The major media, as most already know, are largely supported by advertising revenues. For the print media, that means the sale of advertising space in each edition. For the broadcast media (and many of the narrowcast media as well), it means the sale of advertising slots embedded in program material. In both cases, what moves the prospective advertiser to buy ad space or time in some medium is the number of eyeballs on that medium. Should the eyeballs drift or be lured away, so will the advertisers...and the revenue to the media...and the media themselves.
Concerning the oft-cited and important goal of reducing the media’s influence over our perception and thinking, Ace has a few thoughts for us:
The only way that people will actually stop doing a thing is when they simply do not wish to do it any longer.Telling people to "boycott" is like asking people to willpower-quit smoking: It won't work. You're telling them there's this awesome, desirable, luscious thing out there waiting to be consumed, and that they nevertheless mustn't consume it.
But what if their minds change? What if they no longer see these things as desirable? What if they don't feel like they're "boycotting" Marvel movies, but instead are simply no longer watching repetitive, flavorless entertainments designed for 12 year old boys?
What if people don't boycott the media -- but instead just walk away, no longer much interested in it?
Once again, please read the whole thing; Ace is one of our best yet least appreciated writers, and he’s elucidating some important truths in this piece. But wait: there’s more!
How do you get people to “walk away, no longer much interested” in something they’ve been using to fill their time for decades? Time-filling is a component of most contemporary Americans’ lives. We have more leisure time than any previous generation. It has to be put to some use; few of us will merely sit and do nothing for any significant stretch of time.
The answer is simple:
Unfortunately, “simple” isn’t the same as “easy.” Some conservatives are trying very hard indeed to produce alternate forms of information, education, and entertainment that would compete with the existing media for Americans’ attention. The Internet itself is of value, at least as long as one doesn’t become a Facebook or Twitter addict. But the public’s media-consumption patterns are largely habitual, and old habits die very hard, especially when they’re reinforced by familial patterns such as “dinner at six, the news at seven.”
The core truth is that we will fill our time with whatever appeals to us most. Therefore, to induce Americans to leave the “glass teat” powered off when at leisure, we must offer them better ways to fill it -- and we must make sure they know about them.
I’ve tried to do my part. I have many colleagues in that endeavor. Some are better than others, of course. There are also many independent makers of music and films, some of whom ask us directly for material support via Kickstarter or GoFundMe. The great challenges lie in getting the word out, and in making sure that the results justify displacing the major media by our offerings.
Thoughts? In this endeavor, no seemingly harebrained idea should be rejected out of hand. The task is too important, and the avenues explored to this point have been few...and largely unsatisfactory.
0 Yorumlar