Fox News: You’re Not Special and Mr. Rogers Was An Evil Man
Posted by John Brownlee
The other day, I claimed that I couldn’t be offended. But then I watched this clip from a Fox News report in which they discuss the legacy of Mr. Rogers. And you know that smug little bitch who calls Mr. Rogers an “evil, evil man” in the first thirty seconds? I wanted to rip out her heart, hold it up before her eyes as she coughed up blood and died, then stand over her jerking corpse, screaming as I stared directly into the sun.
It’s a disgusting, vile little piece and it’s very likely that you won’t be able to get through all of it. To summarize. Fox News’ argument for Mr. Rogers being “evil” goes like this: he told two entire generations of children that they were “special just the way they are.” Then, in what can only be described as a despicable lie, the Fox News anchors claim that that’s precisely where Mr. Rogers left off. He never taught children anything except to merely exist in a static state of selfish self-entitlement. And that’s why my entire generation is comprised entirely of rapists, murderers, welfare recipients and drug addicts.
There are a lot of reasons to be offended by this, but the biggest reason is that Fred Rogers was the kindest, most inspiring and most loving man to have lived in the last 100 years. His love for children and his passion for their education and well-being were absolute and unhypocritical. Watch this clip from Mr. Rogers’ testimony to the US Senate in 1969 to increase funding for PBS. If you disagree with Mr. Rogers politically, that’s okay, but there is no mistaking the sincerity of his passion for child development. You have to be a loathsome cunt rag to shit on Mr. Rogers’ corpse.
But there’s good reason to be personally offended by Fox’s comments as well. Because as Eliza said to me earlier when we were discussing this, “Mister Rogers and his ilk are responsible for the golden age of freelance, freeform, lowbrow pop art that we are now experiencing.” He didn’t preach self-entitlement: instead, Mr. Rogers encouraged children to follow that unique spark within themselves that would — through their perseverance, kindness and the powers of their imaginations — make them great.
In that sense, we’re all Mr. Rogers’ children. The last two generations have largely toppled an oppressive status quo of duty and drudgery in favor of rewarding those individuals with the bravery to follow their imaginations. The opportunities for the adventurous, the talented and the imaginative are limitless, and the unprecedented age of art and information that surrounds us attests that fact with its every writhing. For all of its obsessions with the fetishistic and profane, Ectomo is a blog we hope Mr. Rogers would have liked, because it reflects something that Eliza and I have always striven to maintain: we medicate ourselves from an inherent predilection towards jadedness through the constant act of imaginative discovery. And there are millions of people like us, bringing joy to the world, making things, feverishly dreaming, and not giving a damn about any other criteria than trying to make people happy.
In conclusion, I’d like to finish this post with this beautiful quote from Esquire’s write-up of Mr. Rogers’ acceptance of the 1997 Daytime Emmy for Lifetime Achievement:
Mister Rogers went onstage to accept the award — and there, in front of all the soap opera stars and talk show sinceratrons, in front of all the jutting man-tanned jaws and jutting saltwater bosoms, he made his small bow and said into the microphone, “All of us have special ones who have loved us into being. Would you just take, along with me, ten seconds to think of the people who have helped you become who you are. Ten seconds of silence.”
And then he lifted his wrist, looked at the audience, looked at his watch, and said, ‘I’ll watch the time.” There was, at first, a small whoop from the crowd, a giddy, strangled hiccup of laughter, as people realized that he wasn’t kidding, that Mister Rogers was not some convenient eunuch, but rather a man, an authority figure who actually expected them to do what he asked. And so they did. One second, two seconds, three seconds — and now the jaws clenched, and the bosoms heaved, and the mascara ran, and the tears fell upon the beglittered gathering like rain leaking down a crystal chandelier. And Mister Rogers finally looked up from his watch and said softly, “May God be with you,” to all his vanquished children.
Fuck you, Fox News.
Fox News: You’re Not Special And Mr. Rogers Was An Evil Man [YouTube]
Categories: Clips, Crime, Madness, Monsters
Posted at 1:39 pm on July 17, 2007
58 Comments -
Being a decrepit old Baby Boomer who had kids late in life, I completely missed out on Mr. Rogers. But between the story you told, and the mental_floss article, I really wish I had been able to watch as a kid. Too many children grow up never being special to anyone.
Comment by Miss Cellania — July 17, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
It is sad when in a twisted quest to find content that Fox should choose to pick on one of the most benevolent, gentle souls to have ever graced the phosphorescent screen. God bless you Mr. Rogers and may the Hounds (and Cephalopods) of the Abyss carry off the “brilliant” minds at Fox who thought this one up.
