"A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem."
Albert EinsteinHow is television applicable?
How is television a perfection of means?
I don't know if anyone noticed, but the whole TV experience hasn't changed much since its invention in 1927 and its proliferation in America following WWII. We still sit in front of a box displaying images and speakers producing sound. What we do have now are more gadgets and more options--hundreds of channels, surround sound, DVR, audience participation shows like American Idol, etc.
Have you ever wondered why TV hasn't witnessed any revolutionary changes? There could be several hypotheses, but I think TV's unchanging history is due to its near perfection in what it does: communicate. Can any other communicator compete with the TV experience, with its appeal to sight and hearing--arguably to two most important senses? No, and no other communication device has.
Television dominates communication because it is cheap, easy to manage, and provides an experience as close as it comes to vicarious.
How is television a deleterious "aim"?
At first television broadcast the news--television was a mass communication device. But why couldn't television be entertaining, like a take-home cinema? With such easy access, entertainment could reach every home with the touch of a button. And what better way to reel in the cash than to stick ads between sessions of entertainment? Television is a perfect example of the market--the competition among shows for the most viewers to create the most competition among companies for advertisement spots--seizing control immediately and turning the boat around 180 degrees into the waters of entertainment appeal.
Since the arrival of this system, little has changed in the TV world. But what has changed in the outside world? Entertainment television became such a central part of the modern family that it now celebrates its own nostalgia on channels like "TV land." But do we celebrate television for bringing us the world news for 60+ years? Does television educate (other than a few select channels)? Does television exist for anything but the entertainment market?
No, it doesn't. Ask me and I'll tell you this kind of rampant capitalist exploitation of people's urge to find entertainment is exactly the reason America is the kind of cesspool that better understands Big Brother more than the Big Bang, Ocho Cinco more than Otto von Bismarck, and Sarah Palin the reality TV mom more than Sarah Palin the presidential candidate.
Einstein seems to attack the same point. Humans are excellent at developing astoundingly efficient technologies, but if no one steps in to use these technologies for the betterment of society then they only more efficiently destroy our respect for anything but entertainment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.