Something to chuckle about.

You know at least some of these are true for you. If you deny it, you're just a dirty liar.

1. I wish Google Maps had an "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.

2. I keep some people's phone numbers in my phone just so I know not to answer when they call.

3. Lol has gone from meaning, "laugh out loud" to "I have nothing else to say".

4. How many times is it appropriate to say "What?" before you just nod and smile because you still didn't hear what they said?

5. I love the sense of camaraderie when an entire line of cars teams up to prevent a d*ck from cutting in at the front. Stay strong, brothers!

6. There is a great need for sarcasm font.

7. I don't understand the purpose of the line, "I don't need to drink to have fun." Great, no one does. But why start a fire with flint and sticks when they've invented the lighter?

8. Sometimes I'll look down at my watch 3 consecutive times and still not know what time it is..

9. I like all of the music in my iTunes, except when it's on shuffle, then I like about one in every fifteen songs in my iTunes.

10. It should probably be called Unplanned Parenthood.

11. Bad decisions make good stories.

12. More often than not, when someone is telling me a story all I can think about is that I can't wait for them to finish so that I can tell my own story that's not only better, but also more directly involves me.

13. That's enough, Nickelback.

14. I totally take back all those times I didn't want to nap when I was younger.

15. Sometimes, I'll watch a movie that I watched when I was younger and suddenly realize I had no idea what the f*ck was going on when I first saw it.

16. I think everyone has a movie that they love so much, it actually becomes stressful to watch it with other people. I'll end up wasting 90 minutes shiftily glancing around to confirm that everyone's laughing at the right parts, then making sure I laugh just a little bit harder (and a millisecond earlier) to prove that I'm still the only one who really, really gets it.

17. How the hell are you supposed to fold a fitted sheet?

18. I would rather try to carry 10 plastic grocery bags in each hand than take 2 trips to bring my groceries in.

19. I think part of a best friend's job should be to immediately clear your computer history if you die.

20. The only time I look forward to a red light is when I'm trying to finish a text.

21. A recent study has shown that playing beer pong contributes to the spread of mono and the flu. Yeah, if you suck at it.

22. Was learning cursive really necessary?

23. Whenever I'm Facebook stalking someone and I find out that their profile is public I feel like a kid on Christmas morning who just got the Red Ryder BB gun that I always wanted. 546 pictures? Don't mind if I do!

24. Why is it that during an ice-breaker, when the whole room has to go around and say their name and where they are from, I get so incredibly nervous? Like I know my name, I know where I'm from, this shouldn't be a problem....

25. You never know when it will strike, but there comes a moment at work when you've made up your mind that you just aren't doing anything productive for the rest of the day.

26. Can we all just agree to ignore whatever comes after DVDs? I don't want to have to restart my collection.

27. I'm always slightly terrified when I exit out of Word and it asks me if I want to save any changes to my ten page research paper that I swear I did not make any changes to.

28. "Do not machine wash or tumble dry" means I will never wash this ever.

29. I hate being the one with the remote in a room full of people watching TV. There's so much pressure. 'I love this show, but will they judge me if I keep it on? I bet everyone is wishing we weren't watching this. It's only a matter of time before they all get up and leave the room. Will we still be friends after this?'

30. I hate when I just miss a call by the last ring (Hello? Hello? Dammit!), but when I immediately call back, it rings nine times and goes to voicemail. What'd you do after I didn't answer? Drop the phone and run away?

31. When I meet a new guy, I'm terrified of mentioning something he hasn't already told me but that I have learned from some light internet stalking.

32. Why is a school zone 20 mph? That seems like the optimal cruising speed for pedophiles...

33. MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

34. Shirts get dirty. Underwear gets dirty. Pants? Pants never get dirty, and you can wear them forever.

35. I would like to officially coin the phrase 'catching the swine flu' to be used as a way to make fun of a friend for hooking up with an overweight woman. Example: "Dave caught the swine flu last night."