Comment by Zralhaust — July 17, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
He was doing what he thought was best, based on the available information of the time. Every generation has a working theory about child development, and that theory is inevitably proven wrong by the generation that follows.
Self esteem was the buzz word of the day back then. And it wasn’t just Mr. Rogers who was peddling it.
You want to know where the sense of entitlement comes from? Look at the sense of entitlement that comes from western culture itself. We all grew up with the idea that we could be anything we want. The very concept of the American Dream is where the sense of entitlement comes from; even those of us who aren’t American find it hard to escape.
Anyone can be president, right? No. You have to be a rich white Christian male.
Anyone can be a supermodel, right? No, you have to be hot, and willing to whore yourself to a panel of judges.
Anyone can be a millionaire? No, you have to be an unscrupulous bastard willing to screw over everyone in your path.
And just who are these kids that they did the study on anyway? Were they all members of the Fred Rogers fan club? Or were they just a bunch of whiny rich kids who had a sense of entitlement to begin with.
I’m with you on this one. Lay off the man. If he was mistaken, it was a mistake that did more good than ill for 80s latchkey kids.
Comment by Peregrine — July 17, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Peregrine, he wasn’t wrong. You CAN be anything you want to be… but that isn’t to say the world is ready for it yet. But because our generation is filled with self-esteem, actively pursuing our dreams instead of giving up on them, the world is changing rapidly into a world where people can be what they want to be. You think Mr. Rogers’ message was wrong because it didn’t upheave the world in a single moment. I think his message was correct, but it’ll take awhile, and one can’t discount the negative effect of a single parent turning their child’s self-esteem into self-entitlement.
Comment by John Brownlee — July 17, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
Who the hell thinks that 6 year olds need to be told “The world owes you nothing – you have to prove yourself?”
I guess this is Fox news’ new stalking horse orders – go tell the masses kids shouldn’t feel like individuals, and see what they say.
Comment by castewar — July 17, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
Fox News appeals to all of those lost souls who made the mistake of following the American Dream rather than their own, and too often it does so by reinforcing their insecurity-driven hatred.
Mr. Rogers’ message was perhaps one of the few things on this God forsaken planet that tried to spare us that hate. He realized the ideal that one can only love others if one first loves themself.
Only the most debase humans can misinterpret and corrupt a message of pure love and care. Mr. Rogers, who was among the very best of people, would have loved them just the same.
Fox can go fuck themselves.
Comment by Matt Anderson — July 17, 2007 @ 2:27 pm
Don’t get me wrong. He was on the right track. But the better adjusted of us probably had parents there to give us a follow up dose of reality to go along with it. No matter how skilled the messenger, the message needs proper nurturing as it sinks in.
I don’t remember a lot of what he said anyway. I just watched for the puppet show.
Comment by Peregrine — July 17, 2007 @ 2:33 pm
As someone who was lucky enough to visit the PBS station (WQED) where Mr. Rogers was taped for years, I can only say how much Mr. Rogers was a decent, loving man. I never met him in person, but met the many people whose lives he touched in person. A minister in his own right, he acted as a Good Samaritan in his Pittsburgh neighborhood. There are too many stories that were never in front of a camera, because Mr. Rogers practiced what he preached. Everyday.
I will take a page from Mr. Rogers’ book, where he convinced us that people around us shouldn’t bring us down to their level. Fox News, I will pray for you, that your employees will stop slinging mud, that you will report the truth, that you will show the same love, compassion, and acceptance in your hearts that Mr. Rogers did. I know that I am still praying for the same things in myself, but seeing a man who could acheive these things makes me feel as if it is possible.
Comment by Krista Krahn — July 17, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
I wonder when Fox News will just give up any pretense that they are about news and air 24 hours a day of Hannity sodomizing Colmes with a fourteen inch strap-on while reciting the Bible. Annny day now.
My favorite story about how well Rogers was loved may be apocryphal, but may not. Someone once stole his old beat-up car from outside the studio where he filmed his show. The local news picked up the story and broadcast it. The next day, the car was back unharmed with a note. It said, paraphrasing here, “If we would have known it was yours, we wouldn’t have taken it.”
Before this post, I wouldn’t have thought anyone could hate that man. But now I understand that there are some people so full of hate that it consumes everything before them. It scares me. It downright chills me to the bone.
