Ignoring China's Olympics

As penance for ignoring Tibet, this member of the International Left proposes ignoring China even more, by not watching the Olympics this summer.

Mrs. Madville Times heard Scott Simon mention on NPR this morning that the Chinese government is pushing perhaps one and a half million people from their homes just to make room for the Olympics. (And we think we have it bad with eminent domain here at the hands of TransCanada and the DM&E!) Simon says that the folks with a vested interest in the Olympics -- the corporate advertisers, the American President counting on China's continued loans to pay for the Iraq War, etc. -- will tell us that such human rights abuses are simply the price of doing business.

So how about this price of doing business: suppose they throw an Olympics and none of us come? Just leave our TVs off, ignore the Olympics and the propaganda from China and the corporations waiting to cash in.

Some will argue that a viewer boycott or any form of boycott would punish the athletes. The sprinters and swimmers and such have sacrificed and trained their whole lives to reach the Olympics -- why deny them Olympic glory because of someone else's political crimes?

Ah, but the games will happen whether the TV is on or not. Even if no one is watching, the athletes will still gather and compete and win their medals. They will know they have proven themselves the best in the world. A TV boycott hits the folks who matter: the Chinese government, who think they can market themselves as a shiny bastion of progress and civilization, and maybe more potently, the corporate sponsors willing to make a profit on the backs of millions of oppressed Chinese and Tibetans. We're just one household... but we might as well start somewhere.

Let the athletes play. We just won't watch. We can use the extra time getting out running, jumping, and playing ourselves... not to mention looking for those "Made in China" labels and putting them back on the shelf.

------
Read more on...

1. China's forced evictions,
2. China's exploitation of migrant labor,
3. China's continued oppression of freedom of religion and thought,
4. China's warm-ups for cracking down on dissidents during the Olympics,
5. and the complicity of American companies in making sure Chinese citizens never read this blog or any other international source of truth.
   

Argus Peddles More Smut!

The leading Sioux Falls newspaper (which would remain nameless if I weren't trying to reach the search engines) must be seeking synergy with one of its major online sponsors, Annabelle's Adult Superstore (i.e., the porn shop). While my wife was scrolling through an Argus Leader online forum on a letter to the editor about transportation for drunk bar patrons, she found an offensive avatar next to one of the posts. (See the forum thread here, but click at your own peril.) The avatar consists of a bare-breasted Betty Boop. We thought maybe some wise-acre hacker had found a way to sneak some porn onto South Dakota's flagship newspaper. But as we read through the post (from an individual of apparently good sense maintaining that people should be responsible enough to get themselves home from the bar in one piece without getting drunk and expecting our tax dollars to provide them with a way home), we found the following postscript:

Do you like my avatar, kids? I found it in the Argus Leader forum gallery. Don't you think my bare breasts are sexy and appropriate for the readers of these forums?? Way to go, Argus!!

Sure enough, when readers register to participate in the forum, the Argus offers a gallery of avatar images, including the Betty Boop and a few other cartoon images of women ill-dressed for South Dakota's winter.

Now I thought my earlier post on the Argus peddling smut might be considered a bit of an exaggeration. The Argus was advertising a porn shop, but at least doing so semi-discreetly. But now here's the Argus posting pornographic images on its own website and encouraging its forum members to use them next to their discussions of the great issues of the day. Now I'm really ready for a boycott. Nobody offers as much South Dakota news as the Argus, but I just don't want pornography coming uninvited into my house (and I won't be issuing any invitations). I don't dare recommend that my fellow teachers or students in my classroom look up articles online in the Argus. I go the Argus for education, not titillation. If the Argus is going to push the latter, I'll have to seek the former somewhere else.

Argus Peddles Smut, Drives Blogger to Irrational Behavior

Four weeks ago, I submitted a complaint to the Argus about its advertising for an "adult superstore" -- i.e., an establishment that sells sex toys and other degrading items. The ads appeared on the same page as regular news stories. I suggested to the Argus that if it couldn't bring itself to pass on the sex store's advertising dollars, the paper could at least restrict the ads to a separate section of its website requiring a login and certification that viewers are adults. The Argus has not responded, not even with a simple, "Thanks for your concern, but our advertising is our business, so tough cookies."

I hate to call for a boycott -- I like reading the Argus, and I have found it to be te best source for substantive online South Dakota news articles. But for what it's worth, I'm going to remove my link to the Argus here, and I will try my best to refrain from referring you, gentle reader, to articles in that paper, at least for a little while... until my desire to fight quixotic battles gives way to the practical need to know what the heck is going on!