36. I think that if, years down the road when I'm trying to have a kid, I find out that I'm sterile, most of my disappointment will stem from the fact that I was not aware of my condition in college.

37. Even if I knew your social security number, I wouldn't know what do to with it.

38. It really pisses me off when I want to read a story on CNN.com and the link takes me to a video instead of text.

39. I wonder if cops ever get pi$$ed off at the fact that everyone they drive behind obeys the speed limit.

40. I think the freezer deserves a light as well.

41. The other night I ordered takeout, and when I looked in the bag, saw they had included four sets of plastic silverware. In other words, someone at the restaurant packed my order, took a second to think about it, and then estimated that there must be at least four people eating to require such a large amount of food. Too bad I was eating by myself. There's nothing like being made to feel like a fat bastard before dinner.

To smoke, or not to smoke?

"Where do we draw the line between a culture of health and individual choice?" As our nation becomes more and more health concerned, its unclear as to where to draw the line between our personal lives and politics. Government and state policies are cracking down on our habits, one vice at a time. Much like high schools have chosen to eliminate sodas from their premises, so have colleges in banning smoking.365 college campus' have banned the habit to some degree. Many are pleased at this change. Claiming that the second-hand smoke was afflicting their health. Others behind the policies say that they have a greater purpose in mind, their "rationale for going smoke-free [on campus] is a desire to model healthy behavior."

Campus' like the University of Montana have taken measures such as creating "smoke-free buffer zones", that ban smoking within 25-feet of buildings so that entering and exiting students don't have to fight a cloud of smoke. Personally, I've never actually seen such a crippling aura of smoke upon entering a building that i've felt my health was affected, but thats just me. Purdue currently has 30-foot "buffer zones" designated for smoking. They considered enacting a campus wide ban, but due to overwhelming negative input to the proposal, they instead have designated outdoor smoking areas. The University of Michigan plans to enact similar policies, but has a different desire than to just punish offenders. Robert Winfield, the school's chief health officer says that they want to "Encourage people to stop smoking, set a good example for students and make this a healthier community." Now thats a mission.

That fact is, it's hard to kick the habit. Smoking has been a form of social interaction for decades. Specifically with propaganda like this in the early 1900's, the truths about smoking have been quite concealed. In these advertisements doctors even pose with cancer sticks in order to sell their "healthy image".

Smokers arn't taking these new bans with a grain of salt. Pro-nicotine students at the University of Kentucky staged a "smoke-out" to protest the new policy. Their policy even rules out smoking within the confines of ones own car. These bans are much like the ones enacted on the TCC campus' this semester. So far I've heard more grumbles than actual people overjoyed by the new smoke-free campus. In reality the percentage of smokers in Texas is a mere 22%, 1-3.5% less than our neighboring states. Nonetheless Texas is cracking down on this once socially accepted past time. From banning it within city limits, to restaurants and now to colleges, city officials are hoping to "snuff" smokers out.

The black market is going white.

"As many as 10,000 albinos are in hiding in east Africa over fears that they will be dismembered and their body parts sold to witchdoctors, the Red Cross said in a recent report." Scores of albinos are in hiding after attacks in Tanzania and Burundi. The fate of albino people born in Africa is like a double-edged sword. Because of their appearance they are terribly discriminated against and alienated in society. Yet also they are prized as being seen as having special powers because of their skin color. This is in a very literal way like keeping a lucky rabbits foot in one's pocket. In some regions of Africa it is thought that the body parts of albinos will bring good luck and wealth. This may be all well and good, but the people who believe this do not intend to leave the body parts on its owner...Attackers chop off limbs and harvest organs in order to sell them to witchdoctors. Since 2007 over 50 albinos in Tanzania and 14 in Burundi have been killed because of these superstitions.

