Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Conscientious Public
For some time now, the commentariat - columnists, critics, bloggers - has bashed the American public as "celebrity-starved," gobbling every sighting and, better yet, smashup of a person "famous for being famous."
And, with the smashups accelerating - just this year we have had shock jock Don Imus, former stripper Anna Nicole Smith, socialite Paris Hilton - the bashing accelerates. Increasingly, we also are cited - in both mainstream and "new" media - as "porn-loving," "potty-mouthed," "stupid," "shopaholic," possessed of the attention span of a flea and, as to political (in)activity, history-averse and criminally apathetic.
Enough. Before this contemptuous "conventional wisdom" congeals into "fact," let's get clear: Some of our number in this democracy may be gaga over celebrity, though I have yet to meet one of these creatures. But - crucial to the survival of the Republic - some of us are most emphatically not.
Call us the conscientious public. (And, if the following seems self-serving, it's meant both as defense against further defamation and antidote to declining readership, by turning a gimlet-eyed view of the broad public into respect for the worthy citizen, Democrat and Republican, within it.)
Instead of celebrity, our eye is on infinitely more important things: the unjust war that America forced on Iraq; the unnecessary death of Americans and Iraqis; our departure from the rule of law, with torture and secret prisons now standard. In short, America's moral fall.
We mark also our fellow citizens still digging out from Hurricane Katrina two years later; the growing inequity between the superrich and superpoor; and, we mark this administration's unconscientiousness to that suffering.
And when we can, we act - to maddeningly little result. By the millions, we protested, full-throat, the launching of the Iraq war, but President Bush wasn't listening; we've continued protesting, but Bush stays the course. When Abu Ghraib hit in April 2004, we let loose an enormous outcry but, unforgivably, torture never surfaced in the ongoing presidential campaign, nor did a champion emerge to forward our cause.
And that enormous outcry to Imus' slurring African-American women as, um, whores? Again, that came from us, though in defending the women, we got dirtied ourselves (it's distasteful even to write the word "whore") - a consequence of fighting pigs in mud. And, while we care about things like honor, dignity and good name, to call women whores and claim it's just a free-speech issue, as Imus did, is to be so uncaring of the injury inflicted as to be psychopathic. (Fittingly, one of the women slurred is now suing Imus for defamation.) And what came of our protest? More celeb-a-thons followed.
Pigs, mud, whores, strippers: Contrasted with the prayerful hope that, in response to 9/11, our best would come forth, what sorry ruin. Instead, the worst in the American character is reflected back at us: the warrior bombast, the vulgarity, a cash-register ethic, Melville's confidence man as national type. That this cruel farce stretches into Year Six portends, in our eyes, tragedy. We should be well past the post-shock need for distraction, a role celebrity fills. But the warmup act won't leave the stage.
"Only a good thing can be abused," goes a French proverb. We conscientious see a great and good thing - the idea of America - being abused, wrecked, and it breaks our hearts, also our health: Burning shame - made more acute in light of the high achievement of the World War II generation - on top of protesting, petitioning, mentoring, and starting new organizations and Web sites, even running for office, takes a toll.
The strain of it all is causing some conscientious to consider leaving the United States; as one soon-to-be expatriate told me, "I can't bear to watch this great country destroy itself." But, most of us are sticking - we have to, we're conscientious - and, sticking, we are emboldened to ask: Why is all our various action, over which we're knocking ourselves out, not to mention our heartbreak and strained checkbooks (we are overdonating to our watchdog organizations), weighted so much less than mere passive consumer choice (for, say, more pix of Anna Nicole Smith)?
And, consider the despair of the conscientious veteran. The New York Times recently wrote of a vet, home from Iraq, who now advocates for brain-damaged comrades: "And day after day [he] has to grind his teeth at how swiftly, how vapidly the occasional news of troubled veterans is bumped aside by a deluge of bulletins about Paris Hilton or some other this-just-in frippery. 'It's staggering, sickening,' he says. 'There are days I scream at the television - lives are being taken, families left in heartbreak.' " No doubt this vet wonders, "What was I fighting for?"
