Grindstaff quotes Richard Zoglin’s warning that “a new batch of shows is playing ever faster and looser with the line that separates fact and fiction” and discusses the ethical problems raised by this blurring of the “line.” Postmodernists would argue that this line was constructed, even fictional, to begin with. Thus, perhaps our awareness of the blurring of the line between reality and fiction is a good thing. We no longer accept our news as “fact” but rather as a story that appears to have some grounding in fact delivered by a station or channel that has some sort of philosophy and then written and delivered by an individual with his or her own agenda.
So: what do you think? Is reality television desensitizing us to reality (as Gringwold suggests)? Or is it making us (and reflecting the fact that we already are) sophisticated, savvy, and even cynical viewers?
And is this a good thing? Or a bad thing? What is your opinion? Be specific.
1 comment:
As Gringwold suggests, I think television desensitizes people to reality. Today's television which possesses both "facts" and fictions" brings a "blury effects" to viewers. Even though viewers think that they would be able to classify a program as either fact or fiction, it is impossible to distinguish the program exactly. This is because the information the TV offers is limited and therefore people only see one aspect of the story. The news, perceived as the most accurate form of information on television, only conveys situations from the reporter's perspective. Who said the reporter's perspective was a fact? And How can we find out this as truth? We only perceive what we are given from TV. Therefore, I believe people are desensitized by TV unconciously and continuously.
Post a Comment