Woo-Hoo! Boston Legal tonight!!!!! I know... Hear me out! We Won!

[johnaries]

we're supposed to be boycotting ABC, and apologies to rsmith6621 for stepping on his thread here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2174527
but I felt like I needed to start a new thread for reasons that will become clear if you actually read this full post.

To begin with, I was the first one to "sound the clarion call" right here on DU with this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1992136

Before I posted this thread, Google showed only three pertinent responses: The ABC website (of course), and the 2 articles on frontpage.com. Although I'll admit the movement didn't really gain serious momentum until Lush Limpballs reviewed it on his radio show, DU led the charge. Many blogs linked to this thread right here on DU, which I had the honor of being the first to post (picture me patting myself on the back until my arm breaks in several places, and then switching arms...)

So, let me say first of all that WE WON!!!! The RW machine was all ready to promote the "9/11 was Clinton's fault" meme on Monday following PT9/11's Sunday Night showing. They didn't care that most people watched football instead of the documentary - in fact, they preferred it. They would much rather TELL someone what any movie portrayed rather than have their kool-aid drinkers actually watch it for themselves. That way, they can also avoid the fact that the movie was really terrible. "it was great, I highly recommend it". The kool-aid drinkers won't watch it, if Lush said it was "cutting-edge and dramatic and true", they'll take his word for it. After all, there's no NASCAR, wrestling, naked titties, or fart jokes; so Lush's target audience won't watch it, anyway.

So..., the movie showed, and where were the all the Clinton attacks (and by association, DEM attacks) that the RW had prepared? The RW had built this up as a huge event, and then..... nothing. No sizzle, just fizzle.

Because WE WON! They were planning for this to help in their propaganda campaign, but we were able to completely neutralize it WITH FACTS. In this case, no news is good news.

Now, as for Boston Legal, it is a very LIBERAL show. C'mon, the main character (Shatner) is very RW, but he's very eccentric and is a self proclaimed victim of "Mad Cow" disease. He's funny, he's amusing, he's endearing, but everybody knows better than to take him seriously. His best friend, who is also the most powerful and sympathetic character in the show, is a flaming Liberal whose courtroom speeches often are speeches I would love to hear on the floor of Congress. We need to do everything we can to support this show and it's message.

Even if you are boycotting ABC, still watch BL.

When the "powers that be" at ABC see that all other programs are losing viewership, but this one show is actually GAINING viewership, they are going to take a second look at the show and question "why is this show gaining when every other show is losing?"

Therefore, continue to boycott ABC shows - EXCEPT for BL and shows like it. Let them know that we will watch their programs, if they are intelligent and honest, like Boston Legal.

[texpatriot2004]

1. Good point about Boston Legal's content nm

[thepurpose]

2. I will be watching.

[Dinger]

3. Interesting Argument, But I'm Done With ABC Till Bill & Co.Take It Over -

My fire is still hot :mad:

[tbyg52]

4. Yes! A good excuse to watch Boston Legal!

It would be really cool if BL went up in the ratings and all their other shows went down.

[johnaries]

11. Uh, thank you, and also, huh?

You shouldn't have to look for an "excuse" to watch BL. Sometimes, the most beautiful flowers grow out of bullshit.

Let's get past "guilt by association" - that's a Rovian technique. We judge a flower by it's own merits, not by it's associations. At least, I thought we did...

[tbyg52]

21. I don't completely agree

We also judge people by the company they keep, with good reason. I'm not saying that's the only way to make judgements, but it's a factor.

I'm trying to think how to phrase my next statement.....

Ah, here it is:

OK, if replacing "excuse" with "reason" would be more pleasing, I don't have any strong objection to that. But I must admit the word "should" usually gets my back up. ;)

[johnaries]

37. It is WRONG to judge people by the "company they keep".

Hello! "Guilt by association"? Remember, even Jesus's desciples admonished him for "associating with the wrong people" What was his reply? Well, of course I'm hanging out with sinners, these are the people I'm trying to reach.

Judging people by the company they keep is still judging people.

Stop it!

[tbyg52]

50. Of course people are not judged 100% by the company they keep,

any more than by any other single factor.

But I *am* going to look at individual people (not groups) and draw my own conclusions about each one, based on the factors I can observe, which *does* include who they hang out with, as one of a number of factors. Of *course* one factor could override or cancel out another. I am not simpleminded; at least I sincerely try not to be.

