Princess Fix IT

There are a couple of things I ran across in the April 12th issue of The Sporting News that got me to thinking and as we all know, that can?t be good.

Item #1

Most major market cities have one Fox Sports cable network, but one is just not enough for spoiled L.A. fans. Enter Fox Sports West2. I have no objections to a multitude of sporting networks to choose from, in fact, I pay dearly for them on a monthly basis, but when the lineup includes Lakers Living Room, I must stand up and object?loudly.

Sure, like any self respecting basketball fan, I despise the Lakers, but that is not the reason behind this particular tirade. My particular line of disgust revolves around the premise of Lakers Living Room, conceived and hosted by Jeannie Buss (AKA owner?s daughter and coach?s main squeeze). Basically, the well developed Buss decided it was a fabulous idea to get player?s wives and the like to sit around and discuss important issues that face the NBA and its players in these modern times. You may ask, dear reader, are these issues related to sex and the professional athlete? Nah. Maybe they touched upon drug use and rising criminal activity among active and retired players? Nope. Well they surely broached the topic of infidelity, child support or the pressures of society on these rich and famous individuals? Not even close. The important issues discussed revolve around how dreamy Luke Walton may or may not be, jewelry on the court and the players? hairstyles. Oh for fuck?s sake! Fine. If you want a show aimed at attracting more women to the world of the NBA, go for it, but why go about it in such a patronizing and ridiculously trite way?

The kicker is while the show is being aired, the parent Fox Sports West network is broadcasting the actual Lakers game, ya know, for fans who are actually interested in the sport of basketball. Brilliant concept, I know. I mean really, who would want to watch the game when they could watch several surgically altered rich bitches sitting around yammering away about hair and cute butts while watching the very game you could be watching without the mindless chatter. I just don?t get it.

Item #2

Anyone that subscribes to a magazine, specifically a sports magazine, has seen the demise of the address label. Some sport magazines used to be sent in plastic, the label affixed to said plastic, preserving the purity of the cover. Others glued labels to the front cover, but they were easily removed without much damage, again, maintaining a possible collectible. Currently, sports magazines have resorted to cutting costs and printing the destination directly onto the cover itself, in a white box that appears to be getting larger with each issue. The way I figure, if you subscribe to a magazine, you are obviously a fan and possibly enjoy collecting or displaying your acquisitions from time to time. So that being said, subscribers should have the advantage, no? Reap the rewards of the loyal customer, right? Well, not exactly. With these new labeling ways, it makes collecting by subscription difficult, aesthetically speaking. OK so maybe there is a cover you prize, so you go out and grab a store copy since your subscription copy is covered with the not so pretty label. That sucks. I?ve conceded to having to do that on occasion to further decorate my walls with sporting studs, but when the magazine companies turn around and market label free magazine covers (that?s right, it isn?t the whole magazine, but just a glossy cover) at the low price of $35 + S&H? I say fuck you.