I've been re-watching Friday Night Lights and one of the story lines deals with an assistant coach saying some comments the Panthers' running back Smash Williams and his belief that black players make better running backs than quarterbacks. Now although he didn't say it exactly like that the reporters who was interviewing him spun it their way to make it seem like he was saying only white players can play quarterback. I know this is a fictional storyline, but it is a good example of the media can spin something to cause a story to become bigger than what it is originally meant to be.

This kind of stuff happens all the time in the media especially with sports. If you watch the episode you see that the coach didn't really mean it in a way to be racist or anything he just didn't articulate what he was trying to say the right way.

This reminded of when Rush Limbaugh said on NFL Sunday Countdown that Donovan McNabb was overrated because the media wanted so badly for a black quarterback to succeed. I understand what he was trying to say, but coming from him and in that forum was not the best way to go about it. There might have been some truth to what he said he just should not have used that forum to bring it up. There was a former player on the show who is black and rebuttled politely even though you could visibly tell he was upset.

My point is that when you talk about race in the media you have to be careful as to how you bring it up. You saw it in a fictional show, Friday Night Lights, and in a live NFL Countdown show. Sports and race is a hot button issue because of the diversity of races in sports. Race is a touchy issue in sports and especially when it is being discussed by a white person. There are definitely issues that need to be addressed and there are some good people out there who discuss those issues. The media just needs to be careful when discussing those issues because other media members may take them out of context and spin them a different way.

I recently caught a couple episodes of the Jersey Shore on MTV as they were playing a marathon. I saw the episodes where Snooki got punched by a guy and the aftermath of everything. During the telecast they blacked out the screen when she actually gets punched, but they leave the audio going so you can hear everything that is going. I went to youtube to see if I could find the actual video of her being hit. I typed in Snooki and the number one searched thing that comes up is Snooki gets punched (not sure if this has anything to do with what people think of her or not, but that's seperate). Anyway, it came up and I saw it.

My problem with this is that you're censoring something that I don't think is bad enough to censor. I understand and fully believe that hitting women is wrong and a guy should never do that, but you're blacking out something that is readily available on youtube with the click of a few buttons. If MTV is going to censor this part of the episode then they need to have everything removed from youtube as well. If youtube is showing this clip and it is up there in many different videos then MTV should censor it from when they play the episode.

When MTV is showing other shows that depict drug use on the air, how is that any less worse? You're showing people shooting up heroine or smoking crack, but you won't show a girl getting punched?The point of this isn't a need to see a girl get punched, but rather some responsibility by MTV to monitor and censor everything accordingly. If you're going to censor one thing then how can you justify not censoring something else when it is just as bad if not worse.

I can understand if MTV felt an obligation to take off Snooki getting punched if she went to them and asked for it. But if there are videos of this on youtube it must mean that MTV showed this clip when it originally airing the episode. If they felt they needed to air it then why not just keep showing it in future episodes?

VH1 does a lot of countdown shows and a recent one was about the 100 Most Undateable Things Guys Do. I caught a little bit of the countdown and some of what was on the list was pretty standard. They had a bunch of comedians and reality television people on the countdown to discuss the list. They had some of the cast from the Jersey Shore on to talk about the list.

One of the things on the list was if the guy takes longer than the girl to get ready he is undateable. I found this funny because Pauly D was on the show talking about this one. There is no way he takes less time to get ready than a girl does. His hair alone probably takes him 15-20 minutes. If he was going to comment on other things on the list then fine, but not this one.

The other issue I have with this countdown was they didn't show a girls countdown as well. I'm not saying this was sexist by any means this was just a good natured countdown like most of them are. I just thought it would have been appropriate to show things that girls do that make them undateable. The other thing I found odd was that they had a bunch of guys commenting on these things and agreeing with them. Some of what was on there was pretty standard and every guy would agree you don't do. But some of them weren't that big of a deal and the guys on the show should have been defending them or saying they weren't that big of a deal.

