"To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost.
"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful."
-- Edward R. Murrow, keynote speech to the Radio-Television News Directors Association Convention, Chicago, 1958 (excerpt)Mr. Murrow saw where things were heading nearly 50 years ago. Television is merely a tool and, like all tools, can be used for purposes both wise and foolish. I've always disliked "reading is better than TV" debates since the typical comparisions between TV and books end up sounding like a straw-man argument.
I'm an avid reader. I also watch TV. The issue, however, is in what I read or watch; don't blame the format (written vs. visual). Sometimes, I see things on TV that prompt me to go and read about them in further detail. Sometimes I've read stuff and, upon noticing that there is a related relevant TV programme to the subject I had been reading about, I'll watch it. To me, TV and reading are complementary, not an either/or proposition.
Television is a tool. If used properly, as Murrow was exhorting to his audience a half-century ago, it can add to your life experience rather than subtract from it. If you insist on watching talk shows, game shows, reality TV and other such assorted crap, on the other hand, of course it's going to rot your brain. Don't shoot the messenger, don't blame the medium. Enough trashy literature exists out there as well that I could put together a decent enough argument favoring TV over reading.
Here's a contrived example for you as an illustration: Let's say you're faced with the option of either watching a rebroadcast of Carl Sagan's show "Cosmos" or reading the latest issue of "Teen Beat" magazine, which one would you prefer? Plenty of crap exists in both formats. Plenty of good material also exists in both formats. The trick is in going after the good stuff and ignoring the crap.
In other words, the usefulness of the tool is, as always, the responsibility of the user of that tool. Treat the TV as a mere "idiot box", you become the idiot. Use it, however, as a tool that "can teach... illuminate... even inspire" and it becomes a very useful appliance in your household.
Go ahead and trash your TV, if you'd like. I'm keeping mine.
