Neil Gabler The Elusive Big Idea

In the article, “The Future Is Now: It’s Heading Right at Us, But We Never See It Coming”, Joel Achenbach speculates that major advancements are not displayed in the media, discussed by important figures, nor anticipated by the general public; The events taking place are not acknowledged until they are actively making a difference in society. According to Achenbach, the majority of us are oblivious to science and technological advancement, two major development advocates, due to the discourse involved. Most of us have a generalized perception of what is behind major changes in society, and are intimidated by the intellectual process that occurs beforehand. Achenbach then explains how we overlooked a worldwide phenomenon such as the internet.

In their article “Moving beyond the 'Vast Wasteland'”, Laurie Ouellette and Justin Lewis critique how public broadcasting functions in the US. Liberal reformers hold to the view that television needs protection from commercialism. The liberal reformer view contains cultural and class hierarchies. They believe that public television is for the white, college-educated middle-class viewer who has “cultural capital”(Ouellette & Lewis, 96). As a result, funding for public broadcasting has gone primarily towards high culture and intellectual programs and not sitcoms or other popular forms of television. Ouellette and Lewis disagree with this, saying that these types of high-brow programming are not the only ones worthy of public investment. Instead, they argue that popular programs that are being commercially maintained also merit public support and investment (96). Rather than reserving public broadcasting for more educational programming, the authors argue that there is a more progressive solution that can incorporate popular media forms while still veering away from commercialization.

Postman made it clear that his book is not an attack on the television itself. Instead he asserted that, supplied by the television's form, it is the change in the definition of how we learn, and thus perceive, the world around us that is under his criticism. When it comes to entertainment, Postman admitted that the television does an excellent job. "Television [...] serves us most usefully when presenting junk-entertainment; it serves us most ill when it co-opts serious modes of discourse-news, politics, science, education, commerce, religion-and turns them into entertainment packages" (159). The television does not require viewers to carry thoughts from minute to minute, and their eyes are never unstimulated, as the average duration of a camera view is a mere 3.5 seconds (86). Such brevity of thought and picture are a drastic difference from the way we used to get our information. That is, through the monopoly of the print media. Then contiguous information, uninterrupted by advertisements and thoughts not spliced into sentence-long segments, was expressed from cover to cover. Now, the kind of information (or misinformation) we are accustomed to receiving via the television set is redefining the way we receive and perceive information. It is not

In an effort to expose the epistemology of television, which Postman believes has not been effectively addressed, he examines the effects of TV on several important American cultural institutions: news, religion, politics and education.  All four institutions, Postman argues, have realized that they have to go on television in order to be noticed which, in turn, requires them to learn the language of TV if they are to reach the people.  Therefore, they have joined the national conversation not on their own terms, but on TV's terms.  Postman contends that this transformation of our major institutions has trivialized what is most important about them and turned our culture into "one vast arena for show business" (80).  In the case of broadcast news, we see visually stimulating, disconnected stories about murder and mayhem along with a healthy dose of infotainment delivered by friendly and likeable anchors that remind us to "tune in tomorrow".  In the case of politics, we have discourse through distorted paid TV commercials and "debates" in which the appearance of having said something important is

All throughout history we have used metaphors to describe people, places, events and emotions; so it is perfectly fitting to describe the mediums with which we project our ideas as a metaphor as well. This is Neil Postman 's basis for his book Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. Television and other media outlets have conditioned us to accept entertainment in every aspect of life; but most of all it masks the state of public affairs and politics. Through his book, Postman begs that we recognize the ways in which media shapes our lives and how we can use them to serve us instead of hurt us. Broken into two parts, Amusing Ourselves to Death focuses on a historical analysis of media, then discusses the television media-metaphor in more detail. Postman examines how media has infected every aspect of public discourse by prizing entertainment as the standard of truth.

Over the centuries, the media has played a significant role in the shaping of societies across the globe. This is especially true of developed nations where media access is readily available to the average citizen. The media has contributed to the creation of ideologies and ideals within a society. The media has such an effect on social life, that a simple as a news story has the power to shake a nation. Because of this, governments around the world have made it their duty to be active in the regulation and control of media access in their countries. The media however, has quickly become dominated by major mega companies who own numerous television, radio and movie companies both nationally and

Postman (1987) claims that television is an evil that destroys the purpose and complexities of public discourse. He argues that important issues are oversimplified and drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Chaffee and Metzger (2001) confirm this assumption by remarking the evolution of print and radio into television and television into new media. Establishing the similarities between Postman’s chief complaints about the television medium and the new media then rearing its ugly head. Chaffee and Metzger indicate the shift in the denotations of mass, media, and communication. With technological advancements, it is impossible to ignore the new media and its impact on modern culture.

