Gentler, Kinder, moderators?

[question everything]

First, a disclaimer. I am not a moderator, never have been, never will be. I would not know what to do, but do appreciate the commitment that DU moderators have to keep this place flowing in peace and harmony (more or less).

But I remember a recent note from Skinner, saying how he instructed the moderators to use lighter hands in policing the board.

Thus, I was surprised, last night, at the swift executions of posts about Oscar night.

Almost every night we post here about Jon Stewart and Bill Maher shows. We know that they do not fall under entertainment - which would place them in the Lounge - but under politics.

Well, Oscar night was about politics. As so many movie critics and regular folks observed: the movies that were nominated covered serious topics. Not just being different - homosexuals and trqansgenders - but also about large corporations such as the pharmaceuticals and oil manipulating world events.

It is not as if the posts were commentaries about the dresses, or about anyone picking his or her nose.. They were about politics. Mostly Clooney's acceptance speech about how Hollywood is, indeed, out of touch, in being the first to talk about issues like AIDS and civil rights and giving Oscar to a black actress back in 1939.

And Rachel Weitz commenting that activists were "better men and women than I."

Jon Stewart pointing to the large Oscar statue above the stage, wondering whether democracy would be brought to Hollywood if a flag would be draped on its face, then toppled it and dragging it through the streets hitting it with sandals..

Or that two of the nominees were about journalistic investigative reporting, adding that they were a "period piece."

Showing mock-TV ads for and against some nominees, with the flag draped across them and one was by a "swift" group..

Now we read that most of the audience did not get him but we, in DU, got him. Loud and Clear.

Plus, the movie industry is a major one, like the steel, or textile or auto industries in other cities. It employs tens of thousands and has a major contribution to the local economy. Which is why every state in the union, as well as major cities, have special film authorities, or commissions, or whatever they call them to entice and facilitate the making of movies in their jurisdictions.

Hence, the comments made during the event about watching a movie in the theater and not wait for DVDs. As many pointed out, this year was unique in that all the nominated movies were not box office success. And why should they? In contrast to the beautiful clips of movies of yesterday, where human emotions and interactions were presented, today's "blockbusters" are action movies full of special effects that can be distributed world wide with no need to translate the dialogs. Or even to have meaningful dialogs. But these are the movies that move us and that can shape - as Clooney pointed out - the opinion of many viewers.

The song about how it was hard being a pimp - we had a couple of minisecond interruptions and wondered whether ABC was delaying the transmission, if the language were too graphic for minors, or something.

I think that the posts about the Oscars should have stayed in the GD and I think that the moderator(s) that swiftly removed them are lacking in understanding how last night Oscar was such a perfect match to DU.

Oh, one last comment: the fact that Brokeback Mountain did not win does not make the voters homophobic; the fact that Munich did not win does not make the voters anti-semites. Of all the movies and actors only five can be selected and only one can win. The history of the Oscars is full of perceived injustices, but this can be true for every competition where many compete and only one can win.

[Skinner]

1. Locking.

If you feel there aren't enough posts about Oscar night in the General Discussion forum, perhaps you might consider going to the Lounge or the Entertainment forum.