This is quite the terrible trend. If you are familiar in any way with the "witch" slayings in Nigeria, all sorts of terrible incidents are happening across the globe and quite under the radar. People, even children, are pointlessly being murdered due to the superstitions of witchdoctors. These albino slayings are happening in rural areas where police force is limited, but authorities are doing what they can now that the issue has been brought to their attention. Aid shelters are educating the refugees on proper skin care due to their high risk of skin cancer, and also with finding indoor employment.



"Even before the killings began two years ago, albino people in tropical Africa suffered an array of afflictions that made physical survival a desperate struggle," said Salif Keita, a Malian albino singer and human rights activist. Albinism is a little known aside from its physical attributes. Aside from being a genetic condition that leads to little or no pigment in the eyes, skin and hair, it is also a lifetime battle. There's the constant heightened risk of skin cancer, irregular eye development and even blindness. Not to mention the social implications of often looking completely different from family members.

The good news on this heart-breaking issue is that so far 7 people have been convicted and hanged as a result of illegally murdering and selling Albino body parts. As of right now dozens more are awaiting trial and hopefully will soon be convicted. The Red Cross continues to help aid the thousands that have made their way to the shelters that have been set up in both countries. Hopefully now that this issue is out in the open, more people will be able to saved from this dangerous trend.

I may be a leo, but you, you're a lurker.

With the explosion of technology came Facebook; the substitute [or compliment] to real social interaction. Undeniably this force has sparked quite the blossoming social society. Much like real life, the friends we collect along our social networks can be categorically placed into groups. We've got the "overly excited Christmas card senders", the "I heard from a friend who heard from a friend who talked to your mother that you go your wisdom teeth out, get well soon" people, "I just had a baby isn't it so cute??? when its actually not but I'm still going to spam your mailbox with postcards of my kid" people and so on. Bloggers like Brandon Griggs have noticed that just like we categorize the people around us, our Facebook friends can also be judged simply by the content of their status'. In his article The 12 most annoying Facebookers he dichotomizes all those people you know you're friends with.


Here's a simple run down:
1.The Let-Me-Tell-You-Every-Detail-of-My-Day Bore.
2. The Self-Promoter.
3. The Friend-Padder.
4. The Town Crier.
5. The TMIer.
6. The Sympathy-Baiter.
7. The Lurker.
8. The Crank.
9. The Paparazzo.
10 The Obscurist.
10.The Chronic Inviter.

[// Pic irrelevant - It's Paris Hilton, a purse dog and a surfboard]

But what happens to those friends who don't mold to this list of common status offenders? They can't just be absorbed into the abyss of Facebook status obscurity. Their nonsensical updating must be categorized! This may be my ADD/OCD speaking for me, but there seems to be a few more categories in which to place these friends in.
From my observations to you:

The overactive status liker- You've seen these people. Similar to simple Facebook lurkers, these are the friends who go around and randomly "like" the status' of others. No comment, no conversation, often times its not even relevant for them to "like" the status that they have chosen to "like"...making it in turn even more unwelcome. To obtain this title it has to be a habitual action. Liking not just one status, but every single one in a non discretionary manner.... 27 times over. "[so & so] had a great night last night!" <---insert creeper "like" here. Whaaat? That makes no sense.

The Party Posse- These are the self proclaimed party invite crew. Facebook status' were made to advertise what bangin' party they're planning on hitting that night, for these folks. With these people, you never know what their lives are like between the hours of 9am-5pm, but once the evening rolls around, let the parties begin! "AWWWYAAAA there's a party toNIIIIGHt"...."Gonna get crunkkk at *** tonight!! Yeaaaaa" [actual status']. Because the world actually wants to know all the parties you can fit into a weekend.

The Lyricists - These are my kind of people. Instead of posting the monotony of one's day, why not post a tiny tidbit of an insightful song? They often speak for themselves in summing up your day, for if you feel the need to post some lyrics, you must be feeling it at the time. I find this a creative outlook for status expression. "Leave the epic poem on its yellow page."...."There is no hope to lose or heart to give, saying I'm out of mind and always on yours<3" [actual status']

The fountains of mysterious wisdom - This speaks for itself. It's alllll those friends who post the most random nonsense. Not quite obscure, but certainly not sane either. "It's like my heart is trying to hug my brain!"...."I don't cut it or curve it, I slang it and serve it" [actual status']


Remember kiddies, "Facebook is a great tool -- and a reminder of why some people get on your nerves." If you can't think of anyone, YOU are that annoying person for one reason or another.

