the summer of '94, a ninety-Karl Raimund Popper and physically debilitated, die in September of that year-to not give up be firmly based on its concern about the potential negative effects of television. The essay which Popper dedicated his reflections, the eloquent title Television bad teacher, was very well received internationally, but also discussed and criticized, not without some confidence in the ability of an old philosopher, born at the dawn of the twentieth century, to understand half still so young, such as TV, everything shown in the following century. But read again today, after fifteen years, his thoughts and his warnings do not seem so outdated and unfounded. His major concerns are addressed to the force with which the audience can read the race to shape television programs by dragging more and more towards a private fund quality. Violence, sex and sensationalism would thus be the spice of a flat media virtually tasteless and cooked with increasing incompetence. The problem with this point becomes Popper education: television, defined as mercantilist, continues to occupy an area more extensive in the growth of children who do not yet have the tools to deal independently and critically on the television viewing. The Austrian philosopher, who in the early '30s he had taught in secondary schools in Vienna, emphasizes the artificial, man made, a television is in all respects by man, and therefore can not bear the characteristics of natural and neutrality that seem to implicitly attributed by our society. But Popper television is not doomed to be a bad teacher. He who does not forget that the television medium is an integral part of which it is responsible, whether we like it or not, even the education of children and teenagers. To make the best television fulfills its educational role Popper suggests, perhaps arousing criticism on this point firmer, the establishment of a license, permit, a document certifying the competence and professional quality those who produce, develop and participate in the implementation of programs. Although the proposal appeared to be very naive and a bit more 'rigid and even dangerous - to the possibility that "licensed" to become a caste monopoly of the means and its contents - is clearly a significant accountability gap to be filled.
And the debate that takes daily on the public-television-in and out is always looking for faults, merits and demerits of this irresponsibility. Popper's solution appears to have been abandoned for the moment, but nothing has taken its place.
For the record, we must remember that Popper had as a reference in its investigations of the private television Murdoch and Maxwell, and knew little about the Italian situation. However, it is known Italian author of a provocative text on changes in the anthropological television 
vo subjecting the man. In Homo Videns , published for the first time three years after the essay Popper, Giovanni Sartori argues, without delay, the impoverishment of the human cognitive by television. The dominance of the visible sull'intellegibile lead the viewer to see the lazy automatic without understanding of the benefit liabilities of a sequence of images without any need for intervention by the abstract capacity and imagination, which are the basis for the development of thinking man, his evolution as a species. Sartori also not forget the role, always in this direction, the internet phenomenon that will bring the ' homo digitalis to replace its recent ancestor homo prensilis . It is not just a genetic modification, television has radically transformed the conditions of our society: public opinion is telediretta, born and depends on the screen. Politics has become videopolitica, and politicians can not help but become moving pictures and to exploit the effectiveness invasive opinion leadering television. Popper, moreover, is still to assume that "a new Hitler would with television, infinite power."
vo subjecting the man. In Homo Videns , published for the first time three years after the essay Popper, Giovanni Sartori argues, without delay, the impoverishment of the human cognitive by television. The dominance of the visible sull'intellegibile lead the viewer to see the lazy automatic without understanding of the benefit liabilities of a sequence of images without any need for intervention by the abstract capacity and imagination, which are the basis for the development of thinking man, his evolution as a species. Sartori also not forget the role, always in this direction, the internet phenomenon that will bring the ' homo digitalis to replace its recent ancestor homo prensilis . It is not just a genetic modification, television has radically transformed the conditions of our society: public opinion is telediretta, born and depends on the screen. Politics has become videopolitica, and politicians can not help but become moving pictures and to exploit the effectiveness invasive opinion leadering television. Popper, moreover, is still to assume that "a new Hitler would with television, infinite power." no shortage of those who intend not to demonize the medium of television, not to make the goat sin of lack of accountability on the part of traditional intelligence agencies - school and family in the first place. But the fact remains that the use of television content, ordered by the continuous programming schedule or freely chosen in the network, occupying most of our time, and besides watching, television, broadcasting content, we talk, discuss, and is written, so that even the press can not help but refer to what happens on TV, far beyond the borders of the pages of cultural criticism. The television has become a matter of record, is entirely part of reality. The sensation aroused by the recent revelation of the mother of Sara Scazzi to Chi l'ha visto? the discovery of his daughter's body, without the live TV link to be suspended, it is only the latest example. The problem, as Sartori does not fail to highlight is that the television picture is not real is mediated and constructed by the authors is the product of their choice to act on reality, communicating to the audience's point of view, the own opinion.
Ultimately, apocalyptic or integrated, the big question of the potential of the medium-television message remains open.
Ultimately, apocalyptic or integrated, the big question of the potential of the medium-television message remains open.
Judith Grechi
0 comments:
Post a Comment