Anyone who knows me knows that I do not prejudge people, but I do observe. The alternative is to be like a fairly small child and accept people based on what they *tell* you, rather than on what you observe them to do. (I belive that to be a lot of the reason for the vestige of support that Bush retains--oh, and I sure *do* judge *him* and his cabal by the company they keep!)

I am not sure quite how we got off on this tangent from my making a lighthearted (as least it was so indended) remark about watching Boston Legal.

I do not wish to continue this conversation, and will not reply to anything further.

With regard to your "Stop it!" and your "Hello!":

Apparently tact, which I was attempting in my previous post, has not worked, so I will flatly state:

Hello! Stop it! (And I quote.) Stop speaking to me in this manner, stop telling me what to do, and stop prejudging *me*.

I feel I am being addressed as a child. It appears to be your opinion that I did something to bring it on. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to disagree and terminate an unpleasant conversation.

[MasonJar]

5. I appreciate your message, but there is no way I will watch ABC

again.

[johnaries]

7. I understand your sentiment, but you will be denying yourself

if you don't watch Boston Legal. Remember that MSNBC was leaning more and more towards Fox News "philosophies", until Keith Olbermann came along.

Boston Legal is ABC's Olbermann. It's an excellent show. If we show ABC that we prefer excellence over pablum, they will wake up.

Remember, our job is not to "alienate" - that is what the RW is for. Our job is to illuminate and embrace.

[Individualist]

28. Nor will I

No ABC, no Disney, no supporting their sponsors.

[Mend]

6. not me....a boycott is a boycott, no exceptions. eom

[AtomicKitten]

9. I agree.

no exceptions

[johnaries]

15. Then you are are undermining the boycott. Period.

The purpose of a boycott is to affect change.

Did you ever have a pet?

When the pet does something "bad", you punish the pet. That's only HALF the lesson.

When the pet does something good, you PRAISE the pet. Then the pet understands what you expect.

Punishment for bad behavior without praise for good behavior creates a psychotic entity.. pet, child, TV network.

PT9/11- bad. Low ratings and negative emails. Boston Legal - good. High ratings, positive emails.

If you don't understand these basics, then you don't understand how boycotts work. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[Mend]

19. I learned to boycott from Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King,

not you. Go read up on the Montgomery bus boycott when African-Americans stayed off all buses, in all weather, for all reasons for over a year. You couldn't even make it for a week and that sucks.

[AtomicKitten]

31. again -- right-on

A boycott is to abstain from using, buying, or dealing with someone or some organization as an expression of protest or as a means of coercion ... not except for Boston Legal which is a gross rationalization.

[johnaries]

38. Rosa Parks and Reverand MLK would have supported

Boston Legal.

Don't you DARE pull this bullshit. They had POSITIVE messages. They SUPPORTED all efforts to get the message out. Regradless of where the message came from.

"I have a dream". Listen to it. Pay attention.

[johnaries]

41. Oh, and BTW, I lived thru the race wars in Nashville.

I was just talking today during a break to my new trainees about the race riots while I was in Jr. High school, about the cops walking the halls of my school and the weapons they confiscated: sawed-off shotguns, machete's, pistols..., even my best friend had a home-made garrot made from piano wire. I remember hearing a noise outside my classroom and rushing outside to see what was happening, and seeing huge mobs of people clashing together and blood flying.

I don't have to read shit. I lived through it.

So excuse me for being so blunt, but fuck you. Read all you want. I was there, in the middle of it. Both sides were violent. BOTH sides were violent. It was not pretty, and neither side could be portrayed as "taking the high road".

It was nasty. It was violent. Don't let anyone try to "glorify it", it was horrible. Perhaps that was necessary, but having experienced it once I am not anxious to experience it again.

You wouldn't, either. If you had lived through it. It was exhilarating, yes, because we were fighting for what we believed in. But if you had lived through what we lived through, you would do anything you can to make it a little easier.....

[Mend]

45. I lived through it...I can't imagine you thinking I didn't. I also

know a lot about defense mechanisms, and you are using rationalization to defend your behavior. You are pretty angry too, which is very revealing. I was in Chicago in medical school in 1968 and saw enough rioting to last a lifetime but enough of me. Enjoy your "boycott".

