Do you think television, to a large extent, controls the masses and shapes our thinking and beliefs and 'occupies' us so we are too apathetic and cultivated to ever think outside the box?

[Overmydeadbody]

Because I do, and it is begining to bug me how controlling television can be on someone who watches a lot of it.

It shapes so much of our thinking and force feeds us images of the ideal way to live every damn aspect of our lives.

Sometimes I wonder what we, as a civilisation, would be like without the cultivating medium of television.

scottishmummy

exaclt WWW, it just keeps people ina vegetative state doing nothing.

I think you are right with the church Grimma, it has just replaced that as a way of controlling the masses, maybe not in such an active way, but it is still getting the same desired result.

As for the news, don't get me started on that. It isn't 'news' being reported, but 'news' that has been carefully selected out of all the possible storeis that could be reporting on, highly censored and controlled, and all with alterior motives in mind. The news is not telling us about wha's happening around the world, it is just telling us the bits they want us to hear, and not telling us the bits they don't want us to hear. (and don't ask me who they^ are, I don't bluddy well know)

OK. I have no choice. I'm going to have to confess a bit of academic interest here...

There are LOTS of research studies of people's engagement with TV. Known in the business (not my specific field though) as 'audience studies'.

There is lots of evidence of 'influence', yes.

But there is also lots of evidence of engagement with TV. People - for example - develop relationships with ideas, with programmes, with other people because they're interested in telly. Not everyone passively watches. There have been some studies in which cameras were placed on top of people's tellies and watched what they did while watching. They did almost everything you can imagine BUT sit and gawp.

And even at the level of belief, culture, influence, TV is but one noise among others. I'm not a complete sucker for this idea (I prevent my children from watching some things because I think it is bad for them) but I have some sympathy for the notion that most people are capable of filtering out stuff that is no use to them.

OMDB: the problem with your argument is who is doing the controlling? And why?

It is quite important who 'they' are, isn't it? Because if we can't pin that down, we can't be being 'controlled'...

yes and no.....

MN a bunch of anonymous strangers tap tapping with (usually) no verbal/social interface.the leap of faith is we potentially attribute positive values and beliefs to internet usage and anonymous stranger's.when actually generally we don't know.for all you know it could be a big hairy trucker trucker called Tallulah in a priddy dress

Discussion board's on internet do generate a familiarity yes by name post recognition, but end of day the majority of us remain anonymous

Yes
Tv can be sinister
so can the internet

there are numerous documented scams/hoaxes/unsavoury people using internet.just as internet can be a great source of support and information for people/the internet can potentially link an join geographically and socially diverse groups

any medium that occupies majority of time, to detriment of face to face interactions can be negative

so imo any medium can be toxic or divert one to the detriment of other activities

depends on the person and their relationship to the medium

so no i dont think tv is necessarily negative

it all depends

frank lloyd wright called it chewing gum for the eyes
and i agree with him..

Wilf > "most people are capable of filtering out stuff that is no use to them. "

But do you think people DO or do you think people become less discerning the more time they spend watching tv?

I don't think there's any 'they' controlling us (well, unless we're talkung about politicians and that's another discussion) but I do think television distracts people from relationships and interests to an extent (says she, on mn while partner is on xbox, irony irony!)

but was there a survey Wilf ?

no, I don't think so. I always had the TV on as a kid - did my homework in front of it, ate in front of it and now I can completely tune out as much of it as I want. I can sit in front of an advert and at the end of it, not even know what I've watched and then switch right back on when the TV programme comes back on after the ad break. I view it as 'veg out time' (tv watching).

I am too apathetic to reply properly but I agree with Scum's last post.

I know Wilf, I know.

TO be honest I don't know who's doing the controlling, I don't even believe there is some sinister person or people actively doing the controlling I'm not sure I even know what I mean.

MAybe it is society and societal norms doing the controlling? making sure the status quo stays the same and the boat isn't rocked? Maybe it is all of us, no one wanting change or deviation form the norm... oh I don't know.

