Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

Television and Poverty

SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 7:25:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Article in the Sociological Imagination

http://sociologicalimagination.org...

Excerpt from Article

The evening was a stark reminder of our current crisis of representation, which both media and political agents contribute to, sometimes greasing the wheels and sometimes driving the machine of welfare commonsense. This machine insists that unemployment, poverty and precarity are the result of individual poor decisions, lack of willpower or motivation. The commonsense narrative of the welfare state is that welfare itself has created something called "welfare dependency"; a state of infantilised reliance, indulgence, entitlement, the "something for nothing" culture so often spoke of by political elites. Accompanying such "welfare dependency" talk is the fantasy solution of "getting tough", hardening our "soft touch" welfare, making assessment more rigorous, reducing eligibility criteria, increasing conditions and so ensuring that people become more "responsible", "reliant", that they make better "lifestyle choices".

The last paragraph of the article reads ~ in part ~

Rather, my questions are; is our representation "machinery" broken? Has television craft become television franchise? What are the conditions that enable ignorance about poverty to be claimed, constantly; by television producers who claim to bravely explore it while reproducing the same tired visual scripts; by politicians who cling to myths about the feckless welfare-dependent poor? What would television look like if production companies consulted advisors with actual, sociological expertise about the very processes they wish to "represent"? What would welfare policy look like if politicians read sociological research about poverty rather than a narrow range of think-tank publications? How bold would it be if, rather than inviting them to appear as "reality stars" in their vision, directors gave cameras to people marginalised by poverty, showed them how to use them, and asked them to represent themselves and their lives in self-authored programming? Then we would truly be in a golden age of television.
gingerbread-man
Posts: 301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 8:06:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/28/2015 7:25:41 PM, SaxxyBlues wrote:
Article in the Sociological Imagination

http://sociologicalimagination.org...

Excerpt from Article

The evening was a stark reminder of our current crisis of representation, which both media and political agents contribute to, sometimes greasing the wheels and sometimes driving the machine of welfare commonsense. This machine insists that unemployment, poverty and precarity are the result of individual poor decisions, lack of willpower or motivation. The commonsense narrative of the welfare state is that welfare itself has created something called "welfare dependency"; a state of infantilised reliance, indulgence, entitlement, the "something for nothing" culture so often spoke of by political elites. Accompanying such "welfare dependency" talk is the fantasy solution of "getting tough", hardening our "soft touch" welfare, making assessment more rigorous, reducing eligibility criteria, increasing conditions and so ensuring that people become more "responsible", "reliant", that they make better "lifestyle choices".

The last paragraph of the article reads ~ in part ~

Rather, my questions are; is our representation "machinery" broken? Has television craft become television franchise? What are the conditions that enable ignorance about poverty to be claimed, constantly; by television producers who claim to bravely explore it while reproducing the same tired visual scripts; by politicians who cling to myths about the feckless welfare-dependent poor? What would television look like if production companies consulted advisors with actual, sociological expertise about the very processes they wish to "represent"? What would welfare policy look like if politicians read sociological research about poverty rather than a narrow range of think-tank publications? How bold would it be if, rather than inviting them to appear as "reality stars" in their vision, directors gave cameras to people marginalised by poverty, showed them how to use them, and asked them to represent themselves and their lives in self-authored programming? Then we would truly be in a golden age of television.

It would probably look like Scandinavia.
Not my gumdrop buttons!

Debates currently in voting period:

http://www.debate.org...