Those who share, care.

If you have immersed yourself to any degree in the world of music, you undoubtedly have your own personal collection on your computer. With the exponential explosion of the ipod onto the music scene, everyone has an Itunes library these days. Here you can hoard music to your hearts content by obtaining tunes through many a fashion. You can take the commercial route and hand over 99 cents a song [$1.29 for Top-chart songs and those deemed popular], or you can venture down the road of file-sharing. If you're not familiar, you've really been missing out. Through torrenting and other Peer-to-peer sharing outlets you can obtain just about anything you could ever imagine with the click of a button. There is continuing controversy over the validity of "sharing" music files, yet this outlet is growing in popularity. And frankly the truth is, those considered "Illegal downloaders" Buy more music. I've seen it first hand. "People who are music superfans do more of everything to do with music: they see more live shows, listen to more radio, buy more CDs, buy more botlegs of live shows, buy more t-shirts, talk about music more, do more downloading -- all of it." Nix the radio part, I don't necessarily find that relevant. But as for the rest of that quote, I find this conclusion entirely true. True lovers and devotees of music often lend just as much of their money to what they feel passionate about, as they devote to being under the influence of the tunes themselves. "The people who file-share are the ones who are interested in music," said Mark Mulligan of Forrester Research. "They use file-sharing as a discovery mechanism." This is exactly what it is. It is a risk free way to trial music, which can later evolve into a avid following of musicians and artists.

Countries such as Australia have already taken actions against illegal downloading by restricting those who offend the policies of their internet access. But does this actually benefit the music industry? Having family from Australia, I know what a separated world its like living in this country. Everything is delayed, more expensive and very VERY different. Hard copy CDs can be exponentially more. If you can't download music to trial it [or even pay for the music and download it online], how informed is one going to be in the music world? How can you then go to concerts? Buy merch? How often do people blindly buy CDs without first hearing the music? The percentage is small.

There has been some talk of America adopting similar policies regarding this file-sharing phenomenon. This would never get far. At least it shouldn't. Music downloading is a frontier of discovery and without it, the music industry would not flourish as it does today.

I'll have a double cheeseburger and hold the lettuce?

This is the start of the infamous "McDonalds drive-thru rap" on youtube. Maybe you've seen it, maybe you haven't. I personally had never heard this quite interesting rap until my little brother was shouting it into his phone [ I later found out he was leaving a lovely voicemail for a friend]. He's 13 and he loves it. Thinks its the most hilarious thing he's ever heard and many a time I've heard, "When I can drive, I am so going to do this!" Alriiiiight. Way to go little bro. Let's end up like these kids who did it and wound up getting a ticket:
Teens cited for burger ‘rap' in drive-thru. And in case you're interested here's the video :

McDonalds drive-thru rap

Really, I see this as a case of "Disgruntled Minimum Wage Employee Syndrome". If kids want to rap their order, go for it. At least they're super-sizing their order, sheesh. No need to go all commander McDonalds manager on them and call the cops. Using his powers of authority, he took down the license plates of the offenders and proceeded to escalate the issue into a monumental offense. Local authorities then tracked the meddlesome children and "gave all four teens the equivalent of a speeding ticket on the charge of disorderly conduct for disrupting business." Kids are kids. They come up with stupid raps and spout them in public. The teens claimed no one was in line and that their performance wasnt disrupting anyone. Only in American Fork, Utah would this be an issue. Statements to police from employees said that the "workers felt threatened". "It was basically harmless," one of the teen's mother said. "It wasn't interfering with anything, and it's just hard to believe a ticket would be issued for that." Here in the great nation that is America, you can get a ticket for just about anything. Jaywalking,
possessing silly string between the October 31st and november 1st on Michigan streets, and if you're in good 'ol Texas you can't shoot at a Native American from a trolley car. Only in America folks.

