Interview for Current TV’s Infomania Show

I did a funny interview with Ben Hoffman for Current TV’s Infomania Show, which aired tonight. Ben’s a really funny interviewer!
I was actually laughing quite a bit during the interview, but they cut it in a funny manner to make it look like I was serious during his jokes, which made it even funnier :-) Also, when I said I make 6 figures, you include dollars and cents, right?

The title of the segment is based on the fact that when you Google certain words like philologist, feet, antidisestablishmentarianism, hooker, boobs, I appear right at the top of those searches due to the success of my videos discussing those word origins.


Comments/DISQUS help? Click here.

Allowed HTMLDISQUS Status

Leave a Reply

110 Responses to Interview for Current TV’s Infomania Show

  1. wyo550 says:

    The interview was typical amateur journalism and made the talent look conceited in her answers. The producers of non-show like this one (whatever it was) should submit their questions to the talent and her producers ahead of time, so that the talent’s “personality” (whether actual or an act) is properly conveyed. Right now, I’m mad she makes so much money in a bad economy. Hey, moneybags, is “six figures” what you stuff your bra with? I bought a six figure Porsche in Scottsdale Saturday, can I have a loan at 6%?????? The show and the talent would have been MUCH better off with a funny “Oh so Marina” answer of “I think I make six figures. You count six figures with the cents, right?” ha ha ha!!!!!

  2. originalistrick says:

    Gotta go watch the Horns play a [DOUBLEHEADER] with the Nittany Lions. Marina – love you, girl! HFW Family – keep up the great banter! See ya’ll in a little while.

  3. originalistrick says:

    MY quote for the day:

    ‘A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.’

    Thomas Jefferson

    • leonard says:

      “He is one of those people who would be enormously improved by death.” – H. H. Munro ‘Saki’ 1870-1916 %$%$%$33..or..A man has cause for regret only when he sows and no one reaps.
      Charles Goodyea~~~~~~~~~~~~~Life should not be estimated exclusively by the standard of dollars and cents.
      Charles Goodyear~~~~~~~~~~~~~I weep for the liberty of my country when I see at this early day of its successful experiment that corruption has been imputed to many members of the House of Representatives, and the rights of the people have been bartered for promises of office.
      Andrew Jackson

      • leonard says:

        “Just a month later, on 16 November 1916, while serving near the French town of Beaumount-Hamel, Hector Hugh Munro was fatally shot by a German sniper’s bullet. According to several sources his last words were: “Put that damned cigarette out!” It is alleged that Munro’s sister Ethel had destroyed his personal papers.” :shock: from :grin: Biography written by C.D. Merriman for Jalic Inc. Copyright Jalic Inc 2005. All Rights Reserved.

        • leonard says:

          I am ready to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.” – Sir Winston Churchill 1874-1965…………….hotforwords………………….crazy night, no luck with new videos and today is another day, sleep tight, u all :razz:

  4. Has anyone figured out why Marina was wearing a pink glove for this lesson? :mrgreen:

    • leonard says:

      I think, Gorby and the bowel movements…and Marina uses the magic glove for conducting. {GORBY and the BOWEL MOVEMENTS) Suites to wear…instrumental version} Or, its a pick -up devise for small things of stink(I think) :roll:

    • originalistrick says:

      Don’t know about the color. But I’ve looked over my shoulder and seen doctors’ hands in that position…

  5. bsomebody says:

    @ Lady M, in case you were wondering about Che’s recent absence, he sent me an e-mail saying he was stuck in Mexico for a while. He said he would be down there for quite a bit, so you should just send his prize to me, instead. Oh yeah, he said he wanted your old copy of OED signed “To bsomebody, thanks for all your input. Love, Marina. XOXO.” or something like that. :???:
    It’s true, I tell ya! :oops:

  6. muggins says:

    I’m shocked that your interviewer made reference to your boobs, Marina. Not that I blame him, after all I have red blood flowing in my veins too, just that it’s beneath a certain threshold in public discourse. Notwithstanding, if I dare brush dangerously close to that same threshold, sometimes your videos recalls one of my cherished memories going way back to a TV appearance of Jayne Mansfield on a live awards television show (circa 1960) that alas probably was not videotaped, where she wore a uniquely revealing gown, with cutaways in her dress exposing her boob flesh south of her nipples. Normally, deep plunging necklines reveal a goodly portion of the boobs, usually the upper/middle hemispheres, just hiding the nipples, but the designer of Jane’s dress had the inspiration to have cutaways featuring her southern hemispheres. The designer of the dress may have been Australian. It’s a fashion detail I’ve not witnessed since. Marina, I hope that your designer reads this comment and catches the hint.