[april]

8. No I am going to watch c span this is a true reality show

[highnooner]

12. I love BL!

[SammyWinstonJack]

47. I do too, and I watched last night, and I will continue to watch it.

But then I never said I would boycott ABC.

[Blue Belle]

10. I'll be watching Boston Legal too...

I for one can't wait for another Alan Shore rant. :)

[ComerPerro]

13. Is the liberal guy the dude who played Jackson in Stargate (the move)

James Spader, I think it was?

[HeeBGBz]

16. Yeah, mmmm Spader

I love the chemistry of Spader and Shatner.

[ComerPerro]

20. He was good in Stargate

[HeeBGBz]

14. I refuse to abandon Boston Legal

After they spoke out so eloquently last season. I haven't watched a thing on ABC in weeks, but I won't piss on one the few shows that challenged the rwingers and the powers-that-be last year. I don't believe that the crew of BL have sold out. If this seasons shows prove me wrong, then I'll stay away from them too.

Episode Summary

"Can't We All Get A Lung?" / Season 3 Episode 01
Broadcast: September 19, 2006

Denise and Schmidt defend Daniel Post (Michael J. Fox) after he’s arrested for trying to buy a lung. Meanwhile, Shore reunites passionately with Marlene (Parker Posey) and defends his pal, Jerry “Hands” Espenson (played by Emmy Award winner Christian Clemenson), after he’s caught driving in the carpool lane with a life-sized sex doll.

[Raine]

17. I don't watch BL but

I will be watching Lost & Greys' Anatomy when they start the new season, I'll boycott the sponsors. If you're not a Neilson Family they don't care if you don't watch or not, it's with the sponsors you can hit them.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

18. I said in another thread that we should "center" our efforts on something

a bit more specific. Boycott ABC News. Boycott Disney. Boycott the sponsers. Boycott the major shareholders. I personally am boycotting ABC EXCEPT for BOston Legal because it is a show that regularly beats up on the Admin.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

22. I don't think we should boycott BLegal - it's one of the bravest shows.

Personally, I am boycotting everything EXCEPT Boston Legal because they have been one of the bravest shows on tv. Every week they have at least one case that is absolutely devastating to BushCo - and the hero James Spader is a rock solid outspoken liberal. Candace Bergin is also a good liberal and her character often takes potshots at BushCo. It would be a crime if that show were to go off the air.

Whoever writes that show is a hero and Candace Bergin is also a hero to me.

[johnaries]

25. Amen! And I'm a Taoist (aka atheist according to fundies..). nt

[Catshrink]

23. No ABC for me, except for Boston Legal.

Shatner is such a buffoon and Spader is such a flaming liberal I can't bear to miss the show. I loved the episode when Shattner shot the fish. Seriously, Allan's liberal closing arguments are well worth watching.

[johnaries]

24. If you boycott Boston Legal, you are boycotting Liberals.

I've seen several posts on this thread saying "a boycott is a boycott, period" That's RW thinking. We, as progressives, boycott only the things that hurt humanity. We support anything that helps humanity, whatever it's source. We do this to encourage others to support actions to help humanity. If we boycott them "no matter what", we are no better than the inhuman scum that we claim to oppose.

I know, we're all pissed off because "they don't play fair", but we know they don't play fair. But let's make sure we don't lower ourselves to their level, or else we are no better than they are. Which means, we could become them.

If you insist on a "general boycott" just for the sake of a boycott - you're one of "them". We don't need you. Go away. You are hurting the rest of us who are working for real change. You need to question your motivations. You are not trying to effect change, you just like being rebellious. We need people who are committed to the Constitution, because it's in serious trouble.

So don't give me this stupid shit about boycotting all ABC shows. If you are serious about effecting change, support the shows that support freedom of speech. You can boycott all the rest. If you boycott all shows, even the ones that support your own point of view, no one will take you seriously.

Boycotting is only half of the equation. Support is the other half.

And support is actually much more effective than boycott. It's not as obvious, and doesn't make headlines as often, but in reality it is much more effective.

[Wally101]

42. Question for boycotters....

A boycott is only successful if you actually are trying to effect a change. I haven't heard much of what people are expecting ABC to do to stop people boycotting them. What are your demands?