What part of our public school system is failing those children deemed mentally ill?

While browsing in the local category of The Dallas Morning News online, I came across the story of a young boy failing to adjust to society. Not just any teenager having trouble fitting in, but a Hurricane Katrina refugee living with his mother in the Texas town of Tyler. What drew my eye was this headline:
Student held in Tyler teacher's stabbing had long history of mental illness.
Upon further reading, I found out this boy had:
A) A diagnosis of schizophrenia, psychotic episodes and probable mental retardation.
B) A track record of being in mental hospitals in Texas and Louisiana.
C) A past stay in a Smith County juvenile lockup and then in a Texas juvenile prison for stabbing his sister.
D) Family history of mental illness, namely his uncle who brutally murdered his grandma.
and most importantly a discharge from TYC, the Texas Youth Commission, for being more of a burden than they could handle.

Now what is a mother left to do? Home with a son with a disturbed mental state, in addition to trying to support 3 other kids in a single parent household, she has no other option but to put her troubled kid into the public school system. According to state laws, every kid must be accepted into the system, no matter the needs the child has. Here he could not properly be handled as any other special needs student. He had violent tendencies and even had trouble walking in the hallway with other students. It was in this public school, Tyler High, where he fatally stabbed his teacher Todd Henry. Who is to blame here? The Texas Youth Commission for dismissing him when he was not suitable to be dismissed, or the mother for putting him in school? Mind you, his mother had taken him to many a psychiatric hospital and gotten the same diagnosis. Her child was too unstable for them to handle. Then theres the state law that kids must be in school. Therefore, I see her as left with no choice but to enroll her child in high school, despite his dark past. Byron's court-appointed lawyer, James Huggler even said that he was "Absolutely amazed that he was released from TYC, given his mental state and the fact that he was apparently kept in isolation with no effective treatment and no effective after-care program for his return home". He insisted that treatment is what his client needs rather than punishment. I'm thinking Huggler might be right here. His past hospital stays and reformative juevenial center sentences were less than effective. For future cases, troubled teens like Byron need to be properly accounted for in the public school system. Its a tragic instance that a teacher was killed before this was realized.

Are Journalism ethics dead?

I would say for the most part journalists adhere to the "Code of Ethics" in which their job entails. They set out to gather the news and portray their findings in an honest and sincere fashion. But as in every occupation, there are those radicals that misrepresent all of those in their field. The journalists who go for the "shock factor" of news rather than what is honest and fair and ethically correct. These here, are the exceptions. Yet on the other hand, every day thousands of journalists adhere to the code of ethics and portray news as how they traditionally set out to do so.

Newspapers and broadcast media have their standards. What they can and can't say on air, what they ethically or morally should or shouldn't say. But sources like twitter and blogging are in a league all of their own. The writers behind these sources are not held to any moral light; they can write and represent their information in any way they choose. Their bias can saturate every inch of what they write. This is their private writings that they can share with the world as they please. They are not employed to comment on events, so therefore private citizens can blog how they choose to. They are not obligated to "Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error." Many times this can be blatantly obvious. Just are we studied in class, many people obtain their information through the Two-step flow model. Peers are a major source of news information. When we depend so heavily on others for our current events, there is eventually going to lapses in truth. Every once in awhile I stumble upon someone's twitter, and they frankly have no idea what they're talking about. People like this spout off information that they've heard without bothering to check their sources. Who needs to? Blogs and twitters are like the opinion columns of a newspaper. But certainly much less refined and polished.

Newspaper journalist are held to this Code of Ethics, while those not employed to write are not. Twitters, blogs and the infinite other sources in which a private citizen can write, are wildly opinionated and informal sources of information. They do not follow under the lines of traditional journalism regulations.

