Problemas con le television

(Languages of this post: Interlingua, Spanish, English)

In su libro "Quatro bon rationes pro eliminar le television", Jerry Mander narra como ille arrivava a ille conclusion post multe annos de producer annuncios commercial e de gerer su proprie agentia de publicitate.

Le plus notabile de toto es que, ante abandonar su profession, ille essayava a poner lo al servicio del ecologia e discoperiva que le problema non esseva in la natura del annuncios commercial mesme: Illo se trovava in le irrealitate del experientia de vider le television.

Mesmo le contacto con la natura deveni irreal quando illo se reduce in le schermo. Mesmo le vita personal anque se disconnecte e se submerge in un limbo de imagines intense que imita le existentia ver e lo rende passive usque le puncto de falsificar lo.

Multe annos postea, Giovanni Sartori arrivava a un conclusion simile in "Homo videns": Le television non solmente distorque le realitate ma atrophia le personalitate human. In ultra, como multissime personas crede lo que illes vide, le politica se reduce a producer imagines favorabile e mendace.

Satori cita con approbation lo que dice Karl Popper in "Le television, un mal magistro": "Le television ha devenite un potentia immense completemente irresponsibile. Il non pote haber le democratia con potentias sin controlo."

Popper, cognoscite per su positiones liberal, surprendeva multes quando ille proponeva le censura in le television. ("Le lection de iste seculo"): "Si omne nos esseva responsabile e considerava le effecto de lo que se monstra al infantes, tunc nos non haberea besonio del censura. Ma, lamentabilemente, isto non es le veritate."

In un societate homogenee, omnes possederea in commun le mesme valores, e le censura representarea le integration popular, que expellerea o reprimerea le dissidentes quando illes appare. In un societate heterogenee, toto se complica, ben que existe valores commun.

Pro le guerras de religion, Carolo V (quinte) non trovava un solution melior in le Sacre Imperio Roman que le homogeneitate imponite per regiones. Ubi il habeva un prince lutheran (o catholic), omne le population debeva esser lutheran o catholic.

Le Illustration credeva que on poterea superar le religiones con le illustration e le tolerantia, ma illo finalmente produceva le revolution francese que imponeva un theocratia jacobin. Le excessos del atheismo in controlo del stato eventualmente produceva le stato agnostic que ni crede in ullo ni ha un religion official.

Le stato agnostic ha functionate acceptabilemente in le mundo occidental, assumente valores christian sin attribuer los a un religion, como si illos esseva obvie e universal (pro exemplo: prohibir le polygamia). Ma in un mundo globalisate, le numero de valores commun tende a zero; e, si le stato es formalmente agnostic, como se pote determinar valores moral?

Esque on debe tolerar sacrificios human, appellate hodie assassinatos ritual? Esque on debe tolerar le ablation del clitoride? Esque on debe tolerar le pedophilia, que, segun alicunos, produce le felicitate inter le juveniles. Non offender le convictiones de ulle persona pare rationabile usque le apparentia de un persona qui defende valores como istes con le conviction le plus tranquille.

Consignar le valores al vita private (pro non excluder e pro non offender) finalmente significa legitimar le interesses illimitate del potentia e del moneta. Le television commercial non trova ulle inconvenientia in degradar le societate pro ganiar moneta, o in vender su servicios a illes que cerca le potentia pro su proprie scopos.

Iste degradation non es de origine technologic, como apparentemente crede Mander e Satori. Illo veni de un disaccordo de valores cultural. Illo veni del solution abstentioniste del stato agnostic, que es un opportunitate de auro pro ganiar immense quantitates de moneta e/o potentia politic.

Quales es le valores con le quales on va a justificar le censura, e que va on a censurar con illos? Si on vole vider in le television lo que tu appella antiqualia, si on vale lo que appare in le schermo e compra lo que illo vende, qual es le justification que tu va a usar pro imponer tu proprie valores?

Le apparentia in programmas de television transmitte imagines identificabile, que genera le popularitate e plus grande opportunitates de accesso al television. Tal popularitate produce multissime moneta pro le commerciantes e le celebritates e votos pro le politicos. Le votos confere potentia; e le potentia, moneta e augmentate accesso al television, e le circulo vitiose moneta > television > imagines > popularitate > votos > potentia > moneta ... es un excellente mechanismo pro accumular capital financiari e politic e reduce le practicas del democratia a un serie de activitates cynic.

