Fifteen-year-old Miley Cyrus and her Disney bosses are “shocked, shocked” to see the latest issue of Vanity Fair.
“I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be 'artistic' and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed,” Cyrus said in a statement. "I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about."
First of all, Miley, it’s whom. Don’t be a fool, stay in school.
And does she really expect us to believe she didn’t get contractual pre-approval of the shoot before it went to press and saw it too late to have it changed? And what exactly was she thinking when photographer Annie Lebovitz told her to take off her shirt and hold a sheet against herself in a faux postcoital pose? And her father and entourage just happened to be out of the room when that happened? And she never mentioned it to them?
Just exactly how dumb do they think the American people are?
If you’re worried about her future, take heart. Just as Jamie Lyn Spears’ pregnancy won’t hurt her relationship with Nickelodeon one bit, neither will this Vanity Fair flap hurt Miley. In both cases the companies are “shocked” and “disappointed” all the way to the bank. Both “Zoe 101” and “Hannah Montana” will pick up tens of thousands more adolescent male viewers, more merchandise will be sold, the sponsors will get more business and everyone wins, even the newspapers who proclaim their righteous indignation even while plastering the "offensive" photo all over their page and Web sites. Meanwhile, both girls are providing for their future by beginning the transition from child star to grown up (I hesitate to say adult) stars.
If this all seems familiar, maybe it’s because not so long ago teen star Vanessa Hudgens of “High School Musical” fame, another Disney employee, turned up in her own, more explicit pictures. (At least in her case she was of legal age.) Again, we are asked to believe the actress had no idea how those pictures wound up on the Internet.
If you want to blame anyone, blame Jessica Biel, the likely trailblazer in all this. About a decade ago, she was a star of the WB’s family- friendly drama “Seventh Heaven,” playing the daughter of a minister. Then she found her way into the pages of a men’s magazine, and was fired by producer Aaron Spelling. No skin off Biel’s back. She’s now a major movie star, appearing in top-grossing films like "Stealth" and "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" as well as the upcoming "Nailed." Needless to say, she's no longer playing preacher’s daughters. Heard from any of her demure costars lately?
As long as sex means big money for American corporations, get used to seeing fewer boundaries on both.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
“Your MetroCard Is Now Worth $5.50”
Good For 2 3/4 Rides
Riding the subway lately seems like going out to dinner with one of those jerks who divides the check so precisely he asks you for $17.46, and that’s only because you can’t split a cent in half.
The profligate MTA, whose wasteful ways and duplicitous bookkeeping have been chronicled in numerous audits, gave in to pressure not to raise the fare with a backdoor increase on the backs of riders of moderate frequency. Instead of a $2.00 bonus for every ten rides purchased, the bonus is now $1.50. Too bad that’s not enough for a full ride. So after exhausting the ten rides, a rider then faces the choice of adding 50 cents for the last ride or buying another ten rides and winding up with a $3.00 bonus (good for one and a half rides, except there are no half-rides). Only on a $40 purchase do you end up with an even bonus good for three rides. The MTA is obviously pushing for a front-loading boost by pushing the high-priced card, and also banking on a stall float for the rest. Many of those who buy the smaller cards will simply carry around that surplus for days, weeks or months before paying to even it out. In some cases people will be frustrated, lazy or forgetful enough to toss away the card with the surplus, giving the MTA a free gift and getting nothing in return. Call it a de facto transit tax.
If only the MTA put as much effort into cutting spending and streamlining the system as they do figuring out clever, penny pinching schemes.
Riding the subway lately seems like going out to dinner with one of those jerks who divides the check so precisely he asks you for $17.46, and that’s only because you can’t split a cent in half.
The profligate MTA, whose wasteful ways and duplicitous bookkeeping have been chronicled in numerous audits, gave in to pressure not to raise the fare with a backdoor increase on the backs of riders of moderate frequency. Instead of a $2.00 bonus for every ten rides purchased, the bonus is now $1.50. Too bad that’s not enough for a full ride. So after exhausting the ten rides, a rider then faces the choice of adding 50 cents for the last ride or buying another ten rides and winding up with a $3.00 bonus (good for one and a half rides, except there are no half-rides). Only on a $40 purchase do you end up with an even bonus good for three rides. The MTA is obviously pushing for a front-loading boost by pushing the high-priced card, and also banking on a stall float for the rest. Many of those who buy the smaller cards will simply carry around that surplus for days, weeks or months before paying to even it out. In some cases people will be frustrated, lazy or forgetful enough to toss away the card with the surplus, giving the MTA a free gift and getting nothing in return. Call it a de facto transit tax.
If only the MTA put as much effort into cutting spending and streamlining the system as they do figuring out clever, penny pinching schemes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)