(no subject)

[andrewducker]

The reason for this poll was that laserboy became outraged because the newspapers only seemed to be interested in the latest ongoings on tacky reality tv-shows involving large-breasted 'celebrities' and not in political ongoings.

Leaving aside the fact that he's reading the wrong papers, I pointed out that in general people are far, far more interested in large-breasted celebrities than they are in politics.  The majority of the population of the country have, at best, a cursory interest in politics, but 50% of them have breasts and something near that number want to get their hands on some.

So, I asked the poll, which shows that even the readers of my journal (who are all, obviously, well-read, engaging people with an interest in the outside world) think about breasts far more than they think about the largest event in world politics at the current moment.

Don't blame the media for feeding you shit - if you're interested all the stories are out there, if people were interested they'd be reading them.

Comments

[original-aj.livejournal.com]

Ah, but there is a difference between thinking about breasts / thinking about one particular issue, and thinking about breasts / thinking about any political issue. There is also a difference between being interested in breasts and being interested in the inane doings of people who happen to possess them. So I think your methodology is flawed. Your conclusion is valid, but not proven by your poll. Sorry....
;-)

[diffrentcolours]

There's an old adage, and you probably know it better than I, about how the American public aren't stupid, and how any phone-in radio sports quiz will demonstrate an amazing capacity for fact retention. The upshot is that if politics were as interesting as sports, then people would be interested in politics.

Perhaps we need "I'm An MP, Get Me Out Of Here!" to boost public awareness of the political system?

[darkoshi]

I didn't answer the poll because i'm not sure which i think about more. Neither is a favorite topic of thought. But also, because when I do think of breasts, its probably not in the mode in which you were referring to. More about how i don't like them, and wouldn't it be better not to have them... or are they maybe not so bad, and can i get used to them, etc.

[stillcarl.livejournal.com]

Don't blame the media for feeding you shit

But I do...

And there's a difference between breasts and the war in Iraq in that if there wasn't any media we'd still think almost as much about breasts but probably not at all about Iraq.

Most of us need the media to know what's happening in the world - no media would mean no information about Iraq for us to ponder on. Breasts on the other hand confront us by the thousands on the streets every day, media or no media.

There's also thinking and thinking. I also think a lot about cars, in that I drive a lot and need to think about them else they'll run into me and kill me. Now that thinking's about on the same level as thinking about breasts. ie, none too deep and near enough to autonomous. Thinking about Iraq though isn't at all like that. Iraq's an argument, not just short-term processing to stay alive or a pleasant contemplation.

If you'd asked if people had read more about breasts than the war in Iraq in the last month you might've got a different result.