Pro impedir lo, il ha controlos (non multo efficace) sur le moneta que entra in le campanias electoral. On debe fortificar los e, super tuto, intervenir in su destination principal: le television. Le melior remedio esserea supprimir le annuncios politic. Ma il pare pauco probabile que le Instituto Federal Electoral va facer isto in le futuro proxime.

(Adaptate de un articulo de Gabriel Zaid publicate in le magazin mexican "Contenido", septembre, 2005)

...

(Mander, Sartori, Popper, e Zaid e le usos del television

(Il es ver que le television, como altere canales de communication, es un filtro que modifica le realitate. Vider le effectos del destruction de New Orleans in le television, pro exemplo, non ha le mesme effecto que vider tal destruction in le citate mesme. Le television, como le cinema, es un fenestra que monstra solmente un parve parte del totalitate de iste scena de destruction. E illo non pote transmitter le odores infecte del aquas del inundation de New Orleans.

(Ma le parola scribite ha simile limitationes, e illo non pote presentar directemente un vision del destruction de New Orleans o del effectos de un tsunami con le mesme precision de un photo o de un succession de photos movente como in le cinema. E un description scribite de explosiones de bombas in le guerra o scenas de tortura nunquam potera haber le impacto de presentationes audio e audiovisual de tal scenas, le quales es assatis facilemente disponibile in le Rete pro illes qui vole trovar e vider los.

(Omne medios de communication, sia le parola scribite, sia presentationes audio e audiovisual, ha lor usos utile e nocive. Un libro pote inseniar le forma scribite de un nove lingua, pro exemplo, o presentar propaganda antisemitic, como in le caso de "Mein Kampf".

(E presentationes audio per le radio anque pote inseniar linguas o transmitter constantemente le propaganda national de un stato tyrannic como illo de Hitler. E presentationes audiovisual anque pote presentar facile- e economicamente un drama de Shakespeare o de Moliere o spectaculos como le propaganda nationalsocialiste de Leni Riefenstahl.

(In societates ultracapitaliste como le Statos Unite e Mexico, le effectos del cyclo Moneta > television > imagine > popularitate > votos > potentia > moneta ... es tanto nocive como le abuso de omne medios de communication in statos como le Germania fasciste de Hitler o le China communiste contemporanee.

(Ma le causa de isto non es le defectos in iste medios ma in lor organisation social. Organisationes como le BBC del Regno Unite, pro exemplo, ha producite programmas de radio e television de altissime qualitate.

(E pro studentes de linguas, le curso de francese de Pierre J. Capretz--completemente in francese, con presentationes imprimite e audio e audiovisual de un excellente serie integrate de dialogos, exercitios, e textos de lectura--monstra como omne iste medios pote esser un auxilio excellente pro studentes de francese de omne le paises europee e non solmente pro anglophonos.

(Io es confidente que omne vos qui lege lo que io scribe hic applauderea tal effortios. Io mesme face lo que io pote pro promover le studio de linguas in iste sito per le production de parve textos bi- e trilingue que eventualmente potera colligerse in nove anthologias o facilitar le production de nove cursos que poterea usar los como exercitios de lectura. [Harleigh Kyson Jr.])

---

Problemas con la televisión

En su libro "Cuatro buenas razones para eliminar la televisión" (Gedisa), Jerry Mander cuenta cómo llegó a esa conclusión después de muchos años de producir comerciales y de tener su propia agencia de publicidad.

Lo más notable de todo es que, antes de abandonar su profesión hizo un intento de ponerla al servicio de la ecología, y descubrió que el problema no estaba en la naturaleza de los comerciales mismos: estaba in la irrealidad de la experiencia de ver televisión.

Hasta el contacto con la naturaleza vuelve irreal cuando se reduce en la pantalla. También la vida personal se desconecta, se sumerge in un limbo de imágenes intensas que imitan la existencia verdadera y la vuelven pasiva hasta el punto de falsificarla.

Muchos años después, Giovanni Sartori llegó a una conclusión parecida en "Homo videns" (Taurus): La televisón no sólo distorsiona la realidad, sino que atrofia la personalidad humana. Además, como la gente cree lo que ve, la política se reduce a producir imágenes favorables y mentirosos.

Cita con aprobación lo que dice Karl Popper en "La televisión es mala maestra" (Fondo de Cultura Económica): La televisión ha vuelto un poder inmenso completamente irresponsible. No puede haber democracia con poderes sin control."

Popper, conocido por sus posiciones liberales, dio la sorpresa al proponer la censura en televisión ("La lección de este siglo" Océano): "Si todos fuéramos responsables y consideráramos el efecto de lo que se muestra a los niños, entonces no necesitaríamos la censura. Pero, lamentablemente, éste no es el caso."

