The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #108347   Message #2254776
Posted By: Little Hawk
06-Feb-08 - 12:28 AM
Thread Name: BS: Joan Baez Endorsement of Obama - Feb 2008
Subject: RE: BS: Joan Baez Endorsement
We don't have a different opinion and I have not insulted you.

We both agree that TV can do what I say it does, and sometimes has done what I say it does, and that it doesn't always do bad things, but that it does some good things too.

I am not insulting you, I am pointing out that you are misinterpreting my statements to be absolutist statements, which if you read all of my statements in context is clearly not the case.

You can't lift out single sentences out of context and disregard the rest if you are inclined to be objective about what I say at all. You must read the entire statement. I clearly said "I don't believe that TV or any other medium is intrinsically bad, nor do I believe that its influence has been wholly pernicious. It's just a tool. Tools are neither bad nor good, they're completely neutral in themselves. They can be used for good, for bad, or indifferently. One has to look at how they are being used, and why."

I don't get the impression that you're even the least bit interested in trying to understand what I am presenting, which is simply a philosophical viewpoint about different media and how they can be used. I think the only thing that interests you here is "winning".

That's impossible. There IS nothing to win here. He who gets the last frikking word in does not WIN. He who walks off in a huff does not win. There is nothing to win.

Don't you find any interest in comparing the passive nature of a medium like TV (and radio) to the more active nature of a media like the Internet...or a book...or a magazine?

You can control the situation yourself if it's the internet or a book or a magazine you're interacting with. You can read whatever part you want WHEN you want if it's in print. You can stop reading when you want and start again when you want. You can REread one part over and over again if you want. You can be free of the mindless advertising being repeatedly thrown in your face on TV and radio.

YOU are in charge when it's a book or a magazine or the Internet. You're empowered. You are not in charge or empowered at all in regards to watching TV or listening to radio except in two very narrow ways: you can turn the damn thing off or you can turn it on. That's it, period. Other than that, you're helpless. All you can do is sit there with your mouth open and swallow whatever "Mommy" puts in your mouth or you can spit it out. But you can't participate in any way whatseover.

I like being empowered, not being a passive receiver who has to sit on his couch through commercial messages and scheduled programming that's OVER when it's over...and nothing I can do about it.

Does that not strike you as an interesting difference in the nature of those respective media and how that can affect a public over a period of time?

Stop trying to "win" the damn argument (which would be pointless anyway) and find some interest in the actual subject matter for heaven's sake. This isn't about you or me winning anything.

I don't talk to you so I can win anything here...I talk to you simply in hopes of being understood.