A depressing insight into the dumbing-down of everything.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

The top "most read" news story on the BBC website right now is "TV star Dec misses England goal"


I think here, in a nutshell, is the reason the Proletariat will never revolt

[Trolldor]

It's not dumbing down at all, it's what people actually want to read.

[JimC]

Sport is the opiate of the masses in this current age...

[Horwood Beer-Master]

It's not dumbing down at all, it's what people actually want to read.

Sorry, that sentence doesn't appear to me to make a coherent point. Could you rephrase it?

[Trolldor]

It's not dumbing down at all, it's what people actually want to read.

Sorry, that sentence doesn't appear to me to make a coherent point. Could you rephrase it?

GOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL! Extraficator the culstarfines!

[Horwood Beer-Master]

Ok, I'll rephrase my request for a rephrase.

How does the second half of the sentence ("it's what people actually want to read") validate, or provide evidence/argument for, the first half of the sentence ("It's not dumbing down at all")?

[Trolldor]

Dumbing down implies a wilful enforcement of ignorance. There is no dumbing down at all, people are quite naturally idiotic enough to think it's news worthy.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

Dumbing down implies a wilful enforcement of ignorance. There is no dumbing down at all, people are quite naturally idiotic enough to think it's news worthy.

It's the 'quite naturally' thing I'd disagree with there. I think it has far-more to do with the tsunami of Prolefeed (soap operas, reality TV, tabloid newspapers, gossip mags, ITV, relentless ads for shiny new crap of no intrinsic value, e.t.c) which people's brains are marinated-in from birth 'till death these days.

Combined with an education system that's entirely devoted to training kids for the world of work, over actually teaching them how to think - and what chance do people have?

[Trolldor]

Actually, the education system (at least here) is an impressive imprvement over any education system of the past.
The new 'education revolution' occuring in Australia will actually set back the education system a couple of decades by returning to the system a couple of decades ago.

Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

But were living under a system that acts to compound any innate idiocy as opposed to dispelling it.

It is not necessarily an inevitable written-in-stone fact of life that the bulk of people in any given situation, if provided with a free choice in the matter, will always pick the lowest, least informing/thought-provoking mind-numbing form of entertainment over any others.

It is however inevitable that once such trash begins to rise in popularity, all things being equal that rise in popularity will if left unchecked become self-perpetuating, with low-intellect and low-entertainment being caught in a positively reinforcing feedback loop.

So whilst it is true on the one hand, that the lowering standard of entertainment output in recent times has been simply due to the audience having more choice in the matter. It is also true that this lowering standard of entertainment has in turn has a detrimental effect on the audience intellect (which then in turn has a detrimental effect on their choices - thus forming the aforementioned feedback-loop).

[Feck]

...Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

But were living under a system that acts to compound any innate idiocy as opposed to dispelling it.

It is not necessarily an inevitable written-in-stone fact of life that the bulk of people in any given situation, if provided with a free choice in the matter, will always pick the lowest, least informing/thought-provoking mind-numbing form of entertainment over any others.

It is however inevitable that once such trash begins to rise in popularity, all things being equal that rise in popularity will if left unchecked become self-perpetuating, with low-intellect and low-entertainment being caught in a positively reinforcing feedback loop.

So whilst it is true on the one hand, that the lowering standard of entertainment output in recent times has been simply due to the audience having more choice in the matter. It is also true that this lowering standard of entertainment has in turn has a detrimental effect on the audience intellect (which then in turn has a detrimental effect on their choices - thus forming the aforementioned feedback-loop).

It's true .......I'm off to play Bejewelled

[Trolldor]

...Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

But were living under a system that acts to compound any innate idiocy as opposed to dispelling it.

It is not necessarily an inevitable written-in-stone fact of life that the bulk of people in any given situation, if provided with a free choice in the matter, will always pick the lowest, least informing/thought-provoking mind-numbing form of entertainment over any others.

It is however inevitable that once such trash begins to rise in popularity, all things being equal that rise in popularity will if left unchecked become self-perpetuating, with low-intellect and low-entertainment being caught in a positively reinforcing feedback loop.

So whilst it is true on the one hand, that the lowering standard of entertainment output in recent times has been simply due to the audience having more choice in the matter. It is also true that this lowering standard of entertainment has in turn has a detrimental effect on the audience intellect (which then in turn has a detrimental effect on their choices - thus forming the aforementioned feedback-loop).

I would disagree, quite simply because there is no reason why these people are necessarily forced in to occupying their time with the mundane. It is a self-imposed affliction.
The television has an off button, books can simply be picked up and opened at any time. The internet provides a valuable commodity for research on entertainment and access to a wide variety of more 'advanced' entertainment, or reviews of such at the very least.
They could simply go outside, talk to their friends or family, buy model kits, pick up an instrument, purchase a book or dvd - or even download them for free. They choose not to do any of these things, they choose to watch reality television, they choose not to read newspapers but choose to read tabloids. There is option, and there is choice, and they are the ones who create the market for them. If there was no willing audience, none of these things would exist.
It is hardly self-perpetuating. It does not fuel itself, it does not create a market or audience, it appeals to one. It expands not because it has the power or influence to do so, but because it feeds off the desires of the audience.
In the words of my sister:
"I have to be in the mood for something deep."

