Subject:
|
Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 5 Oct 2002 15:01:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
543 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
<snip>
No argument with any of that (you'll never see ME arguing the case that a
show "ought to be banned" rather than "just turn the channel on it" so the
off button is the completely appropriate response). It just misses the
point, which I may have made poorly.
My whole point about cites ((deliberately?) misconstrued by drive bys like
Ed) is that while you can get ideas where ever you like, the practice of
citing from TV or popular media, when such citing is giving the appearance
of evidence rather than exposition, isn't a good practice. And your cites,
rightly or wrongly, do tend to appear that way.
At least they do to me anyway, especially when I am trying to read all what
you post and understand it, but don't necessarily have time to read every
word and analyse every nuance. "brevity is the soul of wit", someone once
said, and you are not the tersest poster here. :-) Nor am I, so "pot kettle
black" ! :-)
Separate that from the general detestability of West Wing (a well acted,
well written show that has a fundamentally flawed premise and a pernicious
mission... the worst kind of show, it's easy enough to ignore dreck), OK?
The takeaway I have from Leo's column wasn't so much the bill of particulars
about the show's faults (valid as they may be), but the observation that a
lot of people substitute watching TV for critical thinking.
Yes, polls indicate that people think certain ways, but that doesn't mean
that they're RIGHT when they do so. You get what you measure for, and as the
sheep follow each other off the cliff, pointing out that they didn't HAVE to
follow the shepherd (who darted away just as the first few plunged over) is
true but not useful. (a not particularly well thought out analogy, I'd be
the first to admit, but I'm a bit rushed at the mo (so shame on me for
posting instead of taking time to do it right, I suppose...) )
The mass media are giving people what they appear to want... there doesn't
seem to be a mass market for certain types of shows or certain types of
thinking. Not too many rugged individualist capitalist heroes in shows these
days, are there? :-) Just the same stock characters (perky smart liberal,
big stupid conservative butt of jokes) and their views... caricatures of
reality. Maybe we're culturally doomed. Maybe people won't be able to return
to thinking for themselves anytime soon (if they ever did?).
Who knows?
Does that make me elitist? If it means recognising that some people are
smarter than others, yes. Happily. If it means doing what Hollywood does,
force feeding views cleverly disguised as entertainment into popular shows,
then no.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
| (...) Hmm, "misconstrued" and a "drive by". How quickly the name calling starts. If you had read my response down a few threads, you would have seen that I thought this was a fresh debate topic, not a follow-up post with a new heading to a previous (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
|
| (...) There was once, well, a West Wing episode ;) , in which a pollster mentioned a little tale about polls-- " Polls tell us that people are sick and tired of hearing about sexual scandals of politicians, and yet the ratings of any show that (...) (22 years ago, 4-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
