Top entertainment news story of 2008

Sometimes you can only be saddened by the actions of the media. These days the media fails the public so often that the youth of the nation tend to think this is the way the news is supposed to be. You know, chasing down stories about nothing ad nauseum. Yet there were days when in a year of tragedy and triumph the best and worst of it all would be recorded properly, at least in a year end list.

So for this year, who might you think have taken the top spot of the most important entertainment news story of the year? And for everyone spurring into action to write the election of Obama, that's politics not entertainment.

Could it be the death of Charlton Heston? He was 84, had been in movies since 1941. He made an astounding 22 films in the last decade of his career. For some in Hollywood's top tier that is their entire career. In total he made 82 films, just missing a film for each year of his life by 2. He starred or was in 15 great films that have stood the test of time. And I won't even mention his television career of some 51 years. And of course there is his political activism since the 1960's.

Nope not him.

Might it be George Carlin? Younger than Heston he died at 71. He was an actor of modest means, an author of some acclaim, but a comedian among the best on any list anyone will ever make. He was the first person to host Saturday Night Live, and the first to have the mike shut off and censors racing to the stage. Though infrequently in films his career as an actor spanned 14 films in just under 40 years - proving more his influence on the American culture he discussed and joked about so well. In times like these the loose of someone who can make us all laugh must be #1.

Not even close.

Well perhaps we need to look more political and philanthropic, like Paul Newman? Another logical justifiable choice considering that he was in films since 1952, was a director/producer of 12 films, and 11 of his 64 movies are unquestionably great - still drawing audiences from youth that have never heard of his name. And he was a race car driver of some skill. And he was an active philanthropist giving away millions, in fact tens of millions, long before Oprah made it fashionable. Then we have to add his political activism, for the left which Hollywood loves, and his support of gay marriage - a hot button issue in Hollywood these days.

Such a choice would be cold as ice.

Now you might start making wilder guesses. Maybe someone Black since Obama won and is not eligible in this category. Bernie Mac was a young 50. His death was sudden and shocking. He had just finished a film. He was part of the hugely successful Ocean's trilogy of films. He had huge success in television, in spite of the way in which it continues to maintain an overall view of America as if in the 1950's. He was a successful stand-up comedian, and had been in the business for 30 years. He was a family man, and had no issues. He was only in movies for a decade, but he made 27 films of which at least half were decent if not better.

You were better off picking Obama.

No the number 1 entertainment news story in America for 2008 was in fact.... Heath Ledger's death.

Because Heath ledger killed himself with an overdose of drugs. He was 28, had made 19 films of which most people could only name 8 at best. He was best known for his role as a gay cowboy, and as the worst Joker ever (in my opinion). His death was used to slather on hype to a sequel far inferior to its predecessor.

If the media were truly honest they might say that Heath Ledger won because he made them a lot of money. The movie studios used his death like a flag to rake in money, and no one would dare say anything against their film because Ledger was dead (except me). And they have kept the story going since January, fueling the chance (almost definite) of Ledger winning an Oscar - because he is dead and made a great movie about being gay. Hollywood can't resist that combination.

Maybe I shouldn't care, but I won't drink sand because the major media tells me it's water. Ledger may have been a great person, but I didn't know him. All I do know is that he was a rising star, that had performances that meant nothing to me. His last role was all hype, and he killed himself with drugs. That does not place him above a massive philanthropist and exceptional talent. it doesn't even place him above moderate talents with better resumes and longer careers.

But lest you think me too harsh, the top 10 entertainment list of 2008 as picked by the media goes on as follows:

• The writer's strike ends - money and media jobs
  
• Dark Knight becomes a blockbuster - money and inferior to Iron Man or the orginal
  
• Saturday Night Live becomes popular again - money and politics
  
• Britney Spears - making parenthood a joke and drugs interesting
  
• Paul Newman - he is BELOW Britney - HOW!
  
• TV is on the Web - money
  
• George Carlin - Way down on the list
  
• Tim Russert died - which was big news and one of the media's own
  
• Jennifer Hudson's family dies - horrible and sad.
  [Charlton Heston did not make the list likely because he was a known staunch Republican. Hollywood hates that.]
  

Out of the dozens and dozens of entertainers and celebrities that died or made real news in this past year Ledger is number 1? People who contributed more to the art and society than Ledger ever tried to do died this year, but the media can't stop talking about him. It's an insult to so many that died, and to the public the media is supposed to serve.

