Why can't we make it tv turnoff YEAR???

by **Sepka** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:05 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Media literacy + media democratization is key to rolling back the vapid, ugly, corrosive forces dumbing down the industrialized world.<hr></blockquote> I'd argue that democratization is the enemy of literacy. Web pages are an essentially democratic medium. Anyone can write one, be they Joe Blow or a megacorporation. The final result is displayed on the same computer, with the same capabilities. A browse through the content that's hosted on a popular provider like Geocities or Angelfire would be enough to horrify anyone who values clearly written English. I'll not even address the deficiencies of overall design that are present on most of these pages. Democratization, by removing the gatekeepers of the medium (the editors, publishers, etc) also removes the requirement that the work meet minimum standards of clarity and literacy. I'm sorry to say that most people simply don't see the value of literacy. Faced with a choice between rewriting a paragraph to more clearly emphasize their point, or using 40pt red letters and an animated icon of a monkey, they'll go with the latter method. It's easier, and it's more visual - it looks like television. This delusion that ideas are more forcefully expressed through colour and movement than through words is another of the evils wrought by television. Democratization will only bring more of the same. -Sepka the Space Weasel Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sepka>Sepka</A> at: 4/28/06 3:58 am

by **Sepka** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:11 am

Those interested in publishing small runs of books might try LuLu <a href="http://www.lulu.com.">www.lulu.com.</a> Increasingly, the use of book printing machines (like a printer/cutter/binder combo) is making low volume book production feasible. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **thoughtographer** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:20 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I'd argue that democratization is the enemy of literacy. Web pages are an essentially democratic medium. Anyone can write one, be they Joe Blow or a megacorporation. The final result is displayed on the same computer, with the same capabilities. A browse through the content that's hosted on a popular provider like Geocities or Angelfire would be enough to horrify anyone who values clearly written English. I'll not even address the deficiencies of overall design that are present on most of these pages. Democratization, by removing the gatekeepers of the medium (the editors, publishers, etc) also removes the requirement that the work meet minimum standards of clarity and literacy.<hr></blockquote> I guess you don't like punk music or underground publishing too much. It's things like LuLu that wouldn't exist without the independent spirit that's managed to squeeze past the tastemakers and gatekeepers so many times in the past. Fuck the gatekeepers. "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thoughtographer>thoughtographer</A> at: 4/28/06 8:24 am

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:54 am

ProfPan wrote: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>TV is a part of the human media environment. Learning to deconstruct its message, and to understand its value as a propaganda tool, is vitally important.<hr></blockquote> Indeed. Notice everyone talks about 'using it' prudently like a drug, a unique drug that has a survival-charged direct line to your amygdala lizard brain through your eyeballs, for that is what light-based images are. This is what makes it such an excellent fascism pathway, make people who 'look' different seem dangerous and you get your own rally. Sensitivity and resistance to T V is animal specific, but like other neurotoxins, the safest dose is zero. You certainly can learn alot about the social engineers by looking at their 'product.' But as little as possible after having learned, I'd recommend. Subliminals work, too.

by **thoughtographer** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:12 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>You certainly can learn alot about the social engineers by looking at their 'product.' But as little as possible after having learned, I'd recommend. Subliminals work, too.<hr></blockquote> Yeah, right. Promoting abstinence instead of education and empowerment has such a glorious history of success -- if you view success as having the end result being entirely opposite your stated goal. Don't teach them to use birth control -- just tell them not to have sex! Drugs are scary! Don't do them! JUST SAY "NO"! "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thoughtographer>thoughtographer</A> at: 4/28/06 9:14 am

by **brother shamus** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 12:10 pm

We are going on a year without television and seem to have lots more time to learn to play guitar and work on other projects. We still veg out with netflix and rented videos but only for the 2 hours of that movie. Not the 4+ hours that we used to veg from one show to the other. Now when I do see commerical television, the commericals are so abrasive that I just can't watch. We have more time to work with the community and not the isolation of the box.