What infuriates is that this egregious situation is rigged ... and the commentariat has to know that. To bump news of troubled vets in favor of "frippery" reflects the monetized "celebrity sells" bias of the media's corporate owners. Instead of bashing the conscientious public for something we never wanted, pundits should bash their bosses for pushing meretricious product (and their hack colleagues for reporting it and their editors for assigning it). Also, they might ponder their corporate owners' motives in accelerating the inanity as the ruin deepens. But that's a profile in media courage we seldom see.
Where the conscientious public does get respect is in the editorial. There we are appealed to, in moral voice, about the important things - i.e., America's moral fall.
Yet, elsewhere in the same venue, even in prestige ones, the moral line is chucked and we read of "kinky chic"; the pornographer as entrepreneur; critics' thumbs up to the latest sleaze (e.g., the TV series "Californication") - and see ourselves again "dissed," as "prudes" and "righteous" and (new epithet) "pearl clutchers" if we object. This is the worst hypocrisy - moral hypocrisy - yet it goes uncommented upon. Analyze that, please.
But, apart from respect, getting squared on terminology is crucial, because perception is reality. And the commentariat, dealing in ideas, helps shape perception, also capacity: To brand a people with their worst traits is to cripple their capacity to recover their path, govern themselves, solve complex problems.
When global warming was declared fact by the world's scientific community some months ago, three of the six TV screens at my gym featured endless loops of Anna Nicole Smith - not confidence-building, considering the gathering storm(s) coming at us.
In a word: The conscientious public cares about the commonweal, while the celebrity-starved does not.
Happily, the conscientious public is making its point, or rather history is making it for us: A big and growing majority of Americans now opposes the Iraq war. And, finally, torture is being addressed: The recent attorney general confirmation hearings focused on waterboarding, the presidential candidates are being forced to take a stand, and a month ago a group of World War II interrogators broke silence to condemn this administration's use of torture.
More than celebrity-gazing, it's these two matters - when and why we wage war; how we treat people in our custody - that define who we are as a people and what we are fighting for. Will we have that defining moment - or more drivel? The next celeb-a-thon, featuring a couple from the UK named Beckham, is already under way, and O.J. Simpson has made yet another comeback.
Six years after 9/11, patterns are being set - bad ones. Let's stop the suicide now. At its simplest, the remedy is a matter of lighting: Just as the commentariat has ignored the conscientious public, it could ignore the next celeb-a-thon - simply kill the lights, for what's celebrity without its lights, its stage?
At the same time, this spitball into the commentariat's cubicle is to demand: Hey, over here, pay attention to us, the conscientious. For we are fighting for the nation's conscience and the commonweal. It's also to remind: Print is forever and history takes names.
Carla Seaquist, a playwright based in Gig Harbor, is author of "Who Cares?: The Washington-Sarajevo Talks," among other works. Her Web address is www.carlaseaquist.com
Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company
42 Comments so far
Show AllThe general public need to learn about the engine of propaganda, and how it's being run all over everything, from Roy Eidelson:
"Manipulation of public sentiment has been at the very heart of the White House's entire Iraq war enterprise, and it will likely have a similar role in any enduring U.S. presence there. For those interested in a psychological analysis of this warmongering, I have recently completed a short YouTube video entitled "Resisting the Drums of War." It examines how the Bush administration's messaging targets five core concerns that often govern our lives–concerns about vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. The video describes their warmongering appeals and offers suggestions for how to counter them. It's available for viewing HERE."
Namaste … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … … … … … … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »
They treat the presidential hopefuls like celebrities rather than potential leaders. They ask them trivial pursuit questions in the so-called debates, which aren't debates at all. It's insulting to them and us to ask questions like "who believes in God, hold up your hand". Any question with the slightest amount of substance has to be answered in 90 seconds. I've stopped watching the "debates". They're infuriating and frustrating. I hear Dennis Kucinich got all of 5 minutes of air time in the last one.
But I loved reading the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Now THOSE were debates! Kennedy and Nixon debated. These dog and pony shows they are now subjecting us to are a meaningless joke.
Pastor> great points...
Celeb gossip is regulated speech.
That is stripped of political potency.
At least weather relates to our life, if only distantly.
I use the word commodify. the process by which the un-channeled, general rebellious, angst of youth, in a culture of meaninglessness; is then used to sell them (brand them) with non political images of rebelliousness. Its ok to be a rebel just wear the rebel uniform.
