Town Square

anyone else watch Cosmos on Fox TV?

Original post made by parent, College Terrace, on Mar 11, 2014

Anyone else watch that Cosmos TV show on Fox TV? How did this communist propaganda wind up on Fox? Did they lose a lawsuit and get forced into this by some lefty judge? The entire cast is non-white, except for some caricatures of the religious right who go around burning scientists at the stake. The show also takes stands on climate change, evolution, and astrophysics without giving equal time for conservative viewpoints. This is FOX for heaven sakes. How did this happen???


Like this comment
Posted by Mr.Recycle
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Mar 11, 2014 at 12:09 pm

Fox is run by leftist hollywood liberals, and always has been. Fox News is totally separate, and is solely the responsibility of Roger Ailes, not Rupert Murdoch.

Like this comment
Posted by Thanks for the laughs
a resident of Duveneck School
on Mar 11, 2014 at 12:33 pm

Funny postings!

Like this comment
Posted by CrescentParkAnon.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 11, 2014 at 2:07 pm

I saw about half of it ... can't quite see how you got to your view ( communist propaganda? ) and can't relate to it.

It did remind me of my admiration for Carl Sagan and appreciate of his books and television appearances. As a kid growing up he was one of my biggest heroes. I was very sorry to hear of his death in 1996 at such a young age, 62.

The world would not have many of the problems it currently has if we had more Carl Sagans and less Rupert Murdochs. There is really no popular science writer that has filled Carl Sagan's shoes, and the country is poorer for it.

Like this comment
Posted by parent
a resident of College Terrace
on Mar 11, 2014 at 5:56 pm

@CrescentParkAnon - isn't it obvious?
anti-white-people = communist
anti-religion = communist
global warming = communist
evolution = communist
anti-biblical genesis = communist
How much more proof do you need that this show is a communist plot?

Like this comment
Posted by Missing Sagan
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 11, 2014 at 6:04 pm

I saw commercials for this show and hoped it was some spin-off of the hugely successful and inspiring Carl Sagan series that I adored in my teens.

But, no, it is just some dumb rip-off of the name. Mr Sagan must be spinning in his grave.

Like this comment
Posted by Marty
a resident of Barron Park
on Mar 11, 2014 at 6:44 pm

The last of the powerless right wingers gasping, kicking and screaming as the world changes around them. The "True believers". I hope most can move on with minimal discomfort. Remember, blind faith will run you into a tree every time.
See you in the future.

Like this comment
Posted by CrescentParkAnon.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 11, 2014 at 8:48 pm

When I was a kid, young adult, there were two series on TV ... that I don't think would ever make it to broadcast TV today, maybe not even cable. Well, of course they both were on PBS, or whatever it was called at the time.

One was "The Ascent Of Man" hosted by Jacob Bronowski, the other was "Cosmos" hosted by Carl Sagan. Both of these series espoused the secular, Western rational scientific view of the world and human experience.

What I see today in the media is pretty much a sharp and violent veering away from that, in the same way that I imagine Western Civilization veered away from the experiments in real democracy by the Greeks only to be somewhat reignited 2 thousand years later by the Age Of Reason and the Enlightenment.

When I saw the opening of the new version of Cosmos, I have to admit, confronted with the face of Neil deGrasse Tyson instead of Carl Sagan sort of threw me in terms of all of my archetypal references. Who is this guy, what has he done? In the opening minutes deGrasse Tyson talked about how Carl Sagan went out of his way to recruit him for Cornell, and related the story of their meeting and how much it meant to him that Carl Sagan had opened himself and his life up to him. But as I read more, past the marketing chaff, deGrasse Tyson, did not attend Cornell, he went to Harvard. And yet he seems to have no shame or problem attaching himself to Sagan by the sentimental story that he told.

I wonder, am I just rationalizing a discomfort in seeing a black face, where in all honesty I think the story of rationalism and astronomy ... cosmology if you will ... would be more appropriately related by a descendant of the tradition of Newton, Brahe, Copernicus, etc? But who? I don't see anyway who could do the job of Sagan today. In addition it is so important to include all people outside that tradition in this age of science ... and too much technology ... that I don't think it is racism in any way - yet I am not comfortable with what I saw in that show.

Maybe it's just that I am getting too old, and in the same way the old "Star Trek" shows without the fancy special effects seemed to have more deeper and gripping plots, I think the original Cosmos series will be better because it was done in a time and a voice that can get through to all, before there was so much noise and distractions.

I did not see anything that was better illustrated or better explained in the new Cosmos. Perhaps some real scientist should have hosted the show ... back a few decades it could have been Walter Lewin the popular MIT physics professor.

