Daily Kos recently did a post on the background of one of my favorite Christmas songs, “Christmas in the Trenches“, while a Fanpop.com article from last year delivered a devastating take-down of one of my least favorite Christmas songs, “Do They Know It’s Christmas?“.
Consolidation of media ownership + corporate propaganda = (rather unsettling) comedy gold:
The Onion looks back at It’s a Wonderful Life:
A hilarious but deeply cynical Rankin/Bass-style musical number (NSFW):
Films and videos don’t always gain a cult following because they’re good. Case in point is the “Star Wars Holiday Special” (1978), the first official spin-off which was only broadcast once and never released on home video. George Lucas was rumored to have been personally involved in keeping it hidden since he considered it such an embarrassment. Because of its rarity and underground status, bootlegs of the original broadcast were long sought after by fans of Star Wars and obscure cinema.
As holiday specials go, it has a fairly standard flimsy narrative that strings together a variety of celebrity cameos, comedic skits and musical numbers. What sets it apart are appearances by all the main characters of the film and the strained attempt to fit them into a 70s holiday variety program. Comedians like Bea Arthur, Art Carny, and Harvey Korman or musicians like Diahann Carroll and Jefferson Starship don’t seem to belong in the same universe of Star Wars much less the same television program. Though much of the comedy and guest appearances fall flat and the production as a whole reeks of crass commercialism and cloying sentimentality, it does have moments of inspired weirdness that might make it worth seeing by hardcore Star Wars fans, paracinephiles, and/or stoners.
This is a 15 minute “fan edit” version of the Star Wars Holiday Special:
In contrast to the Star Wars special, the “Pee Wee’s Playhouse Christmas Special” (1988) is an example of how similar holiday tropes can be used more creatively towards an equally bizarre but more satisfying end result. The campy, self-aware and subtly subversive tone of Pee Wee’s Playhouse is better suited for the “pop culture mash-up” aspect of holiday specials than the more self-contained world of Star Wars. It also helps that Pee Wee’s show is written with more humor and wit and features an eclectic mix of guests who all seem to be having fun.
The roster of celebrities include Annette Funicello, Frankie Avalon, Grace Jones, K.D. Lang, Little Richard, Cher, Magic Johnson, Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah Winfrey, Charo and Laurence Fishburne among others. Like Pee Wee, they’re iconic and have collective appeal that transcends age, race and gender. They’re also perfect guest stars for a throwback to televised holiday events of the past with a postmodern and absurdist sensibility.
In “La Antena” (2007), a surreal Argentine parable written and directed by Esteban Sapir, the population of an unknown city is kept under the complete control of Mr. TV through his monopolization of the broadcast system and food supply. Everyone in the city except for a singer, La Voz, has lost their voice (yet are still able to communicate through visual words). With the help of his scientist henchman Dr. Y, Mr. TV kidnaps La Voz in a scheme to take away the last remaining means of communication from the the citizens. A TV repairman gets word of the plan and attempts to foil it using an abandoned antenna in the mountains.
The film is shot in a silent film style reminiscent of the works of Fritz Lang and F.W. Murnau, but also seems to incorporate influences from modern fantasy films such as Dark City and Pan’s Labyrinth. Unfortunately, the only complete version of the film I could find was without subtitles, but those who don’t know Spanish can still enjoy it because the story is conveyed mostly through (beautifully evocative) imagery and doesn’t rely heavily on dialogue.
As the nation approaches the first anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, mainstream media are predictably excluding from their tragedy porn any substantive analysis of the idiosyncratic, misleading, and in some cases flagrantly propagandistic reportage of the event that might call the official story into question.
As with a majority of scandals and coverups over the past several decades where powerful interests are implicated, American journalism has become more and more complicit if not actively involved in delivering dubious information that establishes a dominant narrative, while thereafter failing to vigorously interrogate and amend faulty coverage that leads to vast public misconceptions.
The assassination of JFK, the falsely-reported Tonkin Gulf incident that sparked the costly Vietnam War, and the similarly questionable events of 9/11 that have together brought the US to the present national and geopolitical impasse all come to mind. One is left to ponder how the behavior of a wholly government-controlled media system would differ from our corporate-run consciousness industry that routinely and shamelessly showboats its First Amendment protections.
The consequences of such a communication breakdown are vast, with countless lives and entire nations having been undermined and destroyed. Moreover, the “first drafts of history” become plagued by myth and distortion that eventually cohere as collective memory, thus robbing a people of their self-determination, nullifying their humanity, and ensuring that the cycle repeats interminably.
