What’s with all the big stuff?

After years of trying to develop what he called a “premium” hamburger, McDonald’s CFO Ian Borden surprised no one the other day by announcing that the company’s new focus is not making burgers better, just a lot bigger.

The move won’t please nutritionists, but it fits perfectly with a growing desire among Americans for super-sized stuff.

Consider ads for the 2024 Chevrolet Suburban boasting that, at 18 feet in length, the vehicle is “impossible to ignore.” Chevy refers to its massive SUV as “a room with a view.”

And what about the 100-year-old Stanley company that found new life when its giant drinking cups became a sensation. Now Stanley is selling a humongous 96-ounce version for $90, “thoughtfully designed to be your personal hydration companion.” When this big baby is filled with water it weighs 8.8 pounds.

In the world of fashion — or at least fashion fads — a recent headline in the New York Times noted “Fashion’s Big Idea: Oversize Everything.” Seems skinny jeans are out and clown pants are in. This month Julianne Hough wore what might have been the biggest pants in Oscar history when she hosted ABC’s red carpet show. “Hough wore a white Alexandre Vauthier couture jumpsuit with a gold and silver metallic bodice,” People Magazine dutifully reported. “The pants were so voluminous, though, that they acted as an optical illusion, making her jumpsuit look like a gown.”

The fascination with over-sized items comes at a time when many folks are troubled by a shift toward deceptively smaller products in categories such as snack foods, the result of what’s known as shrinkflation. “Some companies are trying to pull a fast one by shrinking the products little by little and hoping you won’t notice,” said President Biden last month.

But there’s no such problem when it comes to, say, TV screens. They’ve grown steadily in recent years—from roughly 55 inches, measured diagonally, to 98 inches. Samsung offers a version it calls The Wall, which measures 292 inches, making it the largest TV on the retail market.

Being a golfer I was intrigued by a club I saw on Amazon named the Sooolong, with the “biggest, baddest driver head on the planet.” It’s listed at 750cc’s, which, for the record, is about 60% larger than USGA rules permit.

The rest of the world has long scoffed at the way we Americans favor bigness — from our 10-gallon hats to our Big Gulp sodas.

That brings us back to McDonald’s which recently offered a Double Big Mac sandwich, consisting of one-and-a-half buns surrounding four beef patties. “The opportunity is significant” said Mr. Borden, for a “large, more satiating type burger.”

Satiate is an interesting choice of words to describe the trend. The dictionary defines it as “gorge, overfeed, sicken and nauseate,” which are really big matters, to say the least.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on What’s with all the big stuff?

Our obsession with true crime

In television, now more than ever, crime pays.

A search for “true crime” on Netflix produced 300 titles. Nearly half of Apple’s top 20 podcasts in the U.S. are devoted to true crime, and the internet is chockablock with recommendations for the best new true crime books.

As I type this, Paramount+ is announcing that Dennis Quaid will play the real-life serial killer notoriously called “Happy Face,” based on the “Happy Face” podcast from iHeart. And Village Roadshow Entertainment is announcing both a scripted series and a two-part documentary based on the story of convicted serial killer William Dathan Holbert, better known as “Wild Bill,” who is currently serving 47 years in prison for five murders.

Why are Americans drawn to this genre more than at any time in TV history? Some people suggest the trend is linked to the continuing perception of rampant crime in American cities (a politicized issue whose statistics are debatable). But real-world crime is perpetrated largely by gangs, drug dealers and street thugs — none of which is central to most true crime dramas on TV.

Hollywood’s favorite theme concerns white females who were harmed by strangers, described by the late journalist Gwen Ifill “Missing White Woman Syndrome.” Surprisingly, Pew Research found that 43% of true crime fans are Latino, and 36% are Black, and 34% are white.

Dr. Chivonna Childs of the Cleveland Clinic believes, “True crime appeals to us because we get a glimpse into the mind of a real person who has committed a heinous act. We want to see how they tick, and that’s totally normal and healthy.” However, University of Colorado professor Amber McDonald says a “dopamine dump” occurs for many viewers of true crime programs, along with an adrenaline rush. “So there is a physiological component with these shows that gets people hooked beyond just the story.” This, she says, can lead to “secondary traumatic stress.”

“I’m concerned about the trajectory we’re on,” said Glenn Sparks, a professor at Purdue University who has studied the effects of media violence. “If I worked at Netflix I might say, ‘Well, this is what people want.’ But that doesn’t mean it should be provided,” he added. “Research shows that escalating violence on-screen can make us more tolerant of it in real life. It can leave lingering fear that can cause sleep disturbances and other problems.”

