High School Stars (or, How I learned to Stop Worrying and Decide Which Seat to Take)

The internet is a frightening, desolate place.
It has spawned many horrible things over the past 20 years of public availability- 4chan, Chris Crocker, Rick Rolling and the Meme (to name a few). For all of it's achievements, there are at least a million things the internet is responsible for that you probably wish you could un-see.
The newest of these abominations is Rebecca Black, and her song 'Friday'.


Recently declared by Newsbeat's Technology Reporter as the "Worst Song Ever" (and I guess Radio 1 has the most experience of bad songs to be able to say this), Friday is an attempt by Rebecca Black to gain worldwide fame as an 13 year old internet musician. Some may argue that this has worked, as her official video on Youtube now has over 25 million views (as of time of writing).The reason, however, for her fame, is the ridiculously poor quality of the song- as you will have just seen. The lyrics are of particular interest, as they appear to make no sense at all;

"Kickin’ in the front seat
Sittin’ in the back seat
Gotta make my mind up
Which seat can I take?"

"Yesterday was Thursday, Thursday
Today is Friday, Friday (Partyin’)
Tomorrow is Saturday
And Sunday comes afterwards"

According to some information released about the video, it was made by a record company in Los Angeles called Ark Music Factory - a company that apparently deals with unsigned 'talent'. Now, terrible lyrics aside, that means that someone must have forked over a lot of money to make that deal happen. My bets are that Rebecca didn't pay for it with her pocket money. Mummy and Daddy Black did. For what reason?

Currently, another child star is dominating the hearts and minds of young impressionable boys and girls everywhere. He's Canadian, he's produced a film called 'Never Say Never', and his name rhymes with Hustin Nieber. I'm talking of course about 15 year old Justin "I don't know what German means" Bieber, who is probably making more money after less than 2 years of his career than John Lennon made over 20 years. It's no surprise, then, that there are some parents out there who want to make a quick buck out of their children in the hope that they may get as lucky as Bieber.

It is a terrible thing to see, children as young as 8 or 9 being thrust into the limelight by overbearing and pushy parents who want their slice of the fame that others have seen before them. It's not new- how could we forget Lindsay Lohan, who has probably made more of a name for herself since she started hanging around with Paris Hilton than she ever did when she was in the Parent Trap. Michael Jackson is perhaps the number 1 example of what happens to child stars, having been pushed into the business at just 6. There are many other examples, but you don't need me to tell you that they very often end the same way - drugs, sexual abuse or suicide. Except for maybe Wil Wheaton, of Star Trek fame, who still appears to be normal and drug-free more than 20 years after his fame died.

In my opinion, child stars are not really children at all, merely under-developed adults- forced prematurely into the adult world by popularity. They will never be able to experience the innocence of childhood because they are placed high on a pedestal in the public eye at an age when they should be out grazing their knees and picking their noses. They cannot act as a child should because everyone is watching them. Therefore, despite them MAYBE having some talent, like being able to sing really well or act, they shouldn't be exposed to fame. Huge amounts of fame will no doubt make the kid in question feel like they can do anything and they will be loved for it. When it's over, and their fame declines, it could be hard to accept that people don't think they're awesome anymore, maybe for no apparent reason. How is a child supposed to understand the fickleness of the public? It's a concept that could drive anyone to depression, drink and drugs, let alone a child. In my opinion, encouraging a child to become famous is nothing more than a indirect form of child abuse.

Relating back to our friend Rebecca Black, she has tasted fame not because of her talents, but because of the cruelty of the internet. We watch her video because it's bad - so bad it's funny. In her case, she might well believe that we like her because she has talent, but this would be a lie. She could well go though life thinking that her fame is deserved, and try and get even bigger. When she discovers the root of her fame is based on ridicule, imagine the damage this could cause and could already be causing. Has she recognised that she is being made a fool of, or does she think we like her because she's a good singer/songwriter? I'll leave you to decide that.

Twatter

To launch into today’s rant-a-thon; what is the point of Twitter? You know, the latest social networking craze to hit the internets that has every self-obsessed weirdo pawing at their iPhone or typing on their cookie-encrusted keyboard every time they blow their nose.

