Why. why. WHY. are the top 4 most requested songs on radio stations the 4 most overplayed?
I mean, I get the obvious. But what I am saying is... why are you calling in and requesting songs that you will hear in no more than 2 minutes? By the time you get in on the radio station, guess what? They just played your song. But you didn't hear it, because you had the radio turned down. Because you have to when you are calling into the radio station. Congratulations. You're an idiot.
So I guess my issue is I want to hear the top 4 interesting requested songs. I want to hear some throwbacks people. I want them to be like "Alright these are our top 4 requested songs" and Sean Kingston's Fire Burning comes on. Yes, hell yes, who all called in to hear that song?! Epic. I liked that song as well, good choice.
I mean, I know when IIIII called in to request a song, (that is not infamous among my friends) it was not an overplayed song. It was popular yes, but still had few and far between plays. It was a once every 3-4 hours. Not a once an hour. But that was when there was a lot of music coming out.
I guess I have no real way to summarize this. I just really don't like hearing top 4, top 5 lists and then after they are done playing those... they play them again. Because they are in the loop. Ridiculousness.
Now that I reread my work, I bet those radio stations don't even track the most requested songs. They just get lazy and just play the most popular songs out because it seems the most logical. Well I'm just making things up at this point but just remember, requesting songs is because you DON'T get to hear them every hour.
I may just be bitter because I once got suckered into announcing one of those lists. When I called to request a song.
Ring-a-ling,
Em
Monday, October 10, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
The Playboy Clubbed
Alright, so it comes as no surprise that I have been watching The Playboy Club faithfully. I have to admit I find the Playboy Bunny the epitome of classy sexuality. If ever I get my figure to where I want it to be I will one day be a Playboy Bunny for Halloween. Blame it on The Girls Next Door, but I just don't see anything wrong with it.
And now it comes to my attention that The Playboy Club has been canceled. And that it has been rallied against by parent groups and whatnot as being degrading and too sexual and women's rights blahdiddy blah blah blah.
Now...let me get this straight... the show is premised on girls who had nowhere to turn, who wanted to make something of their lives, get their start in the world. And that's....degrading....? How? Because they wear skimpy bunny suits? Because of the magazine? Even though anyone who knows their history... the bunny is far different from the playmate.
But it's ok for Pan Am* to be aired (with considerably shoddier writing) which basically implies the SAME lifestyle? But because they are wearing a stewardess uniform and therefore covering up more of their body it's ok? Isn't there some sort of saying regarding dressing up a mule in horseshoes but it's still a mule... ? And l mean like they totally have a great range of diversity in that show too just like The Playboy Club... oh...wait...nope. Just kidding.
Dear World,
I am confused.
So The Playboy Club is alas too provocative for primetime. But it's ok for the character Brittany on Glee* to wear that horrendously inappropriate short skirt? A show that's even more geared to the impressionable age group? Oh I'm sorry, it's ok because it isn't degrading... she was singing Beyonce's Girls, which is centered on girls running the world. So skimpy/slutty outfits are cleared when their backed by a powerful song. A skimpy sexy outfit has no place in a time where women were all around degraded. Nice hypocrisy, parent groups.
I guess all I want is the show back, because it was getting really good, and I really wanted to see it through. So if a cable network would like to pick that up... that would be aces.
I'm Bunny,
Em
* These shows have redeeming qualities too, but for comparison sake I singled them out. I actually watch both of these as well.
And now it comes to my attention that The Playboy Club has been canceled. And that it has been rallied against by parent groups and whatnot as being degrading and too sexual and women's rights blahdiddy blah blah blah.
Now...let me get this straight... the show is premised on girls who had nowhere to turn, who wanted to make something of their lives, get their start in the world. And that's....degrading....? How? Because they wear skimpy bunny suits? Because of the magazine? Even though anyone who knows their history... the bunny is far different from the playmate.
But it's ok for Pan Am* to be aired (with considerably shoddier writing) which basically implies the SAME lifestyle? But because they are wearing a stewardess uniform and therefore covering up more of their body it's ok? Isn't there some sort of saying regarding dressing up a mule in horseshoes but it's still a mule... ? And l mean like they totally have a great range of diversity in that show too just like The Playboy Club... oh...wait...nope. Just kidding.
Dear World,
I am confused.
So The Playboy Club is alas too provocative for primetime. But it's ok for the character Brittany on Glee* to wear that horrendously inappropriate short skirt? A show that's even more geared to the impressionable age group? Oh I'm sorry, it's ok because it isn't degrading... she was singing Beyonce's Girls, which is centered on girls running the world. So skimpy/slutty outfits are cleared when their backed by a powerful song. A skimpy sexy outfit has no place in a time where women were all around degraded. Nice hypocrisy, parent groups.
I guess all I want is the show back, because it was getting really good, and I really wanted to see it through. So if a cable network would like to pick that up... that would be aces.
I'm Bunny,
Em
* These shows have redeeming qualities too, but for comparison sake I singled them out. I actually watch both of these as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)