My question about television
Submitted by quiet.meadow on Fri, 05/18/2012 - 23:52I do appreciate the replies, but I am still deeply concerned about how people view the influence of tv. Negative 8 votes and counting now. People really don't like to question the medium.
From the posts I'm getting, it seems like a lot of you think tv is pretty innocent. There is a great book called Four Arguments for the Elimination of the Television which might be worth a read. So this is where I'm coming from in my question. I also am at -7 votes? I sort of think it's funny, but then again, it makes me sad because I wonder how many people really love and want it more than something non-virtual.
I don't understand how taking over the Republican Party will change America. It seems that the power elite could just as easily blackout the Republican Party and form a new, certified party giving it media attention. It certianly appears that people do whatever the tv tells them. Wouldn't the Republican Party would get just as much publicity, as say, the Green Party? Any thoughts?
- Login to post comments
The GOP needs new blood
We're it.
STAND WITH RAND 2016
I watch my computer
I love livestreams. Reality shows aren't even real, but livestream news is the best., OWS, conventions, protests. No wonder CNN is taking a dump.
Don't force me at gunpoint to give up my TV!
Do you not realize that if you banned television, it wouldn't just disappear.
In banning it, you would be making it illegal to own, sell, or produce televisions.
Every law is ultimately backed up by the use of violence.
Are you going to have the government break down my door and steal my TV, just because you don't like them?
If I resisted you or government by proxy from stealing my TV, would you physically harm or kill me?
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
Uhmn....
Where in my question did I say anything about "banning" it? I personally don't own one, and I think it's a personal choice. There are arguments for and against television. HUH? Where are you coming from?
How else would you "eliminate" TV, in the good ol' US of A?
My post is rhetorical, to get people to think about how laws work.
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
Through education
Since a conflict of interest exists that keeps television journalists from reporting on the myriad negative consequences of television (and also consequences of advertising) - effects on the individual and society as a whole, the general public obviously need to be educated some other way. That's why insider Jerry Mander wrote his "Four Arguments...," as also others have written books (as per my comment below). Hopefully those who do come to understand things will spread the word within their sphere of influence. Kalle Lasn, on behalf of children & young adults, created materials that are available to schools. He's a marketer; he understands that people will do what's considered "cool" The more that's known about media, the less cool it appears.
Thank you!
.
Tv has been eliminated
a one way propaganda tool that shouts at you giving you no response. Replaced with the internet.
sovereign
Well,
yes that's how law can work. Morality can be dictated by whomever is in power which basically means that it's all relative. For example, some people might think using a certain kind of lightbulb is wrong and others might want to control who you marry. But the book I'm talking about argues for people to make their own decision. But here you seem to be getting into what is a basic, human law and what is relative.
One time George Patton yelled at Rommel
"I read your book!" right after he defeated him in a battle during the North African campaign. Rommel wrote a book just a few years prior on Battle tank tactics,Turns out George could read German. Use TV as a tool with the knowledge that it is indeed propaganda. To shun it entirely is a mistake of superstition as it is with other real world feelings. "Know thy enemy" is very important in every action of freedom. Rather than stick your heads in the sand, Understand it, and use it for what it is. Every sensory input is knowledge gained, depending on perception and understanding of the input. Read between the lines as you watch it.
"You go and carry off the enemy's land; the enemy comes and carries off your land"-Ancient Sumerian tablet
Pass.
One friend admitted that the only reason they watch is to be hip about the topic of the hour.
Free includes debt-free!
Not for me,It is like...
Being able to read the mind of the inner thoughts of the nation as prescribed and dictated to them. Propaganda is a powerful tool as long as you understand it is indeed "Propaganda". It is like overhearing the conversations of several young children inventing a game together. The mind set is quite fasinating.
"You go and carry off the enemy's land; the enemy comes and carries off your land"-Ancient Sumerian tablet
yep.
I know many people who are influenced more than they know, and I am probably among them because I live among them, not because I own one.
The GOP crooks are already running away from it's own party
They created a shadow party called "Team Nevada" to coddle and lick their wounds from the trouncing we did to them getting delegates. They never saw it coming, and now they're running :-)
Real eyes realize real lies
2012, we want our country back
2012 is the year for Ron Paul!
I'm 54 years old. I grew up
I'm 54 years old. I grew up in a household with television but didn't have one when I went to college and have never owned a TV myself. Television is basically one big cesspool. Why would I want it emptying into my living room? Has anybody on his death bed ever said, "Gee, I wished I had watched more television!"
You can have a working television or you can have a working brain. Take your pick.
Oh
Thank you, thank you , thank you!!!! :)
Oh
Thank you, thank you , thank you!!!! :)
Oh
Thank you, thank you , thank you!!!! :)
TV is a
Liar box. Why in the world would anyone have such a thing in their homes.
sovereign
Part of free market
Part of free market libertarianism means six corporations can have a monopoly (or hexopoly in this case) on major media outlets and they have every right to twist and distort and lie.
Another part of free market
Another part of free market libertarianism would be that the government doesn't have the authority by way of the FCC to create extraneous costs to create or maintain TV or Radio stations. This alone would kill the monopoly of our media, because they(the 6 corporations) would have to compete with countless other channels and stations for viewers and advertising cost would go down as a byproduct of having many more options for the company's advertising dollars.