I am a big NBA fan and I've been critical of the way media outlets have been handling the coverage of the Conference Finals and the playoff loss of LeBron James and the Cavaliers. At this time of the year all attention should be focused on the four teams playing for a chance to go to the Finals. Instead, a lot of media outlets have been giving a lot of their NBA coverage to James, as he is set to become a free agent this summer. I understand his free agency is a huge issue because it could change the landscape of a lot of teams this summer if he indeeds leaves Cleveland. However, I think the majority of the media attention should be focused on the teams who are actually playing.

It is not fair to those players and organizations who have worked extremely hard since October to be overshadowed by one individual player. I'm sure the majority of fans whose favorite teams have been eliminated from the playoffs may not be interested in the Conference finals, but that does not mean those teams do not deserve the fair amount of coverage.

For the past week James has been receiving a lot of television talk and internet reports. Many people are speculating about where he will go in free agency rather than discussing the match ups of the four teams left in the playoffs. It is not fair to these teams that writers and reporters are dedicating so much of their time towards something that can't even happen until July 1. Every single person who writes for a media outlet has an opinion about this situation. It is completely unfair because no one knows. Every single report, whether it holds any significant weight or not, has been published and will be published.

ESPN.com has created its own LeBron James tracking page. The page is entirely dedicated to James and all opinions and reports on the matter are on that page. Everyday this week a different writer will examine a different issue surrounding James' pending free agency. This just takes away from having new articles about the four teams still playing.

It is totally unfair for these teams to be overshadowed by an individual player. There is no need to give this kind of attention while play is still going on. If media outlets want to speculate about this situation after the NBA Finals are over then fine. But until then do not make the teams who are actually playing play second fiddle to one individual player. It is not fair to the teams, league or fans.

Bret Michaels, the front man for the band Poison turned reality TV star, recently had a brain hemorage and was in the ICU for a number of days. Normally I am very critical for how the media handles certain celebrity issues, but in this case everything about the coverage was very respectful.

I thought Michaels' representatives did a great job of updating the status of his condition in a public way, through his Facebook page, that was able to keep the media informed without having direct access to Michales or the people around him. When a celebrity has a something about them come out to the public every media person and outlet wants to be the first to report on it. In this case I think the media did a great job of not crossing a line about the personal issues facing a celebrity.

What happened to Michaels was very serious and could have cost him his life. I think the media took that into consideration when trying to cover what was happening. I think they took his children and family into consideration as well.

I think the media needs to also think about how they cover things in the future. They need to remember that whoever they are following or trying to find a story about has family and may have children. Its the children who are going to have to deal with the fallout too and they need to be taken into consideration.

In a recent episode of How I Met Your Mother, Ted walks into his living room and asks if Project Runway is being recorded. Robin and her boyfriend are in the room and as a result of Ted asking this Robin's boyfriend thinks he is gay.

My question is whether or not that is offensive to gay men? If a gay man were watching would he find that to be a stereotype?

Although the way the show portrayed what happened in a light matter I still couldn't help but wonder if this was in anyway a view point from the writers or CBS. I don't think this is something the writers intentionally put in there or meant to be offensive seeing as how one of the shows main characters, Neil Patrick Harris, is gay.

I know Harris does not speak for the entire gay community, but I would think that if the show did anything relating to gay issues they would run it past him to see if it is offensive or could be taken the wrong way.

I do not think what happened on the show was anything intentional and was not meant to be a stereotype in anyway. The show is a comedy and is meant to be funny. It is not meant to dive into serious issues. I can't think of any other time during the series in which they made light of a sensitive issue that could have been offensive towards anyone.

I used to watch reality TV quite a bit. After watching a couple shows for a while the more scripted I felt it became. Alot of reality shows are not really genuine and authentic. They seem to be scripted more to cause more drama. I get that the networks may do this because if nothing is really going on no one is going to want to watch. It boosts ratings if there is drama. However, my problem with this is that it doesn't allow for the people on the show to be themselves. They have to over do it and embelish certain things and it makes them look bad.

