View Single Post
Old November 21 2012, 03:42 PM   #16
Daddy Todd
Daddy Todd's Avatar
Re: NewsCorp may buy Simon & Schuster

Christopher wrote: View Post
I don't think one can worry too much about which multigajillionaire owns a piece of any given thing, since you'd pretty much have to live on a desert island to avoid using something that was connected to them in some way. For instance, the Star Wars films are distributed by 20th Century Fox, which is a subsidiary of Murdoch's NewsCorp. Would you boycott Star Wars for the rest of your life because of that?
Well, Disney now owns the SW franchise, so I assume any new films will be released under one of Disney's banners, not Fox. Anyway, after the prequels, my interest in seeing any more Star Wars is now dipping into negative numbers.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Or Planet of the Apes or Die Hard or X-Men or the Alien franchise?
Rise of the Planet of the Apes was pretty good, and I wouldn't mind seeing a sequel, but it's easier for me to justify one movie a year from Fox than it is to justify a steady stream of books from Murdoch's Evil Empire. I seriously avoid HarperCollins, unless it's a new Tim Powers. The other properties are long-since played out, and if Prometheus is any indicator, are as deep into the crap well as Star Wars at this point.

Christopher wrote: View Post
What about The Shield or Burn Notice or White Collar?
Are those TV shows? I don't watch TV.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Do you boycott Hulu and Photobucket because NewsCorp owns them?
Don't think I've ever used Photobucket; Tumblr is lots more fun. Hulu re-runs TV shows, and, as noted above, I don't watch TV.

Christopher wrote: View Post
What about its 5% share in MySpace?
MyWhat? I don't think anyone has used MySpace -- apart from no-name indie bands -- since Facebook killed it dead dead dead. No great loss there.

Christopher wrote: View Post
The thing to remember is that there are countless layers of hierarchy between the things you actually watch or read or use and the moguls who ultimately profit from them. For instance, there was all that furor recently over the homophobic statements of the guy who owned the Chick-Fil-A corporation, but that wasn't the fault of the people who owned the individual restaurant franchises or the people they employed (many of whom are gay themselves). Boycotting their restaurants probably hurt those people lower on the totem pole a lot more than it hurt the owner.
Nice attempt to make the protesters worse than Cathy. Sorry, not buying it. I've worked for deeply homophobic companies; they eventually learned they must change or die. Chik-Fil-A needs some kind of wake-up call to prompt them to move on from the '50's. If we don't work every angle (including boycotts and protests) they will have no incentive to leave their hatefulness behind.

Christopher wrote: View Post
At that level, these moguls don't have much contact with the actual businesses they own. They just see the money that comes in from them, and it's all kind of interchangeable to them.
So, is it wrong of me to decide not to contribute even one penny of my hard-earned money to people who hate me? It's pretty much the only leverage we have against their kind of evil, so I'm going to leverage it for all its worth.
Daddy Todd is offline   Reply With Quote