Or maybe what grates about all the new stuff I see in the media is that it is all done by "celebrities", and not real people. Cosmos was done by Carl Sagan, it was his vision, his voice, in fact it was called "Cosmos: A Personal Voyage", but this new version of Cosmos is subtitled: a space-time odyssey, as if to appeal to our media experiences, of watching 2001. Does everything we see now have to be slickly produced, vetted, images focus-grouped, ideas censored.

When are we really going to get serious about bringing science and rationality to the people of the world ... I thought that was America's destiny, the last best hope. Not a slick marketing bait and switch, and image PR. Something just doesn't sit right with me about this new series.

Are there any young people who watched this show. I get the impression that most of the serious comments here were from older commentors? From the 50's when we went all out to bring Americans to science and technology, we seem to be doing all we can to export it to other countries while feeding mental and physical garbage to our own society? I can't help but think that Carl Sagan himself would see a more important message to be sent out to any intelligent life on our planet than just another remake of Cosmos, which was already done and done perfectly. Why does everything we do have to be a lesser remake or something already done well - what is the message that sends to our citizens?

Like this comment
Posted by Astro
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 11, 2014 at 9:05 pm

Well, CrescentParkAnon, I would submit that Dr. Tyson is firmly in the tradition of the great scientists you named. Since you raised it, I would also suggest that you are discomfited by the sight of a dark face where you are, unfortunately, expecting a white one -- thereby in your mind rejecting the possibility that a dark person could possibly perform as well as a white one.

I have no problem with his mention of Sagan, after all, Sagan was impressed by him and wanted him to come to Columbia. That Tyson went to Harvard brings no shame; it's a pretty good school.

If you were to read Dr. Tyson's Wikipedia entry (Web Link) you would find that he has devoted much of his life to "bringing science and rationality to the people of the world," as you say.

The packaging of the show is probably necessary to cut through the chaff of the modern media environment and hold the attention of the very young people we need to attract to science and the people who need to be reminded of the glories and the mysteries of the universe. It also doesn't hurt to remind people that reason will get you farther than faith in trying to understand the big questions.

Like this comment
Posted by CrescentParkAnon.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 11, 2014 at 10:28 pm

> Since you raised it, I would also suggest that you are discomfited by the sight of a dark face where you are, unfortunately, expecting a white one

No, I raised it to consider it, and dismissed it. It's like the N-word ... I can call myself on my own prejudices, but they are off-limits to you, after all you do not know me or know my sensibilities or prejudices, and it is cheap shot to make that claim - just because I mentioned it.

For example, in terms of human rights there are few that could make the "Cosmos" of human rights, but I would be fine with that the fact of that person being Dr. Cornell West. The man has vision, is articulate and inspiring. Tyson's style is just not the same in terms of inspiration, to me, than Sagan's. The vision of this show is not his, he is a mouthpiece. At that he does adequately, but I cannot rate him as highly or say that this is an evolution of the concept of Cosmos.

Like this comment
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 12, 2014 at 9:15 am

I refuse to patronize any broadcast from News Corp, including this new version of Cosmos. News Corp has polarized America since it's inception.

Like this comment
Posted by anonymous
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Mar 12, 2014 at 9:22 am

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is excellent at communicating with the general public. My problem was I found the show too elementary and also with too much gee-whiz slam-bam special effects. SOME effects are fine; plus this show could be screened in the middle schools - perhaps that would work. I could care less if the show features black or white people.

Like this comment
Posted by CrescentParkAnon.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 12, 2014 at 12:49 pm

> My problem was I found the show too elementary and also with too much gee-whiz slam-bam special effects.

Yep, this show purports to be bringing science to the public, but this is information that may have been new back when Cosmos was first run, and there is really nothing new here - just patting itself on the back for trying to be like Carl Sagan without any thought behind it. I find it amazing in a negative way, how there is nothing new, inspirational, challenging or original on television or media for the general public in an age when more scientists are living than have ever lived in the past and there is more information and more known about the cosmos than ever before.

Whatever is running our media needs to be kicked out, fired, gone, completely changed ... and likely it is some version of FOX News, something that wants the public space in this country to be impoverished and desolate.

Like this comment
Posted by Star Stuff
a resident of another community
on Mar 17, 2014 at 9:40 am

[Post removed.]

Like this comment
Posted by Hmmm
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Mar 17, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Hmmm is a registered user.

[Post removed.]

Like this comment
Posted by Aquamarine
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 17, 2014 at 8:57 pm

[Post removed.]