Any death is sad, but ranking hype and money over substance may be worse.

How much for a Yahoo accolade?

I noticed something over the weekend. Yahoo had a little blurb on the top movie stars of 2008. It was an interesting photo selection for one big reason. Almost every one of the people they were touting had a flop in 2008.

The list starts with Gong Li. You may not recall her name. Then again you probably didn't recall Hannibal Rising, with good reason. The list moves on to Nicole Kidman. She has become synonymous with Hollywood failure, which the film Australia confirms yet again. But then the list loses all perspective. It goes into a tailspin of stupidity.

The next "actress" on the list is Paris Hilton. A woman so without talent she couldn't make sex look interesting to watch. Her claim to fame was the film the Hottie and the Nottie. The hottest thing about the film is akin to the apparent intelligence of Hilton - just not being there at all. Is the possibility she will inherit a major company really that important to Hollywood?

The list moves on to Jennifer Lopez. Who is lauded for giving birth to twins. Which does deserve notice. But not on a list of top movie performers. Even when some thought she had a movie career she was bad. And she hasn't gotten better.

To disguise the fact that there were so few good movies and to bolster the huge number of movie stars with flops the list then goes international with Aishwarya Rai. She is a top Bollywood actress. I've never seen her in a film and have no comment.

But the list jumps back to the ridiculous with Hillary Duff and her performance in the mega-flop War, Inc. I reviewed that movie and to summarize both her performance and the movie, disappointing and a waste of time.

The list goes on to name Mary Kate Olsen, The Wackness, Lindsey Lohan, Chapter 27, Jessica Alba, The Love Guru, right up to Angelina Jolie. Jolie is the only actress on the list with a film the average person can say they saw, and actually liked. She is the only woman on the list (perhaps excluding Rai) that had films that made real money. In effect only she and perhaps Rai deserve to be on a list of top movie stars. The rest need to be on the top of a pile of dung for their performances.

The list then turns to men. And the choices are only moderately better. The star is with Tom Cruise because of his appearance in the flop Tropic Thunder, but more likely the Valkyrie movie that has yet to show. Next we get Patrick Swayze - because he has pancreatic cancer. Like Lopez I have to wonder how that has anything to do with movies. It's sad, but it does not go to the top of a list of movies.

Then the list does another odd change of direction. They pick Denzel Washington, who did not have a film in 2008. But at least he was nominated for an award this year. That's closer to a reason to be on this list then most. The list then flies off with failures like Bankock Dangerous (remake) with Nicolas Cage, Orlando Bloom - also without a movie this year. At this point we finally get to someone who was in a movie that made money and most people saw (for the men).

Will Smith is 5th with Hancock and the upcoming Seven Pounds. And right above him on the list is Brad Pitt with a flop - Burn After Reading - and the nominated Benjamin Button arthouse film. Leonardo DiCaprio broke even as I recall with Body of Lies but took 3rd. Next is Johnny Depp who like Bloom and Washington didn't have a film, and like Washington was nominated. And of course 1st went to the dead guy Hollywood can't stop talking about - heath ledger.

This entire list is Bollocks. Of the entire group Aishwarya Rai, Angelina Jolie, Will Smith, and Heath Ledger deserve to be on it. Maybe an honorable mention to Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise. That's it.

I don't know what pipe the people at Yahoo are smoking, but it must be powerful. Either that, or there must be one hell of a kickback coming from advertising for Yahoo to tout this kind of rubbish as a top list of anything. Maybe if they named it the Top Movies Stars of 2008 - whose companies gave us a lot of money. Or is that too long.

And people wonder why the quality of movies is dropping faster than the average IQ of a high school graduate. When you can buy accolades who needs writing. It's just sad.

Heath Ledger will win an Oscar - who is surprised

Ah the Oscar rumours are starting to pour out. And in yet another year of generally poor movies the majority of films being selected are yet again probably those you have never heard before.

Though there is one exception this year. Batman: The Dark Knight. That film will get an Oscar nod. Everyone is sure of it. And Heath Ledger will win posthumously. Everyone is sure of that too.

Since the moment that Ledger was found dead, there has been nothing but hype about The Dark Knight, and his performance as the Joker. I believe I said at the time that he was sure to win, and that the movie will bring in tons of money. It seems this will happen.