“Because Netflix bases so much on technology, when something works, you’re going to have a lot of different versions of that same thing. I think that’s what’s happening with this kind of violent content,” said Gina Keating, the author of “Netflixed: The Epic Battle for America’s Eyeballs.”

True crime drama has been part of tabloid media for over a century, but its modern exploitation is often traced to Truman Capote’s 1966 book “In Cold Blood,” covering the deaths of four family members on a Kansas farm. In the era of streaming television, the genre has exploded, beginning with “Making a Murderer,” the landmark Netflix program from 2015, with its story of a man accused of murder and sexual assault.

Regardless of how politicians spin the statistics, many Americans are concerned about safety. And Hollywood’s eagerness to exploit it is, indeed, a true crime.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Our obsession with true crime

Big pharma’s song and dance

The earworm “1-8-7-7 Kars 4 Kids” always struck me as a stellar example of how insufferable advertising can be when its creators really put their minds to it. The organization behind the long-running ad boasts that the jingle “has quickly become one of the most memorable and catchy radio ads of all time.”

Though I’m not keen on encouraging youngsters to misspell words like “cars,” and while I’ve never understood who among us has enough extra autos sitting around that they’d willingly give one away, at least the dreadful tune is for charity.

That rationale won’t fly for the pharmaceutical industry that has slyly decided the best way to sell drugs on TV is to have a cast of unusually cheerful folks dance and sing about the likes of diabetes, colon exams and irritable bowels. If you watch almost any news or sports program you’ve undoubtedly run into — or away from — ditties such as “I have Type 2 diabetes, but I manage it well. It’s a little pill with a big story to tell!”

That’s from the dance number for Jardiance, a diabetes drug that sells for about $570 a month. Equally annoying is an ad that has the audacity to bastardize a Frank Sinatra classic: “My doc and I agree I’d pick the time, today’s a good day. I screened with Cologuard and did it my way!”

But nothing — I truly hope — can be more painful than the song-and-dance number for Pepto-Bismol: “When you have nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, di-a-rrhea…” In the scene, three young corporate types, in what looks like an office break room, belt out the lyrics while rubbing their stomachs and smiling so broadly you’d think they just won a month’s vacation rather than a trip to the bathroom.

Madison Avenue has long been aware of the strategic value of what are called annoyance dynamics in ads. It’s generally accepted that an annoying message has a better chance of sticking in your brain than a more pleasant one, as long as it doesn’t cross the annoyance threshold at which point viewers tune out. This equation is important in pharmaceutical ads which must balance emotion with critical information such as side effects.

The U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries allowing consumer ads for prescription drugs — with spending exceeding $6 billion annually. The FDA requires that such ads include “a fair balance between information about effectiveness and information about risk.” But the regulations say nothing about people dancing in a town square while belting out lyrics about diabetes, which is clearly designed to affect the fairness of the balance.

Peter Yarrow of the acclaimed folk group Peter, Paul and Mary, once wrote what he called “The Colonoscopy Song”: “When I had my colonoscopy, I had a question on my mind / Do we all look the same when the doctor sees us from behind? / Then I had the answer, I felt like such a fool / Cause the doctor smiled and said to me, ‘Your colon’s really cool.’”

At least Mr. Yarrow wasn’t trying to sell us anything.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Big pharma’s song and dance

Larry David can’t curb his instincts

Larry David, Hollywood’s most acclaimed curmudgeon, has apparently devised a scheme to get the last laugh with viewers and critics.

The latest episode of his HBO series “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” which ran on Super Bowl night, provides intriguing clues for those of us who have savored all 12 seasons of David’s irreverent sitcom, as we did with his earlier nine-season ode to nothing, “Seinfeld.”

“Seinfeld” ended its run on NBC in May of 1998 with a finale that attracted a huge audience of 76 million—and countless more in reruns. The episode had Jerry and his pals detoured to Massachusetts where they witness an overweight guy getting carjacked at gunpoint and, rather than coming to his aid, make fat jokes. Charged with violating a local Good Samaritan law, they wind up in jail.

David has spent several decades defending the “Seinfeld” finale, which he returned to write after leaving the show for two seasons. A reviewer at “Entertainment Weekly” said, “the show’s swan song was off-key and bloated.”

