The Moral Majority Rules

Was it lbsen that once wrote something to the effect that the majority of the populace can never be right? That the person who stands most alone always holds the moral truth?

I was traveling with my old car pooling partner awhile back, when we got into a "discussion" about who had more influence during the 1980's, Ronald Reagan or Bill Cosby. Surely, I argued, Cosby had a larger audience, thus had the ability to reach more people. Besides who among us still believes in the power of any politician? Haven't we become too cynical for all that?

Currently, there is a debate raging among the intellectual community in our country (or in other words, the people with way too much time to waste i.e. our Congress); that being-has television become too violent, too dirty for the young impressionable minds of this once great country

To state that television is an evil force in the downfall of our society isn't exactly the most controversial stand to take. Conservatives attack the liberal bias of Hollywood while Liberals bad mouth the conservative corporate dominance of the current network structure. But it is important to remember that Socrates once warned of the dangers of the written word, and the printing press was once described as the single most corruptive invention by the Catholic Church, before one condemns television as de debbil in our society. Technological advances are almost always feared. What has to be questioned however is the determination and acceptance that violence and sex are somehow equal and that television is solely responsible for the downfall of our moral fabric.

The argument goes something like this: Network TV over stretched the boundaries, and children these days are exposed to sinful, corruptive ideas way before they are ready. Violence may not lead to violence, but it desensitizes us all. Exposure to sex leads to lustful, promiscuous behavior,

But how can anyone possibly measure densensitivity7 I watched more than my share of television as a child. My brother and I used to play cops and robbers as well as its now politically incorrect cousin, cowboys and indians. Neither one of us is a mass murderer to my knowledge; in fact, these days I can't stand to watch any type of pop culture created violence. I recently saw the movie Cliffhanger and could hardly stomach the violent scenes. There is no entertainment value in watching another human endure any kind of physical suffering.

It's true that television takes the easy way out whenever possible by entertaining us with violence. But to place the blame on TV while all but disregarding current gun control laws, or spousal, child, or drug abuse, and the hopelessness of inner city living, is a simplistic view to take. Does anyone actually believe the increasing rate in violent crime is mainly due to watching too much television?

It's equally puzzling how one can lump violence and sex together into one corruptive category. I'm no expert but maybe the blonde from my past, CJ, was correct when she called me a pervert for complimenting (the one time I ever did it in my life) her choice in fashion. When did making love become equal with blowing someone's head off (no pun intended)? How can anyone possibly equate the two?

That's not to say television doesn't influence us. While house sitting two kitties, I find myself addressing them in an accent similar to the one Carroll O'Connor uses as the southern sheriff in The Heat of the Night (don't ask why, I only know it's really annoying). But to say the reason anyone acts the way they do is because of the values they learned by watching television is hard to believe.

Because something is popular doesn't automatically mean it is devoid of value. It's too easy to criticize the biggest target available without looking for the actual root of the problem. To impose an atmosphere of unilateral self editing, or governmental control of ideas is truly a dangerous step to take. A parent can always tell the child to shut the TV off. We don't need Donald Wildmon for that. Censorship is much safer than risky artistic expression. While not all pop culture can hold some type of (if any) moral value, the risk in restricting that far out ways the chance in losing a creative, unique expression of the human condition.