Utter bullocks, classifying things as 'deep' simply because they're not a romantic comedy or action film.

[FBM]

...Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

But were living under a system that acts to compound any innate idiocy as opposed to dispelling it.

It is not necessarily an inevitable written-in-stone fact of life that the bulk of people in any given situation, if provided with a free choice in the matter, will always pick the lowest, least informing/thought-provoking mind-numbing form of entertainment over any others.

It is however inevitable that once such trash begins to rise in popularity, all things being equal that rise in popularity will if left unchecked become self-perpetuating, with low-intellect and low-entertainment being caught in a positively reinforcing feedback loop.

So whilst it is true on the one hand, that the lowering standard of entertainment output in recent times has been simply due to the audience having more choice in the matter. It is also true that this lowering standard of entertainment has in turn has a detrimental effect on the audience intellect (which then in turn has a detrimental effect on their choices - thus forming the aforementioned feedback-loop).

I would disagree, quite simply because there is no reason why these people are necessarily forced in to occupying their time with the mundane. It is a self-imposed affliction.
The television has an off button, books can simply be picked up and opened at any time. The internet provides a valuable commodity for research on entertainment and access to a wide variety of more 'advanced' entertainment, or reviews of such at the very least.
They could simply go outside, talk to their friends or family, buy model kits, pick up an instrument, purchase a book or dvd - or even download them for free. They choose not to do any of these things, they choose to watch reality television, they choose not to read newspapers but choose to read tabloids. There is option, and there is choice, and they are the ones who create the market for them. If there was no willing audience, none of these things would exist.
It is hardly self-perpetuating. It does not fuel itself, it does not create a market or audience, it appeals to one. It expands not because it has the power or influence to do so, but because it feeds off the desires of the audience.
In the words of my sister:
"I have to be in the mood for something deep."

Utter bullocks, classifying things as 'deep' simply because they're not a romantic comedy or action film.

tl;dr

[Trolldor]

...Soap Operas are popular because people enjoy them. People don't enjoy them because they are popular.
The same with any other form of entertainment or tabloid.
It's easy to blame the world around you, not so easy to admit that humans are idiots, even the best of us.

But were living under a system that acts to compound any innate idiocy as opposed to dispelling it.

It is not necessarily an inevitable written-in-stone fact of life that the bulk of people in any given situation, if provided with a free choice in the matter, will always pick the lowest, least informing/thought-provoking mind-numbing form of entertainment over any others.

It is however inevitable that once such trash begins to rise in popularity, all things being equal that rise in popularity will if left unchecked become self-perpetuating, with low-intellect and low-entertainment being caught in a positively reinforcing feedback loop.

So whilst it is true on the one hand, that the lowering standard of entertainment output in recent times has been simply due to the audience having more choice in the matter. It is also true that this lowering standard of entertainment has in turn has a detrimental effect on the audience intellect (which then in turn has a detrimental effect on their choices - thus forming the aforementioned feedback-loop).

I would disagree, quite simply because there is no reason why these people are necessarily forced in to occupying their time with the mundane. It is a self-imposed affliction.
The television has an off button, books can simply be picked up and opened at any time. The internet provides a valuable commodity for research on entertainment and access to a wide variety of more 'advanced' entertainment, or reviews of such at the very least.
They could simply go outside, talk to their friends or family, buy model kits, pick up an instrument, purchase a book or dvd - or even download them for free. They choose not to do any of these things, they choose to watch reality television, they choose not to read newspapers but choose to read tabloids. There is option, and there is choice, and they are the ones who create the market for them. If there was no willing audience, none of these things would exist.
It is hardly self-perpetuating. It does not fuel itself, it does not create a market or audience, it appeals to one. It expands not because it has the power or influence to do so, but because it feeds off the desires of the audience.
In the words of my sister:
"I have to be in the mood for something deep."

Utter bullocks, classifying things as 'deep' simply because they're not a romantic comedy or action film.

tl;dr

Fukkin' Walled j00.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...It's true .......I'm off to play Bejewelled

I wouldn't say puzzle games of that kind are either positive or negative forms of entertainment on the "Thought Provoking Vs. Thought Eroding" axis of things. They could be said to be mentally stimulating in a sense (albeit not the sense that builds intellect), 'though some might say they're time-wasting/distracting, but that's a different (if not quite completely unrelated) issue to what was being discussed.

I certainly wouldn't be in the slightest bit tempted to add 'Tetris' to my previous list of 'Prolefeed' (soap operas, reality TV, tabloid newspapers, gossip mags, ITV, relentless ads for shiny new crap of no intrinsic value, e.t.c). Mere distraction alone is not enough to qualify - there's a more positive, pro-active form of brain-rot involved when someone (for example) reads Heat magazine.