Jump to content

Is TV pushing the envelope too far?


Guest Mick

Recommended Posts

I've been agonizing about whether to post this all day but decided that at the very least maybe it will stimulate some discussion.

I watched the season premiere of "24" last night and was personally appalled at the level of graphic violence. Not only by the pyrotechnic depictions of blowing up a bus full of passengers particularly, or the strafing of a residential neighborhood by two attack helicopters, but the torture of the lead charcter by a manic middle eastern villain with a variety of tools straight out of "B" movie from the fifties. It was followed a little later by the detailed depiction of a man being probed in the shoulder with a knife and then gutted to death. All in the name of entertainment. I'm not moralizing here, just very concerned about how far we have to go to "top" the other guy, to be the raciest, profanest, most "real" and pander to the lowest common denominator in order to sell soap and fast food. I'm not a prude and not easily shocked, but I found myself disturbed by what was portrayed on the show and felt obliged to excercise my option and change the channel.

There are those who opine that the graphic portrayal of body parts and crime scenes on "CSI" is just as offensive to some people and maybe they are right. But there is an element of education and enlightenment about forensic techniques that gives it a redeeming quality unfound in shows that glorify violence and amplify America's already tense attitude towards certain ethnic groups. There's little or nothing that we as sound techs can do about the quality of the programming we work on, other than to accept or reject the job based on its apparent integrity or lack thereof, but I for one will be increasingly circumspect about what I watch as I personally think that the boundaries that TV censors have imposed on the business are woefully inadequate. IMHO.

PS No offense to Bill and his crew who do great work on the production sound.

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jeff Colon

To answer the question of your post...imo,  YES! 

I believe it's a symptom of a part of society that has lost respect for itself.  The Goal of all programming is to deliver viewers eyeballs to advertisers... always has been, always will.  Seems like the networks have no problem with staging bigger and better train wrecks to keep em coming.  Whether its Dramatic production or this so called "reality tv", it seems as though the corporate overlords are so busy choking every last dime from the medium, the low road has become the most profitable.  When the rat broadcast a show last year with a magician who spent a week under water titled "Drowned Alive" I knew I did not want to have anything to do with a company who would entice viewers with the possibility of real death on live TV... they may be rich, but I don't know how they sleep at night...

buy me a couple beers, I'll tell you how I really feel about this kind of "entertainment."

JeffC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you defend CSI as being, informational or educational.  In the new work of fiction by Joseph Wambaugh, Hollywood Division, he makes fun of people who watch CSI and think that they know how a crime scene and it's evidence is handled and captured.  You may be educating future criminals not future forensic scientists.

If you consider Wambaugh to be a credible source of information or opinion which I don't, then perhaps you would see the glass half empty, or "CSI" as educating more criminals than forensic scientists. Recent studies by the Los Angeles Sheriff's department, a member of which acts as our tech advisor, have shown evidence to the contrary. Interestingly it's juries that have been affected most, having has their evidential expectations heightened by their increased awareness of DNA testing, trace evidence, AFIS etc etc., thus making prosecutors' more meticulous about the pristine collection of evidence.

Other than that I agree with most of what RVD has said except the part about religious people not being as adverse to violence as they are towards overt sexuality. In my own church the concern blankets all of the above and advocates, as you have, the pursuit of more family oriented material. But since when did the minority rule.

Good stuff Richard.

Regards

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what a complex subject.

when reality tv really took flight, my first reaction was:  "oh god i hope this doesn't last."  little did i know then, that reality tv is here to stay.

i too am surprised by the amount of violence on american television - but the same with movies.  i'm like jeff in that i can go on and on about the lack of decent programing.  but obviously what interests me is not what interests a lot of people and i do think there IS good programing out there too.

i think that if there has ever been a way for tv to "push the envelope,"  then someone did it because it generated viewership and in turn - money.  

in my opinion the worst offender is the 24 hour tv news networks.  tv news (like CNN or FOX) is just as much spectacle to me as are shows like 24 or CSI (both of which i have watched enough episodes of to know what they are about - but for the record, i have gotten rid of my tv connection)  what really concerns me is not so much the "bias" from any particular network, nor the stories they report, but the stories that AREN'T reported - though this is a completely different discussion.

forgive me if i'm wrong, but wasn't COPS the first real reality tv show?  what other reality show is more "newslike" and "reality" than that one?

in the end, it's kind of a chicken and the egg arguement.  what came first?  the programmer or the viewer?  is any particular party totally responsible for what goes on the air?  in the end, i think it's the viewing audience who actually has the power to really change the content on tv.  

sorry for the ramble and sorry if this doesn't totally contribute to the conversation.

my mother watches "dog, the bounty hunter" and i still can't get over it.

-greg-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why i cancelled my cable.

Since I've had a child not to long ago, it made me look at the images i watch on television with a different eye. My wife and I decided that we no longer want to allow those images to be broadcast right into out livingrooms, so we cut the cord so to speak.

I read somewhere that to the human brain, it doesn't matter whether you actualy experience an event in person, or watch it on TV. Once it becomes a memory it makes no difference to the brain.

Now is it hypocritical of me to critisize an industry in which i help provide content ? Well i guess thats a subject for another debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very poignant look at this issue is Mike Judge's newest film "Idiocracy" where an average soldier is put into cryo-hybernation for 500 years by accident. The world he wakes up in has been dumbed down so drastically that he is not the smartest person alive by far! There are a host of ideas represented in this film about where todays society might end up if we go on unchecked, but a great example is the most popular show of that day, broadcast on the Violence network, is a show called "Ouch! My Balls!" Sadly, the film got little theatrical release, or any press, but it's out on DVD now, and it made my Dad laugh, which is pretty tough.

It might be a separate issue altogether, but the prevalence of "cheap" media has certainly added to the quagmire of producers out there clawing for content to fill an ever vacuous cable-verse of 400 channels, half of which are repeats of others, but in HD. Back when it used to cost real money to produce any show, TV, cable, theatrical; there was a distinct reason to make something "good" because it cost a heck of a lot to make it. Now, when any jackass with a DV camera and a Sennhesier ME66 can make a show good enough for MTV, and the standards aren't a whole lot higher elsewhere. It might be pushing the envelope, but it might be survival of the fastest, cheapest and most out of control.

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A big question for me is whether the content is put out there by the people making it of their own will, or whether these shows come to exist due to viewers calling for them!

Its not always the creators that determine the content, I think quite often its a case of "this will sell. this is what they want. lets do it."

I guess more and more people have been making their concerns known in recent years, and maybe we'll see yet another content cycle emerge in the next decade or so. I doubt it, but maybe.

My 2 (south african) cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Larry on this one.My wife and I sit down to watch a show that is entertaining and informative.The Doco channels,arts,Food and living shows are much more appealing at the end of a long day than anything violent or frenetic action.I prefer to be able to sleep soundly rather than have reruns of violence churning through my brain.Violent shows are now banned from our house.

BVS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

There's not much I watch any more just because it's just too much drama. My personal favorite show right now is Battlestar Galactica, for many reasons. But, I find myself watching The History channel, the Discovery Channel, and National Geographic more than anything. My 2nd favorite show is "Dogfights", on the history channel. For those of you that haven't seen it, they take famous arial battles from different wars, and re-enact them with CG, and if the pilots are still alive, they actually have them re-tell the story with the CG recreation. It's a really cool show that gives people an insight into what it's like to be a fighter pilot. The WWII stuff is especially interesting.

-Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...