My analysis is that the media people are bored. They are bored, because within the framework of censorship and editing that they operate under (God Bless America, defender of the free world !), they just get to do all these boring stories about the fight against terror, how the US government can market itself better (delivered in splendid doublespeak), whether the pharmaceutical stocks are in a dip or not, what weather is doing, whether the president has sneezed, whether or not lunch in 7th avenue has become cheaper or more expensive, what the baseball scores are, and all that kind of thing.
I watched a weebit of CNN and stuff the other day, and whereas the production technique is absolutely impeccable, cannot be faulted and grooves along like a train (or a plane) there is no substantive story content, and they were doing a story about how the Anglican church could split over the issue of whether practising British gays could be admitted to the priesthood or not. Meanwhile in Holland, after considerable ostentation, the government has settled a two-year wage freeze, which basically amount to saying that you only get ahead if you change your job, a rather surprising policy from a christian democratic prime minister, or perhaps not surprising at all. Now most of these media people are highly intelligent, highly cultured, they've been around, but they constantly get to do these bland stories and they want something more stimulating and pithy which challenges the grey matter, rather than makes them want to go to sleep or resort to reading Penthouse or the Famous Five. After all, there is plenty to be concerned about: soldiers fighting a war and they don't know why they are there or what the hell is happening, rising debts, sluggish economy, dying popartists, cultural bland-out, unemployment, financially dubious transactions, and all that sort of thing, incomprehensibility in foreign policy, lack of real leadership, and so on. Now I am not saying it is necessarily up to us to fill the gap all the time, but there is definitely an opening here, if ordinary Americans see the opportunity to inject a story and crack open the censors, in such a way that the story gets through, without violating the law. You could look at it this way: since the propertied classes respect intellectual property rights only when they own them themselves, maybe it's time for the stars of everyday life to take the media back, so that they reflect the concerns of the people actually watching the stuff, and not simply just the concerns of what the corporates think people should watch because it makes a buck for them. That's a stimulus for public discussion and a stimulus for more participation, things thaw, things limber up, and more problems get solved because they can be posed. This is just an idea, but, I tell you what, I just bought a copy of Rolling Stone today, and by golly there was an interview in it of Wesley Clark. Okay, I didn't get off (I mentioned local frosty conditions) but have think and consider this. Good, clear pithy questions from Rolling Stone, and very good, clear answers by Wesley Clark, and if I was stuck in Iraq eating my beef jerky or whatever it is that they dish out to the troops while they're pondering existential questions, I'd be getting myself a copy of Rolling Stone, it beats the shit of government propaganda. And you might ask me, how does Wesley Clark get to be interviewed by Rolling Stone ? Well it speaks for itself, doesn't it. Somehow the USA scene today reminds me of the USSR after Stalin has died on March the 5th, 1953 and everybody is waiting for Kruschev's famous speech, but history is stuttering and Beria is doing porno. This may be a weird thought and a false analogy, but that is how it feels. Maybe I ought to reread Antonov-Ovseyenko's The Time of Stalin. Jurriaan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 7:11 PM Subject: [PEN-L] what's going on > A week or so ago, the media appeared to be ready to make a few meek > efforts to peck at the Bush administration. Bush's guys make a lame > public relations effort and everyone backs down, including the Dems. > > Is it that they fear that the economy might pick up, giving Bush more > credibility? Or are they just cowards? Or stupid? > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
