Are you ready for some pre-game?

Back in my high school and university days, I like many others, had become something of a master of the use of filler. You know, the word equivalent of cellulite that was stuffed into a term paper to make it look like we knew more than we actually did. For example:

"The so-called missing link between humans and lower animals and their nearest ancestors the neanderthals, may indeed not be missing-link at all. This is the theme of this paper that I am in fact composing at this moment, that addresses the so-called missing link, which is a link that might indeed not actually be missing at all."

Rinse and repeat.

Most teachers were wise to this erroneous form of wordsmithing and would occasionally call us on it. Sure it was wrong, but there were far too many other equally valid activities in our young lives that demanded our time and attention as did our schoolwork. Some of which I have difficulty recalling at the moment, but I'm sure they were important.

Over the years we discover that filler exists just about everywhere. Food is probably the best (or perhaps worst) example. Just about every processed food product has some mysterious bulk inducing substance to convince us that we're getting more for less.

Anyone who has ever read an ad, or a CV, or a real estate listing, has encountered some of the most well-crafted say-nothing blather, conceived solely to distract the reader from discovering that the product, person or property is about as appealing as a slab of dry tofu. I know, I've written at least one of each.

All these these examples pale in comparison to the truly extraordinary capacity of television to pack every moment of broadcast time with pure unadulterated twaddle, and then hype the living daylights out of each and every second.

Consider CNN's recent coverage of the U.S. Presidential State of The Union address. The program consisted of a panel of about 8 political experts, another guy with some sort of smart screen to track preselected audience responses, and yet another overly peppy talking head monitoring Tweets as the speech progressed. All of this riveting lets-make-up-the-news news was moderated by the appropriately named Wolf Blitzer stalking the massive studio reminding the audience that CNN had the best political team in the history of humankind. But I paraphrase. Hey, here's a radical idea, why don't we just listen to the speech and form our own opinion?

This weekend brings us the annual orgy of sports coverage, the Superbowl. For four full hours we will be inundated with a torrent of hyperbole in the form of behind-the-scenes stories of players, coaches, general managers, team trainers, seamstresses and waterboys. At least once we will hear the words, "even though he is living a life long dream, today (enter player's name) will be playing with a heavy heart." Expect an unending stream of intricate and incomprehensible analysis of what each team must do, defensively and offensively, to win the most coveted trophy in the known universe. Even the most trivial aspect of the game, from the coin toss to the quarterback's choice of underwear, will be discussed and debated by a panel of former players and coaches who would much rather be suiting up to play than pretending to care about the pedantic poetic musings of the host.

Dress it up anyway you want, it's about as satisfying as that mysterious bulk inducing substance crammed into your chili dog, and about as good for you. Here's a radical idea, why not just watch the game?

I guess I'm bitter. Who knew you could actually get paid to generate reams of pointless double-talk?

Wait, I think I saw Wolf Blitzer at the window...