For those wondering, this is what John Steinbeck said in his book "America & Americans", 1966:
"I guess the trouble was that we didn’t have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by the investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn’t have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves.”
So pretty much the same sentiment as Wright's quote, maybe he was paraphrasing Steinbeck?
I think trademark lawyers (of which I am one) may be part of the problem with the whole "Fox News is entertainment!" thing. Some years back, Al Franken wrote a book with the subtitle "A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." Fox sued because they had registered a trademark for "Fair & Balanced" for their news show. The lawsuit was complete bullshit--trademark infringement relies upon a finding of "likelihood of confusion" as to the source of goods or services, and there was no chance of that--but critics pounced on the fact that Fox's federal trademark registration for "Fair & Balanced" is for the following services: "entertainment services in the nature of production and distribution of television news programs." See, see? It's not news, it's entertainment! But here's the thing: because of the way trademarks are classified by the US Patent and Trademark Office (and just about every other intellectual property office in other countries), pretty much every network's news program is registered as something along the lines of "entertainment services; namely, television news programs. " (that one's from ABC's registration for ABC NEWS). So Fox's "admission" that its news show wasn't really news, but entertainment, is really more about PTO filing requirements (i.e., government bureaucracy) than anything else.
Seeing as how this post is strictly hearsay on what his intentions are, other than the factual stats that you presented. Is there no part of you that feels in this day in age, with the 1%ers pretty much on a vapor trail to ruling the world. That there may be some of them that actually want to do something good. Sure, the super wealthy have their scumbags, but so do the other 99% of us and most of us want what's good for the next person/generation. Asking for a friend. I like your posts keep it up
Want to learn a bit more about today's IRRATIONALITY and, while your at it, absorb some fun intellectual history? Check out my substack "All Things Irrational" and subscribe!!
Hey James. Big, big fan of your work. I do feel that you may have neglected to proof-read thoroughly before sending out this latest piece. Much love and respect, Abs.
Thankyou for this article, brilliant take on the whole Musk/Twitter debacle. Something caught my scattered attention yesterday, I'd like to hear your opinion on it.. I think Musk would give Trump and his ilk back their platforms, for example, under the guise of "freedom of speech", and so stoke the fire that's been damped down, but not extinguished, and similarly with hate preachers here in UK and across the ether.
For those wondering, this is what John Steinbeck said in his book "America & Americans", 1966:
"I guess the trouble was that we didn’t have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by the investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn’t have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves.”
So pretty much the same sentiment as Wright's quote, maybe he was paraphrasing Steinbeck?
I think trademark lawyers (of which I am one) may be part of the problem with the whole "Fox News is entertainment!" thing. Some years back, Al Franken wrote a book with the subtitle "A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." Fox sued because they had registered a trademark for "Fair & Balanced" for their news show. The lawsuit was complete bullshit--trademark infringement relies upon a finding of "likelihood of confusion" as to the source of goods or services, and there was no chance of that--but critics pounced on the fact that Fox's federal trademark registration for "Fair & Balanced" is for the following services: "entertainment services in the nature of production and distribution of television news programs." See, see? It's not news, it's entertainment! But here's the thing: because of the way trademarks are classified by the US Patent and Trademark Office (and just about every other intellectual property office in other countries), pretty much every network's news program is registered as something along the lines of "entertainment services; namely, television news programs. " (that one's from ABC's registration for ABC NEWS). So Fox's "admission" that its news show wasn't really news, but entertainment, is really more about PTO filing requirements (i.e., government bureaucracy) than anything else.
Seeing as how this post is strictly hearsay on what his intentions are, other than the factual stats that you presented. Is there no part of you that feels in this day in age, with the 1%ers pretty much on a vapor trail to ruling the world. That there may be some of them that actually want to do something good. Sure, the super wealthy have their scumbags, but so do the other 99% of us and most of us want what's good for the next person/generation. Asking for a friend. I like your posts keep it up
Want to learn a bit more about today's IRRATIONALITY and, while your at it, absorb some fun intellectual history? Check out my substack "All Things Irrational" and subscribe!!
Hey James. Big, big fan of your work. I do feel that you may have neglected to proof-read thoroughly before sending out this latest piece. Much love and respect, Abs.
Thankyou for this article, brilliant take on the whole Musk/Twitter debacle. Something caught my scattered attention yesterday, I'd like to hear your opinion on it.. I think Musk would give Trump and his ilk back their platforms, for example, under the guise of "freedom of speech", and so stoke the fire that's been damped down, but not extinguished, and similarly with hate preachers here in UK and across the ether.
Great article, love the quote
There are quite a few grammatical errors as well as awkward sentence structuring in this post. Sloppy proofreading interferes with your message!
Or not?