My copy didn’t have a sticker.
It may have initially had one, I don’t know and don’t care. That wasn’t my point. my point was that he publicly said he didn’t want her crappy sticker, which is what made me like him.
No I didn’t. I saw the episode. Everything I said is absolutely true. She did the fucking prayer circle, and she absolutely did deliver the “forces of darkness” sermon. You are wrong.
Gosh! Really? Oh wow! And I was sure that when he said they were so important to his writing he was saying they all screwed each other and gave birth to him! Silly me..thanks for straightening that out… can’t imagine what I’d do without you to clarify these complex ideas for me.
Whew!
[QUOTE=YogSosoth]
What’s the difference between her and Montel, or Sally Jesse Rafael, or Ricki Lake, or any of them who’s come and gone over the years?
[/QUOTE]
Quality Control is a big part of it. Unlike Sally and Montel and Ricki she never went for the sleazy issues (“vampire dominatrix hookers and the men who love them” type stuff). You would never see her letting “psyhcic” Sylvia Browne on her show like Montel still continues to do even after she’s numerous times proven she couldn’t look out a window and predict whether it’s raining*, while Sally Jesse Raphael has the Nancy Grace “I’m against pedophilia and don’t care who knows it!” judgment thing. Can’t really speak to Ricki Lake as I don’t recall ever watching her, but Jerry Springer did say he conscously modeled his show after her format (and quickly went into freefall) so apparently it wasn’t on par with Oprah.
Plus, she manages to pull off one of the hardest and most lucrative tricks in media: she is very very obviously highly intelligent BUT doesn’t intimidate people with it. As John Cleese observed(and I’m paraphrasing), most Americans aren’t the least bit resentful of somebody being richer than they are but they hate it when somebody is more intelligent than they are and Og forbid they be intellectual or sophisticated with it. Oprah manages to exude a “my smartest friend” vibe that Sally and Ricky and Montel and crew don’t have and never did, but at the same time she still seems very approachable and down to Earth and “just plain folk”.
*Among other little goofs Sylvia told the parents of one girl who had died suddently that she died of a gunshot wound to the chest (the girl died peacefully in her sleep and the parents knew it, they were just trying to learn cause of death); she told the parents of an abducted child that he was dead and at peace- he was in fact still alive and anything but at peace but was later recovered; and she said “I knew that” when it was announced that all of the miners in a W. Virginia mine cave in were still alive, but then said “I knew that” when later it was revealed the first report was wrong and most of the miners were dead, but Montel continued to have her on. I can only assume she’s paying him.
Oprah used to do the sleaze back in the 80’s, and has psychics on all the time - at least she used to. Maybe not Sylvia Brown, specifically, but what’s the difference really?
She’s also had all kinds of other woo crap on her show like The Secret and A Course in Miracles, and all kinds of self-appointed new age gurus and frauds like Deepak Chopra and Marianne Williamson. I have to say, I don’t get “intelligence” from Oprah, at least not in terms of critical thinking skills. She believes absolutely anything and gets taken in by every other new age scam artist that comes down the block.
Let’s also not forget that she’s responsible for inflicting Dr. Phil on the world, which borders on a crime against humanity.
If psychics were porn stars (i.e. people who fuck others for money but honestly) with Traci Lords representing the more respectable high-end class Sylvia Browne would be the 60 year old “Triple-Vag/Triple-Ass Followed By a Stunt With Two Ponies and a Bonobo That Can Only Be Shown after Midnights in a Particularly Sleazy Suburb of Bangkok And Even Then It’s Illegal” sort. Even accounting for the nature of paid psychics and mediums she’s a one woman Sleazapalooza.
It’s true she’s New Agey and Deepak Chopra is basically Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh with better money launderers and PR agent. She doesn’t believe every scam- she’s scoffed at things like Ramtha for instance- but the thing is that the things she does believe are no less loopy. I remember tuning in once and she was oohing and ahhing and saying “That makes so much sense…” when Deepak was saying “Your soul is not inside of you… you are inside of it”.
However, I think Loopy Oprah came after she was super rich and looking for meaning and purpose and all. She seemed more down to earth in the beginning.
BUT, the absence of critical thinking COULD WELL BE what makes intelligent people accessible to the masses. One reason that Barack Obama’s association with Jeremiah Wright never bothered me was that I’ve always assumed he was basically an agnostic and his attendance at that church was for political purposes (first because it’s a politically active megachurch, second because nobody’s going to support an openly agnostic candidate for president). Her gullibility (and let’s not forget James Frey- while nobody expects her to vet every guest personally you’d think she’d have a staff that would and there were “um, something ain’t right here” cries about that book from the second it was published) could be the accessibility bridge to the housewife demographic.
That one’s actually bitten her in the ass a bit. He’s scooped her on a few guests and stories, intentionally grabbing things out from under her to get them on his show first. (The Ted “Homeless junkie with the Golden Voice” Williams family was one recent example: she was in negotiations to get them on her show and he basically said “I’ll jet the whole family out here, put you up and nice hotels, give you tickets to Disney and ballgames and ride you around on my shoulders while you eat cotton candy” and got them first. She was supposedly furious about that while he was of the “bidness is bidness” mindset (which I would respect were she not his Maker).