All I know is that adverts do influence a nation, news is just tiny snipets chosen from many posibilites etc etc

if tv controlled us we would be fluff and fold fembots.given the propensity for dross domestic cleaning shows eg how clean...Princess Andrea...Kim and Aggy

we have higher executive functioning, volition and choice.you can switch off you know

many despotic political regimes have tried to control the masses through tv with fake everything is great citizens are double plus happy propoganda......doesn't work

ScottishMummy I don't think tv is sinistr or negative, but just that it occupies so much of most people's spare time that is must be responsible for shaping and influencing their beliefs and images and ideas about the world around them and their life and aspirations, and indeed what it means to live.

Just think of all those bloody awful Mastercard adverts. Even if we don't actively agree with and believe every advert we see, if we see and hear the same messages hundreds of times a year for years and years, it is going to have an affect on us isn't it?

Subconsciously, it will have an affect, whether we like it or not.

I'm not arguing for the eradication of all television sets or saying that tv is evil and bad, just that is does shape us and therefore, passively maybe, control us.

And it does help us all be apathetic and lazy, for want of a better word.

what I don't think is right is someone who doesn't have a tv stating all the bad things about the television.

We watch tv - I am not being defensive about it - I love it.
Watching things about honey collection techniques in Nepal this evening. Not very intellectually stimulating but fascinating none the less.

Watching the wonderful Olympics with DS1. He has learned about lots of new sports and also has picked up about flags of the world and we have had the globe out talking about geography and where all these countries are.

There is dross if you want to find it but if you stick to the BBC channels then the adverts don't get you and we have a PVR so when watching most programs we fast forward the adverts.

Not convinced that in an evening playing cards or other hobbies would be better for me than MN'ing whilst chatting to DH and watching the telly.

I don't find it sinister.
HOWEVER I hate the twist that everyone puts on the news. Everyone does it and it drives me MAD

message depends on the recipient their volition,background and preferences.no message is unilateral to the homogeneous masses

the govt 5 a day campaign was hugely promoted, has not achieved it's stated aims.despite massive publicity

don't underestimate ,demographics, class,socio-economic factors as they influence our perception of tv too.and ultimately whether an ad appeals is complex.

mere bombardment does not equate to cash sales

but lots of people do completely tune out the ads. I watch TV almost every evening (and lots of different channels) and I'm not sure I even know what the Mastercard ad is. In fact, I couldn't name one current ad at the moment (though have been watching a lot of Olympics). Dh is much the same.

bythepowerofgreyskull, I wasn't stating that tv was bad, just that it must play a very large part in shaping the nation's thinking, views and beliefs about the world, ya know?

I think the media in general have a gained a lot of control over our lives/attitudes.
For example, our fear of child abduction is exaggerated in relation to the likelihood of it actually happening.
I think most tv is bland and boring, tbh. I can't believe the poor quality of popular shows such as x factor or the soaps.
There are very few stimulating or original ideas in anthing broadcast

but TV can be informative and positive too.the world witnessed Tienanmen Sq.apartheid, undercover BNP stuff.

all appalling all stuff which raised awareness, generated interest,apply pressure on oppressive regime. abhorrent ideas

print media is fantastic too.But lacks the immediacy of tv pictures as they happen

Yes, it can be, but these are not the most frequently viewed or most popular types of programme iyswim

but who cannot forget the immediacy and impact of 9/11 and 7/7 and 21/7 pictures.news as it happen.i wont

some news is transient.yes.but some has impact

TV brought the horror of Vietnam war crashing into domestic cosiness of American life, influenced policy.voters horrified seeing body bags etc coming home.influenced policy and voting

this is what I was on about

Yes and no. I think there is some good stuff on too. I think it is advertising which is behind alot of crap tbh, and we all fall for their crap. Basically it is the job of advertisers to make us feel unhappy with what we have and unfullfilled so that we buy into their products and services. I really hate celeb mags, it is abit sad to hear people discussing these people we don't even know. Weird society.

there arent many prorammes apart from top gear that get a guge global audience these days or really a big uk one

i think now people probably do more things while the tv is on and actually spend less time watching it than they used to

and it is not as if there is one tv production team making all the programmes it is pretty diverse

and the general level of intelligence of "the masses" has risen considerably due in part to tv and now again because of pcs

i gthink it is simplistic to suggest that tv is some kind of doping agent

i have a MASSIVE tv btw so maybe i shouldnt comment

however i can go for weeks without switching it on

im not sure i do anything more intelligent instead tho and i havent yet signed up for voluntary work or written any emotional speeches or impassioned articles