It would be interesting to do a study of celeb coverage and the coverage of presidential hopefuls.
My hypothesis is that the coverage would be the same as the celebs. Like zero as far as political potency.
Nothing they say in the pre election hype means anything. They don't even answer the questions, as if we can't tell when they are just blowing smoke.
Psy-ops. We the people have been subjected to corporate psy-ops for decades now. They didn't spend billions just to figure out how to sell us soap. Now that "our" government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the world's worst corporate criminals, Madison Ave. merged with CIA, NSA, etc. are taking things to a whole new level. "It's a wonder we can even feed ourselves."
Carla,
Thanks for the protest and championing the "conscientious public". What I think is egregious is that "the public" gets the blame for the garbage broadcast through the media. For instance, I've NEVER heard a single person say they wish we had more of the same. The media doesn't care about what's good for America or what would increase our knowledge or understanding. What they do care about is ratings and raking in advertiser money. And it's a funny thing -- people and things hyped by the media DO get higher ratings and rake in advertiser money. This is the key element in why we get garbage through the media. It's a closed circle, guaranteed to keep the corporate goodies flowing.
It would be so easy for the media to shift the goalposts and hype other values, such as political truths and respectable human beings. They'd get ratings just as high and corporate money just as much because everybody would want to know about what was being hyped and hook into the values being presented. That's just the way things "work". It would certainly give the young, who absorb most of their values and attitudes from the media, a much more stable and life-enhancing base to operate from.
Appealing to the lowest characteristics of human beings and selling it as politics, news, and entertainment is not my idea of a mature society at all. Nobody seems to have ever successfully challenged the notion that "sensationalism and glitz" as a consistent value of the media sells better than a mature presentation of facts, opinions, and entertainment. As I said, I believe that in the proper setting, a new "media environment" could be just as successful as it is for (only) the corporations now. I'd like to see somebody care about reality and values that appeal to more people than 8th-graders.
It is the media that creates celebrity and consumerist stories, then spin and spin them to dizzy and distract us from the great and pervasive political and economic issues of the day, robbing us of our American birthright--civil rights and freedom of expression.
The potty mouths are the slimeballs and smearmeisters who defame and muddy all who seek to level the national playing field and to unmask political and corporate yahoos who disarm us with their smiles and lies. In this season of infamy and defamation, one thing is sure--those who cast the first stones are more likely to be expert at it and know how to play the game better than the rest of us.
We are a unit of their mercenary calculus, nothing more.
"or have that big of an opinion about it for that matter. It is safe. You will offend no one, and there are always easy answers."
This just about sums up dinner table conversations with friends or at parties. You are not allowed to have an opinion strong enough to upset the delicate sensibilities of the average American !
I like to think of myself as a member of the conscientious public, but I can empathize with why people are fascinated with stardom. It is the new weather, the safe topic that you can talk to with anyone without risk of offending them or having any type of personal remonstrance.
I recently loss my job because I told people that it is the duty of citizens in a democracy to hold their government accountable to moral codes of behavior. This controversial idea implied that the government would not ALWAYS do what is morally right and citizens may have to think about policy decisions. I did not need to, nor did I speak, about the policies of our current administration.
Focusing on celebrities allows the public to remain safe from the possibility of discovering any ethical uneasiness with the government or our society that may lead to their actual active opposition to those around them.
Don't underestimate the idea that the media deliberately shapes the news to encourage a passive ignorant public. The media will happily report on veterans when the stories demonstrate how well we take care of them, how few are in danger in Iraq, and how great Republican laize faire candidates are in their handling of foreign policy issues.
Yes, the real issue for the media is not the war, but the profitability of the media. They don't want to report stories about veterans doing poorly, being disrespected by the VA or dying, because that may start that social conscience rolling in a direction that may make this country a democracy again.
Grigor: Obviously not an Elvis fan. When I look back at all Elvis accomplished in 20 years I am amazed. It's easy to look at all these imitators and think Elvis was a cheap blow up doll a wig and a bunch of hot air. He wasn't he was the King! But like 4-wheelers say If you don't get it we can't explain it to you. I for one get Elvis and I'm glad I do. Thank you. Thank you very much!