En una sociedad homogénea, todos comparten los mismos valores, y la censura expresa el integrismo popular, que expulsa o reprime a los disidentes cuando aparecen. En una sociedad hetrogénea, las cosas se complican, aunque existan valores comunes.

Carlos V (quinto) no encontró mejor solución para las guerras de religión en el Sacro Imperio Romano que la homogeneidad impuesta por regiones. Donde hubiese un príncipe luterano (o católico), toda la población tenía que ser luterana (o católica.

La ilustración creyó posible superar las religiones con ilustración y tolerancia, pero finalmente produjo la revolución francesa, que impuso una teocracia jacobina. Los excesos del ateísmo en el poder llevaron, finalmente, al Estado agnóstico: no cree en nada, ni tiene religión oficial.

El estado agnóstico ha funcionado acceptablemente en el mundo occidental, asumiendo de hecho valores cristianos sin atribuírselos a una religión, como si fueran obvios y universales (por ejemplo: prohibir la poligamia). Pero en un mundo globalizado, el número de valores comunes tiende a cero; y, si el Estado es formalmente agnóstico, ¿Cómo se puede determinar valores morales?

¿Deben tolerarse los sacrificios humanos, llamados hoy asesinatos rituales? ¿La ablación del clitoris? ¿La pedofilia que, según algunos, hace felices a los niños? No atropellar las convicciones de nadie parece razonable, hasta que alguien defiende valores como éstos, con la más tranquila convicción.

El repliegue de los valores a la vida privada (para no excluir, para no ofender) desemboca en ligitimar el poder por el poder y el dinero por el dinero. La televisión mercachifle no tiene inconveniente en degradar a la sociedad para ganar dinero, ni en vender sus servicios a los que buscan el poder por el poder.

Esta degradación no es de origen tecnológico, como parecen creer Mander y Satori. Viene de la discordia en torno a los valores culturales. Viene de la solución abstencionista del Estado agnóstico, que es una oportunidad de oro para ganar ilícitamente inmensas cantidades de dinero y/o poter político.

¿Con qué valores se va a censurar qué? Si la gente quiere ver lo que llamas telebasura, si le da valor a lo que ve en la pantalla y compra lo que se anuncia allí, ¿con fundamento en qué vas a imponerle tus propios valores?

Salir en televisión difunde una imagen identificable, que genera la popularidad y más accesso a la televisón. Tal popularidad produce muchísimo dinero para los comerciantes y las celebridades y votos para los politícos. Los votos dan poder, y el poder dinero y más acceso a la televisión, y el círculo vicioso dinero > televisón > imagen > popularidad > votos > poder > dinero es un excelente mecanismo para acumular capitales financieros y politicos y reduce las prácticas democráticas a un negocio cínico.

Para impedirlo, hay controles (no muy eficaces) sobre el dinero que entra a las campañas electrorales. Hay que ampliarlos y, sobre todo, intervenir en su destino principal: la televisión. Lo mejor sería suprimir los comerciales politícos. Pero parece poco probable que el Instituto Federal Electoral va a hacer esto en el futuro próximo.

(Adaptado de un artículo de Gabriel Zaid publicado en la revista mexicana "Contenido", septiembre, 2005)

---

Problems with Television

In his book "Four Good Reasons for Eliminating Television," Jerry Mander tells how he arrived at that conclusion after many years of producing commercials and of managing his own advertising agency.

What is most noteworthy is that, before leaving his profession, he tried to put it into the service of ecology and discovered that the problem was not with the nature of TV commercials themselves. It was the lack of reality in the experience of watching television.

Even contact with nature becomes unreal when it is reduced on the screen. And personal life itself is disconnected and sinks into a limbo of intense images that imitate direct experience and renders it passive to the point of falsifying it.

Many years afterward, Giovanni Sartori reached a similar conclusion in "Homo Videns." Television not only distorts reality but atrophies the human personality. Not only that: Since very large numbers of people believe what they see, politics comes down to producing favorable and mendacious image making.

Satori cites with approval what Karl Popper says in "Television, a Bad Teacher": "Television has become an immense and completely irresponsible power. It is impossible to have a democracy in the presence of uncontrolled power."

Popper, known for his liberal positions, surprised many when he proposed censorship in television ("The Lesson of This Century"): "If all of us were responsible and considered the effect of what is shown to children, then we would not have a need for censorship. But, unfortunately, this is not the case."

In a homogeneous society, everyone would have in common the same values, and censorship would elicit a universal approval that would expel or repress dissidents when they appear. In a heterogeneous society, everything becomes complicated even though common values exist.