An intersting article by James randi on how Oprah fixes the editing and production of her show to promote psychics (including John Edwards and Allison DuBois who are every bit the sleazebags that Sylvia Browne is), and tries to marginalize and villify skeptics.
Oprah is a piece of crap.
She’s had John Edwards on. If anything he’s worse than Browne. So is Allsion DuBoise.
If you’re saying she’s pandering, you’re probably right, but I also think she actually believs a lot of that crap. If she believes in John Edwards, how intelligent could she be?
You presented Franzen’s quote as an example of his egotism, and referred to him as the “child of Proust and Faulkner.” While Franzen may or may not be as narcissistic as Oprah Winfrey*, the quote did not support your position. He was citing them as influences, not claiming to be as great as they.
- But come on. Let’s not kid ourselves.
Guess again. You are obviously not very familiar with Franzen’s view of himself generally, and yes that’s exactly what he was doing.
And Oprah is not a narcississt. She thinks well of herself, has confidence, pride in her accomplisments. That is not narcissism. Even if you don’t think it’s justified, even if it is not justified, it’s not narcississm. Even putting out a magazine with your face on the cover is not narcississm.
If that magazine isn’t narcissistic, then nothing is.
As long as you are of the opinion that everyone who holds any religious or spiritual beliefs of any kind are idiots, this is valid. If you are picking and choosing between what Chopra or Williamson or the Dalai Lama or the Pope or your local imam or preacher or whatever has to say and finding that intelligent people can believe X or Y but not Z, then you are full of poo.
Oprah produces Dr. Phil. He doesn’t scoop her, he can’t. She’s his boss.
Then I guess nothing is.
Whatever, that’s not what I was responding to anyway.
Of course it is. She’s on every single cover. But it is also a brilliant business decision and Occam’s Razor is the perfect tool for cutting all those fat checks Oprah makes from her magazine.
Narcississm is not what you all seem to think it is. Or rather, you appear to confuse healthy narcississm with pathological or destructive narcississm. Oprah’s narcississm is of the healthy variety.
Additionally…
Oprah Winfrey is not a narcissist, and even if she was, the magazine is not evidence of that narcississm. It’s evidence that she knows the power of the Oprah brand.
And I say this from a decent degree of knowledge of Oprah in that I have been watching for years, more in the last ten than the previous 15, from many interviews, and from actually having read the relatively harsh bio of her that Kitty Kelly wrote, which made no attempt to bathe her in any kind of holy light at all and actually tried very hard to make the most negative hay possible out of her very human foibles.
Therefore, even if you swallow every single negative thing every written or said about her in the worst light imaginable, she’s still not suffering from destructive narcississm, she’s just extraordinarily self-confident, which, when she was starting out, probably looked pretty obnoxious.
But since she actually has gone on to achieve not only what she absolutely believed and intended she could and would, but has gone light years beyond the wildest of expectations, that self-confidence turned out to be entirely justified. That makes it a whole lot less obnoxious - at least, to people who don’t resent others’ success or who believe, wrongly, that there’s something wrong with recognizing one’s value and good qualities alongside one’s faults.
I wasn’t trying to clinically diagnose her. I was pointing that it is silly that she has appeared on the cover of every issue of her magazine for ten years now.
Fine, we won’t use the N word. It’s still ridiculous in the extreme to do that. The fact that it makes sense from a business standpoint is the only reason to justify it.
[QUOTE=Stoid]
As long as you are of the opinion that everyone who holds any religious or spiritual beliefs of any kind are idiots, this is valid.
[/QUOTE]
Change “idiots” to “wrong” and I’ll admit I’m increasingly of that opinion.
Are you saying that all religious leaders are equal? That there’s nothing inherently sillier about worshiping a Cabbage Patch doll than worshiping Allah, or that moving to a jungle in Guyana or passing out flowers at the airport are no stranger than going door to door as a missionary or tithing 10% of your income? I’m an agnostic but I completely believe some beliefs are stranger and some “holy” men are more transparently charlatans or hypocritical than others.
[QUOTE=Stoid]
Oprah produces Dr. Phil. He doesn’t scoop her, he can’t. She’s his boss.
[/QUOTE]
May wanna remind him.
That’s all the justification required, and rather non-ridiculous.
Ridiculous would be to forego the marketing power of using her face just to make a pointless show of meaningless humility.
I could have said this. If the book is in the Oprah Book Club…no thanks. Unfair and possibly my loss, perhaps, but I am really sick of Oprah.
As far as I can tell, she (and Ellen) buy their audiences. Show up to be in the audience and you will go home with loot. What’s that about? If they didn’t bribe them to come in, no one would show up?
I have no idea whether or not she deals with women’s issues since I have not seen a single one of her shows. I find her very phony and self-important.
I like her magazine.
Her TV show, I’ve watched possibly two or three episodes in all the years its been on.
I’ve tried to read a few of the book club selections but became suicidal.