We talk about celebrities and such because it is something we CAN talk about. You are not going to get into a debate about Paris Hilton. There are no subtlties about her ilk, there will be no fights about her. You do not have to know history, or have that big of an opinion about it for that matter. It is safe. You will offend no one, and there are always easy answers.
So if we address the saying "never talk politics or religion in mixed company" we may be able to elevate public discourse about something mor substantial, no?
Celebrity is cheap news, and so that's the embedded media's principal product. The news-mongers unload this tripe on us day in and day out, and then they tell us how much we like it. We don't.
I go to America every year for about a month and it's easy to see where Americans get their ideas. The TV feeds them their daily dose of pablum and then they regurgitate it back out during the day.
--"I can't bear to watch this great country destroy itself."
This, in itself, is the big lie that envelops our thinking. How, a country whose existence is based on acts of genocide, can be considered great is beyond me. Our entire system of living is based on oppressing others around the world in some form.
We kill, we commit unbriddled acts of violence, we consume with massively disproportionate appetites, we destroy the environment, we condemn millions to death based on our actions directly or indirectly and our standard of living is completely unsustainable.
But hey, we are the greatest country on earth even if we are the only ones saying so !! WTF !!
The Legacy of Corporate Rats in power.
Hillary Clinton, "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" "Lobbist's are people too!" Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha, Nafta, I can't Remember"
Ralph Nader, "A Corporation masquerading as a person"
Shit for Brains, "I got to Catapult The Propaganda"
Socrates "Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"
Corrupt Shit for Brains " I'm The Decider"
Blackwater,"Give me that Elvis CD, and let's take a few Shots!"
Bigot's and Lotts"Time to retire to the Lobby Cores."
Brownie, "How do you like my New Suit?"
Dark Vadir, Fear Fear Weapons of Mass Destruction, 911, 911, 911, FEAR, mUSHROOm cLOUDs
Paul Bremmer, I just need 9 billion, in 100 dollar bills. True story, 1480 Chevy ton trucks, back to brack over 4 miles long.
Americans distracted by celebrities? We're distracted by everything, as long as it's on television and doesn't have much to do with reality. And that's the way the powers-that-be like it. TV has been used for a long time as the incredible propaganda tool it is, even though it almost certainly wasn't invented with that purpose in mind. It's used to scare us, to make us depressed, to make us want things we don't need and to make us distrust people who are different from us. Until we, as a nation, learn to ignore the junk (especially the junk that passes for news) on TV, we'll continue to vote for people whose constituents consist of huge corporations, instead of we, the people.
It's too bad that books don't have nearly the power over people that TV does. If they did, and if you could get every poor and middle class person in America to read Kucinich's autobiography, The Courage to Survive, it's almost certain that he would be the next President of the United States.
Will the 2008 Vote Be Fair?
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/348/index.html
Kucinich is Conscientious!!!
http://www.movementvisionlab.org/blog/kucinich-a#1196655389
I don't read Rupert Murdock papers. For that matter I don't watch too much ABCCBSNBC news. When I do watch, I flip a lot, and often turn it off after the first 15 minutes. When I can assume that a garbage story is all over the airwaves, I avoid the TV. On Michael Jackson days I avoid all news.
One network interviewed War News Radio, from Swarthmore College, and asked the editor of her opinion of their network news coverage of Iraq. She had to blurt out that it really wasn't very good.
For editorial opinions, I scan the world's editorial cartoons online. Raw emotions come out of cartoons, and very occasionally some real ignorance comes out which shows how some people think.
I get some news here, so please try to be honest with your slants.
Right on, Booksense! TV must be forsaken for the likes of Pacifica and, well the occasional decent PBS offering (Frontline, Bill Moyers) and of course CD. Doing a little bit to enlighten the masses daily, if not weekly, such as freeway blogging, thoughtful bumperstickers, discussing world events in line at the grocery store, ala 2lyons, so others can overhear and maybe experience another viewpoint, is really important. We need folks to come around to our way of thinking!! Check out Morgan Spurlock's new movie about the Rev. Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping for an irreverent look into how to consume less. Peace to you all!!