Comment by Jeremy Tolbert — July 17, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
Ah, you gotta love Fox News, if there is an back-asswards, ignorant, or infuriating opinion to be had, chances are one will find it there.
I mean really, it’s Mr. Rogers! I remember watching the show when I was a kid and, while I find the “you can be anything” viewpoint a little over the top I would be hard pressed to be able to extrapolate any sort of negative effects from telling kids that they are special people, as are all people.
Comment by Ross R. — July 17, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
You’re right about not getting through it, but the little I watched had me angry…
First off, rapists, murderers, child molesters are “evil, evil men.” A man who took care of millions of children, taught them how to be polite and why, how to help others, how to be good people, was NOT evil.
Second, you can tell how that…woman feels about children. To her, we’re (I’m only 17, I’ll include myself) just a “crop.” Not people, not individuals, just a patch of farmland where they plant the consumers and mindless, media-absorbing drones of tomorrow; the ones she get gets paid to “inform.”
She attacked the hero of millions, and I can only hope someone organizes a boycott/riot against her, and Fox for allowing it.
P.S. – Peregrine, I can’t remember much of what he said either, in fact all I really remember is the kingdom, and an episode where he talked to his mailman, but I can pretty much guarantee we both assimilated plenty of his teachings into our every day lives and demeanor.
Comment by MaicroDrop — July 17, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
This whole thing just defies logic. Does the concept of parenting elude everyone, these days?
“Instead of going to Macy’s, make your own sweater.”
Fuck you. Oh, and eat me. Yes, fuck you and eat me.
Comment by Matthew — July 17, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
The last two generations have largely toppled an oppressive status quo of duty and drudgery in favor of rewarding those individuals with the bravery to follow their imaginations.
Which is exactly what Fox News, and their supporters, are trying to stamp out.
Comment by harmfulguy — July 17, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
The sad thing is, I’m not surprised at all by this. I remember there being a lot of hate for Mr. Rogers from the proto-Fox News watcher/redneck demographic. Kids at school were not allowed to watch the show because their parents were afraid the kids would turn out gay. This segment was a self esteem bump to all those parents and kids who didn’t watch Mr. Rogers, “It’s ok to be scared homophobic hillbilly sheep”.
Comment by Matt H. — July 17, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
wow – that’s ignorant even by fox news standards…
great post in response to this abominable segment – don’t think it could be put better – kudos, jb
Comment by mike — July 17, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
When I was watching this, I kept on thinking of a clip I saw of Mr. Rogers speaking to the U.S. Senate. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a41lJIhW7fA ) So watching that and then the clip of those stupid people calling that man “evil” just angered the hell out of me.
I watched Mr. Rogers but I was also fortunate enough to have parents who gave me a dose of reality while also telling me I can be whatever I want to be and you know what? I am what I want to be. I’m 22 and already doing what I love doing. Maybe I’m at the beginning stages, but still where I want to be.
Speaking of which, in the far off land of Americaland, do the parents abandon the children after birth? I’ve seen many parents in the media stand out against certain media influences (Spongebob, Sesame Street and now, Mr. Rogers) but I’ve never seen them touch on how THEY influence their children.
Comment by Robin L. — July 17, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that some of the Ectomo posts with the most comments have come from Fox News clips?
Nothing gets the fire going the bohemian heart quite like Neo-con propaganda, huh.
Comment by Peregrine — July 17, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
I stopped watching 2 minutes in. Which is longer that I usually last with that shitty Fox morning show (it should be called “Raving Republican Rant in the Morning”). I didn’t think it was possible, but Fox Noise is stretching even more than usual this time. Mr. Rogers made a lot of people feel good and he did make them feel special just for being them
The cynical fucks at Fox don’t get it because they’re cynical, ugly and any specialness they had was taken away from them by Roger Ailes and years of bitter hatred and prejudice. Think I sound riled up now? Imagine what I’d be typing if I didn’t shut the damn thing off after 2 minutes.
Comment by Sloopydrew — July 17, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
“Speaking of which, in the far off land of Americaland, do the parents abandon the children after birth? I’ve seen many parents in the media stand out against certain media influences (Spongebob, Sesame Street and now, Mr. Rogers) but I’ve never seen them touch on how THEY influence their children.”
There’s reactionary idiots in every country. The problem really is that America’s news reports are heard around the world, so it seems like a huger issue than it likely is.
“Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that some of the Ectomo posts with the most comments have come from Fox News clips?”
