Old Labour man gives great speech

[audiotech]

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

I think Adorno basically got it right when he:-

argued that capitalism fed people with the products of a 'culture industry' - the opposite of 'true' art - to keep them passively satisfied and politically apathetic.

Adorno saw that capitalism had not become more precarious or close to collapse, as Marx had predicted. Instead, it had seemingly become more entrenched. Where Marx had focussed on economics, Adorno placed emphasis on the role of culture in securing the status quo.

Popular culture was identified as the reason for people's passive satisfaction and lack of interest in overthrowing the capitalist system.

Adorno suggested that culture industries churn out a debased mass of unsophisticated, sentimental products which have replaced the more 'difficult' and critical art forms which might lead people to actually question social life.

False needs are cultivated in people by the culture industries. These are needs which can be both created and satisfied by the capitalist system, and which replace people's 'true' needs - freedom, full expression of human potential and creativity, genuine creative happiness.

Commodity fetishism (promoted by the marketing, advertising and media industries) means that social relations and cultural experiences are objectified in terms of money. We are delighted by something because of how much it cost.

Popular media and music products are characterised by standardisation (they are basically formulaic and similar) and pseudo-individualisation (incidental differences make them seem distinctive, but they're not). (Boy/Girl Bands all the same? My point.)

Products of the culture industry may be emotional or apparently moving, but Adorno sees this as cathartic - we might seek some comfort in a sad film or song, have a bit of a cry, and then feel restored again.

Boiled down to its most obvious modern-day application, the argument would be that television leads people away from talking to each other or questioning the oppression in their lives. Instead they get up and go to work (if they are employed), come home and switch on TV, absorb TV's nonsense until bedtime, and then the daily cycle starts again.

Not a media-studies student are you?

Most working class families live busy lives, earning a living, raising families and trying to have a bit of fun. Television (when there's time to watch it) can be both informative and trashy, but is the writer seriously suggesting that TV is leading people away from talking to people, or questioning oppression?

Research indicates that people get their news mainly from TV bulletins, bulletins (and other thought provoking programming) that can and does instigate discusssions at home, work, most social settings in fact. Rather than leading people away from talking to each other, it is the opposite which is usually the case.

As for questioning oppression? There are many factors involved here, with ideas, confidence and organisation being the most important. TV influence in this question is not so important. Although propaganda has it's part, the technology that delivers it is now more accessable to people, to enable them to talk to others, or question oppression.

 

[tobyjug]

Boiled down to its most obvious modern-day application, the argument would be that television leads people away from talking to each other or questioning the oppression in their lives. Instead they get up and go to work (if they are employed), come home and switch on TV, absorb TV's nonsense until bedtime, and then the daily cycle starts again.

Given the give or take 48 million adults in the British population, I suggest that you look at the BARB figures for how many people watch TV.
In the small village I live in there are 65 various clubs,teams, societies, and other organisations. (Most towns cities and villages have a lot of things to do or join in with if you know where to look) Most of the adult populations has other interests than watching TV.

 

[fela fan]

Bully for you,just stop ramming it down peoples gobs in order to make you feel self-satisfied and greater than everyone else.

spend more time on.......

Why, do you have a problem with that? Do you feel inferior to everyone else?

You probably can't see it, but by posting up that picture you like so much, and going on about how barking is so 'self-satisfied', you are acting in the same manner as you accuse barking of.

Ironical life is isn't it?!

 

[fela fan]

btw, the law that sedgemore spoke out against, is it going to get passed? Will it be rejected? Is britain really turning into a 1960s south africa?

Is there a name for this proposed new law? I'd like to find out more about it.

 

[fela fan]

Just seen the sunday times, so now know more about this bill. I am flabbergasted. Are the british people going to accept this burmese style governence? We'll shortly be referring to the junta in charge of britain.

 

[jiggajagga]

Just seen the sunday times, so now know more about this bill. I am flabbergasted. Are the british people going to accept this burmese style governence? We'll shortly be referring to the junta in charge of britain.

The bill should be held up in the Lords this week and have to come back for further investigation, but, yes fela, the Brits will accept it because the British people will all be choosing the latest ring-tone for their mobile or wooden floor tiles ( see Adorno post above) at the time the vote goes through instead of taking to the streets as they did in the Anti-war marches in 2003, and believe me, this is far more important than the anti-war march if only they could see it.

PS and before anyone has a go at me for being condescending can anyone tell me that what I say is not true?
I went to my local last night and not ONE person in about 20 had ANY idea what I was talking about when I mentioned the bill! However, everyone knew that the Beckhams latest sprog was to be called Cruz?
I rest my case M'lud!!!

 

[fela fan]

I'm off out now jigga, but have more to say on this. I have just started a thread about the bill per se, and will be interested to see what kind of response it gets from urbanites.

I am totally floored by what i have read in this bill, and find it incredulous that the people will accept it. Although i agree with your reasons for their passivity.

Truly terrible and like i say i want to emigrate again!!

 

[ZWord]

This thread is very depressing.

Is Blair planning to join forces with Bush again or something similar? Why are all these draconian measures being pushed through - are the powers-that-be preparing for bigger things to come?

The way I see it, they are barricading themselves behind bigger and bigger walls, installing more and more security measures to protect themselves because of the crimes they have committed (and the crimes they have yet to commit) against humanity. No government, other than one of the most hated, would need to take such tyrannical steps to protect themselves from the people (fuck all this 'terrorist' BS).

I wonder what they are up to?

The enslavement and commoditisation of humanity.

Back to the good old days.

As far as the internment's concerned, it's not difficult to see that it could be very useful for the governing parties to persuade their real opposition to keep quiet.

 

[ZWord]

A speech like Brian Sedgemore's could be front page news for every paper in the country and the lead story on the TV. Why isn't it?
Is it an unseen conspiracy that ensures that the boat isn't rocked, or is it just the way things are done by accident?

 

[fela fan]

could be front page news for every paper in the country

Could be??

fucking should be man. As to why it's not, well, that's the press for you.

 

[scawenb]

It was Mr Sedgemore shouting back at Hazel Blears:

"You poor, pathetic, human being".

Last night he tried to interrupt her speech but she refused to give way to him. So as soon as the next speaker stood-up they immediatle allowed him to speak and so he said in yet another side-swipe at the poor pathetic human being of Hazel Blears:

Mr. Brian Sedgemore (Hackney, South and Shoreditch) (Lab): I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way, which the curmudgeonly Minister would not do. It would help our proceedings if we knew which amendments the Government will propose within the tight timetable. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we have received absolute and categorical assurances from the press that there is a letter in the post to all of us setting out the Government amendments? Does he have a copy yet?

http://www.parliament.the-stationer...cm050228/debtext/50228-08.htm#50228-08_spnew0