He hee. Media as epistemology ? You maybe already heard "The medium was the message". I think I did get the point.
Trivial TV IS dangerous, no argument there. My point was / is that the trivia is not always obvious. ie TV is not synonymous with trivia Ian On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:14 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually Ian, > > I'm very glad you disagree. What fun is just bobbing our head up and down > at one another? > > If you agree, then you'll be glad to know that I disagree with your > disagreement. > > > >> TV is, like everything else in life. 90% crap. >> > > > I disagree with your analogy. "everything else in life" is a pretty big > category. I mean, it might be true if "everything in life" IS tv because > you watch so much tv, and come to think of it, why would you know so much > about the crap except it has been shoved in your face. > > So, either false analogy, or tautology, but out of bounds on that one. > > > > >> But the 10% is very good - we just have to be selective and discerning. >> >> > > "selective" means you watch comparatively. Watching comparatively means > you're not being selective. I mean, do you read about crap or do you judge > it as you watch? To my mind, there is no way to "select" except by what is > offered, and since what we are talking about "discernment in what I view" > depends upon "viewing in order to discern" we are caught in a dilemma of > devious devising. > > And victims of faulty logic to boot. Shame, in't it. The way the insidious > thing rots your brain. > > Look at it this way. The relative value of the program is weighted by the > craposity of the rest. If you've been noticing an increase of craposity, > then your values have been shifted by the medium itself that you are > supposed to be judging. Judgement warped by the method. > > Media *as* epistemology, Ian. Pay close attention to that last sentence I > quoted from N. Postman: > > "For, like the printing press, television is nothing less than a philosophy > of rhetoric. To talk seriously about television, one must therefore talk of > epistemology. All other commentary is in itself trivial" > > > > >> And I'm talking across popular (US) genres too, sit-coms, serial >> dramas, satirical cartoons, not just intellectual and high-brow stuff. >> Pragmatism can be fun - you know it makes sense. >> >> Regards >> Ian >> (PS talk-shows and reality-TV easily populates 80% of the the 90% all >> by itself.) >> >> > > I'll take your word for that Ian. Although it does make sense to me, in an > age where you need tv to tell you what reality is. > > "Besides, we do not measure a culture by its output of undisguised > trivialities but by what it claims as significant. Therein is our problem, > for television is at its most trivial and therefore, most dangerous when its > aspirations are high, when it presents itself as a carrier of important > cultural conversations. The irony here is that this is what intellectual > and critics are constantly urging television to do." > > > Get that point Ian? > > > television is nothing less than a philosophy of rhetoric. > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
