Upon finishing Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, I was intrigued by Postman's argument that "form excludes content," and that particular forms of mediums can only sustain particular ideas. Postman later on explains how politics and religion are slowly becoming diluted and the daily news is becoming a packaged commodity because television de-emphasizes the quality of information compared to the need of entertainment and how information is becoming subordinate. I believe this argument about the negative distribution of information through television is sensible and accurate because television can not only dictate the type of information distributed, being mostly about celebrity gossip, but can also prevent itself from being taken seriously because of the inclusion of theme music, interruption of commercials, and "talking hairdos".
Like Postman mentioned, information in various subjects is forced to be dependent on television for popularity. An example given by Postman includes how candidates now must rely on presenting a favorable personality or attitude on television as opposed to the candidates' ideas and solutions. Due to the worldwide reach televisions allow, it spreads information in a sense focused primarily on popularity and entertainment rather than being factual-centric. Information in modern society would be more effective if distributed in newspaper or book form as opposed to through television because books exact intellectual, dialectical, and interactive involvement from individuals as television only allows passive involvement.
Televisions do not focus on information and knowledge building, rather, television is focused primarily on commercial feasibility. Books, on the hand, allow individuals to develop intellectual thinking and rational arguments, thus allowing individuals to better themselves intellectually because it is not focused on entertainment and critical ratings. Do you believe television is reducing the quality of information spreading throughout the world? Is it beneficial because the television eases our minds and serves are our soma? Does its ability to connect the world's nations serve as an example of the benefits of future technological developments? Or is the television harmful? Is it because it limits the development of intellectual, dialectical, and interactive, while promoting only passive involvement? Is it because it can be used as a device that allows companies to promote programs focused solely on entertainment and for positive critical reviews, rather than facts than increases viewers' knowledge?
I agree that the quality of information is being reduced because of television. Television is primarily made for entertainment and the programs are made to be enjoyable. Unlike reading, the viewers watch but they are not really involved in the information. Anything with real facts and importance is boring to the average T.V. watcher. There is still quality information in other forms like newspapers and books, but no one is interested. Most people want to be entertained and the T.V. producers know that. Their aim is to make money so they give the viewers what they want. I don’t think television is beneficial because it eats up a person’s time and gives them less motivation to get real information. For example, the presidential campaign is presented on T.V. like it’s a dual between the candidates. Each one is trying to find dirt on his opponent so they can win. Meanwhile, the viewer’s get very little real information and by the time they hear the ideas, they have already picked a side. It’s a joke and I think the personal affairs are brought out to entertain. The real stances should be what matters but it is becoming less important for T.V. viewers. I think the only solution is to find a way to entertain but have quality information at the same time. I don’t really know if that is possible.
ReplyDelete