61–70 of 313 posts
In the west we have “No Animals Were Harmed in the making of …”, which I’m only just learning comes from the American Humane Society: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Humane_Society#No_A... I had always thought it were a generic phrase!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Jesus and his disciples were all in one Accord”
And don't forget that Moses received the Ten Commandments on tablets, although it doesn't say whether he used iPads or something running Android.
In the west we have “No Animals Were Harmed in the making of …”, which I’m only just learning comes from the American Humane Society: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Humane_Society#No_A... I had always thought it were a generic phrase!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
pretty much everything is in the Bible if you look, even automobiles: "and G-d drove Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden in His Fury" https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=plymouth%20fury&ia=images&i...
“Jesus and his disciples were all in one Accord”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Jesus and his disciples were all in one Accord”
And don't forget that Moses received the Ten Commandments on tablets, although it doesn't say whether he used iPads or something running Android.
In the west we have “No Animals Were Harmed in the making of …”, which I’m only just learning comes from the American Humane Society: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Humane_Society#No_A... I had always thought it were a generic phrase!
We also have "No one was harmed in the making of this video" and similar, which has become so prevalent that its absence is sometime used to infer that someone was indeed injured or killed in the clip.
I mean nature is brutal, but typing down an animal to be consumed by another isn't natural.
Anyway, I don't think movies and TV are the main source of animal cruelty anymore.
You see it everywhere: statements like “this is just one of many possible hypotheses” to appease people who might disagree, though to be fair, Western media sometimes include similar disclaimers, or “this was filmed with the owner’s permission” even when it is not really necessary. Then there is the excessive blurring—if someone with even a minor scandal appears, they are edited out or blurred, and a message like “this was recorded on MM-DD” pops up, all to avoid viewers asking, “Why is this person on TV?”
Of course, I understand the need for disclaimers in situations that really warrant them, such as scientific experiments that require proper oversight. But the disclaimers added just to dodge silly complaints do nothing but infantilize viewers, and honestly, they are kind of insulting.
Ultimately, this is part of a bigger problem with Japanese TV. It has dumbed itself down to the lowest common denominator, pandering to the most vocal complainers who often lack basic critical thinking skills. This is not unique to TV, either; Japanese businesses in general have long been hypersensitive to the “customer is always right” mindset. Thankfully, there is some pushback against that now. Still, TV is especially vulnerable since broadcasters get access to public airwaves at relatively low cost and are expected to act like a public utility, making them an easy target for complaints.
Ironically, all of this is helping drive younger generations away from TV, not just as a medium, but because the shows themselves feel less and less relevant.
In the west we have “No Animals Were Harmed in the making of …”, which I’m only just learning comes from the American Humane Society: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Humane_Society#No_A... I had always thought it were a generic phrase!
And "filmed in front of a live studio audience", which doesn't prevent the addition of laugh tracks.
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/flashback/how-fran-...
I wonder how this plays out. As noted sometimes the staff can't eat it, heck sometimes you might not want to eat it. That has to happen pretty often. I worked at a company with a particularly sensitive HR team who would host pizza parties now and then, but they'd only order "weird" pizzas and I guess they liked it, but they were quite miffed when people stopped coming / didn't want to eat some pizza with some kind of…
I don't understand why people will have these stupid preconceptions about food which normally you unlearn during childhood. Complaining about food without tasting it is stupid and childish. Of course if you try something and it doesn't suit your tastes then it's fine to complain, but dismissing something offhand because you aren't familiar with it is rather narrow-minded.