To Ronald White, 2Lyons, and starofthesea:
I actually stopped watching commercial TV about 6 months ago. I am fortunate to have a public Access channel (where I get some Free Speech TV programming and Democracy Now); a Municipal Channel (where I can watch city council meetings); and a community college channel (that has a lot of interesting educational programming). All of these come sans commercial advertisements. I am much better informed about local government and educational issues. Many days I don't turn on the TV AT ALL.
But more informative programming is just one benefit. The best thing is that I feel a wonderful sense of calm concerning the need to buy and consume. Without the constant bombardment of TV ads, I don't feel that sense of lack or angst that marketers try to make us feel. Now I really distinguish between needs ( actually I have very few) and wants ( if I wait long enough they pass).
I've incorrectly believed that our family has never been one to watch a lot of TV. After all, we've always limited the kids to watching only on Friday night and Saturday. But even that seems too much. Therefore, I'm currently trying to wean them away from that. I've added a lot more outside errands and card games and reading and telling funny stories, etc. But I'm running out of material.
I have been telling EVERYBODY with a pulse about my life without commercial TV. But I figured out early on that it's not very effective to tell people to just stop watching. Sadly I believe most people are just too far gone. However, mentioning how much better I feel since I stopped watching commercial TV seems to pique people's interest. I talk about books I've had time to read (kudos to Naomi Klein and others), money I've saved by not buying unnecessary crap, how much more time I have (commercial TV is a time vampire). More than one person has said they want to try turning off the TV too.
If they don't stop watching commericial TV altogether, it seems that the main goal is for people, especially young people, to at least watch TV critically. And to be extremely critical of the commercials that accompany the shows. Don't just have the TV on as background noise, because all those ads creep into your subconscience.
I feel the same way about commercial radio and gave that up too. Thank God for community radio and Pacifica.
We are living in the age of mediocrity, which started, or got its boost, with Elvis. Shallow,over-rated "celebrities" are worshiped, fed to a juvenile, sex-starved and violence-loving public.
"To bump news of troubled vets in favor of "frippery" reflects the monetized "celebrity sells" bias of the media's corporate owners."
This is exactly right. For every bit of "frippery" in the news (be it TV, radio, or paper), something of value has been bumped to make room.
Don't know what to do about this, as most Americans seem to get their frippery from the MSM, and of course, they act accordingly. Just don't know...
BeForKids, you and Carla are correct that, unfortunately, the majority of Americans are distracted by celebrities, sports, soap operas, wrestling, NASCAR, snowmobiles, drag racing, movies, trashy novels, all network TV, porn, cheap buys at Wal Mart, overpowered cars, etc, etc. etc.
When viewing the US corporatist Ponzi-economy, I find it useful to first separate the macro-economy into two vast categories; the requirement industries (housing, food, clothing, education, etc.) and what can best be called the 'distractive industries' (which, unfortunately, constitute about 67% of the US GDP).
Don't get me wrong about the value of the 'distractive industries'. This 2/3rds of our so-called economy not only generates the majority of our GDP, but also has the benefit of employing a large (and growing) portion of the population, and most importantly for the corporatist Empire, does precisely what the name implies --- namely, to 'distract' the masses from realizing that they are being 'played for rubes' in a giant scale Three Card Monte scam by the corporatist Empire.
Each year the corporatist Empire squeezes a bit harder on boht the rubes at home and the peons in their oil-territories --- because that's what unsustainable Empires always have to do; squeeze the base of their hierarchical pyramid as the input of cash and resources to the Empire's peak becomes harder to expand.
Empires never end voluntarily or nicely.
But the end for all Empires inevitably comes, and it comes from one or both of two things: devastating wars which always start (but don't end) in the territories, and/or economic disaster at home.
The people within an Empire tend not to do anything until either their domestic economy collapses, or until foreign wars destroy them.
Given that we are now in an era subject to nuclear war, let's hope that 2008's devastating economic collapse of the Ponzi economy in the 'distractive industries' and the resulting Great Depression caused by Wall Street and banking scams will be the 'least worst' way for this global corporatist Empire to expire.
That would be painful -- but not half as painful as a nuclear war based ending to our common problem of Empire.
