, many of whom believe that Abdul’s absence will completely alter the show. I think that it will definitely be different since Paula Abdul has left, but I’ve always liked Ellen. She seems very genuine and honest, which are good qualities for an American Idol judge to have.

What do you think? Was DeGeneres the right replacement? Should she just stick to what she’s done in the past, comedy and hosting her talk show?

Last little tidbit: here is Ellen DeGeneres' monologue from the 2007 Academy Awards. I thought it was interesting because she momentarily mentions American Idol in it.

Also, this is a funny clip, also from the Academy Awards, where Ellen meets Clint Eastwood, of whom she is a big fan.

Is One Shot Enough?

I know that our campus here at VCSU is really tackling the issue of the H1N1 virus, also known as swine flu. I see posters up everywhere I go and I have started being more Monkish about keeping my hands clean.
Although there is a vaccine for the H1N1 virus, it is not readily available to all, including our campus. However, in recent news, American Health officials are even questioning if a "one shot" H1N1 flu vaccine will be effective, even though both China and a Swiss pharmeceutical company, Novartis, has approved a single dose vaccine (FoxNews.com).

The World Health Organization (WHO) said that "it is encouraged after reviewing the test details from the vaccine by Beijing-based drug maker Sinovac Biotech Ltd". However, the WHO would not comment on Novartis' vaccine since it hasn't seen the data. The WHO commented that "a number of companies were working on one-dose formulations that could theoretically increase the world's swine flu vaccine supplies.

The United States is not taking a position on this issue right now, saying that they are waiting for data to come in from the clinical trials. The U.S. is expecting to announce the inital test results from its vaccine in about two weeks. The vaccine is the same type as one of the Chinese versions, said Dr. Anthony Fauci of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

Novartis, the Swiss pharmeceutifcal company, said its results were based on a British trial of 100 people between the ages of 18 and 50 years old. The people in the trial received either one or two shots of its swine flu vaccine. According to this study, people who got two injections had a better immune response, but getting just one injection provided protection as well, within two weeks.

According to FoxNews.com, it is unclear what this could mean for the earth's vaccine supply. The Novartis vaccine was made using cell culture, while about 90 % of the world's flu vaccines are made using chicken eggs. The Novartis vaccine also includes adjuvents, which are commonly used in European flu vaccines. However, it is uncertain how safe flu vaccines with adjuvants are for pregnant women and children, who coincidentally are some of the groups believed to be most vulnerable to the H1N1 virus. The Chinese vaccine did not use an adjuvant, like most of the vaccines being tested in the U.S.

What do you think about the "two-shot" theory? Do you think it will really take two shots to beat the virus, or do you think that one shot will suffice?