4 ms·

If you genuinely want an answer to this, read Amusing Ourselves To Death. Postman presents a very convincing case that the medium (tv, book, radio, etc.) has a

If you genuinely want an answer to this, read Amusing Ourselves To Death. Postman presents a very convincing case that the medium (tv, book, radio, etc.) has a very strong influence on the content that is presented, and the discourse that ensues. I don’t think that all television is worthless, but neither do I believe that all information forms are equivalent in their ability inform and enlighten.

overgard 8y ago
I'll read that. I have no doubt that medium tends to have a dramatic effect, but I don't see how a medium that requires more attention (say a documentary) is worse than a medium that requires less (a podcast). Of course a book requires the most attention; but that also presents the largest obstacle -- especially if you don't have the time/energy to invest but are otherwise interested in the subject. I guess I don't disagree with you, I just disagree with the people that think not watching things is some sort of badge of honor. I'd also point out that the Postman book was written in 1985, and TV/Movies then vs now with the choices and streaming and the improvement in the medium, I mean, it's not even close to the same thing.
- richk449 8y ago
  > I'd also point out that the Postman book was written in 1985, and TV/Movies then vs now with the choices and streaming and the improvement in the medium, I mean, it's not even close to the same thing. Very true. And that is part of what makes the book so impressive. It is the most prescient piece of writing that I have ever read, in how well it predicts our current politics, and to a lesser degreee, society. The book does not argue that tv is dumb, and watching it makes you dumb. The argument is more that the structure of tv tends to favor the types of content that aren’t good for society. Even though social media wasn’t around when the book was written, the analysis can easily be extended to provide a lot of insight into its effects on society. I’m not saying not to watch tv - I watch plenty of it myself. I’m just (poorly) trying to answer your question about why a documentary would be any worse than a podcast.

overgard 8y ago

I'll read that. I have no doubt that medium tends to have a dramatic effect, but I don't see how a medium that requires more attention (say a documentary) is worse than a medium that requires less (a podcast). Of course a book requires the most attention; but that also presents the largest obstacle -- especially if you don't have the time/energy to invest but are otherwise interested in the subject. I guess I don't disagree with you, I just disagree with the people that think not watching things is some sort of badge of honor. I'd also point out that the Postman book was written in 1985, and TV/Movies then vs now with the choices and streaming and the improvement in the medium, I mean, it's not even close to the same thing.

richk449 8y ago
> I'd also point out that the Postman book was written in 1985, and TV/Movies then vs now with the choices and streaming and the improvement in the medium, I mean, it's not even close to the same thing. Very true. And that is part of what makes the book so impressive. It is the most prescient piece of writing that I have ever read, in how well it predicts our current politics, and to a lesser degreee, society. The book does not argue that tv is dumb, and watching it makes you dumb. The argument is more that the structure of tv tends to favor the types of content that aren’t good for society. Even though social media wasn’t around when the book was written, the analysis can easily be extended to provide a lot of insight into its effects on society. I’m not saying not to watch tv - I watch plenty of it myself. I’m just (poorly) trying to answer your question about why a documentary would be any worse than a podcast.