Not everything on tv is horrid these days. There's this wonderful channel on our set that has these nice logs burning. Every once in a while this hand comes in and puts new logs on the fire. It's ever so much better than the crap on CNN and Fox...
Just to inject a bit of humour into the debate, couldn't help myself.
2lyons, the only reason I watch TV is for either 3 things: comedy, education, or a good movie. I generally ignore commercials that I'm not interested in. Heck, most of my news and comedy comes from the good ol' internet. The average person can make me laugh way harder than the big-wigs can. Also, here's an idea for those who yearn for their movie, music, and magazine goodies: the library! My library is part of a system where you can practically borrow ANYTHING for free! Check it out:
http://www.einetwork.net/
kelmer said: "I read somewhere that German entertainment before the Nazis assumed power was very fluffy and trivial–'dont worry, be happy' type stuff."
The movie and musical 'Cabaret' charts this territory. Hard-working Germans had their currency devalued several times, a belated-gift from their war-mongering leaders who took them into WWI and hid the financial consequences at the time (add in the int'l communities vindictiveness). The Germans responded by whoopin' it up like there was no tomorrow, cuz in a way it was true...
The rise of 'reality' TV has always reminded me of the movie 'They shoot horses, don't they?' examining a Great Depression phenomenon in which the poor got paid to be placed in ridiculous and cruelly competitive situations for the entertainment of the moneyed.
I think there are definite parallels to be drawn with 30s Germany. At present, after a days work, I find it depressing and unconstructive to be faced once again with the Prez's crimes in Iraq, much easier to find out what 'trouble' Britney's been getting into lately (much of it contrived by the paparazzi). In a way, his latest surge in Iraq has defeated the American 'resistence' movement as it has the 'Iraqi' one. Eventually, of course, we'll get the bill for all of this and, like the Germans before us, start whoopin' it up like there's no tomorrow, because ...
Dollar down 40% against the euro: seems we're condemned to repeat history...
2lyons------I agree entirely. Have gone without TV for 12 years. Some radio but even public radio is so mainstream and diluted that o iften just annoys me so I turn it off. Music and silence are my company and I feel very alive---so into the present moment, without all those distractions. Fear is foreign to me as is worry. Makes me wonder how much of those two states are "created" by outside forces. Sure doesn't come from within.
I assume Carla is not referring to all those good conscientious Christians I listened to this morning in church celebrating the return of Jesus Christ to Israel--all with their big assed middle eastern gas sucking cars parked around the sanctuary.
While at the family's house their TV was on and a commercial for Polly Pocket "Race to the Mall" came on. It was girls racing to the mall, and it embodied many things that were detestable in our society today. And that is just one tiny commercial, one drop in the bucket.
The best thing an American can do is also the simplest: turn off the TV.
Don't buy magazines. Avoid the mall unless necessary.
Turn OFF, tune in,
Drop out.
It was the best decision I ever made. And I'm so much happier for it.
Try it. Turn off the TV for a day, a week. Or go on vacation without your cell phones and don't turn on the TV. See how it makes you feel. If you like the awareness you gain from living life out of the grip of that static, then incorporate it into your every day life.
Peace~
"There are days I scream at the television"
To Carla : Therein lies the problem . Turn the damn thing off . Could anyone imagine the impact on the advertisers on MSM to suddenly realize that those millions of war protesters are suddenly not buying the usual crap because they are not watching the ads?
I've got to put this gently but in your desire to keep your creature comforts and protest, your are losing the quality of both .
Until you figure out what Rosa Parks did fifty ago was incredibly clever , cheap and easy,even protesters and the millions more non-caring and caring but non-protesting will be compelled to "eat" ( propaganda )television/newspapers and acccept the deafness of American government.
In comparison to boycotts and protests in France in particular but Europe in general American counterparts are incredibly sparesely-attended based on population ( a million out of three-hundred million, lazy , weak , stupid and ineffective.
Take away the proaganda and the " houses" will fall.
Quit whining on CD . Get off your ass and turn off the television.
Most Americans are not, as they have been potrayed quite often, stupid or unable to reason. Talk, just hot air and saliva, won't cure the venereal rash that our government has become. People must begin to act out their convictions. It can be as simple as standing watch over polling places. Or standing up to prevent the fascist attitudes of those who would govern from taking root in their neighborhoods. Simply not going along with illegal "new laws" is how the People can deal with what is going wrong. It is our right and our duty to disobey and question the source of all that would hamper our freedoms.