Not when most commercial
Not when most commercial advertisements on these networks receive corporate welfare from the U.S. Government.
This may help
Dictators Dilemma
"The dictator may be stuck with a stark choice between securing the rewards of either the invisible hand or the iron fist, market success or social control. The mutually exclusivity of the options pivots on information and communication media. These guide the hand yet weaken the fist. Thus Gorbachev's Soviet Union was scissored between the cutting blades of the globalized economy and personalized media. Had President Gorbachev attempted to maintain strict control over information flows, the Soviet economy would have been sliced even thinner. When he reluctantly relinquished some control over communication, the country itself was cut into pieces."
The Internet is almost a perfect example of market anarchism which is almost the exact opposite of dictatorship; while a one way communication medium such as monopoly control of television is a dictators dream come true.
Joe
Considering that 94-97% of
Considering that 94-97% of all media in the United States is owned by 6 corporations, the most effective way and also the easiest way to change this would be therefore to end the FCC. The FCC with their mountains of Rules and Regulations create extraneous costs for creating or maintaining TV Channels and Radio Stations -these extraneous costs are unsurmountable for most people or corporations to meet- and therefore we have the billion dollar corporations controlling nearly all of our media.
End the FCC and all of the extraneous costs that are created by their Rules and Regulations go away, thereby allowing individuals and small companies the ability to own and operate their own TV channel or Radio station. This will create greater content variation and drive the price of advertising down -thereby creating a situation whereby corporations could lower the cost of their products due to lower advertising costs. Also, the monopolies would necessarily break themselves up by choice just to be able to survive in this climate.
Yes!
Thank you for taking my question seriously!
The Medium Is The Message
Your suggestion of "Four Arguments For The Elimination of Television," by Jerry Mander is an excellent one. It's important to note that the arguments are not re content but the medium itself. Here are two other books by those who done seen de light:
"Culture Jam," by Kalle Lasn.
For Lasn it's more content, namely, the effect of advertising on our culture, especially our youth. Not ironically, both Mander and Lasn come from television/advertising backgrounds. Also, Lasn (who also founded Adbusters Magazine) makes a note in his book, "we're not a bunch of lefties" - when it's Lasn who coined the term "Occupy Wall St." and apparently set the first date. (I'd say the Occupy Movement got usurped! Just like the education system and so much else! The truth is, the Occupy and Tea Party movements do share some common ground, such as being against the bailouts.) I'm with Lasn, among those no less against the power of big corporations as big government (vs. we, the people). FYI, he explains some of how the status quo re corporate power came to be. It's NOT as intended by our founders. One change occurred a century ago(via a misguided SCOTUS decision) - when corporations first came to enjoy rights specified for "persons."
Lastly, there's "Better Off: Flipping the Switch on Technology," by Eric Brende.
Another irony. The book came out of his masters thesis to try to determine any hidden COSTS of technology - at M.I.T. ("the belly of the beast"). I don't know about now, but at the time his book came out, 2004, Brende still did not own a computer. After 18 months of extraordinary "field" research, he discovered the answer. It changed the course of his life. Believe it or not, there are many who have resisted voluntarily giving up - for themselves, on behalf of their families, on behalf of their communities, also the economy - all that technology robs us of, major trade-offs compared to what might be gained.
In fact, the most successful private school movement, worldwide (founded in the 1920's), has a requirement that younger children, through AT LEAST kindergarten, have ZERO tv/computer use at home. [There continues to be no use of technology in classrooms through 8th Grade. Think of the savings!] Thereafter, if only a recommendation, it's urged that children's media be limited to weekend use only, through high school. (The Obama's got that one right!) The benefits are immeasurable and relate to every aspect of human development: physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual. Relevant to the ideals of our liberty movement, it helps children to develop into free-thinking individuals - for reasons relating to the medium and content, both. Yes, it's DOABLE. THOUSANDS of families in America have "unplugged" their children, children who now spend zero time sitting in front of a tv or computer screen. What do they do instead? Try it for a month and see! Oh, yeah, I just thought of another one:
"The Children of Cyclops: The Influence of Television Viewing On the Developing Human Brain," by Keith Buzzell.
While absolutely crucial during earlier stages, the brain does continue to develop during teen years (in the area of impulse control, among others). We didn't come to be a nation of sheeple by accident. Nor did our children, faring so poorly according to standardized tests (including when compared to other countries) get "stupider" by accident, nor become desensitized.
I shudder to think of something happening to the power grid. And then I smile.
Thank you quiet.meadow for raising the issue.
I think it's a protest . . .
and I think the 'revolution' is on--
it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--
Well,
I am glad for a revolution, but will people want to pay the $4000 or more for protesting? I hope so, but I can say, that if I had become a National Delegate, it would be very easy with all my family's obligations to not go.
its not how many people vote for ...
the one of two choices they give you ...
the power lies in WHO GETS TO CHOOSE WHO RUNS
by taking over the party we can ensure good honest people take office when the sheep are given their chance to vote.
Patriot News
http://redpillpost.com
*
Stand up For your Civil Rights
http://SueBadCops.com
Yes
It's a duopoly created by tv. I'm asking about television and the corporate media. It seems it's the people who have the power of tv who get to chose who gets to run.