  7. John says:

    They don’t have your talent for editing do they.

  8. originalistrick says:

    If humankind descended from apes, why are there still apes?

    • Apes and humans are shown to have evolved from a common ancestry from studys of the brain.
      There are gorillas, chimps, baboons, gibbons, etc.
      just as there are anglos, asians, aleuts, etc.
      Does this info help? :mrgreen:

      • John says:

        Maybe god just used some of the same parts?

      • pennsyltucky9 says:

        Sorry Chach,

        This doesn’t qualify as info. Pardon my saying so, but pick up a book before exercising your keyboard.

        • I beg to differ, pennsyltucky. :mrgreen:
          in·for·ma·tion (nfr-mshn)
          1. Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
          2. Knowledge of specific events or situations that has been gathered or received by communication; intelligence or news. See Synonyms at knowledge.
          3. A collection of facts or data: statistical information.
          4. The act of informing or the condition of being informed; communication of knowledge: Safety instructions are provided for the information of our passengers.
          5. Computer Science Processed, stored, or transmitted data.
          6. A numerical measure of the uncertainty of an experimental outcome.
          7. Law A formal accusation of a crime made by a public officer rather than by grand jury indictment.
          What book are you refering to?
          I suggest you start with Darwin: Origin of the Species :grin:

          • pennsyltucky9 says:

            I’ve read it. Good stuff.

            What part of Darwin’s book are you using to support your earlier assertion that

            “There are gorillas, chimps, baboons, gibbons, etc. just as there are anglos, asians, aleuts, etc.”

            Do you really see other nationalities as other species? I am truly sorry.

            Nice copy-&-paste, btw

        • Heh heh! I guess you need to read it again :mrgreen:
          You didn’t seem to understand the definition of the word information, when you used it. :grin:
          I only offer one refresher for free.
          Either educate yourself, or pay someone to get the knowledge.
          If you are unable to deduce from the “information” that I gave out that while apes, chimps, etc. are all simians – they evolved to their own branches, with their own characteristics, within the species.
          Same goes for humans. Japanese, Chinese and Koreans may all appear similar (for example) but a closer, more comprehensive examination reveals distinct differences. Darwin used animal species found in places suchas Australia, New Zealand and the Galalgapos Islands to illustrate his examples.
          Now, if you’re done playing “bait and switch” games with me, you might focus your attention on the relevant subject of the discussion before using words suggesting things not said by me as arguements you wish to make. I am not sure I believe you have read Darwin, as you claim, based on your words as you have used them. Suggesting that I need to “pick up a book before exercising my keyboard” is very lame coming from someone needing a refressher on the definition of a simple word – information. Perhaps taking your own advice might serve you better. :mrgreen:

          • pennsyltucky9 says:

            Ha, ha. Yeah, “take my advice, I’m not using it.”

            Reading Darwin is like a prison sentence, actually. It was a different era, and he was British, so the language is completely different than anything I’m used to, and a very difficult read. For example:

            “Now, let some alteration of physical conditions occur in the district– a long period of drought, a destruction of vegetation by locusts, the irruption of some new carnivorous animal seeking “pastures new”– any change in fact tending to render existence more difficult to the species in question, and tasking its utmost powers to avoid complete extermination; it is evident that, of all the individuals composing the species, those forming the least numerous and most feebly organized variety would suffer first and, were the pressure severe, must soon become extinct.”