I think this is pretty funny, because some people have described me as a neo-con (incorrectly, because I’m some sort of libertarian, and oddly becoming more tolerant — not less — as I get older) based upon my support for going to Iraq, although not in the execution of our occupation. You’d think I’d love Fox News, but the more I see (and I love 3,000 miles away from the US, so that’s not a lot) I grow more and more appalled.
Comment by John Brownlee — July 17, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
“my support for going to Iraq”
*Scrapes jaw off floor*
Comment by Sloopydrew — July 17, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Although I won’t go so far to call Rogers “evil” (yeah, that FNC is itself “special” ain’t it — and in Special Ed!), I never liked that guy when I was a kid. He was the kind of creepy guy my mother told me to keep away from. (Captain Kangaroo also made my skin crawl…)
And look at me now!!
Comment by Mike Cane — July 17, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
“*Scrapes jaw off floor*”
Sloopy, you need to understand that there were lots and lots of good reasons at the time, and even in retrospect, to go over. I’m not going to pretend that some of my reasons for going weren’t ultimately proven wrong, but they fit available information at the time. I did my research before coming to a conclusion. Iraq WAS in breach of UN resolutions. Saddam Hussein was a genocidal maniac who raped, tortured and murdered millions of people who stood up against him. He WAS a supporter of terrorism… if not Al Qaeda, than the Palestinian Suicide Bombers he supported. He was an unstable, murderous and war-hungry tyrant who had proven time and time again a willingness to cause large-scale problems in an already volatile region. And there were good reasons to think he had WMD in Iraq — the Clinton administration, for example, certainly thought so too.
On the latter point, I was largely wrong, along with a lot of intelligent people (and along with a lot of stupid people). But I do believe that the Middle East would benefit from a democracy, and I don’t believe it can really afford to wait around 100 years for one. I also believe it’s the right but not the obligation of a free society to liberate the oppressed. But I think, along with that right, comes an obligation to both liberate the oppressed and then set them up on their own two feet to govern and lead themselves… a goal that America has utterly failed to achieve.
The world’s problems can’t be solved by nice little treaties and supercilious handshakes. I was wrong, but I was wrong for good reasons, and at least I thought about them, which is more than I can say for most of the people on both sides of what has largely been a knee-jerk political debate.
A lot of people make the mistake that just because it all looks hopeless and completely obvious now, it always was, and that anyone who supported a war in Iraq then must be a fool or a vicious, racist sadomasochist. It isn’t so.
Comment by John Brownlee — July 17, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
One further elaboration on the above: I think the greatest reason to remove Saddam from power was humanitarian. It’s where we failed to govern on a humanitarian level that disturbs me most.
Comment by John Brownlee — July 17, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
John Brownlee,
I certainly don’t think that anyone who supported the war in Iraq must be a foolish, vicious, racist sadomasochist. And I agree with the majority of what you said. Our only disagreement lies in the area of Weapons of Mass Destruction and whether or not there were good reasons to think Saddam had them.
Yes, people had thought he had WMDs but we sent weapons inspectors over there, we sent expert after expert and had expert after expert tell us that there were not Weapons of Mass Destruction. We were told all of this before invading Iraq.
I have been against this war from the beginning, but not for reactionary knee-jerk reasons. I have been against it because I was told, time and time again, that there were not Weapons of Mass Destruction. Experts from numerous countries came to that same conclusion after spending weeks, months or even years there.
If you ignored everything but the people who were there, putting their necks on the line, telling us that there absolutely were not Weapons of Mass Destruction, that Saddam wasn’t tied to 9/11, that Al Qaeda wasn’t in Iraq, that there was no yellow cake in Nigeria, etc. etc. you could figure out a pattern of deception relatively easily and without a great deal of research.
Bush and his cronies wanted us in Iraq and they were going to say whatever it took to get us there. They had planned to invade Iraq prior to Bush taking office (see the letter many in the current admin. — including the Vice President — wrote to then President Bill Clinton imploring him to invade the country).
In no way am I trying to say, “I told you so” (I couldn’t, as I haven’t discussed politics with you until today), but I am trying to clear up false memories people seem to have about the WMDs in Iraq. Just about anyone who was initially for the war in Iraq now says that the evidence was there and the case for WMDs was a strong one. It wasn’t. But as Joseph Goebbels once said, “The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.”
Oh, and to stay on topic — Mr. Rogers.
Comment by Sloopydrew — July 17, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
Bravo, John. I feel roughly the same as you on this, despite most everyone I associate with being on the far end of the “we shouldn’t have been there in the first place” side.
