Talk:Pinky Show
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the world outside of the USA "liberal" would be an very tame but essetially accurate description of the Show. But i guess that this is meant as an insult.
- I don't understand the above statement. At all. Does "the world outside the USA" simply mean all other nations? Moreover, is the above comment an insult? Or is the description -- "liberal" -- and insult? Is it a tame insult? But accurate? I don't understand. At all. Alright then, I can agree that moral standards in the United States, and the culturosphere for which it stands, are substantially different from other nations. In some cases, I must confess I watch the goings on in open mouthed amazement. But still, the above don't make sense. 82.181.197.172 (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I consider myself very liberal if not bleeding heart, and I find the pinky show so inaccurate in general that I cannot find them very liberal. "Us liberals" like to believe in reality and the pinky show is often about 20-30 years behind the times in terms of their research. Their shows on free trade are completely bogus and attack strawman that no economist has believed in since 1995. I consider them damaging to liberal causes, not because I disagree with the thrust of many of their shows, but just because they usually just spit out the usual "common wisdom" which involve lots of factually wrong conclusions. I think "annoying" is a very tame but essentially accurate description of the show. 75.208.25.102 (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Can you give specific examples of the mistaken or factually wrong conclusions derived from the usual "common wisdom"? Or was that just your opinion? I watched the Iraq War and the Viet Nam War episodes, and they seem quite good, though I understand why they would be upsetting to US audiences. 200.89.148.92 (talk) 04:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I consider myself very liberal if not bleeding heart, and I find the pinky show so inaccurate in general that I cannot find them very liberal. "Us liberals" like to believe in reality and the pinky show is often about 20-30 years behind the times in terms of their research. Their shows on free trade are completely bogus and attack strawman that no economist has believed in since 1995. I consider them damaging to liberal causes, not because I disagree with the thrust of many of their shows, but just because they usually just spit out the usual "common wisdom" which involve lots of factually wrong conclusions. I think "annoying" is a very tame but essentially accurate description of the show. 75.208.25.102 (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Voice actors
The voices of the characters are unusual: Are the voice actors known? Are they children? --Thenickdude 01:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I think the voices are foreign voiceover artists. 75.57.162.209 14:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
This article needs a rewrite. Bad. -SAB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.248.206 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Pinky Lee
Is there a relation between the name of this show and the one in the 1950s by Pinky Lee?--Brz7 (talk) 14:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
No —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.234.164 (talk) 02:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] specific political viewpoint
I'm not sure that I could agree with the statement that the show expresses a specific political viewpoint in the context of politics the pinky show is beyond the spectrum of what is politically acceptable in mainstream media. It's also produced with Final cut pro thus I don't know if low tech is accurate either, perhaps a production quality rather than a technological one.
Alaskanwarrior (talk) 08:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
