Mirador 3/12/10 Opinion 9

Don’t Endanger Your Friends’ Lives by Texting in Cars

Award Shows Swap Merit for ConnectionsMirador explores the strengths and weaknesses of the ubiquity of media awards showsby Craig Dathe

With each new year arrives a fresh batch of awards shows. Nonprofit appreciative organizations from many sectors of the entertainment industry put on high-budget televised ceremonies, to entertain us and distribute hardware to the artists that they believe deserve recognition.

Sounds easy, right? Get a bunch of experts from each industry, get them to vote on what they think is the best of the year, and give the winners little statuettes for a job well done. But the awards show game isn’t as simple as all that.

Let’s take the Oscars as an example. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is comprised of members from the major players in the film industry. Accordingly, the films that get nominated typically have big-name actors in them and a boatload or two of money from major studios put into them. No matter how well that favorite indie flick of yours was written, if no one’s heard of the director or the leading actors, then the Academy doesn’t care.

Also distressing is how the Academy’s influence shapes popular opinion of certain genres. Ever noticed how comedy, animation, horror, and western-themed movies never get the same respect on Oscar night as your average Clooney-fest? It’s not because the comedy and horror folks don’t make quality films: it’s only that the ubiquity of the Academy in popular opinion leaves these genres marginalized.

In fitting fashion, William Friedkin, an Oscar-winning director and producer, describes the Academy Awards as “the greatest promotion scheme that any industry has ever devised for itself.”

The same goes for the Grammys. Major-label music executives run the show, so you hardly ever find an award given to an artist without radio time. The Emmys are no different; the corporate monopoly is just more submerged. Behemoth television companies like ABC and NBC own the airwaves. They decide what shows you watch, and thereby decide what shows have a chance at getting called up to the podium.

Somewhere a screenwriter is living in his landlady’s

closet, crying himself to sleep every night, because he’s written the funniest sitcom since Seinfeld but doesn’t have the connections to get an interview with Warner Bros.

Many entertainment experts have such criticisms for their industry. Kari Olmon, a theater critic for Curtain Up and Broadway World, holds her industry’s Tony awards in a less-than-reputable light.

“They’re an enjoyable spectacle, but most serious theatergoers consider them to be completely devoid of substance,” Olmon says. “The Tonys are definitely a promotion vehicle for producers, and producers invest a good deal in the publicity and PR that the Tonys accord them. So yeah, the awards are a way for producers to give their shows exposure because theater is a marginalized art form and the caption ‘Tony Award Winner!’ looks good in the New York Times ads.

As you can see, Olmon doesn’t save any nice words for the Tonys. Hers is a complaint that all awards shows receive, from the Oscars to the Grammys. Granted, I don’t have any real complaints for the televised ceremonies themselves. It’s Hollywood entertainment, and no more sinful than the Superbowl or The Bachelor. If you’re expecting edgy art-house aesthetics in your Emmys show, then you’re going to be very disappointed. But

entertainment value aside, the awards for which these ceremonies are held hardly represent the entire industry.

Olmon puts the matter most succinctly, if not most pessimistically, when describing the Tonys.

“Conclusion: the Tonys have nothing to do with artistic merit and everything to do with money,” said Olmon.

All right, maybe some artistic merit is recognized in these awards shows, and they can be fun to watch, but clubhouses of industry bigwigs should not pose as representatives for the entirety of their industry’s artists if they’re going to ignore 90% of those artists’ output. The Oscars aren’t going to go away, and perhaps they shouldn’t. But the Academy’s word is hardly the last word.

by Grace Hilty

A car full of screaming girls flies down the street singing Lady Gaga with all the windows down. Oh look! The driver’s phone lights up – the text has arrived. What will she do? Follow the law? Debatable.

While some may have the self-restraint to at least wait until a red light, or maybe even the final destination, this driver…not so much. For all she knows, this could be a text concerning life or death (whether or not Yogurt Shack is still open), or possibly an “LOL” response from the cute boy she’s texting.

She’ll pick up the phone with one hand, struggling

to hold the wheel and watch the road while reading and replying to the long awaited text message. She’ll use the “classic” technique entitled “watch the road for three seconds, text for two.” Possibly one or two of the passengers in the car will feel a bit uncomfortable with the driver’s multitasking, but will likely keep quiet.

It seems that new teenage drivers, barely competent behind the wheel at all, let alone with a phone in their hand, would have their minds solely on the road at all times. However, this is not the case.

Most teenagers can barely walk down the hallways and keep a steady conversation going without banging into the occasional pole. Because teenagers lack multi-tasking

abilities, they should be the ones paying the most attention to the road, but statistics show otherwise. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the highest number of fatal accidents in 2009 concerning distracted drivers occurred within the 20-and-younger crowd.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety writes, “Drivers who use handheld devices are four times as likely to get into crashes serious enough to injure themselves.”

Recently, many states put a ban on drive-texting into effect, but the movement is not nation-wide quite yet. Only 23 states published statistics about the dangers of texting while operating a vehicle in the past year, and an

even smaller 19 states have outlawed it altogether. These laws are a step in the right direction, but in the future, they must make their way into every state.

Texting while driving can be placed on the same level as drunken driving in terms of inhibiting a teen’s driving abilities. In 2007, Liberty Mutual Insurance Group conducted a survey in which students from 26 high schools nationwide rated a variety of driving distractions, and text messaging was at the top of the list. Yet even though 37 percent of teens rated text messaging while driving as “extremely” or “very” distracting, they continue to send and receive texts in their moving vehicles anyway.

The most significant problem resulting from drive-texting is that, though illegal, police have a difficult time enforcing the law due to the fact that some teenagers are able to text message while driving without making it obvious to police officers outside of the car. Oftentimes teenagers get away with it because of this. But law-makers aren’t trying to ban teenagers from having freedom or a social life. These laws are in place to protect them from making a life-threatening mistake.

Although the law may not penalize you the next time you text the cute boy back, just don’t do it. It could be your life on the line. So throw the phone to your friends in the back seat and let them read it out loud. (Don’t kid yourself; you would need their help creating a witty reply anyways). Graphic: Don Wright/MCT

Photo: Kevin Sullivan/Orange County Register/MCT

Kathryn Bigelow accepted her Best Director award for “The Hurt Locker” during the 2010 Academy Awards on March 8.