But I continue to believe that the movie was horrible. I thought the Ledger Joker was the worst version I have ever seen. The animated Batman series has a better Joker, and that is a kids version.

But that will not stop the Oscars from handing him an award. He's dead and there was way too much hype. He has to get the award lest Hollywood be called an unsympathetic place for drug addicts. Well maybe Ledger was not an addict, though he did die from a drug overdose. Close enough.

But his personal problems are not what the awards should be about. It's about the acting. And while he was good in a role that was written horribly and directed without the dark manic humor that defines the character, it was hardly Oscar quality. But when you are in a desert and all you have is sand to drink.

Still there is hope. The Wrestler is still getting mostly rave reviews, Seven Pounds has yet to hit theaters and The Soloist has yet to be mentioned. But if there has to be an action film, based on a comic book that must win an Oscar for 2008 (because I believe 2009 will go to the Watchmen) then I would pick Iron Man. That was far superior to The Dark knight in all respects.

But since I'm not a member of the Academy, we will see.

The Joker - an example of speculating and not collecting

Do you recall back in the day when you would play with a 3 inch Yoda doll that was part of your Star Wars collection? I’m talking about the toys based on the original movie, before they paid attention to which chapter they represented. They were fun and cool and everyone wanted a Darth Vader or Boba Fett (which came out before the second movie as I recall).

Perhaps you were more interested in the G.I. Joe dolls. Each stood about 6” tall and some had special abilities like ‘karate action’ or an ‘eagle eye’ or simply a 'fuzzy' beard. Again this is before the cartoon series that spawned a new version of toys, a mere 3” tall.

If you do recall these toys, or others like them, with joy in your heart don’t search on eBay. The prices these then-modestly priced items go for now will astound most. But some want to search around for the latest in the Batman: Dark Knight series of toys, or the X-Men, Hulk, Spiderman and so on. They should choose carefully.

There are hordes of would be collectors buying up the various items each movie spawns, hoping that one of their purchases will one day broker their dream vacation. A great example of this is the current craze for all goods that are the Joker, bearing a likeness to Heath Ledger. Honestly I think such pursuits are a waste.

Collecting generally happens either because of a rarity of an item, it’s representation of a significant event in time, age, or it’s value as an item of fond memories – even if those memories are second or third hand. That’s why you can sell a good condition Dr. Seuss Green Eggs and Ham first edition book for several thousand dollars. Or why certain stamps are priceless. The same can be said of the above mentioned Star Wars, G.I. Joe, and various coin collections. There is a value that can stand the test of time.

But today there is a rush based on minor activities and passing curiosity. Not unlike the comic book craze in the late 1980’s that caused comic book prices to rise dramatically, and then all but the older, rarer books to have that value nearly evaporate within a year or 2.

Heath Ledger is dead. It is a shame. But he did not die, say like Bruce Lee – at the top of his career, rising in legend and acclaim, in the middle of filming what might have been a classic film. Mr. Ledger died of a drug overdose that he gave himself. No mystery or glamour to it. His death was no Marilyn Monroe event. He was no mega-star. Thus there is no significant event that can survive time.

Thus anyone hoarding the Joker toys is making a massive bet that Ledger will be remembered in an historic manner in 5 years, thus giving a value to their collected items. I’m sure they are also hoping that the millions of other items produced before his death, and more than a few after, will all wind up in the trash as little Jonnie or Jane grow up. But considering many of the Joker items, and Batman as well, were snapped up by hopeful collectors (or speculators might be better to describe them) the chances are slim for rarity. Thus the hope of selling an item in the future to die-hard Heath Ledger fans diminishes.

Since the Joker items have just come out along with the movie, age is something that won’t happen for another decade or more. And considering the trend of Hollywood to ‘revision’ older successful films, it’s highly likely that by the time any item today becomes a fond memory of a middle- or later aged adult, there will be at least one more version of Batman corralling bad guys on either a small or big screen.

So overall the chances of a Heath Ledger Joker item becoming a collectible of worth are unlikely. Now I don’t say this to diminish the memory of Heath Ledger, but this is the most recent and dramatic point that can be made right now.

Collecting is not speculation. It should not be done with the hope of a reward in the future. That kind of wait-and-sell is best suited for the stock market, and your odds are far better there. Collecting should be done for the sheer joy of it.

