Admittedly, there are many inventions that clearly belong in the realm of awesome; anything from penicillin to rockets would have been a good choice. We talked about it, my mother, my girlfriend and I, as we drove to a New Year’s Eve party (because it may be the end the world, but there’s nothing a good margarita won’t fix,) and each came up with an answer. Or, I should say, both my mother and my girlfriend eventually settled on one answer: the Internet. Now, if that is not foresight I don’t know what is. We all know now the undeniable impact the Internet has had on our lives and we can’t even envision how it will shape our lives in the future. That’s how big this thing is.
For me, however, there was just one answer: Television.
You see, before we had the Internet to simultaneously make the world smaller and more alienating, and before we could break the barriers of time and space (and privacy) with colossal outlets of information, or replace our real social networks with virtual ones and figure out exactly what we wanted to say in 140 characters or less, we sat around at home to watch the same thing at the same time as millions of other people around the country. We had little choice. What was on, was on. It was a beautiful thing and it still happens all around the globe.
We created entire worlds for television; we exported talents to unreachable places; we created new professions just so we could see those shows in our native languages; we disseminated values (some better than others) and changed cultures (for better or worse.) All this was possible thanks to Television. This medium was untouchable in its ability to transmit information; it changed the way we did advertising, the way we made movies, the way we learned, the way we played, the way we wooed each other, hated each other, what we knew about each other, who we trusted and how we elected government.
Of course, the Internet has some of those same virtues and flaws and then some; but you have to give it to the tube with its damn images and stories. There was nothing interactive before: the interaction happened in your head.
The potential impact of Television is probably why I studied Mass Communications in the first place. The news was always important to me. Storytelling was important to me. This medium could shape things, and that attracted me. Before the Internet, Television was the mass medium that demanded the biggest responsibility because it influenced the most people; that was, if I may be so bold, intellectually sexy. In a way, I felt about Television like Martin Scorsese feels about Siri in that awful iPhone commercial when he tells it that it is going places. I felt the same way: "I like you Television, you're going places.”
Still, today, I watch television everyday and, for the most part, it is a good friend to me. I still feel a connection to the stories and, for my money, it is still the best medium to try and make sense of current affairs. If you’re conscientious enough you can find someone who will biasedly explain any particular side of an issue like he or she were talking to a 5 year old. That’s one of the beauties of the television space-time continuum: the information has to be clear and digestible. The problem, then, is not finding people to explain every side of an issue, but having the discipline to look for them. But once you know where to look, Television tells it to you like it is and lets you be the judge.
That is also the tricky thing about Television. Many people complain about the futility of the medium and how inconsequential it can be. And they are right. Television requires from you. You have to make an effort to look for the information and you have to filter it. It demands from you the intellectual exercise of sorting through our own cultural decline.
Of course, this cultural decline is also often attributed to Television and its power to showcase the worst. Indeed, there is so much evil on TV these days that I often turn to Stephen King to get away from the horror. Even channels that used to be about science and knowledge like Discovery and History have devolved into reality-show exhibits, with their truckers and pawn shops and crab grabbers, and auction hunters.
However, as we gradually morph into a culture that swipes information off with a slide of the finger, Television becomes more of a misdemeanor offender. The ever-reaching expansion of the Internet and the focus on all devices that connect us to it, dwarf whatever zombiefying effects Television may have been accused of in the past. Thanks to the Internet and the advent of smartphones and tablets information is now received in even quicker snippets designed for our ever-shorter attention spans. The traffic is so fast that many times it registers as no more than just a blip on our radars.
For the record: I am not saying that the Internet is evil and should die, so you can stop calling me a hypocrite and a dirty hippie. The Internet, like all media, is like The Green Lantern's ring: bound only by what you imagine you can do with it, no more, no less.
A few months ago, in a demonstration of how effective the Internet can be at propagating information, many rallied behind a documentary to denounce Ugandan war criminal and leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army Joseph Kony. Thanks to YouTube, the documentary reached over 86 million views and brought forth an issue that had been largely ignored for more than 20 years. The International Criminal Court (ICC) had indicted Kony in 2005 and he had been included in the list of “Specially Designated Global Terrorists" since 2008. Yet, it was thanks to the Internet that knowledge of Kony's case became widespread.
Unfortunately, very soon interest died down and the campaign was accused of slacktivism (a pejorative term that describes campaigns in support of a particular cause that have little or no practical effect other than making those involved feel good about themselves.)
The moral of the story is simple and trite: having access to the information is not enough. We must learn to discriminate. And then we must dig further. All information arises from human interaction; even information about events that do not involve humans is filtered through the human experience. Information is the presentation (or representation) of events that have real effects on real people. That's why it is important. It can be entertaining, but that cannot be its only purpose.
We can enjoy information for its entertainment value but we will only be connected to the world at large insofar as we connect to the events that happen to the world at large. You don’t have to be an activist or a news junkie but you’d be surprised how paying attention to information that is normally beyond your comfort zone can broaden your perception without you even making much of an effort.
When I was a kid, it was through Television that I was first exposed to The Barber of Seville, one of my favorite operas of all time. I still remember an episode of Tom and Jerry where Tom performed Chopin, and I watched it so many times that I eventually learned the piece by heart. The Lone Ranger's theme was the Overture to Rossini’s William Tell and I could hum it by age 7.
I guess what I'm saying is that I haven't changed my mind much, since 1999; even though the Internet gives us superpowers, I am still partial to TV. Or maybe I just miss a time when Television was the only thing keeping us from going outside and playing.