Twitter joins a long list of social networking sites claiming to be the last thing you will ever need to stay connected with friends (because nobody appears to use the phone these days), and like its cousins, Twitter has a function specific to it’s users; Facebook is for people who have a kind-of social life but like to think that everyone loves them regardless of personality flaws, Myspace is for people with imaginary social lives, and Bebo is for people who have clearly never heard of Facebook.  Twitter is for people who think that their every movement is a significant world event.

Twitter is apparently just as awesome as Facebook, according to the people that use it, but I beg to differ. The difference between Twitter and it’s more elaborate goliath of a counter-part, Facebook, is that the latter actually has a use. I myself own an account on Facebook, and despite the constant inundation of useless updates telling me that “Bob has taken the Which Pokemon Are You? Quiz and is a Magikarp”, it’s a wonderful tool for getting invited to parties and other events.  Twitter appears to serve no other purpose than to inform someone you’ve probably only met once that you’ve just come back from an awesome party that they weren’t invited to. 

Out of sheer curiosity I visited the Twitter website to see whether or not I was wrong in my assumption that Twitter has no apparent purpose. It seems that the developers also have no real clue about what it’s for;

“Why? Because even basic updates are meaningful to family members, friends, or colleagues—especially when they’re timely.

• Eating soup? Research shows that moms want to know.
• Running late to a meeting? Your co–workers might find that useful.
• Partying? Your friends may want to join you. “

Translation: Buggered if we know.

I suppose if you read between the lines, the only real use of Twitter is to help the crazed ex-boyfriend that has been stalking you for the past 3 months  by telling him your every movement  so he doesn’t have to sit in a bush outside your house with binoculars.  Even the people that subscribe to your twitter feed are called “followers”. Think about that before informing the world that you’ve just popped into W H Smith.

So, if you’re the kind of person who thinks that everyone should know every time you fart or play scrabble, then go ahead, get a Twitter account today! I can’t  say I didn’t warn you. To quote Newsweek, “all the world's a-twitter” with the mating calls of  14,590,000 birds who want you to know what they’re doing right now.

Arguments on the Internet

I hate people who argue on the internet. I really, truly view these people as lower beings. Arguing on msn, not that's not really arguing on the internet, because that's sort of a type of conversation now. Arguing on forums is kind of acceptable too, because that's what they're there for (and let's face it, what else would frustrated Halo 3 fan boys do with their spare time?) Arguing on MyFace (Myspace and Facebook), now that's just a kind of retarded wonderment.

Ok, so currently everyone is up-in-arms about how "terrible" the new Facebook layout is, and their complaints on their personal message-type thing read something like this to me; "omfg teh new fb layoutz iz teh sux!!!!!1 i is gonna sue fb naow coz dey hav fukd up mi life!!!1 *slits wrists*" Seriously, no matter how perfect their spelling and grammar is, they always read like that to me. Now, in my ongoing quest to prove myself wrong about how pathetic and un-savable the human race is, being faced with countless people moaning about something as insignificant as Facebook isn't exactly promising evidence. If something as small as a different layout on Facebook (which isn't actually too different) is all it takes to drive people to insanity and homicide, what the hell will people do if, say, John McCain were to be elected in the US and during his acceptance speech declared that the new national religion of America was Creationism? I really don't think I can imagine it.

The annoying part about any sort of social networking site like Facebook is that there are the occasional users that contemplate changing their name to "Captain Wow", and think anything that they believe in must be true. These are also the type of people who argue on the internet if someone were to say, for example, that there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the new Facebook layout. Normally their retorts read like this; "Hey FUCK YOU". Well, what can I say to that? I was expecting a well-formed, legitimate argument with evidence to prove I was wrong in my decision to like it, and all I got was a half-arsed insult. How foolish of me to expect anything else.

I suppose it's right what they say; Arguing on the internet is like being in the Special Olympics- even if you win, you're still retarded. Especially if you've sat through 12 years of English Language lessons and you still can't form sentences without adding "lol" at the end.