I watch Keeping up with the Kardashians (guilty pleasure) and while watching the episode where the whole family goes to Vegas there is a scene where one of the sister's boyfriends shoves a $100 bill down a waiters mouth because he wouldn't serve the drunk douche any more liquor. Kris Jenner becomes enraged and is embarrassed and says she hates him and all that. I then saw an interview with the two of them on E where they were in good spirits together and carrying on as if nothing was wrong. I have a feeling that E told them to embelish a little bit and make it seem like there was friction between the two.

My problem is the fact that they were friends after everything that happened. If you're gonig to tell people to embelish what goes on then at least tell them to keep up the charade for the cameras when they get interviewed so it doesn't look like a set up.

Ok, so I watch a lot of ESPN and every time I've watched it for the past couple weeks they always show at least one proflowers.com commercial. I understand Mothers Day is coming up and that's why they've been showing it.The only other time I've seen it was during the weeks leading up to Valentines Day. I understand the reasoning for putting this commercial on ESPN and during sporting events. Men watch sports so if you put this commercial on during a game the men watching are more likely to remember it and go to the website and purchase flowers.

My problem with how they've been advertising is what about the rest of the year. If they're going to advertise for Valentines Day and Mothers Day, why not buy spots, not nearly as many though, for the rest of the year? There is always something going on. Whether its a birthday or an anniversary. Flowers are an easy way to go and you don't even need to leave the house to buy them. I guess it just bothers me from an advertising perspective that they wouldn't try and capitalize more than just on two holidays.

I know this rant doesn't really have to do with specific media, but it was something that was bothering me. You always see beer advertisements year round on sports channels, so why not add this one to the regular mix as well?

The television series 24 is in its eighth and final season. In the show there are numerous terrorist threats that take place on US soil. The one thing that is clear when dealing with who is mostly responsible for the attacks is that they are from the Middle East. Not every season has people from the Middle East behind all the attacks, but they do have that happen in four of the eight seasons.

I think that is a pretty clear message from the people who come up with story ideas. They either think the Middle East is responsible for every terrorist attack that happens in the world or they're lazy to try and come up with new ideas.

In each season there always other countries that help facilitate attacks, but people from the Middle East play the most prominate role. Nowhere in any of the episodes does it ever show a disclaimer saying that the events that take place or the characters portrayed are fictional and do not represent the true feeling of anyone involved with the show. I think the message is clear when doing these types of storylines that the people involved have something against the Middle East. I'm not saying that is right or wrong for them to have those feelings. However, when doing a television show I think personal feelings and positions should not interfere and overtake making a TV show.

While watching The Masters, Phil Mickelson was walking off the 18th hole after winning and went over to his wife and gave her a hug. This may not seem like a big deal, but both her and Phil's mother are battling breast cancer. The announcers were saying how Phil had won for his family. They then went on to talk about how this was a great for the family and I felt this was a not so subtle message towards Tiger Woods.

I found it interesting in the wake of Tiger's family falling apart the announcers would go that route when talking about Phil. The reason I am surprised is because we don't know. We don't know what happens behind closed doors with the Mickelson family. For all we know they could be going through some of the same problems. Tiger was caught cheating on his wife with numerous women. I'm not saying Mickelson is doing the same thing by any means, but we just can't say he isn't. To make him seem like a great family man and husband only makes it more difficult on him to be perfect and that isn't fair to him or anyone.

When you paint someone to be this all mighty figure who can do no wrong you set yourself up for disappointment. After everything that happened with Woods people should not immediately jump to the next person to be their role model or be the face of marriage and family in professional golf. Although it was nice to see Mickelson win considering what him and family have been going through let's be real and know that it was just a golf tournament.

No matter what happens while playing golf he still has to go home and deal with the real life situations facing his wife and mother. For the CBS announcers to try and make it seem like winning this golf tournament will somehow make it easier to deal with everything else and making him seem like this great family man is unfair to themselves, the golfer and the people watching.