For religious warfare, Charles V (the fifth) found no better solution in the Holy Roman Empire than uniformity imposed by region. Where there was a Lutheran (or Catholic) prince, all the population had to be Lutheran or Catholic.

The Enlightenment believed that religion could be overcome with enlightenment and tolerance, but it finally produced the French Revolution, which imposed a Jacobin theocracy. The excesses of atheism in state control eventually produced the agnostic state that believes in nothing and does not have an official religion.

Agnostic states have functioned well enough in the Western world, assuming Christian values without attributing them to a religion, as if they were obvious and universal (for example: prohibiting polygamy). But in a globalized world, the number of common values tends to reach zero; and, if the state is formally agnostic, how can moral values be determined?

Should human sacrifice be tolerated (today called ritual suicide)? Should cutting off the clitoris be permitted? Should there be tolerance of pedophilia, which, according to some, makes young people happy? Not offending the convictions of anyone seems reasonable until someone comes up who defends values like these in the calmest of ways.

Consigning values to private life (to avoid exclusion or offense) finally signifies legitimizing the enlightened interests of money. Commercial television does not find anything wrong in degrading society by making money or by selling its services to those who go after power for its own sake.

This degradation does not have a technological origin, as Mander and Satori apparently believe. It comes from a lack of agreement about cultural values. It comes from the solution of permissiveness of the agnostic state, which provides a golden opportunity for earning immense amounts of money and/or political power).

What are the values to be used in justifying censorship, and what should they be used to censor? If someone wants to watch on television what you think is trash, if someone values what appears on the screen and buys what it sells, what is the justification you are going to use to impose your values?

Appearing on television programs transmits identifiable images, which generate popularity and even greater opportunities of access to television. Such popularity generates a lot of money for business people and celebrities and also votes for politicians. Such votes confer power; and the power, money and increased access to television, and the vicious circle of money > television > image > popularity > votes > power > money ... are an excellent mechanism for accumulating financial and political capital and reduces the practice of democracy to a promise completely dominated by cynicism.

To reduce this, there are controls (not very effective ones) on the money that goes into electoral campaigns. People should strengthen them and, above all, intervene in their principal destination: television. It would be best to eliminate political advertising. But it does not seem very likely that the Federal Election Commission [of Mexico] will do this anytime soon.

(Adapted from an article by Gabriel Zaid published in the Mexican magazine "Contenido," September, 2005)

...

(Mander. Sartori, Popper, and Zaid and the Uses of Television

(It is true that television, like other channels of communication, is a filter that modifies reality. Seeing the effects of the destruction of New Orleans on television, for example, does not have the same effect as seeing such destruction in the city itself. Television, like the movies, is a window that shows only a small part of the totality of this scene of destruction. And it cannot transmit the fetid odors of the New Orleans floodwaters.

(But the written word has similar limitations, and it cannot directly present a vision of the destruction of New Orleans or the effects of a tsunami with the same precision as a photo or a succession of moving photos in a film. And a written description of bomb explosions in warfare or scenes of torture can never have the impact of audio or audiovisual presentations of such scenes, which are rather easily available on the internet for those who want to find and look at them.

(All media of communication, whether the written word or audio or audiovisual presentations, have their useful and damaging effects. A book can teach the written form of a new language, for example, or presentation antisemitic propaganda, as in the case of "Mein Kampf."

(And audio presentations by radio also can teach languages or constantly transmit the national propaganda of a dictatorship like Hitler's Germany. And audiovisual presentations can also cheaply and easily present a drama of Shakespeare or Moliere or productions like the national socialistic propaganda of Leni Riefenstahl.

(In ultracapitalist societies like the United States and Mexico, the effects of the cycle of money > television > images > popularity > votes > power > money ... are as damaging as the abusive use of all communications media in states like Hitler's Germany or contemporary communist China.

(But the cause of this is not the defects in these media but in their social organization. Organizations like the BBC of the United Kingdom, for example, have produced radio and television programs of very high quality.

(And for students of languages, the French course of Pierre J. Capretz--completely in French, with printed, audio, and audiovisual presentations of an excellent integrated series of dialogues and exercises, and reading texts--shows how all these media can be an excellent help for students of French from all European countries and not only for native speakers of English.

(I am confident that all of you who are reading what I am writing here would applaud such efforts. I myself am doing what I can to promote the study of languages in this site by producing short bi- and trilingual texts that eventually can eventually be collected into new anthologies or facilitate the production of new courses that could use them as reading exercises. [Harleigh Kyson Jr.])