• Upgrayedd1776@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    isnt tv just a different form of passive entertainment, before it were cheap dime store comics and bubble wrappers, before that plays, before that jesters, and before that Grungh with his cool rocks that look things we dont have words for…

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      If much of what it displaced was books and conversation, seems like a big step backwards for a variety of reasons. Less depth, less interactivity, more centralized control and utility for propaganda. The general mindsets of older generations probably reflect its influence.

      • Upgrayedd1776@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        i would question how much it has displaced books versus the general literacy rates among the populations, sure there were more books, but if only 10-20% could actually read, does that make difference? I grew up mostly on tv, and i learned a lot of from it, simpsons taught me a lot about world culture, norm macdonald taught me not to give a shit about the news narrative and say what is real, and thousands of other references that went over my head but still contributed to my understanding of the way fo things. its an interesting question presently becasue we literally have unfettered access to all knowledge in our pockets and dont even have to know how to read.