Those rationally dissenting from the official record and who occupy positions to alter public opinion are usually written off by establishment-controlled media outlets as “conspiracy theorists,” “wackos,” and so on. If such individuals cannot be neutralized through defamation or blackmail, and if they possess information or occupy positions where they are capable of posing a serious and immediate threat to official fictions and thus the power structure itself, they are prone to becoming oddly “suicidal,” (see, for example, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here), or are simply killed outright (e.g. here, here, here, here, here, here, and here and here).
What else won’t we see in the corporate media’s series of heart-tugging memorials devoted to the anniversary of Sandy Hook? The two most recent and obvious indications that the event itself is at the very least a coverup include, first, the wholly unreported story of the Obama administration’s $2.5 million payout (read: bribe) to state and local law enforcement agencies directly involved in responding to the incident, and second, what is by almost any measure the entirely illegal destruction of pertinent evidence in the demolition of the crime scene itself.
Empowered by the internet as their primary means of communication, a broad array of independent researchers have conduced an impromptu “truth commission” that together calls the Sandy Hook narrative presented by corporate news media into serious question. For those with eyes to see and the ability to think critically they have also shamed the mainstream journalists directly involved in (mis)representing the event to the American public.
Yet without a genuinely independent investigation of the incident apart from the oversight and influence of the [Governor Dannel] Malloy and Obama administrations, the broader public will likely never know what actually took place on December 14, 2012 in Newtown Connecticut. As has too often been the case throughout the last half century, the prospects are high that yet another “big lie” has again taken root in the ever-malleable and somnambulent public mind.
Whenever there’s a cheerful jobs report propagated by corporate news, many of us know they’re lying (because it just doesn’t correspond to reality) though we might not know exactly how the numbers they use decieve us. At Counterpunch.org, Paul Craig Roberts dissects some of the figures cited by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as support for claims of an economic recovery. For example, their payroll jobs report says that the US economy created 203,000 jobs in November. Since it takes about 130,000 new jobs each month to keep up with population growth, the remaining 70,000 of the jobs would have only slightly reduced the unemployment rate yet it supposedly fell from 7.3 to 7.0 which is too much. It turns out the payroll survey counts a person holding two jobs as if it were two employed persons, while the unemployment rate is calculated from the household survey, which counts a person holding two or more jobs as one job. Though the two figures are often reported together, they actually have no connection.
Payroll numbers can be skewed by seasonal hiring and because the birth-death model used to estimate the numbers of unreported business shutdowns and startups often underestimate the former and overestimate the latter. The unemployment rate figures are innacurate because it leaves out people who have given up on looking for work. The greater the number of discouraged workers there are, the lower the rate of unemployment, according to the BLS.
So exactly where and what are the 203,000 new payroll jobs created in November? Paul Craig Roberts breaks down the figures as reported by the BLS and discovered that the majority are lowly-paid, part-time, nontradable (non exportable) domestic service jobs including:
…retail trade with 22,300 jobs, transportation and warehousing with 30,500 jobs, temporary help services with 16,400 jobs, ambulatory health care services with 26,300 jobs, home health care services with 11,800 jobs, and the old reliable waitresses and bartenders with 17,900 jobs.
This is the jobs profile of the American super economy. It is the profile of India 30 or 40 years ago.
PCR continues his analysis by citing the work of statistician John Williams (shadowstats.com), who found more misstated jobs that could be attributed to the government shutdown and reopening, the birth-death model, and concurrent-seasonal-adjustment errors. According to Williams, whose figures include long-term discouraged workers who cannot find a job, the US unemployment rate is actually 23.2%.
Of course there’s no recovery with a 23.2% unemployment rate, but to keep stocks and bonds at all-time record high levels, the Federal Reserve is printing $1,000 billion new dollars annually, potentially creating an economic bubble. Despite these issues, the BLS estimated a third quarter GDP growth of 3.6%. Paul Craig Roberts challenges this claim with the following figures:
US real per capita income has declined from $29,554 in 2007 to $27,319 in 2012, a drop of $2,235 or 7.5%.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 1,277,000 fewer seasonally adjusted payroll jobs in November 2013 than in December 2007.
He concludes by asking:
How it is possible for the economy to have been in recovery since June 2009 (according to the National Bureau of Economic Research) and there are 1,277,000 fewer jobs today than existed six years ago prior to the recession?
How has real Gross Domestic Product recovered when jobs and real consumer incomes have not?
After the Crash 