The Entertainment Culture- How Television Has Changed Everything

In the spring of 2011, Newsweek asked 1,000 Americans about the history, political institutions, and economic systems of the United States. The results would have made any social studies teacher blush. Asked to name one power that the Federal Government has, 81% could not name a correct one. 43% of those polled didn't know what the first ten amendments were called. Jay Leno had conducted some of his own questioning in a segment he called, "Jaywalking" and stumbled upon many of the same results. Being the host of a late night comedy routine, Leno covered these unsettling problems in a blanket of comedy and they were laughed off by the audience without any real thought. But, this is nothing to joke about. Now, at this point you might be wondering where I'm going with this and what that electronic box sitting in your living room has to do with these Americans and their ignorance. Well, it is, in part, because of this tube that broadcasts flashing lights, attractive people, and small samples of content, that modern culture finds itself in an almost illiterate position. The old forms of discourse, revolving around the written word and traditional argument have been completely altered, repackaged, and mailed to our homes through a box of vivid pictures and silly sounds.

It's no one's fault in particular because the medium itself gives us this delight. TV and entertainment go hand in hand, and that includes even the most "serious" news show. Television is a wonderful tool for show business and entertainment, which is not necessarily a bad thing. But when wrapped in the cloak of actual discourse and logical debate, entertainment seeps into every last crack of serious conversation. It transforms news into something fun to watch, political debates into full scale boxing matches, and social issues into soap operas.

TV addiction is not completely like the average drug addiction, however there are certain similarities that are frightening. Studies point out that children and adults watch television in a relaxed state, and don't actually consciously think about what they are watching. It is a medium that embraces the subconscious and allows pictures and sounds to enter the mind with little viewer awareness. In a world full of stress and fast-paced lives, this relaxation mode becomes addictive, and the viewer simply accepts the images he sees on the screen.

Many people have probably witnessed this addiction first hand. Interrupting someone's TV time can spell out disaster. No one likes being talked to when they're watching the flashing lights that have caught their attention. Kids with video games are the same way. It's not easy separating your child from the computer and TV screens once they've been hooked. The medium is hypnotizing and the studies show this.

This hypnotizing quality has reached the entire nation. Infants and small children watch an average of two hours a day. Children and teenagers watch four hours of TV (81% being unsupervised), and then move to the computer and video games for about another three hours. Adults are no better, with the average viewing rate of four hours a day. Television has become America's favorite past time, and this has created a cultural shift. Moving from books, to radios, and now TV, which 99% of American households own, the "tube" has become the centerpiece for homes across this country.

It's fun to laugh and watch drama unfold in front of you from some undisclosed fantasy world, but television has moved over the years into the domain that written language once monopolized. News and political discussion has become a part of this medium's makeup, and the viewers, with relaxed minds, have adopted a new view of old traditions. Images, especially in the mind of quasi-hypnotised TV viewers, cannot be questioned and destroy our ability to think critically. Television ads, for instance, are based on emotional responses. When a man is buying his favorite cheeseburger or the "fastest" computer he is ecstatic and filled with joy. Questioning the image would just be stupid. Questioning how happy he "really is" is meaningless when the image says all that needs to be said. Images in television leave us no room for rational thought. All we have to do is sit, watch, and enjoy.

This is why when applied to actual news, television becomes a problem. News and political discourse are meant to be thought about, but the images inhibit are ability to do just that. The old saying that, "a picture is worth a thousand words," is deceptive. It may give us an image that we can hold onto, but words allow much more freedom. Debate comes from language not pictures, so when images become the foundation of our discourse there is less conversation and more "talking points".

Political news can be found all over television. From Fox News to MSNBC the political debate that once lived in pamphlets and books has been edited for TV. We have seen it and even come to accept it. The concept of "talking heads", two or more people simply conversing on television without much background noise and images, has not been adopted by many broadcasters. Probably because it doesn't bring in the same crowd that Bill O'Reilly, Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman do. On their shows they have political opposites battle in front of millions of viewers armed with a new version of discourse.

Each person is usually given 30 seconds to pronounce their views and then the same time for a short rebuttal. Anyone who has studied any social or political policy knows that in 30 seconds even the fastest speaker could not explain his position. So, the rules have changed, and instead of actually talking about issues, it has become a boxing match. Each person is looking for the K.O., which won't necessarily beat the other man's argument, but it will shame him into defeat. The content becomes a debate between characters, not detail oriented positions.