My main problem with the war, as it was originally conceived, was it’s inclusion in our ridiculous “War on Terror”. Saddam wasn’t doing any of the things we said he was (hoarding WMDs or funding Al-Qaeda), but he did need to go.
Comment by chesh — July 17, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
Fox News airing something controversial is the least newsworthy thing I’ve seen all day.
Comment by The How-To Geek — July 17, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
“I have been against this war from the beginning, but not for reactionary knee-jerk reasons. I have been against it because I was told, time and time again, that there were not Weapons of Mass Destruction. Experts from numerous countries came to that same conclusion after spending weeks, months or even years there.”
You apparently haven’t read The Threatening Storm, written by the guy who predicted Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and a huge expert on Iraq. It was written well before invasion. It argued strongly against Bush invading Iraq. Yet it made a hugely compelling case that Saddam had not proven destruction of the WMDs he’d claimed to have at the end of the first Gulf War (and no one in the UN will claim that these weapons were destroyed according to protocol either).
I also recall reading (but can not cite) numerous article around the time in which UN inspectors said time and time again, “Something fishy is going on here. Saddam is not accounting for the WMDs he claimed ten years ago to had.”
Post-war, we know the truth: Saddam used up his WMDs before and during Gulf War I and lied to make himself seem big after the fact (a prospect that seemed to occur to almost no one in the West, because it’s a decidedly non-Western way of thinking). But to claim that all of the experts were united in complete denial of WMDs is absurd: I seriously doubt anyone can point to many experts at the time who didn’t, at the very least, argue that Saddam was acting really fishy.
Comment by John Brownlee — July 17, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
Saddam Hussein was an evil bad man who would have had to be removed eventually. But my first and best reason for not supporting the war from the beginning was because Bush and the war hawk’s motives were and always have been suspect. Going in when they did, in the way they did, and with no reasonable plan on what to do once they got there, was foolhardy at best, and at worst, self-serving and vindictive. There’s just so much good and bad all mixed in there, that we could argue about it for ages just to get past all the qualifying statements.
Anyway, sorry if my little observation derailed the discussion.
Hey, wasn’t Mr. Rogers mega-cool?
Comment by Peregrine — July 17, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
I am in tears watching this loathesome, wretched excuse for “journalism”. As Joh said, Fred Rogers was the kindest, gentlest most respectable man in America media in the last 100 years, and here’s the fucking FNC weatherman giving him shit. And talk about a bullying a weak opponent. The man’s been dead for several years now, and even if he were alive he would no doubt refuse to ackowledge this offal with a response.
The rightwing in America has really come a long way into depravity when they take the time to rip on an ordained Presbyterian minister.
May God truly have mercy on their souls, as I am sure Mr. Rogers would want. I’m not nearly so good as he was. I hope they rot in hell.
Comment by Brian Schlosser — July 17, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
Fox did a similar hit piece on Kurt Vonnegut when he died. So it doesn’t surprise me that they would now try a Lapsarian hit piece on Mr. Rogers. Exactly how would Fox like to see children raised? They would like nothing better than to see a theist meritocracy governed by cronyism and birth right. Instead of children thinking themselves as special and then feeling empowered to make the most of themselves, Fox would probably like children to take the kind of oath described by Kurt Vonnegut in God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater:
I do solemnly swear that I will respect the sacred property of others, and that I will be content with whatever station in life God Almighty may assign to me. I will be grateful to those who employ me, and will never complain about wages and hours, but will ask myself instead, “What more can I do for my employer, my republic, and my God?” I understand that I have not been placed on Earth to be happy. I am here to be tested. If I am to pass the test, I must be always unselfish, always sober, always truthful, always chaste in mind, body, and deed, and always respectful to those to whom God has, in His Wisdom, placed above me. If I pass the test, I will go to Heaven when I die. If I fail, I shall roast in Hell while the Devil laughs and Jesus weeps.
That’s the ideology that Fox represents.
Fox says that they are quoting a hypothesis made by a professor who was “tired of his students’ sense of entitlement.” This is silly. I think anyone who looks at history can see that neither Generation X or Y2K is any more possessed of a sense of entitlement then the generations before. The professor is simply suffering from teacher’s burn out and has resorted to Lapsarianism. Cory Doctorow has agreat article on the difference between Lapsarianism and progressivism here: http://www.locusmag.com/Features/2007/07/cory-doctorow-progressive-apocalypse.html .
