Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Tamsin bloody Omond

LLETSA said:
Never before have we had so much in the way of TV, literature, drama and film that criticises the way the world is, often pointing the finger in the direction it needs to be pointed. And never before has opposition to capitalism been so weak and a workable alternative more remote.

Capitalism can afford any number of talented celebrity critics.
Click to expand...
You're arguing against your earlier point, here. If people are getting criticism of capitalism 'beamed' into their homes, then why isn't it dominating their way of looking at the world?
 
Jeff Robinson said:
But what if people are too busy working in capitalist jobs and buying capitalist products and services to pay attention to the box and the rags. Presumably they are the most free of capitalist values...
Click to expand...

Why do you think people don't pay attention? It isn't even necessary to pay that much attention to absorb the values anyway. As for buying products, much of this product is responsible for the phenomenon of using new technology to tailor your entertainment interests to your inevitably narrow concerns. Which worsens the situation.
 
Random said:
You're arguing against your earlier point, here. If people are getting criticism of capitalism 'beamed' into their homes, then why isn't it dominating their way of looking at the world?
Click to expand...

It's anti-capitalism as mass entertainement, and makes capitalism's opponents and critics feel better for a bit.
 
So you're saying that the cultural values carried by the mass media are, on the one hand totally powerful, and on the other hand, have no impact whatsoever. How can you hold these two opposing beliefs?
 
Random said:
So you're saying that the cultural values carried by the mass media are, on the one hand totally powerful, and on the other hand, have no impact whatsoever. How can you hold these two opposing beliefs?
Click to expand...


Can you not see how the overall cultural values pushed by the media neutralise the very critiques of capitalism that the very same media occasionally broadcasts? In the end it's all reduced to mere babble designed to confuse.
 
Random said:
So you're saying that the cultural values carried by the mass media are, on the one hand totally powerful, and on the other hand, have no impact whatsoever. How can you hold these two opposing beliefs?
Click to expand...

Doublethink, caused by watching too much TV :D

This thread looks more interesting in light of the book I'm reading that BA posted a link to on the thread about the 'Social Media Backlash' - Lletsa's point about the splintering of the messages especially. However, I don't think his point rings true - TV, like radio is a unifying broadcast medium, unlike the internet. It's truly 'mass' media. Admittedly, the 'mass' part of that (water cooler TV and similar analogies) are generally watching X-Factor and not something 'improving', but it's still a medium that brings people together collectively and provides a common narrative, unlike the individualist splurge of the internet.
 
kyser_soze said:
Doublethink, caused by watching too much TV :D
Click to expand...

Not really no. It's about permissible dissent, innit. Straight up new speak propaganda doesn't work.

Andrew Marr's interview with Chomsky springs to mind ...

[video=google;-4827358238697503]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4827358238697503#[/video]
 
LLETSA said:
Can you not see how the overall cultural values pushed by the media neutralise the very critiques of capitalism that the very same media occasionally broadcasts? In the end it's all reduced to mere babble designed to confuse.
Click to expand...

As I've said many times before I think you've got things the wrong way round. The media is not a major cause of people's lack of ability to change the world, but it does reflect it.

Edit: you're still being confused here, on the one hand you say that TV 'beams' a cultural message on teh other hand you say it's all just a babble. And I'd agree with the second part - the media content is not significant, the social context is what's important.
 
LLETSA said:
Sadly, contemporary capitalism can afford any number of Stuart Halls.
Click to expand...

Can it?

11 Apr 1991

TV personality Stuart Hall changed his story when police questioned him over the theft of a jar of coffee and packet of sausages from a supermarket, Knutsford Crown Court was told yesterday. The 61-year-old former presenter of BBC's It's A Knockout first claimed ''it's all a dreadful mistake'', but is then alleged to have said ''Yes I knew I was taking them'', according to Mr David Hale, prosecuting. Hall denies stealing food worth #3.94 from a Safeway store near his home in Wilmslow, Cheshire, on October 4 last year. The trial continues
Click to expand...
 
It both reflects and is a contributory factor toward it. A thought fox on this tho - were the media to start broadcasting a consistent workers rights, anti-cap message, would it's consumers end up with a political variation of compassion fatigue?
 
kyser_soze said:
It both reflects and is a contributory factor toward it. A thought fox on this tho - were the media to start broadcasting a consistent workers rights, anti-cap message, would it's consumers end up with a political variation of compassion fatigue?
Click to expand...

Depends whether it was relevant to people's lives.
 
Well, as for Tamsin Omond, it seems she is not afraid of a bit of publicity, is proactive and energetic and must have a fairly thick skin if the reaction to her in this thread is anything to go by.

Almost a perfect set of qualities for a career in politics.

Good luck to her !!
 
weltweit said:
Well, as for Tamsin Omond, it seems she is not afraid of a bit of publicity, is proactive and energetic and must have a fairly thick skin if the reaction to her in this thread is anything to go by.

Almost a perfect set of qualities for a career in politics.

Good luck to her !!
Click to expand...
Why good luck to her?
 
weltweit said:
Why not?

And guaging the reaction to her on here, she may need a bit of luck :)
Click to expand...

Just a bit puzzled as to why you wish budding politicians good luck. Do you like politicians? And I don't think she'll be much affected by criticism from the likes of us. In fact it might just add to yet another newspaper article.
 
Random said:
Just a bit puzzled as to why you wish budding politicians good luck. Do you like politicians?
Click to expand...

Why not wish her luck, she seems to be making waves, good luck to her...
But no I don't particularly like politicians.

Random said:
And I don't think she'll be much affected by criticism from the likes of us. In fact it might just add to yet another newspaper article.
Click to expand...

She seems to be actually doing things, taking some kind of action, good on her, action is energising, action is good (usually)...
 
We need more people who set up their own organisations instead of supporting existing ones. Solidarity is so out-dated. Narcissism is where it's at.
 
Random said:
As I've said many times before I think you've got things the wrong way round. The media is not a major cause of people's lack of ability to change the world, but it does reflect it.

Edit: you're still being confused here, on the one hand you say that TV 'beams' a cultural message on teh other hand you say it's all just a babble. And I'd agree with the second part - the media content is not significant, the social context is what's important.
Click to expand...

I haven't said that the media is the cause of people's inability to change the world-nor that the world can't be changed. The world, after all, changes constantly in many ways.

Why does the media's babble preclude a cultural message? How could it be anything other than an increasing babble as it endlessly proliferates?
 
kyser_soze said:
It both reflects and is a contributory factor toward it. A thought fox on this tho - were the media to start broadcasting a consistent workers rights, anti-cap message, would it's consumers end up with a political variation of compassion fatigue?
Click to expand...

In the formerly Communist-ruled societies, the end result of precisely this message was that even those who supported the social system believed hardly anything of what the media told them. Under capitalism the message is more subtle, as well as increasingly inescapable.
 
LLETSA said:
Why does the media's babble preclude a cultural message? How could it be anything other than an increasing babble as it endlessly proliferates?
Click to expand...
You're delivering vague babble yourself now. First you say that it 'beams' cultural values, then you say it's content-free, just a babble.
 
Random said:
Depends whether it was relevant to people's lives.
Click to expand...


Only is you believe all people are consistently rational and reasonable. One of the major failings of ideologies is that their adherents believe that everybody basically thinks like they do.
 
LLETSA said:
Only is you believe all people are consistently rational and reasonable. One of the major failings of ideologies is that their adherents believe that everybody basically thinks like they do.
Click to expand...
Why does relevance have to involve rationality?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom