Weapons of Mass Distraction
Larry Gelbart, writer of “M*A*S*H,” and “Tootsie,” wrote an HBO movie called “Weapons of Mass Distraction.” The title is one of the best things about it.
Mass distractions distract everyone from thinking about war, help us stop thinking about Dick Cheney or the share price of AT&T. Mass distractions help keep us focused on which guy with sticky hair will win “American Idol” and encourage us to become hypnotized by Britney Spears, a mentally unstable hillbilly.
I’m not coming at this from a cultural mountaintop. I’m a veteran of E! Entertainment Television, have produced bio-docs on Arnold Schwarzenegger and Warren Beatty and have been doing pop culture movie segments for ReelzChannel. I’m in this pop culture thing really deep, ok? Lots of my colleagues in cable are doing great things melding pop culture with science. Exciting pop media is on the horizon with iPhone and Motorola phone aps. I get that pop culture is a powerful engine. But who’s driving?
Diane Keaton: It’s so clean out here [in Los Angeles.]
Woody Allen: That’s because they don’t throw their garbage away, they turn it into television shows.– “Annie Hall.”
It’s relaxing to watch garbage on TV, more relaxing than taking out the real garbage. (“Is that starting to smell bad, or is it the television?”) People say mass media is dead, but nearly 29 million people watched the finale of American Idol. The most popular video on YouTube has been viewed about 56 million times. The pop audience is big and it’s a cultural powerhouse.
“We need better shows.”
- Jeff Zucker, chief executive of NBC Universal, quoted in the New York Times.
Zucker’s network is struggling in the ratings so making better shows seems an admirable directive. But what does better mean? I’m willing to bet that for Zucker and his product placement guru Ben Silverman, better means servicing the advertisers who pay for the shows. Judging by the garbage NBC puts on they haven’t been thinking much about the viewers.
Why do they put garbage on TV, anyway? Because people will watch it. If people will watch singers singing off key, that’s what goes on. Network TV programming, like banking these days, is a remarkably morality-free occupation. There is no cabal determining what goes on. (Sorry, Dan Brown, no Illuminati.) It’s all market driven. So who’s driving the culture train? Nobody, really. It’s kind of driving itself.
Here’s the thing: I believe in editors. As in Managing Editors, as in people who make a point of figuring out what might be visionary, necessary and important to know. I believe you can do this and cater to pop culture and mass culture.
Now that I have trashed the soldiers of television and maybe irritated some hard-working and dedicated others who could pay me good money, may I issue a few retractions? Britney Spears is a good entertainer who can draw and hold an audience. Naked celebrities are entertaining. Some of the people on “American Idol” can carry a tune. The dry humor of “The Office” is almost as funny as a real office. Tyra Banks might not be completely evil. Kittens are really cute. Kittenwar.com is an important website that has sucked down hours of my time. Just another weapon of mass distraction.
Great! I was just thinking that this week, and exactly so. Will a topic like yoga be attention getting enough for a television network, and if it means having to “mass-distract” it, then is that what we want to do?
Hey Lee -
I’ve got another link for you…
Check out Karma Tube… http://www.karmatube.org/index.php
Not so much “Mass” and clearly not meant to be a “Distraction,” this channel aims to be a tool for change.
Hi Lee,
“Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.” Mencken’s view still holds.
Bob
I often remark “we get something like 500 channels but there’s still nothing to watch!”
However, somehow, the TV is almost always on
Mencken is still right. But what can we do to change this? I just don’t believe that it’s part of our DNA to want crummy television. I think people will respond to good programming if it’s provided. Look at “Planet Earth” on Discovery – a big hit for the network and more than good enough to spawn an imitator/sequel with the current Disney theatrical release. For me there’s always hope!
It’s a little scary but certainly true. I often get Remote Control Finger Fatigue when punching through all the choices on DirecTV looking for something to watch that won’t melt my brain. Maybe video on demand will help things, allowing programmers to cater cost effectively to smaller markets.
Love it! In this month’s Wired there’s a listing of all the other “Tubes” out there including DNAtube, SIMtube, ORIGAMItube, SCUBADIVINGtube and a few others too questionable to mention here.
This is a question that I’ve been thinking about for years. Take any topic, add celebrities, and you have something people will watch. That’s the conventional wisdom anyway. It sometimes works. But often not. Travel Channel tried a show with Jeremy Piven traveling to India – cool show but didn’t last. “Dog the Bounty Hunter” and similar exercises in bad taste have made stars out of people you’ve never heard about. I think the docusoap format, in particular, works it brings us compelling people and situations – so in that case there’s no need to mass-distract or lower the bar. Good, compelling content will always be located because people are seeking it. Look at the comment in the strand about all the competitors to YouTube and you’ll see that almost anything can find a market. (Whether it can be monetized is another story.)
Lee
Yes! This was particularly on target to me – I enjoyed it very much.
Happy weekend