Seinfeld, himself, had second thoughts. “I sometimes think we really shouldn’t have even done it,” he conceded years later. “There was a lot of pressure on us at that time to do one big last show, but big is always bad in comedy.”

Now, it appears that in the final season of “Curb” David is doubling-down on the controversial plot. He and his pals find themselves in Georgia where Larry has been charged with violating election laws by bringing water to a woman who waited in the hot sun for over two hours to vote. Despite facing a fine and up to a year in prison, Larry pleads not guilty. The episode ends with the judge saying, “Trial set for 90 days hence.”

That would appear to be the setting for the finale. Will people from Larry’s past testify to his social hostility and ill temper? Will the witnesses even include Jerry Seinfeld, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Jason Alexander and Michael Richards, who showed up on “Curb” back in season seven?

Will Larry David make his exit with the same irreverent view of comedy, television and society that has made him a legend among the cranky?

David has long advocated what he describes as “no hugging, no learning.” His characters are indifferent to the world around them, while he is annoyed by everything around him — including the oblivious masses. In a 2014 podcast interview David acknowledged the “grief” he took about the “Seinfeld” ending, but explained, “I was not interested in an emotional ride, and neither was Jerry.”

The difference, of course, between now and 1998 is that we all seem more easily annoyed by life’s little insults. So maybe Larry won’t go to prison. Maybe he’ll persuade the court that he, like Jerry, has been right all along about confronting the absurdities around us. Maybe he’ll finally be seen as heroic.

Nah. I think Larry will wind up behind bars.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Larry David can’t curb his instincts

Billy Joel’s AI State of Mind

A friend who reviews music and interviews top performers for a newspaper in New England, was up early Feb. 1 to sample the release from pop legend Billy Joel — his first new song in 17 years, “Turn the Lights Back On.”

The music and accompanying video link he sent me evoked memories of Mr. Joel’s “New York State of Mind” (1976), with a hint of “Piano Man” (1973):

“Drivin’ down 7th Avenue/ So many things have changed/ The places, the faces, the traces/ Of the days are falling out of range.

“While I’m parking my car/ I see a familiar bar/ The neon beer sign has seen better times/ And this joint can’t keep up with the fines/ So raise a glass, make a toast/ Honor all forgotten ghosts/ Turn the lights back on my friend/ Turn the lights back on.”

It was vintage Billy Joel, or so it seemed to us. But later in the day when I eagerly searched for the track to play it for my wife, Mr. Joel had changed his tune:

“Please open the door/ Nothing is different, we’ve been here before/ Pacing these halls/ Trying to talk over the silence.”

“I’m late, but I’m here right now/ Though I used to be romantic/ I forgot somehow/ Time can make you blind/ But I see you now/ As we’re laying in the darkness/ Did I wait too long/ To turn the lights back on?”

Seems the version my friend and I were enamored of was written by Tom Scharpling on his podcast “The Best Show,” with collaborator Brian Heveron-Smith, They had only the title to work with after Mr. Joel announced the new project in an Instagram post Jan. 22.

More intriguing than the musical fake are the comments on YouTube. “I wasn’t a Billy Joel fan until I heard this song,” writes @MichaelList. “He finally got me!” To which @Jack5505 replies, “This is not his new release. This is a fake.” And Michael posts, “Really?! I still love it!”

The music industry has been challenged by AI vocals that mimic a sound by processing dozens of prior works by an artist. Many have appeared on TikTok, with some already prompting legal action by record companies.

Meanwhile, Billy Joel, who turns 75 in May, still sounds great. And apparently, he’ll continue that way long after the lights go out.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Billy Joel’s AI State of Mind

Did you really think TV would ditch ads?

So, you thought by cutting the cable-TV cord you’d avoid exorbitant monthly fees and those dreaded commercial interruptions. Now, you’ve subscribed to so many streaming services that your monthly tab is higher than before, and it turns out that’s the least of your problems.

Lately you’ve noticed ads pouring into streaming. This week, subscribers to Amazon Prime were confronted with the news: “Movies and TV shows included with Prime now have limited ads. You can upgrade to be ad free for $2.99 a month.”

All of this relates to a fundamental truth in the media business that many consumers can’t seem to understand or accept: Television programmers and producers like to money, and advertisers have a longstanding willingness to spend it.