Every generation suffers from Lapsarianism in times of stress. Even Socrates was quoted by Plato as saying: “The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority, they show disrespect to their elders … They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and are tyrants over their teachers”
Comment by Rikki Simons — July 17, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
War. War never changes. – Fred Rogers
Comment by Joel Johnson — July 17, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
What a wonderful read that was. Thanks, John.
Comment by Andrew — July 17, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Wow – only came here for a blog to lighten my oh so heavy heart….bloody hell….I’m going back to watch ‘Super President’ again (shakes with fear)…lol..
Comment by Mangawitch — July 17, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
That is truly heartbreaking commentary. I did get through it, but it took many pauses to sling many sarcastic, venomous comments.
I didn’t have much exposure to Mr. Rogers, myself. I can safely say that what I do remember was encouraging at least.
Humans as individuals are special. We are all different. We can be whatever we want. Those are all positive, creatively-charged statements. That is the message carried for years, dilligently, by Mr. Rogers.
In mere seconds, these supposed adults have laid out some of the most negative, destructive, undeserved comments I have heard in a good long while.
Many people have cast a poor view of the concept of “sense of entitlement” – myself included. However, the fact remains that we are indeed all entitled to some things in this life. Such as the right to strive, the right to shine, and the simple right to be. It’s one of the rights not entirely robbed of us (here in America and in other democratically-minded nations).
Self-esteem and self-entitlement have one thing in common: “self”. We ultimately have only ourselves in this life. Our worlds are decendend from the limited viewpoint that is our own. This means that the possibilities truly are as boundless as our capacity to see them through to fruition. One of the first steps to fulfilling our individual potential is most assuredly grasping the concept of individual self-worth. A concept that is so often poorly conveyed to the unlearned young person. Mixed messages can lead to the development of assumptions of worth that aren’t necessarily founded on the notion that others are worth something as well, and that the worth of both one’s self, and other inviduals’ worth must both be respected to truly be successful.
Despite this seeming plauge of poor assumptions as to what some individuals feel they are entitled to it does not excuse this pitiful finger pointing and mud slinging on the part of the Fox News crew. Truly they are expressing a failure to recognize the value of the individual by dismissing the works of Fred Rogers as “evil”.
As upsetting as it all is, and now that I have gotten my natural, reactionary anger out of my system from first viewing that, I’ll close with this:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Comment by Giania — July 17, 2007 @ 8:49 pm
What about the dumbass professor who’s behind this Mr. Rogers theory? The Fox News people are just the idiot messengers. Anyone who gets a C and asks for an A is either lazy or actually believes they worked hard. I don’t expect much from Fox News but I do expect more from teachers.
RIP Fred
Comment by annie — July 17, 2007 @ 8:52 pm
It takes quite a bit for me to be offended. And this is, hands down, the most offensive thing I have seen / read in quite some time.
You can say what you will about his politics. You can say what you will about his belief in a singular Christian god. You can even mock him for his love of the cardigan (all of which were knitted by his mother, by the way)…
But to even imply that Fred Rogers is, in some small way, responsible for the degradation of society, is so highly offensive that I’m really not sure where to begin. I’m steamed, fuming and frothing at the mouth.
Fred was a good man. I can’t say that about anyone I know and keep a straight face, but when I say it about Mr. Rogers… Motherfucker, I mean business. He was kind, caring and selflessly devoted to making children understand one simple truth…
You can be anyone you want to be, because you are special. You are unique.
He was right. I was lucky enough to have Mister Rogers say these things to me as a child and I tell my son the exact same thing, because when you’re small, the world seems so goddamn big. Having the power to choose who and what you will become is all the power these children have. And it’s all they’ll ever need.
I am what I am, because of what I’ve chosen to be. Mister Rogers taught me that and I will never be able to repay that kindness.
Mr. Brownlee, I shall happily act as your second should you ever meet with the common thug that dares to defile the name of Fred Rogers.
Comment by thefinn — July 17, 2007 @ 10:00 pm
I don’t know whether to find this disgusting, or expected. What a fine example of what many Americans have turned into, that these news anchors can sit there with the same mindset they are calling Mr. Rogers evil for inflicting on my generation as they sit there and shift the blame away from the complete failure of parenting in their generation if you were to agree there was even an issue with us. Sitting in front of millions of people on live television spreading hate against a man who loved children so much, swaying the other ignorant, simple minded bastards who actually digest the lies coming from that studio is exponentially worse than what they accused Mr. Rogers of.