Therefore, what we mostly see on the screen is what the sponsors promote, which are usually mechanisms to keep society stable. This exactly what American media was doing from the muckrakers of the 20's to the war in Kosovo in the 90's. Let us now look at some examples of the use of TV as a mean of control over society. Before January 1991, public opinion polls showed that the American public was split into two groups, 50% each, about whether the U.S. should attack Iraq or not. Historians say however, if any anti-war voices had been heard in the mass media at this time, the outcome could have been completely different. The second example turns out to be a tragic one, when we talk about the freedom of speech. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the pictures of the irradiated Japanese were not made available to the American public until the 1980's. In both cases we see the control of society through TV, by those who control it, and directing society toward a certain destination, which is found to be the "way forward for the humanity", and keeping the system together by creating a popular culture based on consumerism; turns out to be a modern way of practicing authority in our lives.

As discussed in class, one of the most influential agencies of socialization is the media. The way we see ourselves or the way other people see us come from what we are told by others and what we tell ourselves. In the Better world handbook, the chapter on media states that “the way we think and act in our daily lives is inextricably linked to the information we receive about the world” (Jones, Haenfler and Johnson). The chapter continues to discus how information delivered to us can be bias and this raises the issue on who controls the media and what we see through it. The problem with this could be that that whoever controls the media does not necessary have our best interest in mind and the content that is transmitted through the media is profit driven. . In the article “Lies my teacher told me: Everything your American history textbook got wrong” gives a perfect accept of how easy it is for information to get omitted based on what people what you to know and what they don’t want you to know. From a young age, people decide what they want you to know, so that they can decide on what they want you to think about certain topics whether its American history or something else, its like the

Over the past century or two it has become quite evident that elite certainly hold all the cards when it comes to what the public should know through the media which initially was supposed to be autonomous of the government and the socially elite. This essay will mainly focus on the findings of Noam Chomsky and his postulations, the works of Harold Innis and his influence on the first application of the political economy approach within the media. And I will touch base on theories by Boyd Barrett then neatly wrap it up with a bow of how influence impacts public opinion in general.

Economism, or vulgar Marxism, is a key feature in explaining the media’s role according to Marx. This is also referred to as the base/superstructure model. In economism, “the economic base of society is seen as determining everything else in the superstructure, including social, political, and intellectual consciousness.” (Marxist Media Theory 1) This maintains that the media is used as the base of society. Society is referred to as the superstructure. Clearly, media shapes society even today. Since consumers rely on the media for information and entertainment, (ex. Television and radio new, magazines, newspapers, Internet), they are shaped by whatever forms of media they chose to be an audience to. The media manipulates everything from popular fashion to the food people consume.

Mass media plays an important role in the society by providing entertainment, information and acting as the government’s overseer. Several scholars have developed philosophies that help people understand how mass media fulfills its roles in the society. For example, Horkheimer and Adorno have constructed theories that explain the functions and impacts of mass media in the society across the globe (Mosco, 2008). The central theme in all mass communication models entails the meaning of media contents, which include the images and texts and their influence on the target audience. The perception of the target audience concerning the text and images in the media are what form the basis of these theories. This essay discusses two hypothetical frameworks: the political economy and cultural studies theories, including their similarities and differences, and how they help in understanding the relationship between the media and society.

Media influence is the force by which ideas are injected into people’s lives shaping the very culture of society. This influence is masqueraded through hidden media message, resulting in a change in its audience which can be positive or negative, abrupt or gradual, short term or long term. Although mass media’s influential effect can reach a wide ranged audience as an agent of socialization the responsibility to contain what it releases has not been of importance. “The media’s socially significant obligations are formally ignored.” (A.S. Zapesotskii, 2011, p 9). Media messages can be exerted through many different outlets such as TV shows, music, movies, commercials, news, magazines, games which are all gravitated to entertain audiences ultimately offering personal gratification that can sometimes blur the lines between reality and

The book begins with Neil Postman describing how the way we communicate, whether it is orally or through written material, has an effect on how we interpret our world. He then goes more specifically into how television has changed our culture. Postman’s intention for writing this book is to “show that a great media-metaphor shift has taken place in America, with the result that the content of much of our public discourse has become dangerous nonsense”(16). There is no problem with television being used as a form of entertainment, but when entertainment takes over serious issues, it may become dangerous. I agree with this to some extent; I think that there are current events that need to be taken seriously, but some audiences may need that comic

Certain media theorists such as Sherry Turkle do an incredible job on studying these properties of technology and their bearing on us, but sometimes seem to dwell on the negative side of the analysis. In short some of these media theorists do astonishing work studying the impact socially that using and communicating through modern technology has, but then takes a negative stance due to their archaic understanding of what is capable with these technologies. We have come so far in the past years in advancing humanity and its natural predicaments while being heavily reliant on technology to communicate. Not noting that advancement is pessimistic and