Let's be controversial, Pro-lifers.

For all the death that goes on in the world, there are those that can be prevented. That is the aborting of the those not yet considered citizens. For every argument there is known to be a definite right and a definite wrong. Or at least very strong an avid supporters on both sides. One side so blatantly hideous and on the reciprocal something seen as near Godliness. I'm not here to determine where this action falls on the line morality. I can only state my opinion from my few years of life experience and observation.

I find this stifling of human life a terrible thing. I do. The life was created and therefore has the right to develop fully and live. That's how I feel. But here comes the complicated thoughts I have that get caught in the crosshairs. What about the US Declaration of Independence? You might say to yourself, what does this have to do with abortion? Here amongst the inalienable rights given to each and every individual, the Declaration states that we each have the right to "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Right there in the beginning. Let me focus on the right to the pursuit of happiness. There are those out there who frankly do not deserve to have a baby. Specifically those people who see a child as a social accessory, a monthly child-support check or a welfare hand-out. Selfishness such as this is quite saddening. These babies deserve to have a life in "pursuit of happiness". With a life in any one of these situations, these kids have a doomed existence as a burden for a nanny or a daycare facility. This doesn't even take into count the thousands who didn't want a baby to begin with. How much worse it would be to be born into a home in which you were both unwanted, and neglected. Not just in a physical way. The law requires you at least have to feed and shelter the kid. But where's the law that there must also be love? There's not one. This is no life to have. I see no happiness here. And if this trend should continue, the baby will then grow into a neglected teenager. A kid without a loving home and a future to be fated with internal trouble. Maybe I'm being overdramatic, but I've seen it happen.


I find the idea of murdering a baby that looks like a baby, repulsive. Therefore my approval of abortion is approved only at a very, very early stage. Within the week of conception is the only point with which i agree with it, where no cutting is involved. This covers a Friday night lapse in judgement, simple stupidity on the part of an irresponsible person, and rape. This is the only point in which I will mention these instances. I think the bottom line is that if you cannot physically care for a child or simply you do not want one, you can't properly give it the care it needs; violating it's rights as a person. There are those out there who just want to "let the babies live". Let them live? Sure, by outlawing abortion you will let these babies "live". But will they really? They can grow up in their drug-addicted parents homes. They can live their childhood in a room with other toddlers in daycare. They can come home every day from school to an lonely, empty house while their parents work. They can live their lives each and every day knowing they are a burden. A mistake. A friday night mess up. Those out there picketing their signs and yelling their insults, maybe they were an almost abortion. When legally allowing abortion, you'd be hard pressed to enforce a discretionary law as to who and who cannot have one. Maybe some actually should, while others should follow through. But who should say?
For the cause, let's outlaw stupidity as well. Many people would be offended, but I say we go for it. It might stop the need to have abortions in the first place.

We'll tax your beer, we'll tax your sin.

Move over parents, big brother is stepping in again. First they will deem what is "pleasurable", what is "sin" and then they'll tax these guilty pleasures in an attempt to initiate change. In the article "Obama says higher taxes on soft drinks should be explored", I found this new proposition another alarming attempt at the government sticking its unwanted foot further into our homes. First it was alcohol, then cigarettes, now sodas? "I actually think it’s an idea that we should be exploring," President Barack Obama said in an interview with Men’s Health magazine. For the record here, sodas have already been removed from schools in an attempt to "thin-out" the student population. Instead they've been replaced by diet alternatives and juices that may boast quite similar sugar content. But that is beside the point, in this article the idea has been proposed to actually up the cost of this item deemed as a "luxury". We'll pay for our "pleasures" through our pocketbooks it seems. I say we question these so-called "sin taxes". These are generally put on items that could "cause harm to people, such as alcohol or tobacco, and are geared to increase tax revenue and cause a slowdown in consumption"(Tinsley). But is this what they're actually doing? Are they slowing down consumption? Are these taxes succeeding in their purpose? And yet again this year the Senate Finance committee has proposed up-ing taxes yet again on on beer, wine and hard liquor. Really what needs to be said here, is that people will buy what they want to buy regardless. Niccotine addicts will buy their tobacco. Drinkers will buy their alcohol. Kids will guzzle their sodas. Who hurts here? I say the citizens do. The lower income families especially. "A tax on juice drinks and soda would further squeeze hardworking families already struggling to pay their bills and keep their health coverage...there could not be a worse time to ask them to pay more for the simple pleasures they enjoy," said Susan Neely, president of the American Beverage Association. This hardly seems fair.

