Page 6 - Amusing ourselves to death
P. 6
AMUSING OURSELVES TO DEATH
could be exploited- who is precisely exploiting and maintaining this potential? He responds
that the medium will do it naturally by saying, "We must not judge those who have framed it
this way too harshly," "they must follow where their medium leads," and "there is no
conspiracy here". However, given the long history of how entertainment has been used to
divert lower classes from greater concerns, the question must be asked. The Roman games
are the most iconic example that we can take into account. According to modern academic
explanations, gladiator games were "social control vehicles" that served to distract the
population and divert their attention away from noticing their "diminished autonomy" under
an authoritarian power (imperialism); the Roman empire started endorsing the violent
spectacles of gladiatorial games so that the "entertained" lower class would be less likely to
rise up and rebel.
So, the question now is, how about the internet? What impact does that medium have on
public discourse? The first question we must address is whether the internet, rather than tv,
is the dominant medium of our day. Now, considering that the internet has indeed become
the dominant medium of our time and has replaced tv, what are its biases and what effect do
they have on our public discourse? The bias present in the internet, like the bias found in
television, is to entertainment. Except it's more geared toward entertainment than television.
In what way? Contrary to the earlier years of tv, information was scarce since it could only be
transmitted via limited media—very few Tv channels and typically only one Television set per
5
could be exploited- who is precisely exploiting and maintaining this potential? He responds
that the medium will do it naturally by saying, "We must not judge those who have framed it
this way too harshly," "they must follow where their medium leads," and "there is no
conspiracy here". However, given the long history of how entertainment has been used to
divert lower classes from greater concerns, the question must be asked. The Roman games
are the most iconic example that we can take into account. According to modern academic
explanations, gladiator games were "social control vehicles" that served to distract the
population and divert their attention away from noticing their "diminished autonomy" under
an authoritarian power (imperialism); the Roman empire started endorsing the violent
spectacles of gladiatorial games so that the "entertained" lower class would be less likely to
rise up and rebel.
So, the question now is, how about the internet? What impact does that medium have on
public discourse? The first question we must address is whether the internet, rather than tv,
is the dominant medium of our day. Now, considering that the internet has indeed become
the dominant medium of our time and has replaced tv, what are its biases and what effect do
they have on our public discourse? The bias present in the internet, like the bias found in
television, is to entertainment. Except it's more geared toward entertainment than television.
In what way? Contrary to the earlier years of tv, information was scarce since it could only be
transmitted via limited media—very few Tv channels and typically only one Television set per
5