            That’s just one sentence from Darwin and Wallace’s chapter “On the tendency of species to form varieties.” There’s page after page of that, and if read slowly, it makes perfect sense. But it’s mind-numbing to try and get through it in a short time, like on a Sunday afternoon when there’s a paper due tomorrow at 8am. It’s a nightmare. I got an A in the course, though.

            His contemporaries Herbert Spencer, Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, and Lewis Henry Morgan also presented initial theoretical facets to the concept of evolution that we still see vestiges of in the present day, but for the most part they were typical “armchair theoreticians,” not quite the fieldwork scientist Darwin was. This was where some seeds of the now-debunked “cultural evolution” model were planted, and your idea about “Anglos, Aleuts, and Asians” representing different species like “gorillas, chimps, baboons, gibbons, etc” follows this very extinct line of “reasoning.”

            Specifically, it allows for the Western European (read: English gentleman) to view the world as if his culture alone is at the pinnacle of evolutionary perfection, which by default places all other cultures down there somewhere in the “less human” category. Without this critical bit of pretzel logic, the idea of state-sponsored subjugation by force of entire cultures for the profit and betterment of the colonizing power would amount to nothing less than sinful behavior, like the slavery it truly was. But since “God” empowered the Western Europeans (by virtue of their assumed “great evolutionary superiority”) to sieze the lands, resources, and workforces of “less highly evolved” peoples all over the world and dictate how they will live their lives, what religion they’ll follow, and to whom they’ll pay taxes, etc. like the “gorillas, chimps, baboons, gibbons, etc.” which have pretty much been either hunted to near-extinction to put trophy heads on the wall of English manor houses or had their habitats stolen and cleared for farming, etc. This sets the stage for people like Hitler to rise to power. First he “proved” (at least to his own satisfaction) that Jews, Gypsies, and the physically and mentally disabled were less “human” than the “good Germans” and “true Aryans” whose help he needed to do the job. As soon as that misinformation was fixed securely in the eyes of his public, they could then be rounded up because their rights were suddenly and very clearly less important than those of his constituents, etc. due to their lesser standing in the eyes of his regime. You see, if we don’t de-humanize a population, it’s a lot harder to justify taking what’s theirs and having them systematically killed. Ask any Australian about the native population there and whether the Brits were nice and respectful of their culture. Same deal. As to your statement:

            “If you are unable to deduce from the “information” that I gave out that while apes, chimps, etc. are all simians – they evolved to their own branches, with their own characteristics, within the species.”

            Huh? Within what species? “Simian?” Again, a book might help.

            It’s obvious that you don’t know THESE ARE ALL DIFFERENT SPECIES. They can’t interbreed. There is no “within the species” here. Your’e talking about different animals, apples and oranges. Humans are all one species. Gorillas, chimps, orangutans and gibbons are not. So get as mad as you want about my refusal to accept the Eurocentrist view of some perceived difference between “anglos, asians, aleuts, etc.” There is none. The recurring theme in the definition of information is KNOWLEDGE, not assumption or wild conjecture based on supremacist folktales.

            Sorry if I get a bit strident. I see you as an intelligent person, and aside from your occasional off-subject political commentary, I generally enjoy your posts. Otherwise why would I waste my time? You seem to occupy a position of respect and authority here on HFW, and it’s disturbing to read things that are so grossly inaccurate represented as if “common knowledge.” In this regard, you have a bit of responsibility to uphold, wouldn’t you agree? Me? I’m just some idiot guitar player from Ohio. So what if I have an Anthropology degree with double honors? What the hell do I know?

            Thanks for responding.

        • Hey! Good response – well thought out.
          There is only one little point remaining to clarify, and you will see we are actually on the same page.
          The thrust of the topic, and examples cited using Darwinism, alude to differences within a species group attributable to environment. Cave fish are blind (no eyes, or under developed eyes) because of where they exist. Tube worms, found near undersea magma vents spewing sulfurous emissions, at extreme pressures are another adaptation.
          Somewhere in the past, these forms of life shared an ancestry with surface dwelling animals we are more familiar with. Studies of the brain show links to our human ancestry from animals like birds and lizards (thalmus), to other species with developed hypo thalmus and, ultimately, cerebral brain function.
          I agree Darwin has much dreck to sift through to get to the nut of theories. His audience were anthropologists…
          I even tried reading Plato’s Republic, once. Even with a thick dictionary, I was worn out after ten or eleven pages.
          Aren’t you glad this is a lighthearted discussion? :mrgreen:

          • pennsyltucky9 says:

            Lighthearted, uh yeah. Hmmm.

