7 ms·
This Venn diagram always gets me. https://i.chzbgr.com/full/8291744000/h3159FC59/ https://i.chzbgr.com/full/8291744000/h3159FC59/
by skunkworker 8y ago
This Venn diagram always gets me.
https://i.chzbgr.com/full/8291744000/h3159FC59/ https://i.chzbgr.com/full/8291744000/h3159FC59/
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- inscionent 8y agoAll of those shows have an acceptable time, place and use for me.
- ham_sandwich 8y agoThis chart holds only in the sense that the Kardashians play dumb caricatures of themselves. They may cater their brand to the lowest common denominator but they most certainly aren’t dumb themselves. They essentially parlayed Robert Kardashian’s friendship with OJ Simpson into a media empire; there is something to be said for how media savvy they are.
- amyjess 8y agoYou could also make the same argument about Paris Hilton. By all accounts, she's a really shrewd businesswoman.
- Apocryphon 8y agoAnd for our industry, Ashton Kutcher. But it was only his characters who were dumb.
- Ascolta_Pere 8y agoUnrelated, but this reminds me of a saying we have in Spain about our fascist ex-dictator Franco whenever someone claims he was dumb: Look, he was evil, not stupid.
- clairity 8y agohaving money (as you note, the family wealth came from kris jenner's husband) makes it easier to make more money, with no implications about the intelligence of the wealth holder. take trump for example. nytimes detailed about $600+ million in wealth transfer to him from his dad. while we don't have tax returns or financial statements to confirm this, he's probably worth about a billion dollars now. that rate of return is (roughly) less than 2% yearly. he would have been way better off putting that money in an index fund--he'd be worth about $3 billion if he had.
- bluGill 8y ago> that rate of return is (roughly) less than 2% yearly. Don't forget to factor in Trumps' heavy spending over those years which greatly reduces his rate of return. You could just as easily say that he is keeping his value level with respect to inflation and spending the rest.
- rightbyte 8y agoA index fund doesn't follow the index. There is a broker fee, stock transaction fees for the broker to keep the fund balanced and stock falling out of the index (because of the company eg. halfway to bankruptcy) is a loss for the fund but in the index the next biggest stock just takes it's place. To keep up with the index is probably really hard.
- clairity 8y agoit's not that hard (and there is no "the index", just various approximations of a market portfolio). vanguard is well known for low-fee, no-frills index investing (among other things). invest in one of their funds and you'll likely net over 5% over the long run.
- RussianCow 8y agoThe iShares S&P 500 ETF (quote: IVV) has an expense ratio of 0.04%, is offered commission-free on many brokerages, and based on some quick calculations, follows the official index to within about 0.5% returns. You're right that it's not completely "free", but the total "cost" is only about half a percentage point, meaning you can pretty closely follow the index in the long run with a single ETF purchase. I don't know what could be easier. :)
- bduerst 8y agoI don't think anyone thinks the Kardashians are genuinely being themselves at this point. I mean, the show is painfully obvious in being scripted. It's like the Truman Show sans Truman.
- tomjakubowski 8y agoIf you ever find you've entered a cafe and need to sign a waiver because they're filming a reality show scene in there, I highly recommend staying to observe the process. It is hilarious the extent to which they fake the drama on these shows. The scene was two women fighting over something. Between takes, the director and players were riffing and helping each other to develop their nasty insults and "bitchy" comments.
- JustSomeNobody 8y agoI can't help but think it was a publicist or something and not them...
- samstave 8y agoI met someone who worked for the kardashians on the show and said they are king, generous and respectful to the staff working their brand. Said that they know full well they are managing a brand and that they are parlaying that as they know it shall run out soon. They said that the mom is the eagle-eye over the brand and pushing it to ensure max profit for them. While i wanted to respect that, and i respect the hustle, it just shows that you can go too far with brand exploitation. The daughter had the brand advanced through high profile sexual scandals (sex tape, personal relations etc) The fucking dad had a transitional sex change to keep the limelight ( Nobody cares if he "wanted to be a woman his whole life" - thats his business. Not mine and not worthy of attempting to grab attention dollars. IMO, the kardashian enterprise ilustrates only one thing: The dicotomy of the education gap in this nation. Never mind a wealth gap. Education gap is why the US is doomed.
- huaw6 8y agoWell throughout history the education gap has always existed. "Bread and Circuses". In every culture, from the east to the west. What has changed today is hyperconnection. That changes the rules of game.
- village-idiot 8y ago“Bread and circuses” is not a comforting comparison.
- mmirate 8y agoNot comforting, but such is the way of history. Democracy, even representative democracy, and especially first-past-the-post representative democracy ... is inherently unstable. The things that started happening to the USA since (at least) the 16th Amendment? All of this has happened before. All of this will run its full course as it ran before. And all of this will happen again unless the right people, at the right time, will learn from the Roman Republic, where we and our ancestors have nigh-unanimously failed to do so.
- bduerst 8y ago
- hkmurakami 8y agoImo whoever made this doesn’t understand how smart and savvy the family matriarch is.
- coleifer 8y agoI use this simple litmus test: if it has a laugh-track, then it's for dumb people.
- g2e 8y agoNot Seinfeld.
- 24gttghh 8y agoPartly true: Seinfeld used a laugh track, and also a real audience for stuff like scenes in Jerry's apartment. https://www.quora.com/Did-Seinfeld-use-a-laugh-track-a-live-audience-or-a-combination https://www.quora.com/Did-Seinfeld-use-a-laugh-track-a-live-...
- PhasmaFelis 8y agoIt only works for recent shows. Outside of the last decade or two, every sitcom had to have a laugh track, period.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Outside of the last decade or two, every sitcom had to have a laugh track, period. More correct: every live action sitcom used a laugh track and/or live studio audience.
- SamReidHughes 8y agoThe Simpsons didn't.
- PhasmaFelis 8y agoI think Simpsons managed to trick the powers that be into classifying it as a cartoon instead of a sitcom. Different rules.
- raverbashing 8y agoOne of the benefits of watching dubbed versions of some shows is that it does away with that crap. Really. It's probably on the Top 3 stupid gimmicks by showbiz bigwigs together with the Loudness Wars and anti-piracy messages on original DVDs
- anonytrary 8y agoWow this is hilarious, but are the KK crew actually dumb? I don't think so. Where do you think Silicon Valley sits on this graph? Is Silicon Valley is a show for smart people about smart and dumb people?
- untog 8y agoI think Silicon Valley needs its own Venn diagram of "self aware" and "not self aware". That said, I can't think of any shows that adopt the Silicon Valley mindset hook, line and sinker. There was an awful Bravo reality show a few years ago though. That said, Silicon Valley probably belongs on both sides of the Venn diagram. Lots of people enjoying the show without realising they are the joke.
- pmichaud 8y agoI think the claim is more like the Kardashians play dumb characters [who happen to have their real-life names].
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]