Pope set to resign / New Pope elected

[Vee]

Yes, but they did break into programming at the drop of a dime?

[katie_9918]

Programming that is pre-recorded and available on-line, on SoapNet, and likely tomorrow.

I honestly don't see the big deal here.

I'm not a huge fan of political (non-election or actual newsworthy stuff, I mean) or non-severe weather pre-emptions, but I get that other people find them important.

I just don't understand the utter disdain in this particular case. You're not into this, that's fine, but there are plenty of people who are.

[frequentsoapfan]

They probably did in certain places.

[Mr. Vixen]

People stay getting worked up over the pre-emption of a god damn soap opera! For real y'all, I love you, but please take up a hobby. This ain't that serious. And you can hate all day, but the election of a new Pope is huge, global news. You can pretend it's not all day, and you have every right not to care, but just because you don't care doesn't mean it's not massive news.

[ChitHappens]

Judge Judy wasn't interrupted, so I'm good!

[Cheap21]

I cant believe there's been 4 damn pages going back and forth talking about the Pope and preemption. Damn the preemption got more talk than the actual daily show gets within 6 hours of airing

[DRW50]

I'd say that's more about the poor quality of the show than it is anything else. On previous recent days, instead of talk about the actual episodes, there's been rehash #23 about KDP's Twitter, rehash #49384 of whether or not people hate Sabrina too much, repost #9 of The Soup's relish clip, and general arguments over who is or is not a GH character.

I just don't see the big deal in some people complaining about preemptions. No one is suggesting they go to the ABC studios and shout at windows. It's just some griping in a thread.

[Vee]

Once again, it's not about the preemption of a soap opera. That happens. It's about the dogged, overly enthusiastic insistence about a new Pope in Rome being treated as programming-breaking international mega-news in America in 2013. I had to watch that [!@#$%^&*] all afternoon and part of the evening on major networks for days, and in a nation that no longer identifies as largely white and Christian I don't consider it worthy of that kind of coverage - and I find it offensive.

[Mr. Vixen]

Then turn off the TV.

[Vee]

I'd rather see TV get its head out of it own ass about this antiquated [!@#$%^&*]. It's certainly news, yes, but it's not our government. It's not our universal custom anymore. It's not a national emergency or tragedy. And so in the 21st century, I'm annoyed watching a gaggle of old white people on television tell me how important and exciting this is and how much they wish I could be there.

[katie_9918]

Why not just turn it off then? You may not identify as largely white and Christian (and I agree with you on that count, this country can't identify as ANYTHING as a rule these days), but there are many others who appreciate a historic event not being swept under the rug just because we're too damned politically correct to identify it as a major historical event.

Plenty of people thought the 2008 election got shoved down our throats, but that was a major historic event. When certain members of my family got sick of it, they TURNED IT OFF and didn't complain about it because they RECOGNIZED it even if they didn't feel it as much as plenty of other people did.

[rhinohide]

It's HUGE for 1.2 billion people worldwide and for more people in the US than tune into GH daily. Whatshisface and Kate's wedding preempted everything for about 12 hours. This isn't Great Britain either. Guess we don't get to decide what is newsworthy.

[Vee]

I'm very white. And I don't want it swept under the rug. I just think that in this day and age there is a time and a place, and the coverage has gotten off-putting.

That was electing our political head of state. This is a religious figure in another country for whom only a part of our culture still identifies as their spiritual leader (and within the context of a political hierarchy which unfortunately has been really tarnished in recent years). I don't have anything against Catholicism, or Christians or Christianity, or Buddhism or whatever else. But I don't see breaking into our regular programming night and day for any of these other faiths, and I like to believe we've moved beyond that. Certainly it should be a top story on 24-7 news cycles or at the midday or evening news slots, but breaking in all day everyday is overkill and out of step with today's America to me.

[dragonflies]

news channels go overboard with any kind of news they deem important, they oversaturate people with it to where they get sick of it. Tis why I like when they cover tragedies, but when they do it 24/7 for days on end, it's like enough please

[partyperson25]

If you ask me,being a muslim,it really doesn't pertain to me directly. To others yes,so if it is big to anyone else,direct or not,it is big news globaly. Because no one is separated by country or religion in this world,everyone is mixed (obvious statement) so this news will and IMO should be addressed,even if it does interrupt our soap. And thanks RSinclair for backing up all religions,including Islam. Greatly appreciated