The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Visual media rules! The lost war against forgetting > Comments

Visual media rules! The lost war against forgetting : Comments

By Malcolm King, published 8/9/2010

Is there any value in memorising a poem if it is always available on the Internet?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
The main problem with visual mediums is that it infects the most serious discourse with the values of a sideshow. It's no wonder people trot out half baked ideas on population and climate change.

They've been educated through a medium that uses canned laughter as part of its appeal. Then again, I think we place too much importance on education fixing every social ill.

The author sails close to some elitist views of text over image but generally makes a pretty good case for grounding the argument in the empistemology of the word or Logos.

The reason why 15 year olds can't remember history is that they were never taught it in the first place.
Posted by Cheryl, Wednesday, 8 September 2010 11:44:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Malcolm King article + Sentimental drivel based on ignorance =nothing to see here folks, nothing to see here.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 8 September 2010 12:10:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cheryl, did you see the Dick Smith ego-published population program a couple of weeks ago? It was a perfect example of what you're describing, with every visual cliche in the book - pictures of teeming Bangladeshi streets and the quater-acre block of Dick's "humble" childhood home
Posted by Rhian, Wednesday, 8 September 2010 2:54:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Rhian, yes I saw it. I don't mind my emotional chain being yanked for a good cause such as feeding people but I'm less keen on having my chain yanked for 'offing people' in the developing world.

King's article is pretty much straight forward Neil Postman from the 80s, who ripped off the ideas of Joshua Meyrowitz who wrote 'No Sense of Place' but it goes some way to explaining why many people point to images when they try to use serious discourse.

If you plonk children down in front of a TV for five years, without any parental guidance, you'll get frightened kids who think we're being over populated or some other such fantasy.

Basically, if you feed people images without any context and 'facts', you'll the equivalent of an hyper-emotional PowerPoint display. It's the same technique that has been used to get men to fight in wars and even to go all mushy when they hear the music to Born Free.

It's mental fairy floss.
Posted by Cheryl, Wednesday, 8 September 2010 3:17:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hieroglyphics have been around for many thousands of years.

What is new is the ready access to large amounts of information that was often locked away in some fault or library in the past.

Does this make remembering information redundant.

Not quite I would think, but remembering information for the sake of remembering information is now redundant.
Posted by vanna, Wednesday, 8 September 2010 9:25:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not sure why the "net" is joined to TV in this article ("TV-net").
The "net" is TV's arch enemy and despite the traditional media's attempt to curtail it, it has thus far not succeeded. (Conroy hasn't given up being the champion of re-centralised information management however.)
Why was Google so successful?
Unlike other search engines who sought to use a paid model with humans trying to rank and sort web sites, Google used an algorithm: A set of rules so that computer software could do the task automatically. Other engines partially used algorithms that relied on "metadata" (data about data), but this assumed that website designers would honestly represented their site content...not a good assumption!
The worst thing though was the influence that paid for links had on search results. Basically: Google indexed the net, others were a portal for paid advertisement regardless of applicability. (A bit like commercial TV)
Google's method is not perfect but uses the fact that people are lazy and would rather link to an authoritative source than re-create the content. This means the "page rank" system effectively captures "crowd intelligence" by averaging the links to a page, and the links to the pages that link...
People are currently winging that Google is too powerful. The answer is simple: Do it better. Google got big by doing the job properly for the consumer, and by doing so becoming the only game in town. Contrast this with Microsoft, who got a technology monopoly then used massive legal grunt to bankrupt the tech companies they stole from.
The real beef with Google is commercial: They are giving away what others would like to charge for: accurate maps, accurate web search, accurate information. The profiteers are not happy!
BTW. Reading is not dead. Real understanding has always been a minority activity. True the banality of TV is stunning, but the written word is still living.
Posted by Ozandy, Thursday, 9 September 2010 10:19:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ozandy,
So why didn't someone in Australia do what Google did?
Posted by vanna, Thursday, 9 September 2010 2:06:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"If you plonk children down in front of a TV for five years, without any parental guidance, you'll get frightened kids who think we're being over populated or some other such fantasy."
You could argue the same thing about any discourse though, including starving children, wars in the middle east and so on.
Also, the same is true for absolutely every kind of information medium mankind has- books, journals, newspapers, TV, the internet- all fall under the same problems as far as quality of information and conveying emotive terms.
An underhand tactic is an underhand tactic, regardless of what 'cause' it goes towards and how noble the person subjectively believes it is.
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 9 September 2010 4:23:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, I forgot what I wanted to say...the television's on.
Posted by MindlessCruelty, Friday, 10 September 2010 9:22:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza is partly right but of course the great failing of TV news is that it has set itself up as the bastion of serious discourse, yet it has no grammar, little or no context and is one way communication. At worst it's trite and banal. Yet at its best, it can be captivating. Rare.

What do we know of the world through video? That's it's fast and action packed. Yet looking out my window I'm watching my dog sleeping in the sun. The values of TV news are the values of entertainment. Some books try to make the same claim but for all of the American Psychos of Ellis and others, they are still caught in the subject verb object structure. We make sense of the world through grammar - something video doesn't have.
Posted by Cheryl, Friday, 10 September 2010 12:16:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy