Television

Lucid Lounge
1

Im supposed to write an essay on a generalization about television. I have a lot of ideas, but thought it would be cool to ask for suggestions. Just dont come at me all at once, hehe. :smile: im just kidding, dont hold back, its TV for crying out loud!

What im playing w/ so far:

TV is geared towards capitalism duh! and does not present other views.

TV, for the most-part not open-minded (shows, commercials, etc) and is in fact very simple/shallow minded, dealing mainly in issues relating to sex, violence, food, sex, and more violence! oh and the strange pursuit for useless material goods!

TV shows tend to further the existence of good and evil. (which i believe to be relative concepts)

TV is addictive and people get annoyed if their fix is interrupted. Who here hasnt heard the classic line: ‘please be quiet im trying to watch tv’ or more like ‘shush im watching tv’ strange how rude/egocentric people can be without realizing it

TV commercials tend to use irrelevant symbolism (to the product) to sell a product.

Any input would be greatly appreciated! :grin:

2

How about, television exploits peoples feelings. They get you to try to either hate one thing or love another thing.

3

Yes! very cool idea. Its like theres so much emotional bias on tv to get you to feel a certain way about things.

Take the classic example of the war in iraq:

Fact: we are killing people

‘Solution’: “our sons and daughters are over there in Iraq”

Result: you dont want to think your children are dying for a bad cause, so you think almost fanatically that they are the ‘good guys’ and use such mentality to convince others. (because you must tell everyone you are a ‘good’ parent!)

‘Solution 2’: “we are fighting a war on terrorism” (attaching such concepts as evil and dark etc)

Result: We think we are the good guys automatically, making us much-less likely to question things.

Oy, i’ll stop myself at this point. :tongue:

Wait one more:

Bush’s classic line: If you arent with us, you are against us. implying that there is no room in between, there is no grey-area, its just plain extreme-duality, folks. Welcome to regression. :neutral:

Sorry, getting a bit OT here, but then again not really, its all intertwined: television, commercialism, capitalism, ever-growing need for resources, the taking of such resources, justifying such through a play on words/feelings in mass-media. (isnt Iraq by coincidence of course the 2nd largest oil wells in the world?)

Dont get me started on outsourcing.

LOL anyways, thanks downward~spiral. What do you think the main feelings used are? IMO, in the US at least fear is the main emotion played upon.

But its so sad though. Theres never anything that isnt biased, you know? Its either ‘hate this’ or ‘love this’ but never are both/all views presented in equal fashion (sometimes you might see it on the fringe, but im talking the mainstream here)

Anyone else? :grin:

[dont matter if its off topic. what are you thinking? type it! :grin: ]

4

That last one about Bush saying you are either with us or against us. That really reminds me of the Bible.

5

I agree, taking sides first, and then deciding what your opinion is going to be, rather than forming an opinion and taking sides based upon it.

e.g. You’re a Republican so you agree with Bush’s environmental policies, instead of first agreeing with the environmental policies and becoming a Republican because of it.

or

You’re a Democrat so you support Clinton’s elective war against the Serbs in Kosovo because it saves people from genocide, but are against Bush’s elective war in Iraq even though it saves people from genocide.

or

You’re a Democrat so you are against Bush’s belief that it is worthwhile to send American troops to stop genocide in Iraq, but are in favor of stopping genocide in Sudan because Bush hasn’t sent troops there (yet).

or

If you support the war in Iraq you are obligated to volunteer to serve there (because you don’t support the war in Iraq) but if you support the war in Afghanistan you are not obligated to volunteer to serve there (because you do support the war in Afghanistan).

etc., etc. It’s interesting to note that you can also reverse many of these, such as the Kosovo one. I recall many Republicans against the war in Kosovo because the Serbs posed no danger to America, and humanitarian concerns were brushed aside. By the same token, General Wesley Clark, who commanded NATO forces in the conflict, was (I assume) in favor of the war in Kosovo despite it being an elective war, but because Bush launched an elective war in Iraq, Clark now says that elective war is always wrong.

You can see this effect sometimes even more clearly in other countries. For example, France is against the U.S. taking unilateral action because unilateral action is bad, but sends its own forces into Sierra Leone, etc. Similarly, the British often complain that using airstrikes in Afghanistan is wrong because it kills innocent civilians, but the British airstrikes that killed hundreds of thousands of German civilians in WW2 were not wrong.

People in favor of the war in Iraq often overlook casualties inflicted by the bombs while pointing to Saddam’s torture of children, while opponents of the war in Iraq overlook the torture and complain about the bombs. (A child is killed either way. Of course intent exists only in one of the cases.)

I see this phenomenon a lot in the case of abortion and the death penalty. Many Democrats feel it is hypocritical to support the death penalty and then be pro-life because life is so valuable. Republicans feel it is hypocritical to be against the death penalty because life is so valuable and then be pro-choice.

Let’s face it, it’s often easier to pick sides than pick issues.

6

What about TV as the center for social gathering?

I never watch TV alone. When i do, it is often cause someone told me on ICQ or whatever that there is something particular on. I think the social factor explains why people watch brain dead programs like survivor or pop idol, or ricky lake…