Humor yourselves to the idea that what they are saying is correct…If Mr. Rogers influenced our lives so much at such a young age, any parent that can admit that doesn’t deserve to breathe the same air as their offspring because they are a complete failure. Nail his ass to the wall for making the parents of our lost generation realize their faults. Die in a fire, Fox News, YOU are the evil ones.
Comment by Rich — July 17, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
[...] ectoplasmosis » Fox News: You’re Not Special and Mr. Rogers Was An Evil Man “…we medicate ourselves from an inherent predilection towards jadedness through the constant act of imaginative discovery.” (tags: blogs, writing, television, fox, mr_rogers, ectomo) [...]
Pingback by » Blog Archive » links for 2007-07-18 — July 17, 2007 @ 11:14 pm
I watched the clip and I have to say that they make one good point. They say that our society has more narcissictic people than ever before and they should know because they are talking about themselves.
Comment by Jen Larkin — July 18, 2007 @ 2:48 am
That clip was worse than swap.avi. And I watched all of swap.avi
Comment by Kevin — July 18, 2007 @ 4:13 am
Brit Hume made a pathetic and failed attempt at taking Christopher Hitchens to task for speaking ill of the dead after the terrible Jerry Falwell got sent down to the lake of fire. But somehow, dead people who’ve actually made meaningful contributions to society — first Vonnegut after his death, now Mister Rogers — are wide open.
By the way, it wasn’t a sense of entitlement that prevented me from developing a Puritan work ethic. It was seeing the generations before me work themselves to death at meaningless, thankless jobs.
Comment by Angry Sam — July 18, 2007 @ 9:15 am
Mr. Rogers was the creepy gay uncle of PBS programming. Whenever that show came on, I changed the channel to something more intelligent, challenging and fun.
Queer puppet shows in Rogers’ utopian basement were neither enlightening to children, nor did they teach any real-life lessons on coping or getting along with others.
Zoom, Sesame Street, the Electric Company and even Jim and Tammy Baker’s puppet shows were far more entertaining.
That said, I don’t think anyone should be slamming the guy on the news- he’s dead and his marginal impact on society should speak for itself.
Comment by BelchSpeak — July 18, 2007 @ 10:55 am
And John Brownlee is guilty of “botch listening.” Fox News didn’t make the accusation that Mr. Rogers was evil at all- A professor of Louisiana State University named Don Chance did, and the story was picked up by the WSJ here:
http://tinyurl.com/2mwgd5
Fox News morning host were making light of Chance’s implications that Rogers was evil.
For many people, you mention the number one cable news channel, and they go ballistic with Bush derangement syndrome.
Comment by BelchSpeak — July 18, 2007 @ 11:44 am
Bush derangement syndrome… is there an easy cure for that, or does it take many brainwashing sessions?
Comment by Bat Guano — July 18, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
Bat Guano, yeah, gloss over the fact that it wasn’t Fox News that came up with the story…
Try to stay focused.
Comment by BelchSpeak — July 18, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
[...] Fox News: You’re Not Special and Mr. Rogers Was An Evil Man [...]
Pingback by Sitez » links for 2007-07-18 — July 18, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
As a “professional journalist,” I know all the ways in which a story can be bent to fit a biased medium’s narrative. Fox could have shaped it any way they chose, or they could’ve chosen to not run the joker’s claim that Rogers was “evil” and apparently was responsible for a generation of pussies who want A’s for D-grade work.
Try to stay focused, BelchSpeak, on the ways in which your chain has been jerked, and is continuing to be jerked.
Imagine that, the WSJ also ran the same story!!! Did Murdoch’s sale go through already?
Comment by Bat Guano — July 18, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Jesus… I didn’t watch the clip, because I knew I might start writing in all caps, but LISTEN TO THE FRAME THESE TWATS ARE PUTTING THIS STORY IN… “THAT EVIL, EVIL MAN…” “EXPERTS SAY…” “EXPERTS” SAY A LOT OF SHIT, AND FOOLS DON’T BOTHER WITH THE DETAILS… Fools, and Fox News, and viewers of cable news in general.
I love how they cut to the clarification of the story from the Fox News Weather Center. Yes, weather man, those Asians who didn’t watch Mr. Rogers work so much harder!
It’s the framing of the story, and the details, that matter. When “experts” become an unnamed prof, or maybe it was more than one, a “they” — “they did a study at a university” — and whatever the info that “they” came up with is paraphrased by morning show clowns without a direct quote, without an attributed quote — that’s not journalism, that’s pure bullshitting. It’s an art, bullshitting is.
