7 ms·

I’m reminded of the moral panic my parents generation had around televisions. And their parents generation had over serialized plays on the radio. And several

I’m reminded of the moral panic my parents generation had around televisions. And their parents generation had over serialized plays on the radio. And several generations removed, the panic over the printing press.

whiplash451 4y ago
Early usage of TVs consisted in living the tv set turned on constantly, which in the hindsight was insane. With time, we learned to « master » the technology that was put in our hands. Much along the lines of what this article points out.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  There are still people who do leave the television on constantly. Far worse, there are many, many, many public spaces --- waiting rooms, bars, restaurants, cafes --- in which televisions are ominipresent and, again, always on. This has become far worse, rather than better, with thinner and cheaper displays.
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    That's considerably more prevalent in the US. I choose my bar and restaurants by the abscence of large screens. ( Not only obviousely but if it can be avoided, I do )
- buildsjets 4y ago
  The voice of inexperience with early TV sets is loud here. You would never do that with early sets, as the damn vacuum tubes would burn out very quickly, then Dad would get mad, take the back off the set, take ALL the tubes out, cart them down to the drugstore, use their tester to find the burned out tube, and buy a replacement. Dad, being a busy man, would not appreciate doing this very often, and so tightly controlled our use. We didn’t get our first color + solid-state set (a huge marketing term back then) until 1978. That was probably about 5 years later than typical. It was a Zenith Space Command, also our first with a remote control. It used no batteries, pressing a button struck a metal tuning fork set for an “ultrasonic” frequency that a microphone in the set listened for. I quoted “ultrasonic”, because as a child I could definitely hear it.
  - whiplash451 4y ago
    My bad, I was looking at the 80's when I said early. You have a point!
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
owisd 4y ago
Was there actually a moral panic about TV in general? There was one about TV violence specifically. The general concerns about TV like reduced physical activity are still a concern and aren’t imaginary.
- jmoak3 4y ago
  The movie Network (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film)) famously skewered TV culture and its effect on people. It won several oscars, and is still referenced today.
  - owisd 4y ago
    I would also put TV execs exploiting vulnerable people for ratings in the “real” column.
dredmorbius 4y ago
See Elizabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change (book: <https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/printing-press-as-an-agent-of-change/7DC19878AB937940DE13075FE839BDBA https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/printing-press-as-an-ag...>) and the similarly titled article (<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1877720 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1877720>). The printing press (~1440), and subsequently cheap pulp-based paper (despite its rapid decay due to high-acid content), and increasingly-capable powered presses, and greatly-expanded literacy (19th century) did revolutionise the world, splitting the Christian faith, launching first the 100 Years War then the Long 19th Century (1789--1914 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century), including the Revolutions of 1848 in which over 50 nations saw some form of political ferment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848). Radio played a huge role in the rise of fascism in Italy (Mussolini), Germany (Hitler), and the US (Father Coughlan, McCarthyism). Television revolutionised US politics, particularly at the presidential level (Kennedy-Nixon debates), as did cable television, talk radio, and the nascent Internet. In The Matrix (1990), John S. Quartermann's introduction details the influence of then-nascent computer and fax networks on the Tienanmen Square protests in China. Even early in the 1990s, the role of Usenet and BBSes in conflicts in Yugoslavia and Turkey was noted (see especially Serdar Argic: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic>). McLuhan (who influenced Eisenstein), Harold Innis (who influenced McLuhan), Neil Postman (another McLuhan protege) Edward S. Herman, Jerry Mander, Noam Chomsky, Robert W. McChesney, Andrew Shapiro, and many others have made similar observations (bibliography here: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_advertising_sustainability_externalities/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_a...). If you change how information flows through a system, you change that system. This applies directly to media and its influence on culture, politics, business, and more. The reason that the fears seem so quaint is because we live in the landscape that emerged. We are the consequence. The Time Before seems so difficult to conceive of and understand because it was all but entirely supersceded. We face a similar situation in all likelihood with further algorithmic-driven media and GD ML AI ourselves.
cratermoon 4y ago
If the current attention economy was merely a linear, or even quadratic, step from TV, that would be one thing. We are seeing, however, an exponential increase in the scale, scope, and methods of persuasion. In the same way computers made mathematical calculation not just faster, but completely different, so too persuasive computing makes risks to society completely different.

