Media Madness

January 28, 2009 at 5:26 pm | Posted in OhMidge Advice | Leave a comment


I know people have always said DON’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON TV, but what about reality tv shows and the news? They are real life, right? Wouldn’t it be against the law for them to say they are real and then not be?

– Oblivious in Oregon

images1 images-1


Dear Oblivious,

Everything you watch on TV, whether it’s a cartoon or the 7 o’clock news, gets paid through advertisements in between the segments of the show. They need people to be fixated on watching their show over another show so they try to make it really interesting. It doesn’t matter if it’s a reality show or the news. Both skew real life to fit into their thirty minute time slot. Whether it’s through editing camera shots to tell a more exciting story or it’s by completely making up “facts” on the news, they are both completely guilty of the offenses. Nothing you see on TV is the actual, true life, truth of the matter.

The same exaggeration that is used in the media on TV, goes for newspaper reports and online news. Journalists were once people grounded in truth and on the search for truth. Sadly today, these morals have given way to competition within the media on which paper or show or website gets the higher audience. If you take one story line that actually happened ie, “House on fire, three children and mother escape,” within minutes of the media “reporting” on this, the story easily becomes, “Mother sets house aflame, saves children, let’s husband burn.” The former story line is going to have more people reading the article, while the true to life story will have far less. The news won’t be chastized, and more papers will use this exaggerated line as just a base for what they’re going to write. It’s like that children’s game, “Telephone”.

It’s a tragedy when the public is refused the opportunity to get pure, honest news and instead is supplied with complete lies and political propoganda to fuel hate, drama, and ultimately, the same media business that created it.


Oodles of Noodles of Nonsense

January 21, 2009 at 2:44 am | Posted in OhMidge Advice | 1 Comment

Oh, Midge: ramen

Whats the deal with “Oodles of Noodles?” You know, those Ramen noodles that come in a few different, but all slightly disgusting flavors like oriental or the classic chicken. They only take 3 minutes to cook, once you boil the water of course, and the only time they taste good is when you’re drunk. Why in the world does everyone call them “oodles of noodles?” No where on the package does it say the word oodle, if that is even a word. There are an insane amount of noodles in that package, but how did the name become so well known? You can even google the term and it comes up. If google knows, everyone knows.

Al’s Sister


Dear Al’s Sister,

250px-oodles1First, let me say that I think the people that actually say the phrase, “Oodles of Noodles”, need to be slapped quick. It’s a terrible phrase and it’s completely nonsensical and lame.

However, it seems that the origins of Oodles of Noodles truly is quite the oodle of a question. There are now companies and restaurants called “Oodles of Noodles” but they are just gliding on the name given to Ramen noodles years ago by twisted fools. There is a whole long history to all of this nonsense. First,  the term, ramen, is actually the Japanese word referring to a noodle dish that originated in China. It tends to be served in a meat-based broth, and uses toppings such as sliced pork, dried seaweed, green onions, and even corn. In the U.S., we know the name ramen mostly because a company took it as their brand name.

About the fact that these instant carbs are the perfect cure for a drunken soul: Indeed my friend. They suck up the alcohol much like how they suck up the hot water they sit in. They’re like sponges and for that reason, probably not very good for you in large quanitites.

Onto Oodles…

Oodles is now the name of a classifieds company online. It’s very similar to Craigslist, just a littler more hip looking. You can check out this Uncyclopedia page for more info and history into the word or unword:

Al’s Sister, I think we may want to leave it at that. It might be nicer kept as a mystery and honestly, I’m not sure anyone knows the whole truth about the whole oodle doodle deal.


Clueless Couch Potato

January 8, 2009 at 5:15 am | Posted in OhMidge Advice | Leave a comment

Oh Midge,

I’ve been thinking about buying an HDTV, but I can’t figure out which brand to buy.  Should I get LCD or plasma? Should I spend $800 or $2000? Should it be 1080p or 1080i?

This is complicated stuff and the people who work at Best Buy are creeps, they don’t listen to anything you say.

I just want the picture to look good when I watch Batman and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia and video games.

Also, PS3 has blu-ray built in and it only costs like 400 bucks so why do other blu-ray players cost 600 bucks?

Oh midge, once I buy this junk I’m going to have it for five to seven years right, so what kind of gear will I love to live with?

Clueless Couch Potato


plasmavlcd Dear C.C.P.

This question deserves some research. It seems that people “in the know” say that both are great and for different reasons. The picture to left shows an LCD screen in blue vs. a PLASMA screen in red. Here are some websites that you may find helpful on the subject:

How much money you want to spend is really up to you. I’m sure in the end, once you’ve figured out whether you want the PLASMA OR LCD and whether you want the (i) or the (p), the price difference comes down to size of the screen and what store you’re buying at. I found a great LCD television at Target for a cheap price. It all depends, where you want to shop.

Now, on the subject of 1080i vs. 1080p, it looks like there are major similarities and differences. It comes down to semantics, actually. 1080i and 1080p are both High Definition display formats for HDTVs. 1080i and 1080p signals actually contain the same information. Both 1080i and 1080p represent a 1920×1080 pixel resolution (1,920 pixels across the screen by 1,080 pixels down the screen). The difference between 1080i and 1080p is in the way the signal is sent from a source component or displayed on an HDTV screen. For more on this topic, check out the following site:

The deal with PS3 being cheaper than the regular BLU RAY player all comes down to consumer demographics. PS3 is a video game operator so they can’t expect parents to be buying their kids, (the biggest video game demographic), a video game thing that costs just short of a grand. I think that if you have a PS3, stick to what you have and don’t worry about getting a solo BLU-RAY player. If you don’t already have the PS3, then you should take into consideration that PS3 is not going to put the same quality BLU-RAY-ness into their product as a device used and sold solely for people who want a BLU-RAY player. Ya heard?

Create a free website or blog at
Entries and comments feeds.