How can you even pretend to be a critical thinker, BelchSpeak, when you seem to be taking “them” so seriously? Sorry, that’s glossing over “things.”
… now I see, from the WSJ link you thoughtfully provided, that this is coming from “Don Chance, a finance professor at Louisiana State University, says it dawned on him last spring. The semester was ending, and as usual, students were making a pilgrimage to his office, asking for the extra points needed to lift their grades to A’s.
‘They felt so entitled,’ he recalls, ‘and it just hit me. We can blame Mr. Rogers.’”
So here we got a hunch from a finance prof. But wait, there’s a study behind it all:
“Signs of narcissism among college students have been rising for 25 years, according to a recent study led by a San Diego State University psychologist. Obviously, Mr. Rogers alone can’t be blamed for this. But as Prof. Chance sees it, ‘he’s representative of a culture of excessive doting.’”
Let me back off and say that I agree with that study about college students — but, again, we have few details of that study to look at in this story.
This story makes it clear that Mr. Rogers is responsible for the nambypambies, because a finance prof has a hunch.
In other words, no real story here. Just more bullshit that fits the narrative that cranky old white conservatives want to hear.
Comment by Bat Guano — July 18, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
I finally managed to watch this. What tripe and nonsense. I remember Howdy Doodie, Captain Kangaroo, Kukla, Fran, & Ollie, Sherry Lewis, and Ranger Andy, as well as Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers. We should blame Lamchop for the hippies, libbers, protesters, drugs, and other excessives of the 60’s and early 70’s.
Frankly I was never a big fan of Mr Rogers, he was just too sweet. Having said that, for many of the millions of kids that watched him over the years that was the only time they heard that they were “special”, and liked just because they were what they were.
Children need to be loved, and they need to be told that daily. They need hugs, kisses, hair ruffles, and a feeling of safety. Far too many have little or none of the above. If Rogers gave that little bit of comfort to even one child then he lived a righteous life, unlike those self satisfied TV boobs.
Comment by JMudder — July 18, 2007 @ 8:29 pm
You can clearly see how the weight of the message can overshadow the information. If these so-called journalists were being ironic, they sure laid it on thick. And the net effect was, the message taken away was, Mr. Rogers is evil. It doesn’t matter that they were being ironic, or that it was a fluff piece. What the viewer takes away from the end result is, Mr. Rogers ruined a generation.
They say one thing, and if you were to take a transcript of what was said, you could clearly see what was done. But to hear them talking over each other, outshouting each other, and hear the tone of voice throughout the clip, they’re clearly trying to add unneeded weight to one side of the message. Skillful manipulation of the details, is what it is.
I’m too tired to articulate it right now, and by morning it probably won’t matter anymore. Hopefully somebody sees what I’m talking about.
Comment by Peregrine — July 18, 2007 @ 8:55 pm
Ok, come on people, she is obviously joking. It is most definitely in bad taste, but if you listen to her, you realize that she is sarcastically poking fun at the notion that Mr. Rogers ever did anything to hurt anyboy, unwittingly or otherwise.
Comment by Cameron — July 19, 2007 @ 12:43 am
Everything is reversed: Mr Rogers is bad, medical doctors kill, mechanics break machines, Irak has WMD, avian flu kill millions, honesty is punished, lies look real. That’s called hell.
Comment by Stop-thinking — July 19, 2007 @ 2:20 am
>>>We should blame Lamchop for the hippies, libbers, protesters, drugs, and other excessives of the 60’s and early 70’s.
Whoa! You go too far. Lay off Lambchop!
Comment by Mike Cane — July 19, 2007 @ 9:28 am
[...] John Browlee of Ectoplasmosis wrote a very passionate post about Fox News calling Mr. Rogers a terrible evil man that damaged the psyche and the lives of American children for the whole two [...]
Pingback by The Corsair — July 19, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
she said “crop” of children! that alone says a lot more than I like to hear… despicable
Comment by Oz — July 25, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
[...] Fox news. You’ve confirmed my thoughts about you again and again, but this is totally ridiculous. (via ecto – warning, justifiably foul language in the text) – Fox news making a claim that Fred [...]
Pingback by 8919 Tuesday « The Scotto Grotto — November 14, 2007 @ 11:24 am
xHht4X hi super site thanks http://peace.com
Comment by bob — March 27, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
amazing read, i enjoyed mainly the ending :-)
Comment by personal injury lawyers jacksonville — October 17, 2009 @ 5:40 pm