In line at the supermarket this weekend, seeing the magazines and the newspapers all plastered with celebrity rumors, my husband and I shuddered and focused our attention elsewhere. Two women behind us, peering at the papers, conversed among themselves about "do you know how the twins are doing?" and began conversing about the topic on the closest tabloid about some celebrity's twin babies.
I have not heard people talking about the war, or global warming, or any crucial issue although whenever we go anywhere we talk about it openly in case anyone is listening.
We don't watch TV and haven't in years. Over thanksgiving my brother, his wife, and young kids came over and would not turn the TV off. I turned it off and said that we only see each other once a year (if that), so why watch TV? I wandered away and not 3 minutes later the TV was back on.
I don't get it, but it doesn't surpise me.
As long as people are distracted, things will continue the way they are. I frequent Common Dreams not only to keep myself updated with real news, but to be among people who are keeping themselves aware too. It helps keep up the hope that not everybody is placated and ignorant.
Keep up the good work everyone!
Carla Seaquist doesn't know any celebrity starved citizens? News magazines are losing readership while the circulation of "entertainment" magazines is soaring, with "People" leading the way. Their website had 51.7 million visits the day after the Oscars. That's in one day.
Half the people eligible to vote don't. It's true the corporate media doesn't provide much besides propaganda, but the public isn't paying attention to much besides the state of their wallets. And that's the real reason why they are turning against the invasion of Iraq. They're feeling the pinch.
Aside from progressives who may or may not cave in to the corporate Democratic Party come election time, very few have even heard of Dennis Kucinich. And many young people have never even heard of Ralph Nader. And while the corporate media are sniping at Hillary and Obama, ignoring Edwards and mocking Dennis, they've clearly picked Giuliani as the next president. He's getting a free pass, as did Bush. If the public knew the truth about these two, they never would have made it onto the ballot. That's our democracy.
Ms Seaquist is basically right & to her credit, tries to illumine an important subject. At the same time, however, one must note that even she doesn't go quite far enough. She writes,
And, finally, torture is being addressed: The recent attorney general confirmation hearings focused on waterboarding, the presidential candidates are being forced to take a stand...
- This is too hopeful an interpretation. She's letting the perps off too easily. In fact, the confirmation hearings were more significant for their failure to take a principled stand against waterboarding. (Some Democrats postured as being "horrified," yet confirmed Mukasey anyway.) And the presidential candidates are not really being "forced to take a stand" -- on the contrary, they are simply finding new ways to dodge the issue, or to rationalize it.
One must recognize that the relentless focus on Britney, Paris & Anna Nicole serves very definite political purposes. Spectator sports serves the same purpose. All of this fluff & idiocy is just a diversion, to keep the population's consciousness away from (in Ms Seaquist's apt phrase) "America's moral fall."
I can't believe you wrote this, Carla. Thank you thank you thank you. Where I live, the world of the U.S. - Mexico border, people are so desperate to just survive there is virtually no discussion of these obvious issues. The one and only time in the last 25 years I saw outrage here in El Paso was when thousands and thousands of people marched out of high schools, migrant farmer centers and beat to death, leaky adobe houses, was for the immmigration rights march a year and ahalf ago. It never happened again. I had this little ray of hope, and then -- blink -- it was gone. Then I read this essay. It expresses exactly what I believe most of us are - conscientious. The decent, shell-shocked hard working immigrants who are my neighbors, and the coffee-latté sipping yuppies, the struggling teachers and the animal rescuers, I believe, are all horrified by our moral free fall. Thank you for writing this. It saved me today.
Good article. However, I must bleat my almost-daily bleat.
The war against Iraq is over!
"...growing majority of Americans now opposes the Iraq war."
We won the war (going by the stated war goals). Read Public Law 107-243, the Constitutional basis for the war.
We are involved in a post-war occupation. Giving it the status of 'war' allows the counter-argument 'but we're a war and have to obey the C-in-C'.
Of course, our troops also are fighting the war against the supporters of the guys who attacked us on 9/11. (Public Law 107-40)
And we have the unConstitutional war on terror which the President announced but Congress never declared.