If these politicians are so concerned with the health and future of today's youth, why have physical education program requirements been cut? These same lawmakers have removed the requirement that students must have health education courses before they can graduate. That's why this soda tax was propositioned in the first place; to benefit the youth. Obesity may be on the rise, but in my eyes the way to combat this is through education. Higher taxes are a burden, especially when the money is then spent foolishly on more government programs full of inadequacy. "We all want to improve healthcare, but taxes don’t make anyone healthy." That's the bottom line here.

Music that makes you dumb.

Today, I read a pretty intriguing article on the correlation between people's music tastes and their intelligence. Perhaps not as much intelligence, but their test taking skills as judged by the SAT, juxtaposed with their corresponding band preferences. In "Music vs. Intelligence" I found it funny how routinely certain genres appeared to fall at the base of this chart. Popular music artists that fell under the genres of "HIp hop" and "R&B" commonly fell at the bottom. Despite the chart included in this article, the author fails to make an undermining conclusion to these findings. With this presented information, one must ponder much like the chicken and the egg debate. Is it our intelligence that drives our choice in music? Or is our intelligence already determined, thus music is the varying factor that raises or lowers this standard?

I have reason to believe that both sides of this debate may have valid standing in their arguments. Much like newspapers today, which are written on the level as to be comprehendible by as young as 7th graders, mass radio is dumbed down to a very basic level. As a self-proclaimed connoisseur of all things music, I find the depth of these widely regurgitated "Top Hits" sickening. The lyrics fall flat. Overall their subject matter is animalistic and appealing to very basics of the human psyche. Talking about "getting wasted", "booties", "chicks" and "getting some" and you'll be covering all the bases of what people want in music. Not quite. Looking at this music from a stylistic stand point, simply the subject matter, the template is simple. The message is one sided. The beat may be "sick", but the lyrics have no more depth than Paris Hilton. Metaphors are limited to "lollipops" and "egos". Voices are reduced to synthesized substitutes for talent. I'm just using some simple deductive reasoning here, but dumbed down music = a dumbed down bunch of people.

Now before you go getting all offended, let's take on this argument from the opposite side. Those of the population who have been deemed "above average" and/or "intelligent" by means of SAT scores, let's say they're disgusted with the current state of the radio medium. Their "intelligence" has turned their interests into a direction of less trodden music territory. They have made the decision to turn to music with more depth. The kind that intrigues them, perks their interest with lyrics that speak to them. Did the music make them smarter? Gee, they haven't even listened to it yet. They just knew they wanted something different. This perhaps gives kudos to the theorists who believe that intelligence deems music choice. On the other hand, this might aggitate those mothers who feel "fill-in-the-blank" music stunted their child's intellectual growth. Thus meaning their chid was just always on that intelligence level to begin with. Hmph. What a debate we have.

Perhaps I lean towards the side of those who believe that based on your innate intelligence level, you choose your music. It is not the music that chooses you, or the music that makes you "dumb or smart" as the article suggests. Undeniably music is powerful. It speaks to the listener. It suggests lifestyles and I may even go as far and say it unconsciously influences us. As a people we are drawn to the things that most intrigue us and music is no different. Music should challenge us, change us, and speak to us in ways words solely cannot do. It is an undeniable and inescapable force that is everywhere. It shapes us emotionally, so it is no wonder we question its affect on us intellectually.