From: drumm@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Tv and it's influence.
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:51:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: cnsvax.1992Apr7.145116.259
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1992Apr5.060526.17310@muddcs.claremont.edu>, teverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (Toby Everett) writes:
> In article <1992Apr4.214816.8344@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> mgo5s@newton.acc.Virginia.EDU (Mark G. Ocker) writes:
>>learning tool for children as well.  first off, television 
>>provides exposure to more facts, ideas, places, people, and 
>>perspectives per hour than any other medium could possibly 
>>dream of (however shallow this exposure might be).  furthermore, 
> 
> What do you define as "more facts, ideas, places, people, and perspectives"?
> I define it as the "area" covered (depth times sunjects).  Next, taking the
> example of the evening news, do you consider that half an hour spent with the
> evening news provides more total information than half an hour spent with a
> newspaper? 

Better yet, you could do binary dumps of every program on your computer.
Then you would get even more total information. 

The point is not how much information you receive, but it's content
(or lack of content, as with TV)

The discussion has somehow shifted to 'tv causes brain damage.' 
TV's real threat is that people believe what they see and here on TV.

Yea, you get "More facts", but they are selected facts.  By no means can
this be considered "total information." You get ideas, but whose?  Where
do these "perspectives" come from.  At least you can choose some good
alternate newspapers like _The Nation_, even though many people prefer
to be spoon fed crap like USA Today.


Example: What if everything you knew about drugs and the drug war came 
from TV?  Not just the news, but from cop shows, and donahue.  Would 
you be  getting the full story?  For many people, this *is* their only 
source of information.  Why believe that you are getting the complete 
facts about anything else on TV.

        TV: Point / CounterPoint

                Some people say we should have mandatory life 
                sentences for drug dealers. Others say drug dealers 
                should be shot.  Tonight we will be discussing both 
                of these radically different points of view.

Almost anytime we see something on TV that we know about intimately,
We are frustrated because they either mess it up, or present only half
of the real story.  


But that's only half the damage.  If you sit and watch TV all day, it
becomes your world. Yea, you know the difference, but you have a greater
tendency to believe that housewives gossips all day, Bud is better than
Miller, and Drug users go around shooting people.  And if you have little 
or no experience with these things, other than the tube, Why shouldn't
you believe this?

Little girls might want to grow up to be housewives, so they can gossip 
and have affairs. (after all, it's what everyone does!)  Boys, of course,
want to have the exciting job of Super Cop, the drug fiend killer.  To
some extent, TV steers society by creating roles and expectations.


> Enough drivel from me.  I'm going to go subject myself
> to that hateful influence, TV , and watch Dr. Strangelove.  I still use.

That's Ok.  It is your choice!
But please use with the awareness of who is telling you what.
And remember, please don't watch and drive.   ;)


-- Dan

=================================================================
! With a better selection of shows, I could even see it being   !
! very good. As it stands today [TV] is one of the most biased  !
! and worst forms of communication known.                       !
!                          --  alexc@yang.earlham.edu           !
=================================================================