Couch Potato: TV gives justice a run for its money
Forty years ago civil rights leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. Sunday, his lifetime of achievements was boiled down to a mere two hours and then submitted to the public via History, formerly The History Channel.
King, a eulogy pieced together by Tom Brokaw, while welcome, is not immune from suspicion and raises a few questions.
It is the tendency of journalists to approach their subjects with a lack of bias and a clear head. The fact that Brokaw should be the driving force of this production is somewhat disquieting. King deserves more than this meandering dirge on the anniversary of his death.
King should be celebrated not as a man who stood up and righted the wrongs of our world, but as a man who only scratched the surface. This anniversary reminds us that there is still a long road ahead. So long as racism, discrimination and intolerance continue to exist, it is troubling to see the life of King relegated and reduced to the dusty canons of history.
This courtroom’s out of order
One can hardly visit a waiting room anymore without happening upon a televised small claims court in which the allegations are equal parts ridiculous and unintentionally hilarious.
As if there wasn’t enough absurdity in the court system, those who feel they have been wronged have the opportunity to be represented by a well-known comedian. This ups the laughable charges now that actual intent has been introduced. So goes the plot of Supreme Court of Comedy.
This jewel was, itself, an indirect result of the mockery currently being made of courts everywhere. It all began when the owner of a California comedy club became the target of a lawsuit after a patron complained that his hearing was collateral damage of his neighbor’s boisterous laughter. In an age where McDonalds’ clients can sue the fast-food giant for making coffee too hot, this kind of show almost seems like a natural progression and even sheds a little needed perspective.
It is highly unlikely that this is what King had in mind when he spoke of judging people by the content of the character.