I recently sold a few of my Magic The Gathering cards. I owned them from my time in California (in the early 1990’s) when I started to play the game and collect the cards after I had broken my leg in a motorcycle accident. I had no idea what the value was then, and even less now. But when I sold them – clearing away some things as I moved into a new house – I found out that just 3 of my cards alone were worth $200. That was more than I had spent on the whole collection. And I honestly had a hard time selling them.

I think that is the real value of a collection. The emotion it provides the buyer, and holds for the seller. If you start a collection for any other reason than that, you’re probably wasting your money and time.

Reflecting on V for Vendetta and American politics

So I was sitting home responding to comments on the VASS blog site, when I ran into a comment to my post thanking the Marines, the Armed Forces, and veterans for all they have done for this nation. The comment was an attempt to mock my heartfelt thanks. My reply was direct and obviously in direct opposition. Then I watched V for Vendetta.

It seems a bit ironic that I would watch a movie about how wrong a Government can go immediately after defending a Government that some feel has gone wrong. But there is the issue. Of late there have been a horde of movies demanding that America realize that utter chaos is ruling the nation. According to some there are no freedoms left. Such was the comment made at the abovementioned post. Such is the fare of movies.

Yet the reality is far from this. In V for Vendetta we see a government that has used its own people for biological experimentation. A scary thought for a movie. Except when you consider that America has already done this. They were called the Tuskegee Experiments. And America did not fall.

In the movie similarities are drawn to the Nazi’s, and fanatical Islamist governments that persecute the unwanted parts of their societies. Not unlike the way America had legal lynchings until 1922 (after 7 years of trying to pass the law) and Jim Crow to replace slavery. And America has not fallen.

In the movie the media is used to manipulate how people think. Unlike the direct commentary in the silver screen; reality only has pictures in newspapers (like the photo in post-Katrina New Orleans showing a Black man with a bag in flood waters called a looter, but a White man with a similar bag in waters equally as high is called a survivor looking for food), or news programs that attack the death of an athlete (Sean Taylor – his murder was a discussion of his actions as a teen) versus the months-long sorrow for drug addicts (Heath Ledger, Anna Nicole Smith, Britney Spears – oops she’s still alive right? Well you get the point). And yet America lives on.

For all the fears and horrors that movies imply, state, or hint at America remains the greatest nation in the world. Year after year, for centuries we have seen people across the globe come to this nation by any means they can. The fact America has issues with people of color is not only known, it’s advertised in every medium we have – and still they come. And all the detractors stay.

Why?

Because we aren’t losing all our freedoms. That even if we had half the freedoms that exist now we still would be the freest nation in the world. That we have the greatest ability to allow virtually anyone, or their kids, to have a better life. Because we are more than rich in wealth, we are rich in freedom which has no price tag.

Now this is not to say there aren’t problems in bundles. I do not hide from the issues that need to be dealt with, nor do I accept the word of the Government as Gospel. There are reasons why some think that the Government killed its own people on 9/11 (and this is not about V for Vendetta), or that drugs and AIDS were shoved into the poorer, more racially diverse parts of cities across the country. But at the same time, the people still have power to change how the Government acts.

Fear, some say, it the motivation of the day. But I also see the other side. The fear being feed like a crack dealer via the major media stating not that a terrorist is under your bed, but that the Government is out of control.

We cannot allow ourselves to be blinded by fear – of fanatical religious groups that believe sex with children is ok (Texas), that killing abortionist is ok (Christian), that women have no rights or that suicide bombs make sense (Islam). All those fears are real, existing in this country and outside of it, but they cannot destroy us unless we allow them. In the same manner we cannot be drugged with the opiate of the masses (television, movies, the internet) when some choose to use it to tell us to fear the very thing we control.

If a movie like V for Vendetta tells us anything it is not that we have lost everything. We haven’t even though we have done everything that they fear we might. But if we get lulled by this fear we will be no better off, in fact worse off, than the reality that surrounds us.

I love my country. That why I vote, and promote others to do so. It’s why I cover the Presidential race. It’s why I point out the schism in the media. It’s why I defend what I think is right, and address what is wrong. And it’s why we cannot blindly fight against one fear to just accept another.