by **Sepka** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:31 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Yeah, right. Promoting abstinence instead of education and empowerment has such a glorious history of success<hr></blockquote> Sex and drugs are attractive and fun, though. Even if you've been away from them for a while their charm persists. Television isn't that way. If you go for a few months without watching anything, then turn it on, it's most assuredly not the same as visting your boyfriend after a long dry spell. Absence just doesn't make the heart grow fonder with TV - it tends more to expose its failings. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **Sepka** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:42 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I guess you don't like punk music or underground publishing too much.<hr></blockquote> I despise punk music, although I don't begrudge it to those who enjoy it. Matters of taste aren't a fertile field for discussion. Hardcopy publishing of any sort I hold in fairly high regard, regardless of the opinions being expressed, having been raised in the sort of mileu that regards books as a type of holy object, and bookburning or the suppression of information as the ultimate act of barbarity. That's more or less a conditioned attitude on my part. Web pages weren't even dreamt of when I was a child, so they don't fall into the same category as printed matter in my prejudices. -Sepka the Space Weasel

by **thoughtographer** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:48 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Sex and drugs are attractive and fun, though. Even if you've been away from them for a while their charm persists. Television isn't that way. If you go for a few months without watching anything, then turn it on, it's most assuredly not the same as visting your boyfriend after a long dry spell. Absence just doesn't make the heart grow fonder with TV - it tends more to expose its failings.<hr></blockquote> I guess that's valid if you only view the technology of television as nothing more than a delivery system for entertainment, which I don't. The failings of advertiser-driven television's aren't so hard to see for a lot of the populace, regardless of whether they choose to abstain from it or even take an hiatus from it. The problem with multi-use technologies is usually in the primary application of them, which, in the case of television is (and always was) to deliver consumers to producers. In the early days of television, consumer demand and interest in the (virtually nonexistent) programming wasn't great enough to justify the prohibitive cost of a receiver, so the television manufacturers quickly figured out that they would have to defray their costs with advertising revenue. Now, we're seeing the results of our ignorance in trading rate of development for common sense. Looking at the history of the technology, it's obvious to me that people are no more or less gullible now than they ever were -- there's just more of them. Take a case like the NASA space shuttle program; it was the scientists, engineers and management of NASA who were either too blinded by their own ambitions and dreams, or just too greedy to see that what they were working on was going to be lowjacked by military interests. It's not like everyone involved was getting hush money to hide some big secret about the future use of the technology -- it was their lack of foresight or the will to have it that contributed to the current situation. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> I despise punk music, although I don't begrudge it to those who enjoy it. Matters of taste aren't a fertile field for discussion.<hr></blockquote> I'm not talking about matters of taste. I'm talking about a self-empowered and co-operative ethos that still exists today, regardless of attempted corporate meddling. I am absolutely certain that something you do enjoy (whatever that is, I don't care) was inspired by or derived from punk music. Of course, this is all part of a different conversation. I don't even really like much music that would be specifically classified as "punk" music, at least not by the people who bother categorizing things based on marketing terms. Though it's nice to guess and be right sometimes. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Hardcopy publishing of any sort I hold in fairly high regard, regardless of the opinions being expressed, having been raised in the sort of mileu that regards books as a type of holy object, and bookburning or the suppression of information as the ultimate act of barbarity. That's more or less a conditioned attitude on my part. Web pages weren't even dreamt of when I was a child, so they don't fall into the same category as printed matter in my prejudices.<hr></blockquote> A record, tape, compact disc, wire recording, etc. counts as "hard copy" in my book (sorry about the pun), which are produced by individuals and groups at a financial loss on the order of -- I don't know -- billions and billions? Dictating style as a gatekeeping method instead of letting it happen naturally is a sure path to cultural stagnation. "A crooked stick will cast a crooked shadow."Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=thoughtographer>thoughtographer</A> at: 4/28/06 2:09 pm

by **Sepka** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:34 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Take a case like the NASA space shuttle program; it was the scientists, engineers and management of NASA who were either too blinded by their own ambitions and dreams, or just too greedy to see that what they were working on was going to be lowjacked by military interests.<hr></blockquote> It was take the "spaceplane" concept or get nothing, basically. You have to recall that the decision was taken in the late 60s, when there was incredible pressure on congress to stop spending money in space, and instead use it for hand-out programs. NASA's need for a heavy lifter to service the space station was munged together with the Air Force's desire to have a winged re-entry vehicle that could choose a landing site *after* committing to de-orbit. In the end we produced a machine that wouldn't do either job well, but half a loaf is better than none. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I'm talking about a self-empowered and co-operative ethos that still exists today, regardless of attempted corporate meddling. I am absolutely certain that something you do enjoy (whatever that is, I don't care) was inspired by or derived from punk music.<hr></blockquote> Fie. Punk music didn't invent that. They picked that up second-hand from the SF fandom. -Sepka the Space Weasel

Why can't we make it tv turnoff YEAR???

Re: ,,,

Small Press Books

Re: Small Press Books

Re: TV B GONE

...

Kill your telly.

Re: ...

Re: Small Press Books

Re: ...

Re: ...

Who is online