What's Up With This?

The other day, I read some pundit somewhere say that his viewing of the new movie Alexander gave him more laughs than any other movie since Airplane. Airplane, you must know, is a broad, slapstick parody; Alexander isn't supposed to be.

Reading this article, yesterday, by the Baltimore Sun's television critic, David Zurawik, makes me wonder if it's supposed to be Alexander or Airplane:

.... Some television professionals predict the end of the existing model of anchor-driven nightly newscasts, whose roots extend to the pre-World War II, pioneering radio reports of Edward R. Murrow and William Shirer. Others foresee one or more of the networks abandoning the nightly news business altogether. Still others suggest that the mainstream journalistic tradition of striving to maintain objectivity may be challenged by an overtly partisan media dominated by ideologically driven cable channels and Internet bloggers.....

Anybody who can get past that last sentence without falling on the floor laughing has a stronger constitution than I do.

"At some point between now and 2008, either MSNBC or CNN may break off from the pack and decide to become the liberal alternative to Fox, thus freeing Fox to find a more frankly ideological formula as well," New York University Professor Jay Rosen wrote in a provocative post-election article on his Web log, PressThink....

CNN. May. Become. The. Liberal. Alternative.

This must be genius the likes of Mel Brooks.

It just must be.

[Follow-up: What's Up With This? II.]

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 11/29/04 06:11:17 PM
Categorized as Media.