I want to leave you with a quote from that movie, apply it as you will

“What we need right now is a clear message to the people of this country. This message must be read in every newspaper, heard on every radio, seen on every television. This message must resound throughout the entire Interlink! I want this country to realize we stand on the edge of oblivion. I want every man woman and child to understand how close we are to chaos. I WANT EVERYONE, TO REMEMBER WHY THEY NEED US!”

A point of differnce after Sean Levert dies

In sad news I noticed that Sean Levert died on March 30th. He was 39 years old. While I saw nothing about this in the major media, I think it’s worth noting.

One thing that really gives me pause is the fact that Sean Levert was in jail just prior to his death. One hour before he died he was serving time for failing to pay child support. An autopsy has already been done and the claim is that there was no foul play. And I have to wonder.

Over the weekend I saw news about Anna Nicole Smith’s son. His death was ruled an accidental overdose. Back at the time of his death there was constant coverage, and it took about a week to get a full autopsy done. The only thing that Anna Nicole’s son is known for is being her son, and dying under odd circumstances.

Yet, Sean Levert actually contributed to society (he was a singer like his father, and working with his more famous brother Gerald for a time). While his contribution was nothing to win a Nobel Peace Prize over, in comparison to the Smith son he was King Kong. He was relatively famous in his own right, and the son of a very successful famous father. He was in jail (which the media normally loves to cover and laud when it comes to entertainers in trouble and African Americans in general as I observe). And he died very suddenly with what seems to be in comparison a rushed autopsy.

Now I’m not saying that this was foul play on the part of Cuyahoga County jail, but I am noting that there is a schism yet again. Anna Nicole Smith has been in the news, on and off, for a year. Her son generated significant news coverage a year after his death – while he was an ordinary person beyond his lineage. Sean Levert got nothing, Sean Bell was dropped in a day, Sean Taylor was vilified over his youth, Megan Williams was ignored, and they tried to railroad Wesley Snipes.

Months after his death I’m hearing even more about Heath Ledger. Why? I’m not trying to belittle their deaths, and I do give my condolences to their families and friends, but that does not change the obvious actions of the media. And then some people wonder why Preachers like Rev. Wright are upset.

If we can’t give equal, or even similar, acknowledgement of the deaths of those famous and near-famous in our nation then how the hell can we except to see equality in life?

Update on Sean Taylor of the Redskins Football team - 1.24.2008.1

I decided to do a search on Sean Taylor, the Redskin’s football player that was killed in his home at the end of November 2007. The reason for the search is because of the media attention to Heath Ledger's death. I am sorry that he is dead, but I am noticing the amount of time that is being dedicated to his death.

Similar to the months of coverage of Anna Nicole Smith’s death (or Stacy Peterson), there is no end to the rumors, minor insignificant facts, and minutiae that is being uncovered about the man. This is fine for TMZ and other institutions that waste your time. I can even see how Greta Van Susteren, of Fox News, would cover it [I find her program to be the equivalent of ambulance chasing news coverage]. But without outside factors (like a hint that this was a murder and not a suicide or accidental overdose – which often is the same thing), the time spent on this sad event is troubling to me.

Thus I wanted to go back and compare the on-going coverage to a recent death. Sean Taylor’s death was covered by all the major news media. It did get a few hours of news coverage over roughly 3 days. By news coverage standards that is huge. Of course the follow-up of the case has been sporadic and less well done. Like the fact, reported on Canadian Press that,

“Sean Taylor, the first player voted posthumously to the Pro Bowl, will have his jersey number worn at the game by two of his former Washington Redskins teammates.

The NFL announced Wednesday tight end Chris Cooley and tackle Chris Samuels will both wear No. 21 at the game Feb. 10 in Honolulu.”

Another fact that has been less covered is the Fund that has been created to take care of Taylor’s daughter.

“Cooley and Samuels will each wear his own name on the back of the jersey, above the No. 21. The jerseys will be auctioned after the game, with the proceeds benefiting the Sean Taylor Memorial Trust Fund that was established for Taylor's daughter, Jackie.”

The difference is this:

• Taylor was murdered, Ledger has been reported as not.
  
• Taylor’s murder seems to have been done by 4 individuals that have been arrested. Coverage has not fully confirmed this fact, thus his killers may be at large (though this is unlikely).
  
• Ledger has received sympathetic commentary by pundits. Many have explained his past drug use on various reasons, and drawn correlations to this being involved with his sudden death. None of the coverage has been accusatory or negative.
  