Disney+ now charges $7.99 per month for shows with commercials and almost double, $13.99, to skip the ads. Max also adds a $6 bump for its ad-free version. Netflix, the largest streamer, costs $15.49 per month, but if you’re willing to endure the ads you’ll pay only $6.99.

Hulu, the first major streamer to peddle ads, charges an additional $10 a month for its no-ad version — bringing the fee to an uncomfortably high $17.99. Paramount+ has an ad version, and Apple TV+ is expected to add commercials soon.

The beauty of streaming — for providers, not consumers — is that its commercials are difficult to bypass. Workarounds like TiVo made it doable for broadcast and cable, but not with streaming.

Consumers aren’t the only ones miffed about the influx of ads on streaming platforms. Producers, who used to format their shows with planned commercial breaks, stopped doing it when they moved to ad-free platforms like Netflix and Max. Now, the ads are back, creating a creative dilemma.

Veteran producer David E. Kelley told the Hollywood Reporter that his series “Nine Perfect Strangers” was “horrible” when presented with commercials on Hulu. “We sold it as a one-hour show, and it was served like a pie — but it was pudding,” he said. “You can’t cut pudding into slices, and that’s exactly what was done.”

The biggest gripe for both producers and consumers is what they perceive as bait and switch. They turned to pay-cable and premium streaming outlets based on an implied promise that commercials wouldn’t intrude, only to find that they’re back, more obnoxious than ever.

Truth is, TV distributors, regardless of their platform, were never going to abandon Madison Avenue for long. A 30-second commercial in next week’s Super Bowl costs $7 million. Do the math.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Did you really think TV would ditch ads?

Pebble Beach benches celebrities

At a time when the presence of celebrities seems to overwhelm professional sports (Taylor Swift, I’m looking at you in your sparkly Travis Kelce jersey), it’s noteworthy that this year’s AT&T Pro-Am golf tournament will be, for the first time since Bing Crosby brought his “Clambake” to Pebble Beach, essentially celebrity-free.

Gone are the days when Bing was accompanied on the links by drinking buddy and comedian Phil Harris, who enjoyed telling onlookers he was the pro from “The Jack Daniels Country Club.” Or more recent antics from Bill Murray, who became the event’s course jester, often swiping a sip of a patron’s beer at green side.

For this year’s tournament, which begins Feb. 1, more serious golf and fewer shenanigans were needed to qualify as what the PGA Tour calls a “Signature Event.” There will be half as many players, no weekend cuts — and no high-handicap celebrities. Some 80 amateurs will remain in the field for the first two rounds — mostly high-paying donors to the tournament’s charities — plus an odd sprinkling of professional athletes from other sports, including football’s Tom Brady and baseball’s Buster Posey.

But there won’t be anything resembling comic Tom Smothers doing tricks with his yo-yo as he waited to tee off, or actor Jack Lemmon breaking hearts as he failed to get beyond the third round in over two dozen tries. “I would trade my two Oscars to make the cut and play Sunday at Pebble Beach,” Lemmon said.

I have mixed feelings about this year’s changes, having played in the event three times. There was certainly nothing else like it in showbiz or sports: competing alongside a professional in a real Tour event, for cash prizes, before a nationwide TV audience. But in truth, the celebrity portion was merely a gimmick. We weren’t the best amateurs, only the most well-connected. I got in thanks to my friend and neighbor Clint Eastwood, an owner at Pebble Beach and a frequent participant in the old Pro-Am.

Most of the pros were gracious when we slowed them down with errant shots or, as was occasionally the case with Bill Murray, caused such a ruckus that it was hard to concentrate. Other pros, however, were irked and began skipping the event, which is why this year’s changes were made to lure them back.

For those of us who in other settings were reasonably comfortable standing in front of cameras and huge audiences, hitting a tee shot on the first hole at Pebble Beach was beyond terrifying. Warming up on the driving range one year, comic actor Ray Romano told me, “If I hit more than 14 lousy shots today, I’m dead.” I asked why. “I’ve only prepared 14 funny excuses,” he explained.

Honestly, I think most golf fans hope to see a pro hit a soaring 3-wood from 250 yards to within a few feet of the pin. But when a so-called celebrity swings, entertainment only happens if his shot is shanked miserably into the ocean.

In Bing Crosby’s day it was fun and games. In today’s high-stakes golf business there just isn’t room for both.