            Actually, I’m just glad you have the capability to process things and make intelligent comparisons based on the relevant facts. I may disagree with your use of this site to espouse your political views, but I appreciate your style just the same, Chach. Thanks for communicating. See you around the campus.

    • CampKohler - Sacramento CA says:

      You can’t be serious. If one offspring has a change that is a mutation towards another species, does brother and/or sister immediately die or otherwise not procreate?

      • If I understand your question correctly, the answer is not necessarily death or procreative disfunction. Birth defects happen all the time. Evolutionary changes tend to occur slowly, but evidence in the geologic records show adaptive changes to the environment can happen at rates parallel to sudden environmental changes.

        • CampKohler - Sacramento CA says:

          My point is, regardless of what happens to a mutant offspring, the line of the unmutated offspring still continue on. So if one ape baby headed towards humandom, the remaining ape babies would continue in apedom as before. thus apes would not die out, which is the answer to the original (or is it Original’s?) question.

    • fredjr says:

      Popular demand.

    • bsomebody says:

      The theory of evolution does not state that humans evolved from apes, but that humans (and Neanderthals) and apes evolved from a common, primate ancestor. I believe that, according to the theory, chimps are humans’ closest primate relative. We share a little over 98% of the same DNA (except for Republicans, who share approximately 107.63% of their DNA with spider monkeys.)
      “Well, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle!” No, but the monkey’s uncle could be your uncle. :roll:

    • originalistrick says:

      I just threw that out there to try to stir things up a little.

    • Marina says:

      The apes didn’t take school seriously! That’s why school is so important! :-)

    • Bob says:

      Why are there still apes? To provide a never ending supply of teenagers and YouTubers. :cool:

    • pennsyltucky9 says:

      Hi originalistrick,

      We just had a common ancestor at some point way back in prehistory, is all.

      We’re all Primates, like the monkeys, lemurs, and apes. All of us primates on planet earth are the descendents of some real early primates. Every species is specially adapted to some particular conditions of its environment: jungle, grassland, desert, tree, cliff, etc. The same amount of time has elapsed for all of today’s primate species since that distant ancestor. This means we’re all equally evolved to suit our special habitat niche. We humans aren’t necessarily more “highly evolved” than other primates. We just evolved differently to suit different conditions because we are omnivorous generalists (we don’t specialize our diet like herbivores and carnivores). So we wandered around a lot looking for anything at all to eat while trying to stay clear of lions and stuff. We wandered so far looking for food we got lost, spreading all over the place. We evolved especially to live in a diverse range of habitats by walking upright and having big brains so we could adapt to otherwise inhospitable conditions by inventing clothes and tools. Like other primates, we lived in groups and depended on each other a lot for survival.

      But unlike what MeLikaDotheChaCha said, all the nationalities of humans are the same species. Genetically, they’re the same. Here’s how that works. There’s a huge genetic difference between a baboon and a gorilla: they can’t produce offspring together, because they’re different species. That’s the defining characteristic of a species: they can interbreed within their own species and produce viable offspring.

      Now here’s where Chacha is way wrong: Can an Aleut can have children with an Anglo? Yes. Can an Asian have children with a Native American? Of course. But a human can’t have children with a chimpanzee because they’re of different species. Anyone who’s taken a mid-level biology class knows this. I have an anthropology degree, and it’s troublesome to see such misinformation surfacing under the guise of common knowledge. See comment for further clarification.


  9. ihearbs says:

    [barking up the wrong tree]

  10. originalistrick says:

    Just popped into my head:


    (While I am smitten by Marina, I hope my comments don’t cause her to want to smite me.)

