Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Tsunami Parody
#1

So has anyone heard of this NY radio station that played a parody song to the tune of We Are The World (I think) that was about the Tsunami Disaster? Apparantly they're still getting shit, have fired a bunch of people and suspended more and are still getting shit.

Thoughts on that?
Reply
#2

I heard caller on that station the next day (I'm in NYC area) and about 75% of them were pissed. Some even went to far as to send in an angry RAP song!!!(cue Saved by the Bell "ooooooooooohh" audience sound).
Pretty fucked up if you've heard it. I think if it were humorous in any way, it may have been funny, but it didn't rhyme, it was just a fucking inappropriate thing in the end.
Reply
#3

I have an mp3 of part of the song, and a bunch of fighting on the air between the host and one of the women on the show Miss Info is her moniker. She is Asian I guess and didn't agree with the parody and said so and got ripped a new one. I can attach it if anyone is interested
Reply
#4

Hey Miss Info!

Did you hear the one about the Volkswagen dealer during the Hollocaust?
Reply
#5

no
Reply
#6

Quit cockblockin' homie.

I was hittin on Miss Info!
Reply
#7

she's not here :ph34r:
Reply
#8

oh.

I thought fer sure one of you fukkers would have registered a Miss Info troll by now.
Reply
#9

I'm not going to do it, I need to leave here in 15 minutes.
Reply
#10

In an effort to make this a real discussion I have to ask:

1. Should they have been fired for this parody?

2. Where's the line between tasteless and acceptable?
Reply
#11

link to news article for those not in the know: http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/2005-...rody_x.htm
Reply
#12

I thought our constitution had a first ammendment. My bad!
Reply
#13

VitaminE Wrote:I thought our constitution had a first ammendment. My bad!


Constitution - yes. Company Policy - No.

Jimmy - The old Hardcore Standard. :clap:
Reply
#14

VitaminE Wrote:I thought our constitution had a first ammendment. My bad!


You're thinking wrong. There's two things to consider:

1. They have the right to say anything they want, just not necessarily on a radio station (or website, sup UJ?) that relies on corporate sponsorships, and hence staying in the mainstream.

2. While they arguably have a right to do it, the rest of the country has a right to be angry about it. It gets people talking, but see #1, the radio has to think of its bottom line; if enough people are upset you could lose revenue.
Reply
#15

Having said what I said, I need to add this. Controversy gets a reaction. A reaction means ratings. That's the reason this station had people on there in the morning that were likely to do things like this.

So. Is the Company being hippocritical? Should they take a stand? Say we're sorry it offended people, and stick to their guns? Or are they right in cowtowing to the corporate sponsors and media watchdogs?
Reply
#16

VitaminE Wrote:I thought our constitution had a first ammendment. My bad!


we do have one
also a first amendment

love the new av, E

Confusednarg:

I realise that I have a past to break with--an accumulation of inertia, wrong, foolishness, rot, junk.  A great need of clarification, of mindfulness, or rather, of no mind.  A need to return to genuine practice, right effort.  Need to push on the great doubt.  Need for the spirit.  Hang on to the clear light.
           
Thomas Merton


       
Reply
#17

leucetios Wrote:Having said what I said, I need to add this. Controversy gets a reaction. A reaction means ratings. That's the reason this station had people on there in the morning that were likely to do things like this.

So. Is the Company being hippocritical? Should they take a stand? Say we're sorry it offended people, and stick to their guns? Or are they right in cowtowing to the corporate sponsors and media watchdogs?


i expetc bettor from you leo

Confusednarg:

I realise that I have a past to break with--an accumulation of inertia, wrong, foolishness, rot, junk.  A great need of clarification, of mindfulness, or rather, of no mind.  A need to return to genuine practice, right effort.  Need to push on the great doubt.  Need for the spirit.  Hang on to the clear light.
           
Thomas Merton


       
Reply
#18

Jimmy Wrote:Constitution - yes. Company Policy - No.


exactly.

I think it was in bad taste and the company should do whatever they feel necessary to remedy the problem. that being said if I had heard it and it was done in a quality manner I probably would have laughed.
Reply
#19

I'm practicing coming down the level of everyone else here Wink
Reply
#20

I think yer right on the money (pun intended) with both points. Most fines on the books are written to punish individuals. Typicall $5000 or less, companies laugh at these fines. They usually get 100 times the publicity per dollar resulting the fine that they would have recieved for paid advertising. When Burtuzzi, pulled that shit last year and the sponsors threatened to take their corporate backing away from the NHL and especially the Vancuver(sp) franchise. The punishment was appropriate. When Dorko-the-Love-Sponge pulled his stunt down in Tampa - They yanked his show due in part by the number of sponsors who were going to or did walk away.

Wealth has replaced the legal system! (Sup O.J) Sponsorship in the new leadership in this great country of ours.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author Replies Views Last Post
New Tsunami Hits
Blueeyedwoman
Last Post by leeman
07-24-2006, 06:31 PM
Last Post by SanDog
06-17-2005, 01:33 AM
Tsunami Warning
Blueeyedwoman
Last Post by Charon
06-15-2005, 03:01 PM
Last Post by Anhil8tor
01-28-2005, 06:46 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)