90.5 FM KSJS

So on Monday I was on the air as a fill-in DJ for KSJS, San Jose State's radio station. On Saturday I will be on-air again to broadcast the Spartan football game against Louisiana Tech live from Spartan Stadium. I should also mention that on Monday I wasn't just doing any fill-in. The DJ I was replacing was Brad Stone. He should sound familiar to chemistry students since he is the current chair of the department. But at KSJS he is known as the Jazz music director, and the man who was named "Programmer of the Year - Medium Markets 26-79" by JazzWeek for 2004 and helped the station win "Station of the Year - Medium Markets 26-79" in 2003 and 2005.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to listen to KSJS, or to join the station. But since this blog is all about media, it makes sense for me to write about the one media source that I am a part of other than this blog. It also seems like a good time to write about the station because of the show I did on Monday and the game on Saturday, I didn't even mention the volleyball game that I engineered last Thursday. The station is almost completely run by students, who get units for taking the RTVF 192 class and working for the station. The actual on-air studio is in Hugh Gillis Hall. But the station is also a lot more similar to a commercial station than other college radio stations because it is licensed by the FCC, it runs 24 hours a day, and it has 1500 watts of power (enough to cover San Jose and much of the South Bay).

OH MY GOD, HE JUST BODY SLAMMED KEVIN FEDERLINE!!!

Don't worry I'm not actually writing about him. I want to write about the WWE. It was still called the WWF when I used to watch "Monday Night Raw" every week with my brother. Me and my cousins would go back and forth between watching the WWF and the WCW, but they were both basically the same. I finally outgrew wrestling around 8th or 9th grade. But lately, when I'm bored and channel surfing I've been watching more and more of the WWE and even the new TNA wrestling shows.

To get back to my title, the other day I had nothing better to do so I was watching wrestling and for some reason Kevin Federline was yelling at the crowd and at John Cena (known for making the worst movie of this year, for bringing hip-hop to the WWE even though he's white, and for the innovative spinning championship belt) when John Cena body slammed Federline to the enjoyment of everyone watching live and on, TV including myself.

More recently I was flipping through some channels and I some some of my favorite wrestlers from when I was still a little kid wrestling my brother on top of our parents bed. Not just Dusty Rhodes, not just Ric Flair, but also Sargeant Slaughter and Rowdy Roddy Piper. Just the names describe these guys characters pretty accurately. Another group that has returned is the DX. It really seems like the WWE is trying to attract people like me who used to watch, but stopped watching it as we got older. Just seeing those guys makes me want to start watching every week like I used to.


So what's the point of this post? Well, I don't know if wrestling was ever dying out but for me, it's just now making a resurgence. I'm not yet watching weekly and I'm not even sure what time it comes on. But it seems like different shows and reruns of those shows are on all the time. Every time I see one off these shows I can't help but pay attention. Even the pop culture show "The Soup" was showing clips of Kevin Federline's appearance and his subsequent body-slamming (my favorite part was how he didn't need a gimmick to make the crowd boo him, as soon as they saw him they started booing). So really I'm just writing this to see if anyone else is starting to watch wrestling again, and to see if I can convince anyone to join me in my new favorite guilty pleasure TV show. (except maybe "Project Runway," wait, I really hope none of my friends are reading this. Maybe I should delete that last sentence.)

Everyone likes lists

Maybe not everyone, but I know I like articles that make lists, especially when they are giving some kind of ranking. So without further ado, I will bring you my Top 3 Most Important TV Shows:

(by the way, lists seem more important when you count them down in reverse order)

3. All in the Family (1971-1979) - By the way, I'm using shows that I have watched more than a few times, there might be more important shows that I have never seen so I wouldn't be able to give a fair opinion on them. However, since I'm basically addicted to TV, and because for years I fell asleep watching Nick at Nite. I do have plenty of knowledge of different TV shows for this list.

I was never a fan of this show, but you can't argue the fact that it was important. According to The Museum of Broadcast Communications, "All in the Family was not only one of the most successful sitcoms in history, it was also one of the most important and influential series ever to air, for it ushered in a new era in American television characterized by programs that did not shy away from addressing controversial or socially relevant subject matters." It looked at issues such as racism, homosexuality, women's liberation, rape, breast cancer and impotence. The thing that always bugged me about the show was how Mike and Gloria never thanked Archie and were never grateful for him letting them stay at his house. The show would always make Archie the villain, but would ignore the fact that Mike probably wouldn't have been able to go to college without the free house and food that Archie gave him. Gloria also wouldn't be the person she is if not for Archie.

My favorite moment on this show is probably the same as many people who watched this show. When Sammy Davis Jr. guest starred and at the end of the episode Archie and Sammy pose for a picture and just as the camera shoots, Sammy Davis Jr. kisses Archie on the cheek. The surprise on Archie's face was hilarious. Carrol O'Connor was great at showing his emotions by making weird faces.

2. I Love Lucy (1951-1957) This is my personal favorite of the three shows on this list. It's still a very fun show to watch, even fifty years later it doesn't seem aged. It probably doesn't seem aged because so many current shows are still copying ideas that were used on I Love Lucy. This show was important because of it's great popularity and because it was so early in television history. This show was a pioneer and would have an influence on every TV show since its finale. It was also far ahead of its time because it featured an interracial couple.

I think the reasons for this shows popularity so many years after it was made has to do with its great writing, and especially with the talent and charisma of Lucille Ball.

