Peter Watkins' latest statement on the media, from Media Statement:
Stated simply, the thesis offered by many popular culture scholars is
that TV is a positive and democratic source of communication due to the
shared language and experience that ‘ordinary' people can enjoy through
such widely viewed ‘populist' programmes as soap-operas, game shows,
police series, as well as via identification with the characters and
issues involved.
But the premise that popular culture is a
truly “democratic” force in society is very suspect, even if only
because its PROCESS and FORM are in themselves the complete antithesis
of a truly democratic experience.
The very process of
receiving popular culture messages from the MAVM is experienced and
known to most people only as coming from within, and entirely framed
by, the present hierarchical relationship of the media towards the
public - by which I refer not only to the kind of images that appear on
the screen but also to the entire social and political interface
between the media and its audience. Much of this hierarchical
relationship is an invisible social process which constantly surrounds
us.
The invisible framing of this process - and what we
subconsciously feel about it - is like a supplementary hidden code,
deeply colouring the way we receive all messages from the MAVM. (Part
of the invisible hierarchy is the strict editorial control placed by
the media on the issues they are prepared to raise with the public, and
the members of the community they are prepared to address.)
Furthermore,
the seemingly up-front messages of the media are coded by yet another
hidden, background frame - the rigid, hierarchical structure of the
Monoform. This special language-form has not only had devastating
social consequences, but its compulsory presence throughout nearly all
audiovisual broadcasting and cinema production has prevented the
emergence of alternative forms of media experience, process, or
relationship for the public.
As I describe here, the
dominant forms of media education - the teaching of popular culture,
and vocational media training - have largely succeeded in convincing
several generations of students that the questions of media process and
form and their relationship to ideology are not problems, indeed they
are not even issues. One can enter most media classrooms today and find
that these concepts are not even vaguely understood. Teachers do not
mention them (which raises the question - do they know them in the
first place?), and/or they ensure that media students are not exposed
to alternative ideas and critical concepts.
Part of the
contemporary tragedy is that the audiovisual popular culture is taught,
especially at the tertiary level, as a model to be achieved. Many
academics appear obsessed with what they call the “aesthetic pleasures”
of the media, and are (or have been) particularly fascinated with TV
soap-operas, which have represented a considerable proportion of
academic study and writing since the 1970s.
Media academia
devotes a great deal of time to explaining that soap-operas - popular
culture in general - are positive, sharing experiences for the
audience. Little attention has been given to the down-sides of popular
culture, and there has been almost no attempt to critically evaluate
its impact on society.
One of the many devastating aspects
of the mass audiovisual popular culture has been its effect of
prioritizing the trivial for many people. It focuses on creating
massive public interest and attention on the lives of fictional people
(in soap-operas), and certain public figures and celebrities.