Copyright 2024 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Pebble Beach benches celebrities

Tom Smothers was serious about politics

Tom Smothers wasn’t the first performer to weaponize comedy for political purposes, but he was perfectly suited for it. During the height of his career with brother Dick in the ’60s and ’70s he took on Lyndon Johnson over his Vietnam policies and Richard Nixon over, well, just about everything.

When news came that Tommy died of cancer on Dec. 26, many of us immediately recalled the playful jibes exchanged by the brothers as hosts of “The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour” on CBS. “Mom always liked you best,” was Tommy’s favorite bit of bait for Dickie, who played the straight-man.

But the quips, and Tommy’s boyish smirk, were cover for what proved to be a more serious agenda. CBS had given the brothers their weekly series in 1967 believing they were a safe bet, not activists who would eventually help topple a president. Instead, they immediately did a routine in which they urged LBJ to quit, which he did a few months later by announcing he wouldn’t run in ’68.

The Smothers Brothers cared even less for Nixon, growing bolder in using their “Comedy Hour” for dissent. But soon after Nixon’s victory in ’68 CBS canceled the series, a move Tommy insisted was driven by pressure from the White House. (It was later revealed by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post that Nixon’s campaign paid for an investigation of the brothers.) Tom and Dick sued CBS and won a judgment of just under $1 million, but their powerful prime-time platform was gone.

In 1972 Tommy produced one of history’s most unusual political attack films, “Another Nice Mess,” which I detail in my book “Playing POTUS.” It starred impressionist Rich Little as Nixon and the actor Herb Voland as Vice President Spiro Agnew. The bizarre conceit was that Little and Voland played Nixon and Agnew playing Laurel and Hardy. The film was a financial fiasco, a creative flop — and quite a mess in its own right.

Tommy remained a comedic activist, describing himself as more progressive than brother Dick. He once approached me with an offer to buy “Candid Camera” — the show invented by my father Allen Funt — believing that its brand of reality-based comedy meshed well with his style. I thanked him, but said no.

Tommy and I played golf a few times in the AT&T Pro-Am tournament at Pebble Beach. I marveled at the way he pranced happily down the fairways, even after awful shots, pulling out his yo-yo to entertain fans.

Despite his battles with politicians and network executives, Tommy always maintained a gentle touch. His comedy was pointed, but not mean-spirited — something that seems to have gone out of style today.

After President Johnson left office, due in part to pressure from Tom and Dick, LBJ wrote to the brothers: “You have given the gift of laughter to our people. May we never grow so somber or self-important that we fail to appreciate the humor in our lives. If ever an Emmy is awarded for graciousness, I will cast my vote for you.”

Copyright 2023 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Tom Smothers was serious about politics

TV news puts its trust in women

Apple TV’s “The Morning Show,” which recently ended its third season, offers a melodramatic mishmash of media and current events, yet manages to get one thing right: It depicts women as the new faces of television news.

The series starring Jennifer Aniston and Reese Witherspoon not only places women in the anchor chairs for morning and evening newscasts, it demotes their male counterparts to token tasks like reporting the weather — a complete reversal of the way women were utilized for decades in real-life broadcasting.

CNN has installed a new prime-time anchor lineup that is 80% female, with Erin Burnett, Abby Phillip, Laura Coates and Kaitlan Collins. The token male is Anderson Cooper. This can be seen as a somewhat desperate ploy by CNN, which has struggled in the ratings of late, but across the entire TV news spectrum virtually every anchor opening is now being filled by a woman.

Network news managers have long walked a fine line in trying to give women well deserved on-camera opportunities while also chasing ratings in what is, after all, a competitive business dependent on viewership and advertising revenue. In 2016 Pew researchers found that 51 percent of Americans said they followed the news “all or most of the time” but over the next six years that figure plunged to 38 percent. The door swung open for women anchors as programmers tried to buck the trend.

When Chuck Todd stepped down this fall from NBC’s “Meet the Press,” he was replaced by Kristen Welker. She joins a Sunday news competition that includes Margaret Brennan hosting CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Shannon Bream as the replacement for Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday,” plus a pair of female co-anchors: Dana Bash on CNN’s “State of the Union” and Martha Raddatz on ABC’s “This Week.” Each of these shows in the recent past featured a solo male host.

Women have a regrettable history of being ignored or ridiculed in TV’s principal anchor roles, dating back to Barbara Walters’ struggle to break the glass ceiling. In 1976 she was made co-anchor with Harry Reasoner on the “ABC Evening News,” with a $1 million annual salary roughly double what CBS icon Walter Cronkite — “the most trusted man in America” — was earning. Walters ultimately failed at the anchor job but went on to an illustrious career as an interviewer.