• Taylor was maligned constantly. Pundits gave as much time to rumors and past facts that indicated a negative view of Taylor, as actual facts in the case.
  
• Ledgers is portrayed as had having a positive growing future prior to his death.
  
• Taylor was portrayed as having a negative past, a complicated future, and minimalization of his achievements.
  

Why am I mentioning this, and why now?

I realize that Heath Ledger has just died. I can imagine how his family and friends are taking this sudden and shocking news. I do not intend to be insensitive.

But the fact remains that the media is unjust and biased in its coverage. And that pisses me off. I’m tired of reading about the death of an African American celebrity/entertainer a week after the event. Or that their life is minimized, and coverage short and sporadic. Then a White celebrity/entertainer dies and up to a week, or even months of coverage ensue.

I’m tired of hearing all the wonderful things about drunken drug addicted ignorant White entertainers (a la Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, ect) that need our sympathy. Then I get to hear all the negative mean items about African American entertainers that survived and overcame gangs, poverty, inadequate education systems, social bias, racism, and sometimes more.

But to say this in retrospect does not have the same impact as watching the news today and seeing the impact. Pay attention to the news, and note what is being said. See how much is said about the tribute to Sean Taylor. See how they describe Sean Taylor’s life. Then wait a few months and watch how Heath Ledger will be discussed in what I expect will be a grand scale when the next Batman movie comes out. Watch how much time will be given to remember the positive aspects of Heath, several months from now.

Is this the perfect time? No. But there never is in such matters. But if we cannot celebrate the past of our heroes and entertainers equally, then how can we expect anything else to be equal? If we are not the same in death, how can we be the same in life?

If the major news media can’t be colorblind in death, then I don’t need to know about that death. James Brown was not buried for a month and the major media never noticed. But Anna Nicole Smith, who’s body was a matter of legal debate – exactly the same as James Brown’s was and at the same tme, received multiple days of live coverage.

I don’t want to insult the dead. But I do want to criticize the living. Because the little things matter, a lot. And I’m tired of the lopsided commentary that only exists to subtly and directly stereotype and minimize the existence of any person of color.

Heath Ledger dead in NYC - 1.22.2008.1

Heath Ledger is dead. He was 28.

Unexpected? Yes. The big item of news as is being reported by the major news media right now? NO.

Yet again we are seeing that the news is overly focused on relatively unimportant information. I don’t mean to speak ill of the dead, and I do not wish to make light of the loss his friends and family are experiencing. But there is the fact that the stock market dropped 450 points this morning, the FED cut interest rates ¾ of a point, the economy is in trouble, and the Presidential race is quickly coming to a point where only 2 candidates will remain.

For nearly an entire hour, the only thing that can be mentioned in the major news media is the fact that Heath Ledger seems to have taken prescription drugs, and had a heart attack. Apparently an accidental death, though pills were supposedly strewn about the body. Already rumors of the apartment being owned by Mary Kate Olsen have appeared and been debunked. Like that makes any difference on where the sun sets.

Consider this. Over the rest of the day, and in the next several days I would bet that roughly 3 days of news will be dedicated to this admittedly tragic event. Something like 8 hours of news will be spent on this. How much time was spent discussing the Tiger Woods lynching comments, and Golfweek magazine cover?

How much time has been spent on the racial tensions that occurred YESTERDAY in Jena? How about the time devoted to the Megan Williams case? Or why all the leading Presidential candidates proffered themselves as advocates of the actions of Dr. Martin Luther King yesterday yet not one has been willing to discuss an official apology to African Americans for slavery, nor Reparations.

I understand that Heath Ledger’s death is news on a celebrity. I understand that this will be talked about prior to the release of the next Batman Dark Knight movie. There is no question that reviewer will be kind in their evaluation of his role as the Joker [which from the trailers I have seen so far are not compelling and thus I expect the film to be lackluster regardless of the box office take]. But honestly there is more to focus on.

Is this harsh? Perhaps. But I tend to be focused on the important facts going on, than the distractions that some would like to fill my head with. The economy, who will be President and how will they govern America, race relations, and the impact of racially insensitive and potentially violent images and words being bandied about with the casual flippancy of a morning greeting are all far more important to me.

Celebrities, minor and major, die from stupid things all the time. Their passing should be noted. But I’m just tired of watching endless hours of useless information about their passing (as was done with Anna Nicole Smith) that benefits no one.

Do you agree?