Struggle Between Words and Pictures!!

We live in a culture in which entertainment is essential. It is what breaks through the monotonous routine of our day to day lives. In the article “Two Cultures—Television versus Print,” we’re able to read through the dialogue between to critics with polar opposite views on Television. Neil Postman and Camille Paglia are both from two different cultures and thus have extremely different values. After thoroughly reading the dialogue I believe Camille Paglia’s arguments are much stronger and clearly backed up. Television not only provides an escape for people in today’s society, but presents them with new ways to think about and interpret different issues.

Neil Postman is a professor of communication arts at New York University (Crowley, 283). He grew up in an era that before the introduction of television. Postman argues,

“that reading is an ordered process requiring us to sit at a table, consume ideas from left to right, and make judgments of truth and falsehood. By its nature, reading teaches us to reason. Television, with its random, unconnected images, works against this linear tradition and breaks the habits of logic and thinking.” (Crowley, 283)

He is a strong believer that television takes away from of skills of critical thinking as well as trivializes ideas such as religion. Camille Paglia on the other hand argues, “That instead of criticizing television, most academics and other cultural critics simply turn up their noses dismissively at its enormous power—a kind of intellectual denial” (Crowley, 283). She, unlike Postman, was born post World War II and is a professor of humanities at the Philadelphia College of the Arts.

As I said before I found Camille Paglia made a much stronger case for her arguments. At one point Postman says, “The Nazi regime was only the most recent example of seducing through word and images, one of the most literate populations on earth.” Postman is worried about “the seductions of imagery,” but as we read early this semester, “That Hitler came into political existence at all is directly owing to radio and public-address systems” (McLuhan, 236). McLuhan also says that, “Had TV occurred on a large scale during Hitler’s reign he would have vanished quickly.” This makes complete sense because television provides us with immediate access to information that was previously unavailable. Therefore, the world and the citizens of Germany would have been able to see Hitler and realize the extreme idiocy of his ideals.

Prior to television the primary sources of information were radio or the newspaper. These mediums informed citizens but were not immediate and up to date. You had to wait until the morning to get your newspaper about yesterday’s news, or listen to pre-determined radio programs. Television now made up to the minute information accessible. It also made it possible for people to see, rather than hear or read the news. Television is an extension of visual learning. It is estimated that approximately 65% of the population is visual learners. It is not hard to figure out why people respond so well to television as a medium.

“In this case, I think the only defense against the seductions of imagery is a literate education” (Crowley, 293). Postman believes, “that education should supply what the rest of the culture is not supplying.” However, if we were only educated on things that were not supplied by society what would we learn? If teachers did not utilize the new technologies available to them, they would lose the interest of the students. This is not because students are unable to focus, but rather because in today’s society new mediums of technology have become essential in the way that they learn. Paglia notes, “Watching TV has nothing to do with thought or analysis. It’s a passive but highly efficient process of storing information to be used later” (Crowley, 289). To exclude television and commercial advertising from a communications class would be like excluding the bible from all literature classes.

“Our culture paid a price for literacy, and it will pay a price for its transformation into a visual culture” (Crowley, 291). Postman has clearly taken a technological deterministic attitude toward television. While I do not claim that television does not alter media in our society, I do believe that new mediums only succeed if there is a particular demand for them in a society. “TV is not something you watch; it is simply on, all the time” (Crowley, 289). I believe that Paglia makes an important point. People turn on the TV for a number of different reasons. We can all learn new things from watching television, or get the latest news. But, most people simply turn the TV on to avoid silence or for an escape from their daily routine.

Maybe Camille Paglia’s ideas resonated with me because I too was born into a television society, but either way I found that she made the better argument of the two. She had examples and explanations to back up her arguments. I think people living in today’s society rely heavily on television. They use it as a learning tool, a source of information and news, and even to relax and escape the monotonous routine of their day to day lives. Like Paglia I am inclined to believe that “remembrance of facts has nothing to do with television’s significance or effects.” It portrays reality and connects people from all around the world. Television gives life and new meaning to the words you see in a book. It is because of this that I believe television to be an essential part of the media in today’s society.

Sexism in Media coverage of 2008 Presidential Election

Throughout most of the 2008 Presidential election many important issues in our country became the forefront of discussion. One of these that personally resonated with me was the amount of sexism in the Media. Senator Hilary Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin were victims of sexism throughout both of their campaigns. Unfortunately the excessive examples demonstrating this were far too plentiful. Therefore, I decided that I would focus specifically on a YouTube video of Donnie Deutsch's interview with CNBC.

"DEUTSCH: There is the new creation that the feminist woman has not figured out in 40 years of the feminist ideal that men can take in a woman in power and women can celebrate a woman in power. Hillary Clinton didn’t figure it out. She didn’t put a skirt on! […]She [Palin] talked about energy. Didn’t matter! Today everybody’s running in circles — we want to have her over for dinner. I trust her. I want her watching my kids. I want her laying next to me in bed. That’s the way people vote" (Frick, 1).

This is just a portion of the remarks made by Deutsch in regards to Sarah Palin. While it seems that many people spoke openly and often about the Republican vice Presidential candidate, it is disheartening that the media would use sexist tactics. His comments not only condone a sexist way of thinking, but they actually promote it. Erica Falk states in her book Women For President, "Women, she argues, are always told they must strive for ideal beauty while men are to judge women on the basis of it; Wolf says the beauty myth defines a woman's cultural value in terms of her beauty" (84).

As a woman I am proud of the mere possibility that a woman could potentially be elected Vice President, let alone President, of the United States of America. Women have worked too hard to find an equal place in society. And while we have come a long way it is obvious that we are still fighting every day. Since when does the attractiveness of a man, the outfit he put on, or his parenting ability get as much press as that of a female candidate? Comments like those that Donnie Deutsch made simply continue the long line of sexism in our nation. A popular pop culture and celebrity blogger named Perez Hilton frequently referred to Sarah Palin as "Sexy Sarah." His multiple references to her appearance, clothing, and even her legs are extremely disheartening. This is a man who works so hard as a member of the gay community to achieve equality, yet stereotypically depicts women.

A well known female comedienne Sandra Bernhard said Sarah Palin would be "gang-raped by my big black brothers" if she enters Manhattan. Listening to a woman make comments that are not only sexist but that promote violence against another women is disgusting. We as women cannot truly believe that women are too emotional, or too essential in the raising of a child to be President of the United States. Host Erin Burnett even suggests to Deutsch at one point in the interview that he could, “use a four letter acronym beginning with M and ending with F.” Having these feelings simply reinforces gender identities that society and the media have forced upon all of us from the day we were born.

I understand a disagreement with fundamental beliefs of a candidate, but that is not what the media did. Instead they attacked her parenting skills, her body type, her attire, and even her degree of sexual appeal. The media needs to step up and take responsibility for the way it depicts women. And more importantly we as women cannot give up on the fight for equal treatment in every aspect of our lives.

Falk, Erica. Women For President: Media Bias in Eight Campaigns. University of Illinois Press, 17 Dec. 2007.

Frick, Ali. “CNBC host praises Palin for ‘putting a skirt on: ‘I want her laying next to me in bed.’” ThinkProgress.com. 5 Sept. 2008. Web. 6 Nov. 2008.