celebrity issue on television. The suggestion, provocative, is one of the proposals made by the team of Evelyn Matthei. In fact, it is not about censorship as qualifying. The entertainment programs should be transmitted in time adults, for in them is often violating the dignity of people. The premise is that we should not expose our children to consume celebrity for several hours a day.
The proposal put on the table a question that we rarely take the time to make: what to do with garbage content to flood national channels? The most basic liberal intuition-that somehow we all share, says that there is nothing to do, since we lack any authority to restrict freedom of expression. We regret we can and we can stop watching certain programs, but we can adjust our tastes law.
Yet there are good reasons to think that this answer is a bit poor. A sophisticated liberal as Popper, for example, claimed that television can become a danger to democracy. This case may be a paradigmatic example of the limitations of some unthinking liberalism, which has difficulty perceiving the public dimension involved in any accumulation of individual decisions. In fact, the broadcasting content contribute decisively to shaping our public space. Can we give up all kinds of collective action against it without giving too fundamental public goods? Should not there something like a serious political abdication?
Moreover, if television is not so different from others. There queen savage capitalism in its purest form: the war for ratings known few rules, and that often leads to abuse. If this is true, intervention here would be no less legitimate than other areas. But if television is especially complicated by the presence of an additional factor: its undeniable effect on children. They are particularly exposed to TV and lack of criteria to evaluate what they see. This is exacerbated in low-income sectors, without cable or access to other cultural goods. We also know that the family does not fulfill the role many expect, partly because its contours have changed, and partly because the schedules and routes can prevent parents accompany their children while they watch television. The result is that many children watch several hours of television a day without an adult present. Why are we willing to limit their access to cigarettes, alcohol and harmful superochos, and we are not will ing to do (almost) anything in this field? How is it possible to relocate the years discussing the educational problem without ever paying a minute of attention to television, in front of which spend almost as much time in school?
The question deserves to be made without reference to easy slogans, because the influence of television is too deep. Downgrade culture, Camus said, is the best way to approach the servitude and barbarism: our children-and our future-they deserve better than that.
No comments:
Post a Comment