My favorite moment from I Love Lucy is the Vita-meata-vega-min commercial scene. I still laughed when I read this description from Wikipedia:
In this episode Lucy manages to get a role as the "Vitameatavegamin girl" and is tasked with trying to sell the public a tonic that has healthy amounts of vitamins, meat, vegetables, minerals -— and the less than healthy dose of 23% alcohol. "And it's so tasty too - [grimacing] - just like candy!" During rehearsal, Lucy becomes progressively more inebriated, with the inevitable hilarious result, made only the more funny by the alliterative, tongue twisting product name and pitch. "Do you pop out at parties? Are you unpoopular? Well, the answer to all your troubles is in this bittle lottle!"

1. Sesame Street (1969-) - This is a show that I didn't even think of when I started deciding my three most important shows. It's also a show that I never watched as a kid. I only started watching it since my niece was born almost two years ago. But once I thought about it, it's easy to realize the positive influence of Sesame Street is far more important than any other show. This show has helped to raise children for almost forty years, teaching them to count, to read, and many more important lessons.

It's always weird when people talk about Sesame Street because I'm always the only one who didn't grow up watching it. Because I never watched this show on a regular basis it's harder to comment on than the other shows.

My least favorite moment from this show is any scene starring Elmo. I'm sorry, but he's annoying.

Howard Stern ...

Is there anything I can say about Howard Stern that hasn't already been said? No. He's a jerk, he's controversial, he's always complaining, he's extremely popular, etc, etc. All of these things have been said, and they have all been written about. Probably, each of these statments is true. That's why it is hard to write anything new or creative about Howard. Just trying to write something interesting in this blog reminds me of an article by my favorite writer, Bill Simmons of ESPN.com. The article was called "Tiger's great ... what can you say?" He was writing about why he had never written an article on Tiger Woods. He came up with five reasons why he had trouble writing about Tiger. So why not look at his list and see how it relates too Howard Stern.

Reason No. 1: Overkill
Bill Simmons explained how there were so many articles about Tiger that were essentially the same. "How many times can we rehash the story about a kid who was raised to succeed at one thing -- golf -- and ended up doing just that?". This one definitely fits Howard. We hear about him on the news, in the paper, in magazines, on various TV shows, and on his own radio and TV show. Basically all you hear is how he is controversial, rude, and from his fans how he is funny.

Reason No. 2: His interviews aren't exactly electric
Because golf is a sport of tradition, mostly played by rich/upper class people Tiger Woods does his best to avoid controversy. Howard Stern does the opposite. Though most people like him or not would say Howard Stern gives interesting interviews. It seems like it's always the same thing. He's always pushing girls to take their clothes off, or pushing celebrities to reveal something secret about their love life. It starts to feel like he is just being controversial for the sake of being controversial. Maybe he is just trying to be controversial so he can get more attention, because he knows it will give him more viewers, and that will mean more money.

Reason No. 3: His "competition" hasn't shown up yet
Though he does have many rivals: the media, his old radio stations, celebrities he doesn't like, most recently his fans that haven't subscribed to Sirius. But as far as competition with other radio hosts, there isn't any. As his nickname "the king of all media" suggests, he is the most well known, and most powerful person in the media world. The only person with similar fame and power might be Oprah Winfrey, but they are so different, and their audiences are so different that they really don't compete with each other.

Reason No. 4: He's a little too slick
This is where Simmons criticized Tiger for his reputation as a walking Nike billboard. "Part of Michael Jordan's magic was that he played the business side of sports better than anyone, yet still managed to remain likable." The obvious comparison would be how Stern left so-called Terrestrial Radio for Sirius. Not only did he make hundreds of millions of dollars in the deal. That's enough to make lots of his "common man" fans envious. But he also forced his fans to pay so they could hear a show that had been free for so many years.

ESPN

The Magazine.

To give a good review of ESPN the Magazine it helps to understand the competition. The obvious competition is Sports Illustrated, but the real competition is ESPN.com. I know the main reason I subscribe to ESPN the Magazine is because subscribing to the magazine gives me free access to ESPN Insider. ESPN Insider is the part of ESPN.com that you have to pay for, and as more and more of the website became "exclusive content" I had to subscribe.

Earlier this year I was receiving Sports Illustrated magazines on a free trial for about 3 months. At the same time I was also receiving ESPN the Magazine. I thought I would like SI more because of its prestige and its superior writers. But, ESPN won me over with its larger size, which allows for great photos which you can't see in SI, and its TV style ability to keep my attention. ESPN has lots of quick entertaining articles. If you don't like one you can quickly skip to the next article, or the next on after that, sometimes all three are on the same page. Sports Ilustrated has writers who tell great stories, but it sometimes reads more like a book than a magazine.

I thought about getting a subscription to Sports Illustrated because I really like a couple of its writers, and I can't find fault with any of its writers, but while I was receiving my free trial I spent more time reading articles on SI.com than I spent reading the magazine. I spent even more time on ESPN.com. Another thing that doesn't help to sell magazines is the fact that almost all of the writers for these two magazines also write columns online, many even print the exact same article on their website and in the magazine.

So if you are wondering which is the better magazine it really depends on your preference, because the magazines are actually very different. But if you want to read sports articles that are updated with new information and opinions on today's events you need to check out ESPN.com, SI.com, or other sports websites like CBSSportsline.com. I know I usually check these sites even before I check my email, just so I can keep up with any new events and so I can see if any of my favorite writers have new articles.