Presidential debates are a prime example of what happens when a typographic culture transforms into a pictorial one. In 1988, during the Vice Presidential debates Lloyd Bentson knocked out Dan Quayle and brought the crowd to their feet. Many will remember the line, "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine; senator you are no Jack Kennedy." Without having to listen to the rest of that debate, we are assured that Mr. Bentson won the battle. But, what real information came from that blood bath. I didn't need Lloyd Bentson to tell me Dan Quayle was "no Jack Kennedy". I could have made out fine without that useless information. Instead, I would have been pleased hearing some of his policies and why he thinks they are better than his opponents. But, watching Mr. Bentson use Quayle as a punching bag makes for better TV.

Even the modern debates featuring Romney and Gingrich follow the same rules of discourse. One minute to describe how a candidate is planning to fix the economy leaves much to be admired. The content simply becomes a fight for moral superiority. Romney said this, and Gingrich said that fills the TV screen. This is the nature of entertainment politics. I'll admit, it's kind of fun to watch these two men rhetorically brawl on the stage, but the typographic mind yearns for more than this character bashing. If you are planning on attacking the opponent, do so by attacking his policies and explaining to me why they are faulty. These debates are not enlightening or educational, but entertaining. Television projects comedy and drama into serious discourse and transforms politics into a circus, making candidates and analysts clowns. Ronald Reagan summed it up perfectly when he said, "politics is just like show business."

What American child hasn't seen Sesame Street? My guess would be very few. Although, seen as an educational show, it has taught kids not to love learning, but to love entertainment. It's a colorful, vivid, sound-filled series that teaches kids how to read, how to tie their shoes, and about healthy food habits, but there is a downside. Sesame Street has become an introduction to the show business world that Americans revolve around. It's quite easy to place a child in front of the TV and let Big Bird teach him/her their alphabet, but what does this mean for the future of education?

Unfortunately for society, TV does not follow the same educational guidelines of reality. The late Neil Postman, a professor from the 1980s who wrote on this topic, describes this educational divide perfectly. He said:

"Where as a classroom is a place of social interaction, the space in front of a television set is a personal preserve. Whereas in a classroom, one may ask a teacher questions, one can ask nothing of a television screen. Whereas school is centered on the development of language, television demands attention to images. Whereas attending school is a legal requirement, watching television is an act of choice...whereas in a classroom, fun is never more than a means to an end, on television it is the end itself."

The medium of television does not allow education to take place. It becomes much like the political chatter that clogs TV broadcasts. Everything the education system symbolizes and tries to accomplish, TV laughs at (quite literally). Sesame Street is trying to do something serious, but the medium won't allow it. The flashing lights, puppets, and overall nature of TV teaches kids how to enjoy the "fun and exciting" culture that the "tube" offers; instead of teaching them the tools needed for the difficult and challenging world that awaits them.

Television has some extremely negative consequences on individuals and because 99% of Americans have a TV, it only makes sense these problems would manifest in society. People everywhere have begun to lose the traditional methods of discourse and picked up a new brand sold by the countless shows on television. Society is always evolving and changing thus the TV issue might be brushed off as "normal", but this train of thought underestimates the power of sudden and vast change The institutions that we have created, and for the most part love, are based on the old forms of typographic discourse, and as the foundation crumbles so does the institutions that are built on them.

Democracy began in the small city state of Athens during a period where the alphabet was being created in its more modern for. The alphabet, and its children reading an writing, gave birth to political discourse that allowed all male citizens to participate in government. The enlightenment erupted after the printing press revolutionized the ability for people in Europe to write and read leisurely and participate in the academic traditions that were once kept from them. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, and the political discussions they began, can thank the explosion of writing and thought ignited by the printing press. Only a century afterwards, the American Revolution was sparked by the numerous pamphlets and books being read throughout the colonies, and by the founders's thirst for political discourse based on literary argument. Typographic thinking has been the source of our modern political situation.

Mr. Postman had some insight about where the United States, if not the west in general, is heading. In the beginning of his "Amusing Ourselves to Death," the author interestingly states that we are walking down a path towards the "Brave New World" Aldous Huxley wrote about. Where books, writing and argument were never baned, but instead discarded by the masses in favor of something that gave them more pleasure. Do I think the government is going to take power in a cloud of entertainment? Probably not, but our culture is certainly beginning to lose the forms of education and argument that has made democracy work. So, next time you see Jay Leno and his "Jaywalking" routine, or anything like it, think twice before laughing and ask yourself: where is this country heading?

• Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. Postman, Neil.