WHAT A SHAME- A look at the low points in the modern media. HUMILIATION TELEVISION; IT DOESN'T GET ANY LOWER THAN THIS. PT 2.

I would like to make clear the parameters of this article, regarding what programs are considered to be part of Humiliation Television.  These shows feature guests and situations that can either be scripted or true to life.  In some cases, it is the intent of the producers to mask the true nature of the show.  However, they all have this in common; the guests or antagonists are portrayed, through their actions, as contemptible human beings.  They are only to be looked upon as creatures worthy, at best, of pity or worse to be scoffed and laughed at. They have one other important characteristic; they choose, due to certain incentives, to make public their failings, bad decisions and improper actions.  This is done in the desire to “entertain” the viewing public.

The first type of reality show I would like to examine is the “Jerry Springer/ Maury Povich" category.  Yes, these shows have been around for a while, but in recent years have spawned a host of imitators.   I don’t include all talk shows (Oprah and Dr. Phil have their problems with authenticity and sincerity, but at least they attempt a semblance of caring about their guests).   This type of talk television doesn’t even attempt to realistically disguise their intent, which is to provoke physical and emotional confrontations among those appearing on the shows.

These programs are such trash, with repugnant guests and subjects that don’t merit any sort of constructive criticism.  How much of these shows content are real and not staged is unknown, but that really is beside the point. Removing and destroying any sense of shame and/or humanity among the guests is the order of the day.

(See PT. 3 in a future post.)

Date-8/5/2013.

Scroll down for future posts.

WHAT A SHAME- A look at the low points in the modern media. HUMILIATION TELEVISION; IT DOESN'T GET ANY LOWER THAN THIS. PT 1.

Television is many things. It can be used to inform, teach and educate. 

However, let us not fool ourselves. It is primarily a business and profit is its’ ultimate goal. Those profits can be found in Televisions primary mission; to entertain.

                                                
Throughout broadcast history, T.V networks have provided a vast selection of different categories to entertain the viewing public.  Sit-coms, police and detective dramas, science fiction and soap operas etc. are examples of fictional or scripted shows.  News shows such as 60 minutes, 20/20, Dateline etc. are examples of non-fiction informative programming.  These can entertain, while at the same time providing useful and desired news and information.

In recent decades, “Reality T.V.” shows such as “Survivor” and “Big Brother” have entered the mainstream.  Focusing on a confrontational content that features supposed non-actors in contrived situations, it is generally a benign low-brow form of entertainment.   However, a new and disturbing form of reality television has sprung up.  Its’ popularity is a reflection on the dark nature that permeates today's society.  I call it “Humiliation Television.”

To illustrate, let me ask the following questions;

- When did subjecting oneself to insults and degradation publicly, and on camera, become a desired career path?

- Why is the need for some modicum of fame cause some people to lose any sense of self-esteem and dignity?

- Why would any one take seriously a show that claims to be unrehearsed, spontaneous and true to life, when it is obviously staged? Dialogue and actions done on camera are pre-determined by the producers to create an illusion of authenticity.

In following articles I will examine different types of these shows that make-up Humiliation Television.

(See PT. 2 in a future post.)

Date-7/28/2013.

FEATURE ARTICLES. WHAT PROGRESSIVES MUST LEARN. PT 10.

What could PROGRESSIVES DO, TO SEPARATE THEMSELVES FROM THE IRRATIONAL AND OFTEN IMMATURE ATTACKS OF THE OPPOSITION?

1)  Do not Adopt the same Strategy. Trading Insults, and Using Invalid Arguments meant to Stir Up Prejudicial and Discriminatory Attitudes among Voters, is Intellectually Dishonest and Morally Reprehensible.  Progressives must give the Public a Real Alternative to the Irrational Scare Tactics of the Opposition. 

In Other Words, When Discussing Policy Issues that Affect every Citizen, give the Audience an Opportunity to see the Opposition for what They really Are.  If They want to live in the Gutter that is created by Their Attitudes and Arguments, don't join Them.

2)  Make the Opposition Clarify and Defend any Assertion or Conclusion that They are making, regarding Their Support or Opposition to any Law or Policy Change.

Lets Face it, Many Politicians and Lawmakers live for the Opportunity to Hang Certain Tags on Their Opponents. Call Them on it. Make Them JUSTIFY WHAT THEY ARE SAYING, AND ZERO IN ON THE ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS THAT ARE ESPOUSING.  THESE ARE OFTEN INDICATED BY THE TYPES OF CRITICISMS BEING LEVELED AGAINST THOSE WHO DO NOT WANT TO SEE THEM CONTROLLING PUBLIC POLICY AND LAW.

To put it another way, do not let any Person, Group or Political Party get away with Baseless Accusations, or Irrational Conclusions.  DON'T FEAR THE OPINIONS OF THOSE WHO TOSS CRITICAL THINKING AND LOGIC OUT THE WINDOW, THEY REPRESENT THE WORST OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM HAS TO OFFER.

Date-  3/1/2015.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 4.

A few things we should remember about the concept and definition of 

RIGHTS;

-  Virtually no nation legally defines "Rights" the same way, and the word may not even exist as a separate and distinct element within the laws of a given country.

-  The U.S. generally considers Rights as protections the individual has against abuses by government, or illegal actions that may occur in the private sector.  However,  the code of law in other Jurisdictions may define Rights as actions government can take to protect itself from harm.  This may be done regardless of the impact on the individual or society as a whole.  Usually, it is just a way to maintain the status quo, and ensuring the continued existence of those in power.

This places Human, Citizen or Civil Rights, ( If such things are even acknowledged), as secondary in importance. 

-  In what is becoming a familiar theme inside the U.S., especially around election time, is the charge by some groups that their Rights are being violated.  This may be recent , or a claim that was also made in the past.

However, it is usually hyperbole, with the goal of electing like minded candidates.  This situation brings up a frightening, but all to often glimpse into the mindset of many Americans:  THAT WHEN CERTAIN "RIGHTS" ARE EXERCISED, THEY AUTOMATICALLY NEGATE OR DISQUALIFY OTHERS.

What is the source of this way of thinking?  Is it a lack of understanding about the wording included within the body of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights? Could it represent the desire to accept without question the opinions of those with questionable motives?  Most frightening of all, the unspoken wish to abolish many parts of the Constitution, and that freedom should be limited to the chosen few.

End of PT 4.

Date-  9/10/2014.