4 ms·

Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death makes a good case about how long-form written exposition is uniquely superior to all those modern mediums. There's to

Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death makes a good case about how long-form written exposition is uniquely superior to all those modern mediums. There's too much that's either unsaid or can't be said in those other mediums. The mediums themselves even preclude any kind of depth due to their very nature, constraints, whether they be financial constraints, distribution, time-slot scarcity (as in a T.V. series), etc. Many seemingly educational works become vapid infotainment (TED Talks, History/Discovery networks, videogames can maybe be narrative, but the essence of it is always the gameplay). I think his thesis was directed more at the importance of non-fiction expositions, but I feel it's just as applicable to works of fiction, which are oftentimes even better at expounding important ideas, philosophies, etc. than non-fiction works.

UtopiaPunk 3y ago
I thought Amusing Ourselves to Death was really interesting. I almost agree with it, but I reject his basic thesis that the medium so rigidly defines the form of content. It was written in the 80s, and he seems to say that television shows and broadcast news, as they existed in the 80s, are the only way way for video to exist (namely, episodic TV shows and news made of short and jarring cuts). I basically agree that that format is less intellectually sophisticated than longer forms, but I don't think that form is limited by the television set. As time has passed and "television" is a more amorphous concept, maybe that is clearer. But that short, attention-getting format is driven by profit, especially ad revenue. I think one only needs to watch a good documentary to challenge the author's central thesis. But I think a lot of the book actually holds up well and can be mapped onto streaming and social media. I think it pairs well with Manufacturing Consent.

UtopiaPunk 3y ago

I thought Amusing Ourselves to Death was really interesting. I almost agree with it, but I reject his basic thesis that the medium so rigidly defines the form of content. It was written in the 80s, and he seems to say that television shows and broadcast news, as they existed in the 80s, are the only way way for video to exist (namely, episodic TV shows and news made of short and jarring cuts). I basically agree that that format is less intellectually sophisticated than longer forms, but I don't think that form is limited by the television set. As time has passed and "television" is a more amorphous concept, maybe that is clearer. But that short, attention-getting format is driven by profit, especially ad revenue. I think one only needs to watch a good documentary to challenge the author's central thesis. But I think a lot of the book actually holds up well and can be mapped onto streaming and social media. I think it pairs well with Manufacturing Consent.