whiplash451 4y ago

Early usage of TVs consisted in living the tv set turned on constantly, which in the hindsight was insane. With time, we learned to « master » the technology that was put in our hands. Much along the lines of what this article points out.

dredmorbius 4y ago
There are still people who do leave the television on constantly. Far worse, there are many, many, many public spaces --- waiting rooms, bars, restaurants, cafes --- in which televisions are ominipresent and, again, always on. This has become far worse, rather than better, with thinner and cheaper displays.
- dopidopHN 4y ago
  That's considerably more prevalent in the US. I choose my bar and restaurants by the abscence of large screens. ( Not only obviousely but if it can be avoided, I do )
buildsjets 4y ago
The voice of inexperience with early TV sets is loud here. You would never do that with early sets, as the damn vacuum tubes would burn out very quickly, then Dad would get mad, take the back off the set, take ALL the tubes out, cart them down to the drugstore, use their tester to find the burned out tube, and buy a replacement. Dad, being a busy man, would not appreciate doing this very often, and so tightly controlled our use. We didn’t get our first color + solid-state set (a huge marketing term back then) until 1978. That was probably about 5 years later than typical. It was a Zenith Space Command, also our first with a remote control. It used no batteries, pressing a button struck a metal tuning fork set for an “ultrasonic” frequency that a microphone in the set listened for. I quoted “ultrasonic”, because as a child I could definitely hear it.
- whiplash451 4y ago
  My bad, I was looking at the 80's when I said early. You have a point!

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

owisd 4y ago

Was there actually a moral panic about TV in general? There was one about TV violence specifically. The general concerns about TV like reduced physical activity are still a concern and aren’t imaginary.

jmoak3 4y ago
The movie Network (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film)) famously skewered TV culture and its effect on people. It won several oscars, and is still referenced today.
- owisd 4y ago
  I would also put TV execs exploiting vulnerable people for ratings in the “real” column.

dredmorbius 4y ago

See Elizabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change (book: <https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/printing-press-as-an-agent-of-change/7DC19878AB937940DE13075FE839BDBA https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/printing-press-as-an-ag...>) and the similarly titled article (<http://www.jstor.org/stable/1877720 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1877720>). The printing press (~1440), and subsequently cheap pulp-based paper (despite its rapid decay due to high-acid content), and increasingly-capable powered presses, and greatly-expanded literacy (19th century) did revolutionise the world, splitting the Christian faith, launching first the 100 Years War then the Long 19th Century (1789--1914 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century), including the Revolutions of 1848 in which over 50 nations saw some form of political ferment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848). Radio played a huge role in the rise of fascism in Italy (Mussolini), Germany (Hitler), and the US (Father Coughlan, McCarthyism). Television revolutionised US politics, particularly at the presidential level (Kennedy-Nixon debates), as did cable television, talk radio, and the nascent Internet. In The Matrix (1990), John S. Quartermann's introduction details the influence of then-nascent computer and fax networks on the Tienanmen Square protests in China. Even early in the 1990s, the role of Usenet and BBSes in conflicts in Yugoslavia and Turkey was noted (see especially Serdar Argic: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serdar_Argic>). McLuhan (who influenced Eisenstein), Harold Innis (who influenced McLuhan), Neil Postman (another McLuhan protege) Edward S. Herman, Jerry Mander, Noam Chomsky, Robert W. McChesney, Andrew Shapiro, and many others have made similar observations (bibliography here: https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_advertising_sustainability_externalities/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7k7l4m/media_a...). If you change how information flows through a system, you change that system. This applies directly to media and its influence on culture, politics, business, and more. The reason that the fears seem so quaint is because we live in the landscape that emerged. We are the consequence. The Time Before seems so difficult to conceive of and understand because it was all but entirely supersceded. We face a similar situation in all likelihood with further algorithmic-driven media and GD ML AI ourselves.

cratermoon 4y ago

If the current attention economy was merely a linear, or even quadratic, step from TV, that would be one thing. We are seeing, however, an exponential increase in the scale, scope, and methods of persuasion. In the same way computers made mathematical calculation not just faster, but completely different, so too persuasive computing makes risks to society completely different.