Thursday, 5 March 2009
I joined twitter
mainly because I want to follow Charlie Brooker. Tho I don't see the point (other than to stalk CB), it's just like facebook statuses isnt it?
It's in the media a lot for some reason...? Just because it's new? That gives plenty people an arbitrary reason to hate it... I'm not into that.
There's a lot of that around, hating things cos they are new, I guess people can't be bothered to actually choose what they like and hate based on any kind of real analysis so they just go with the impulse to hate/fear the different/new. You gotta hate something right? I think I wrote a blog similar to this on LiveJournal, about how people distribute their 'liking of things' as if it was a finite thing, actually ((I think I called it 'limiting sympathy' back then when I used big words cos it was before the long long uni holidays melted my brain.)) An example (I always talk about Helen lol) is Helen Meragi, who got myspace, and then a couple of years later myspace introduced photoalbums but Helen didn't want to get photo-albums because she Quote: 'felt like [she] would be betraying [her] old self'. Eventually she got them tho, after Hat convinced her! :P
Anyway, this is a small group of young people... most people that will hate Twitter are OLDDD and they just don't really know what it is and they think as people who are younger than them use it it must be shallow and immature, but also a threat because they are OLD so won't have the power to supress new media forever.
I think young people need a revolution, I personally have had enough of, every time I turn on the TV, hearing a middle-aged, middle-class person calling me stupid because I use a computer, because I write to my friends in e-mails instead of telegrams or face-to-face on a pic-nic blanket eating scones with lashings of strawberry jam and hand-whipped cream or whatever.
This rant is mainly brought on by Baroness Greenfield, a 'professor of neuroscience' who is given regular slots on TV shows, quoted in Newspapers and featured in radio programs with her ridiculous claims that Q: 'these technologies are infantilising the brain into the state of small children who are attracted by buzzing noises and bright lights'. She also believes that in a few years children won't recognise blood, yes, blood, because they've been desensitised by Youtube... I am not joking she said children will go: 'what's that red stuff pouring out of him?'. She believes that in the old days kids read books which taught them to empathise whereas facebook turns kids into unfeeling robots...yeah... doesn't make much sense to me either!
If the mainstream media only allows these conservative "scientists" in these kinds of forums then they are shooting themselves in the foot because anyone with a different opinion (such as any young person) will air their views on... the internet and this will reduce the relevence of these old media such as TV, Radio and Newspapers. It also perpetuates class divides, typical of the BBC to respect such hierarchies, and continues this attack on the working classes which has been prevalent in the media recently (see: Benefit Fraud adverts starring chavvy looking people.) ITV, of course is supposedly less uptight and middle-class but still perpetuates this hierarchy as its 'factual' programs stir up tabloid-like fear and hatred of young people and working class people and its fiction does nothing to question the status-quo , Coronation Street, for example, has very unambitious working-class characters with low self-esteem who marry the people who live nearest to them (before changing their mind and sleeping with someone 2 doors down), the young people are all scheming or stupid or lazy or shallow, its characters rarely read books or use computers, just sit in the pub all day (though its creators are very aware of this format). ITV's american imports are all aspirational, let's-admire-rich-people programs.
You'd think Channel 4 would be better but (like the BBC) that's full of cooking shows which encourage people to cook expensively, eat fatteningly, all in the name of high-brow dining which is supposedly the antithesis to fast-food and other things favoured by the working-classes. Or there's 'grand designs' where rich people get to build their ugly barbie dream houses because they deserve it cos they are so rich. Channel five is just a magazine channel with very cheap TV shows often about other TV shows on other channels but at least it has Neighbours. And don't get me started on the Digital Channels.
Anyway, anyone want to join my revolution?