  11. skaterguy says:

    boobs or hooker do not turn up first on google.

    boobs # 7 here, hooker not at all on page 1.
    antidisestablishmentarianism not at all on page 1.

    you probably never realised google gives different results from region to region.

    Marina – you were obviously not amused by his slogan ” marina, the most googled hooker” …. :shock: i thought it was blunt, but maybe he was provocing a reaction.

    • vault says:

      Actually I think Marina’s reaction to the “slogan” was hilarious. Maybe not everyone gets this kind of humour, but if you read the description she wrote under the video you will realise that this guy is supposed to behave this way. Don’t think he was really rude to her, it was just the tone of the interview. I bet Marina laughed a lot at his comments, wish we had uneditted version as well..

      Besides – “the fourth most Googled hooker” has kind of dual meaning in this case, that was the point :)

      • excited4etymology says:

        I agree…hooker is so ambiguous in its meaning. For it could mean:

        1) a farmer
        2) an adultress
        3) a rugby player

        • CampKohler - Sacramento CA says:

          4. a rugmaker
          5. the person in a talent show that removes a contestant by force
          6. a golf player who hits a ball to the right
          7. a fisherman
          8. William Shatner in a former roll

          I’m bored.

  12. originalistrick says:

    And you are so right about the editing. Loved your expression when he was talking about “hooker”!
    Way to go, Lady!


  13. kickingbassguitar says:

    Well, six figures is not too shabby for a woman with two degrees. Couldn’t you free up some of your creative energy by hiring an assistant to do some of the minutia for you and maybe make even bigger figures?

  14. seesixcm6 says:

    You did very well in that interview. You dressed very nicely and your hair looked very good. You speak very well, and your accent is less noticeable. The sound of your voice is appealing. :razz:
    I’m glad you are so successful. I hope this means more success for you in the future. :razz:

    Marina said;
    “… when I said I make 6 figures,
    you include dollars and cents, right?”

    What the hey, If we use this format, $dd,, and we use your cents, then you are really making 7 figures. :shock:
    Don’t let that cat out of the bag, cause 6 figure Buckey is really gonna be jealous.

  16. This will fool with a lot more people – heh heh! :mrgreen:
    They won’t even know they’re learning new junk and stuff, until it’s too late.
    Marina wasn’t the “airhead” in this interview – LOL! :smile:
    It’s akin to a fisherman dangling a tasty nugget…
    One taste of the bait is worth the hook!

  17. leonard says:

    Good Job :razz:

  18. cufan71 says:

    :cool: & :lol: interview Marina :!:

  19. bike artist says:

    Hi Marina,

    If it feels like one or both of your “boobies” have moved/wobbled for some unknown reason… it may be because somebody “out-there” is “messing around with you”. :shock: :grin: :roll: :lol:

    Good interview… have a wonderful day!

    • bike artist says:

      WORD REQUEST [surreptitious]

    • Marina says:

      I downloaded that app, it’s hilarious! :lol:

      • Capman911 says:

        Are you going to make a picture with that app and send it to Ellen I believe it was who caused such a ruckus about the Bill Orielly show and how she said you jiggled all in front of Bill when you moved your arms? :lol:

      • hs4mm says:

        I’ll discuss the Wobble in the last para, but want to say something else before that.

        What I find intriguing/fascinating is how many people are developing applications for the iPhone. My guess on why Microsoft became successful involves a similar phenomenon: when the personal computer was first introduced, Microsoft facilitated hobbyists to develop applications for Microsoft’s DOS operating system; and many such hobbyists earned their living this way. Even today, the software used by Bank tellers, by auto-shops for tracking inventory etc. are based on “ancient” DOS applications. And I think Microsoft’s downfall was that they progressively cut-off access to hobbyists and went down the path of trying to guess all the things their customers would want to do and providing a kludgey, GUI based way to do those things. In reality, what a person wants to do is dependent on his personal goals and ingenuity — and it is impossible for anyone to list all the ways any one individual would use a computer, let alone list all the ways everybody would use a computer. Also, a computer is more of a tool rather than a consumable product: one can list the things people might do with a slice of bread, but one cannot list things one might do with a knife, a car, or a computer. The value — that of enabling hobbyists to earn a living by developing applications — Microsoft provided in its earlier years was such a great value that people continued to buy Microsoft products long after that Microsoft went against that value.