So saying 'Iraq war' means which conflict? See how the issue has been muddied?
Don't give the Iraq occupation the status of a war.
As for celebrities, I don't own a tv so I don't bother. The world via internet has everything I require.
Right on Carla Seaquist. I've been wondering the same things
for way too long. I agree there doesn't seem to be much
public discussion. People of conscience i know are burned
out and frustrated and many are choosing to just give up.
Many people i know are not even willing to discuss what's happening
on the planet right now. Many i know are leaving the country. Good,
honest people who love this place are bailing because they are afraid.
Not of terrorists but of their own
current government and its ruthless thug mentality. And now
we have to find someone to replace that person just to stay even.
With one out of two of us not participating in the system, this is
getting harder and harder to do. I don't blame people for wanting to escape
current reality by moving to la la land. For what it's worth, i'm going to stay here
and fight for my home. I've
got nowhere else i want to go.
It's honorable that we keep trying but it looks like shock & aww shyt is what's ahead.
I read somewhere that German entertainment before the Nazis assumed power was very fluffy and trivial--"dont worry, be happy" type stuff.
We live in the age of vulgarity--which is why Bush makes the perfect president for the times. He is vulgar beyond belief. Every thing about him. How he became president, his speech, his smirk, everything.
It started with tabloid tv shows, then talk shows, then Survivor and reality tv--a coarsening of the media. The internet lowered the bar as well because you could find anything on it.
Some social activist causes do try to fight fire with fire and make use of the celebrity focus. Peta for example.
I don't necessarily hate celebrities, I simply think their life stories should stay on areas like E! or Entertainment Weekly and not hog up time in the New York Times and CNN. The only time I think of the folks in Tinsel Town is when I'm watching their movies. I only care about how they act on screen, NOT how they act in real life.
In my growing up years (early 50's)....the tv was always on. Always. As I've found awareness around it I watch it less and less, but still watch a few minutes here and then of CNN. When the Spineless Ones "won" the election last year I decided I really needed to watch C-Span for the hearings and Colbert/Stewart. A year later I hardly even think to watch C-Span, I'm so disgusted. And now the writers' strike has taken C/S away (I totally support the writers). So I've been thinking of saving the money and get rid of the Dish.
But today I did turn to C-Span and watched - heaven forbid! - a REAL question and answer session by Dodd and then Obama. What relief, to not just hear the damn sound bite (byte?). I have been disappointed by Obama in the so-called "debates" but then one day happened to catch him on C-Span and watched in amazement an hour long speech that was electrifying and intelligent and....MY GAWD....HE DIDN'T LOOK AT A PIECE OF FUCKING PAPER ONCE!!. Uh-huh, you heard me right. Smart enough to give an hour long speech extemporaneously. Wow. Hillary doesn't do that. I watch for it. I mean, after you've said the same words over and over, doncha think you could just look us in the eye and TALK to us? But no, a candidate might "mess" up, and in one heartbeat be tossed out of the race by the MSM's titters of negativity.
TV is definitely the pablum to keep the rabble calm as rockinintheworld wrote.(great name by the way).
And the very worst of it all is that nobody is asking - not even the PEOPLE are asking - when our constitutional rights are going to be reinstated. That is our Foundation. And it's never even mentioned. Habeas Corpus? Who cares?
I try not to despair, I try to laugh every day so sometimes I watch reruns of Colbert. I'm not ready to give up tv completely yet but I ackowledge that I became addicted to it as a member of the first generation to experience it. I think it's changed us tremendously as a nation. Changed our culture, changed our brainwaves, changed our priorities in life - we became Consumers first, Americans second. Consumers....insatiable "gotta have it right now because they said so on tv" consumers. And in two easy payments of $19.99, whip out that credit card, folks, we gotta keep shoring up this hypocritical house of cards that is American Empire. And the tv has aided the greedy 1 per centers of this world in a way that must make their blood warm.
The TV is a piece of technology that can be used for good and for ill. Unfortunately for the serfs of the world it is mostly used for ill.
Well, I'd rather offend some people with my opinions about politics, than come accross like jackass because I'm up to date with the latest celebrity gossip.