Mark

[aquart]

26. They skinted two minutes of BL to give to DWTS.

I don't want to watch any of DWTS and I'm offended by this nonsense.

They have a truly nasty habit of letting shows run over without notice. Lost frequently runs 62 or 63 minutes, so if you aren't taping the following show, you miss the cliffhanger ending. Another sleazy tactic from dear old ABC.

[johnaries]

27. OK, it just started, and if you saw it....

this is the best writing and direction on TV!

We must encourage this. This is what TV should be. Even if it is on "shudder" ABC.

Encourage what is right, discourage what is wrong.

[johnaries]

29. Shirley Doll!!! LOL! OK, I'll admit

I wouldn't mind having a Shirley doll. But did you notice how he pulled the Freudian "pulling up her collar"?

Classic.

[johnaries]

30. Alan just begged a sexual surrogate to come out of retirement

to help his client.
C'mon, how Liberal can you get? I hope ABC crashes and burns, but this show has to continue....

[philly_bob]

32. BL highlights the bankruptcy of ABC/Disney schedule

But interesting... ever since ABC/Disney ran Path to 911 I've been watching the ABC schedule -- and boy is it weak. Boston Legal is the first show I've broken the boycott for -- the first one I've wanted.

[HeeBGBz]

33. Government interference on what we do with our bodies

And fighting the morality police on busting the sexual surrogate for prostitution.

Pretty good start.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

34. They slapped that bushbot good!!!

n/t

[Dem2theMax]

35. But I don't get ABC on my TV anymore.

Or ESPN, or the ABC Family Channel, or SoapNet or ......

[Imagevision]

36. I don't believe P2-9-11 helped GOP in anyway, just the opposite

especially the last 15 minutes!!

[fishwax]

39. I never could get into Boston Legal

Something about the show bugs me. But I've no doubt it's a liberal show, so I say go on and enjoy it. :toast:

[peekaloo]

40. Alan Shore poked fun at his "redeeming" qualities tonight,

as if he were a series regular on TV. :rofl:

I lurve this show.


edit: damn sticky A key.

[sandnsea]

43. It's the only network show I watch

It and Weeds are the only two thoroughly good programs on right now. I'm usually leading the pack on boycotts, but since most folks aren't willing to give up their right wing stock, I'll be damned if I give up Boston Legal. It was another great one tonight.

[Blasphemer]

44. I don't watch BL but...

I will watch other ABC shows. The reality is that most of the creative talent behind network TV are left leaning so I can't really boycott a network wholesale because of the suits in charge. I love Grey's Anatomy and creator and Executive Producer, Shonda Rhimes, is an African American woman. That's too much of a rarity in the entertainment industry for me to just stop supporting her show. I have no problem boycotting sponsors of programming I disagree with but boycotting the entire network is not the right decision for me but I understand and support those who choose to do so.

[semillama]

46. Explain to me how a boycott of a TV channel actually works

I'm not sure I understand how it can be effective as say, the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Can you boycott something in the privacy of your own home? If you aren't a Neilsen family, who would know?

Could you write to the sponsors of ABC and tell them you won't buy their products because of a certain show, but then watch the channel?

Seems to me that this type of boycott doesn't seem effective, if it's not visible or measurable in some way.

As a side note, what if I wrote to MSNBC and said I was boycotting them for putting on shows like Tucker, Scarborough Country, and Hardball - even though Keith Olbermann is also on MSNBC?

[joe_sixpack]

48. We weren't really serious about the boycott,

were we? Did anyone think we were ready to give up "Deperate Housewives"? No need to feel the slightest bit guilty, IMHO.

[helderheid]

49. I couldn't agree more. I was thinking about this last night - hear me out.

I saw Bill Clinton on the Daily Show and he made a point of saying that when people are doing the right thing, he makes a point of praising them (not just condemming them when they are wrong).

I haven't had coffee so I'm not sure if this will make sense or not.

Disney is all about entertainment. When they do that well, I think it's alright to let them know. Now ABC "News" is a joke. So I won't watch it. PT 9/11 was a bunch of BS. I wrote letters, signed petitions, and gave three thumbs down via my TiVo to the show.

Boston Legal often gives a voice to the left that we don't normally have. 3 Big Green Thumbs UP.

[NotGivingUp]

51. yes, i watched it last night, but i wasn't gonna let 'them' know