        Continuing with my guess, Apple’s customer base has largely been people involved in creating artistic products (e.g., animations); Apple wanted people to use their computers as an end-product and not as something to develops applications for. This is why the fact the people can and are developing applications for the iPhone intrigues/fascinates me.

        Finally, getting back to the Wobble: I do find the ad hilarious, and I suppose I could amuse myself for a minute or so with that application. But a few minutes is nothing compared to a lifetime; in the context of a lifetime, I did rather amuse myself with something physically real: specifically, the body and soul of a live girl. It is not the Wobble that I want, but the real.


      • bike artist says:

        I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw it… just think!… someone inadvertently invented the cyber “BooB-oo” Doll. :grin:

      • animalntaz says:

        Wait… have you wobbled your boobs on your iPhone? (If you have one) :shock:

      • niteowl says:

        This makes me wonder why you haven’t done the word [wobble].

        Now I’m going to be dreaming of things “wobbling” all night long. Not anything in particular, you understand. :smile:

    • Not fair! :cry: :sad: :neutral: :!:
      I’d need an XP version of this software. :idea:
      If they make it for Vista, it won’t work. :oops:
      It should use the cursor keys to initiate the wobble so people don’t have to shake their monitors. :grin:

    • fatbuffalo says:

      Must resist getting an iphone …. :mrgreen:

    • originalistrick says:

      Udderly hilarious!

  20. bsomebody says:

    Great interview! and in English even. :grin: It’s about time we get more coverage over here. :roll: We’re movin’ up lads! Lady M, I do have one point of correction, :mad: please do not forget your many helpers with the website. I know some of these cats put in some wicked time fixin’ some o’ the gremlins ( :evil: ) ’round here. Great job, boys! :razz:

    Now, I gotta go google boobs, and see what all this fuss is about. Be back in an hour or so…

  21. James says:

    I love how he said…. Hotforwords the 4th most googled hooker…. then they put the cut in of her face HA!

  22. Maxim1990 says:

    this is [hilarious] hahaha !!! :grin:

  23. thoughtonfire says:

    Dear HotForWords,

    That was funny! You carried yourself well! (Even if they cut it making you look serious about it!)

    “wot” LMFAO!


    BTW I’m here to learn & stuff! (albeit (date back) I’m not a very good learner (anymore (I used to be!) :!:

    And THAT has something to do with Michael Phelps…

    Sober now for almost 3 years, So :razz:

  24. animalntaz says:

    I Googled those words above, but Google couldn’t find anything to match “boobs”! :???:

  25. greatestpotential says:

    Six figures if you emot the boobies O :smile: O O :grin: O O :oops: O I like the Infomania set, that Charlie Rose darkness fell upon the audience thing going on there. Uh oh. I just googled “boobs” looks like I’m going to be busy for awhile.

  26. Warren says:

    I had to Google and she wasn’t making that up.
    I clicked on your YT channel because you were in the Education section.
    I’ve continued watching your show because I enjoy your unique style and humor as you teach an interesting subject. Now your fans have added a depth that is irreplaceable and I look forward to their company here at your website.
    I’ve always enjoyed your inteviews since it’s at these times your personal side shows through a bit more than it could during your show.
    I think that I’ve mentioned more than two reasons why I watch your show.
    Have a great day.

  27. Marina said;
    “The title of the segment is based on the fact …”

    I’m sure you know that title spelled backwards is el tit
    which just happens to be this video. Love those coincidences.
    That video still has a vacant Ad space.
    Those advertisers just aren’t creative enough.

  28. I loved the dead pan look on you guys, just like that Onion piece on the Forum that ChaCha left.

    By the way, women’s dictionary and men’s dictionary are good Google searchers. Your #1 on those terms also.

    Seen for the FIRST time.
    You were great in the interview,
    but the topic was a little mono-focused, or should that be duo-focused?

These are facebook comments below.


Not your typical philologist! Putting the LOL in PhiLOLogy :-)