In nearly five decades that followed, women gradually assumed prominent on-camera roles — most notably Norah O’Donnell’s promotion to anchor on “The CBS Evening News” in 2019 — but recently the pace has quickened dramatically. Why? For one thing, multiple studies show that Americans don’t trust national news outlets as much as they used to. In Cronkite’s day, the male voice conveyed credibility. Today, in a world rife with disinformation and alternate facts, women are likely to be seen as more honest brokers.

MSNBC now features a five-hour afternoon block anchored exclusively by female journalists. In the evening, two of the channel’s biggest stars, Brian Williams and Rachael Maddow, stepped away (in Maddow’s case cutting her schedule to one day a week) and were replaced by Stephanie Ruhle and Alex Wagner.

Not surprisingly, the one outlet to go in the opposite direction is Fox News Channel, where Laura Ingraham was recently demoted and the three main prime-time hours were given over to outspoken males Jesse Watters, Sean Hannity and Greg Gutfeld. At FNC, where neither journalism nor equal rights carry much weight, women are valued principally for the length of their skirts — in “the leg chairs” as insiders call the seats offering the best view.

Elsewhere, however, women are being tested as anchors and hosts in a journalistic jungle where viewers seem eager for change. Latest example: The selection of three female moderators for the Republican presidential debate carried by NewsNation — Elizabeth Vargas, Megyn Kelly and Eliana Johnson.

It’s a new morning for women in TV news. You can research that by asking Siri or Alexa.

Copyright 2023 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on TV news puts its trust in women

Fed Up? Yes. Nasty? No.

If you listen to pollsters and politicians, or consume heavy doses of social media and cable-TV news, you might come away thinking the nation is in a collective bad mood. We’re said to be irritable, even hostile.

I’ve just come off a 18-day road trip that took me from New Hampshire to Florida, spending time in nine states. My sense is that folks are frustrated with pretty much everything over which they have no control: the economy, politics and global conflict, to name just three biggies. But it’s a mistake to conclude that they’re taking it out on each other.

Americans I encountered seem to be compensating by treating each other — and strangers like me — with surprisingly pleasant vibes, almost the way they did at the start of the pandemic.

My conclusions are unscientific. Yet, having spent much of my career studying human nature on “Candid Camera,” I trust my instincts.

On I-275 in Florida I found myself having to pay a $1.75 toll with a 50-dollar bill. “No worries!” said the remarkably cheerful woman, laboring in a tiny booth on an 82-degree afternoon. “I’ve got plenty of change!” Still feeling guilty about the inconvenience, I fibbed, “I’ve never been on this road before.” “Oh, what fun!” she chirped as I pulled away.

When the young delivery woman in Columbia, S.C., accidentally went to the wrong hotel, she ripped up the bill for my pizza and her boss tossed in a free desert and soda.

In Manchester, N.H., I was among 1,700 people at the SNHU Arena watching Seth Meyers do comedy. It was the most courteous, mild mannered crowd I’ve ever encountered. The cops were like ambassadors, explaining how the facility is struggling since the minor-league hockey team moved away.

At the Mayflower Inn in Washington, Conn., I watched a young man spend nearly 15 minutes carefully guiding a motorist to safety after a semi had wedged his car into an impossibly small corner of the parking lot.

In Harrisonburg, Va., the internet was out at the Hampton Inn and the manager insisted on giving me a partial refund. He was so apologetic you’d think an evening without wifi was something truly awful.

After my rental car blew a tire in Ocala, Fla., the guys at H&D Services could not have been more sympathetic and accommodating, replacing the tire while regaling me with stories about highway mishaps they’ve observed.

In Fort Myers, a city still struggling to recover from last year’s devastating hurricane, employees were setting up holiday decorations at the Big Tower mall, where many of the stores didn’t make it back and half the palm trees are supported by large wooden trusses. “I’m just glad to have a job,” a middle-aged guy told me, as he stacked potted poinsettias in the shape of a ten-foot Christmas tree.

Look, I’m not naive about national discontent. But it’s good to know the American spirit is more resilient than many influencers on the national stage would have you believe.

Copyright 2023 Peter Funt distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Funt’s latest book is “Playing POTUS: The Power of America’s Acting Presidents,” about comedians who impersonated presidents.

Comments Off on Fed Up? Yes. Nasty? No.