It's said so often that it's become a hoary old bag of wind, that TV is not as good as it used to be. A generalisation that masks truth and falsehood in the way that any simplistic statement masks the nuance and complexity of an argument. The meaning is loose, the physical object here in front of me is superior in every respect to that of those old CRT monsters we used to have, but that isn't what is being referred to. It's the programmes. But even knowing that doesn't help. If it's 9pm on BBC2 in 1980 then it was brilliant (Not the None O'Clock News), or any date and time that featured the thing you loved. But however good these things are when covered in a slimy layer of nostalgia it is often much different when we revisit.
Opponents of the view that TV used to be better have a simple response, they can rightly point to shedloads of quality drama that has been produced across broadcasters in recent years.
Proponents of the opposing view can rightly point to 8.7 million hours a year of low-rent, intelligence insulting, reality TV.
With regard to news, current affairs, the arts, there has been a loss of depth of debate. The BBC has become so scared of the govt that it appears to accept the party line on any subject, and doesn't question statements or expose them to any meaningful level of analysis at all. This renders almost all news programmes into shouting matches or meaningless and artificial constructs where a completely bonkers viewpoint is given the same airtime and assumption of credibility as the sane view purely so there is this thing called 'balance'.
In other programme areas there have been changes that have lead to greater equality of opportunity. It has been possible to ditch some fuck awful things such as the Black & White Minstrel Show, The Comedians, and almost all of the racist/sexist/homophobic TV.
It is clear that there are areas of positive change and areas of negative change.
This leads me on to my in depth study of some old TV (nothing in-depth has taken place, just stuff I happened to recently watch). To give me something to do while on the Turbo Trainer (effectively a glorified exercise bike) I've been watching James Burke's Connections on the YouTube. These programmes, the second series from the early 90s, discuss sciencey stuff in an accessible way. They are an entertaining introduction to a wide range of topics and explain how disparate, distant, and different ideas have worked together to make something much greater. This type of programme, while not of any great depth, is something that we still have today.
Then a conversation raised a name and sparked an interest in an arts programme from 1972. This was John Berger's Ways of Seeing. It wasn't just about art, it was about much more, there was a great deal about the hidden ideologies contained within visual images. Unpicking the hidden ideologies and suggesting what they represented was a key part of the programme as well as questioning interpretations, including his own interpretation. I watched all four 30 minute episodes back to back, a rarity, and it appeared to me that we don't have anything as good as that right now. Well, we don't have programmes which discuss philosophical questioning about meaning and our environment. And we really should.
While some narrow fields have become very good, other fields have become less well covered. Either through reluctance to challenge viewers with those ideas, fear of loss of ratings, or some other reason. Which is a shame. Sort it out TV, sort it out.
There are a lot of bees in this image
For official/internal use only:
6766
0-9
No comments:
Post a Comment