All of these factors (or the advantages of television) aforementioned fit perfectly with the 12-hour day, minimum wage life of the working class drudge. The television comes as a welcome distraction from the monotony and hardship of everyday life – occupying the primary senses; ‘atomising’ (cutting-off) people form the real world. The cliché regarding the time before ‘the media’ is that the average family would make their own entertainment. This included reading (an independent activity or reading aloud (to the illiterates) or socialising with other people. With the dawn of mass media, particularly the television has come a change in our leisure choices and the nature of leisure activities. Television is often blamed for the breakdown of social solidarity and social participation. It has the ability to unite and divide people; united as a ‘mass audience’ yet divided physically and materialistically through the influence of advertising. People on average spend 3.5 hours less per week on socialising than watching television or listening to the radio. The time spent is even less with sport, games or hobbies.
The sense of collectivism, which appeared to have been strong during the Second World War, has diminished whilst media broadcasting has expanded. In September 1939 television broadcasting was stopped when it had only just got off the ground due to the belief that the enemy would use the signal emitted by television to home in on targets. During this time, the football game and the social gathering were very popular - this social solidarity being reflected in the countrywide street parties when peace was declared. Whether these two factors (the absence of television and the presence of collectivism simultaneously) have a correlation with each other it is not certain. However, the introduction of television in 1998 to Bhutan in the Himalayas may go some way to prove a connection. Pre-1998, television did not exist in Bhutan, the leader believing it to be the root of all evil. Most of Bhutan’s leisure time was occupied by social gatherings in the form of cultural festivals, religious ceremonies and rituals. After the establishment of the Bhutan Broadcasting Company, surveys showed that over half of parents would prefer to watch television than spend time with their children.
The rate of criminal activity increased ten-fold. Incidents of violent crimes, theft and prostitution rose in number dramatically. Those who subscribe to the hypodermic syringe theory of television would put this increased crime rate down to viewers directly emulating violent or otherwise graphically deviant images they see on television. It is more likely, however, that television brought commercialisation to Bhutan and the pressure to obtain those ‘must have’ items of the Western world possibly drove some Bhutanese to criminality. Whatever the explanation, this instance highlights the immense power and influence the television has upon society. This example cannot be seen as representative of the impact of television in the Western world during the 20th Century. In Bhutan, television was introduced suddenly to a society, which had no previous experience of television and was over seventy years behind the rest of the world in terms of media and communication. As a result the impact was extreme. In Britain and America television and broadcasting was introduced and expanded slowly, gradually creeping into the lives of the population. It has been debated upon whether or not John F Kennedy would have beat Nixon to the office of President his aesthetically pleasing appearance not been televised (hence the phrase ‘style over substance’). It was clear to most that Nixon had the better policies and arguments.
The power, influence and all-pervasive nature of the media itself could be responsible for the reduction in non-media based (or out of home) leisure activities. Positivists would have it that the media or television shapes society and its attitudes whereas Interpretivists believe society has moulded what we see in the media today. It is likely that this process is less rigid than either of these two theories and more negotiable between media producers and the consumers. Negative attitudes or a general bad political or social atmosphere will be reflected in the media. Newspapers and television producers represent selected and edited images and speech in their reporting of crime. The media have created a series of moral panics over the last century, all of which can only be described as witch hunts. During the seventies the new crime of ‘mugging’ received excessive media coverage to the extent that ‘mugging’ appeared to be rampant, a mugger round every corner. The most recent scare is over Paedophilia, a crime that most newspapers would have people believe is epidemic. The truth is that this particular crime is very rare but has been blown up out of all proportion by media coverage. This moral panic has possibly led parents to keep their children in doors more, maybe making them hesitant about letting their children take part in outdoor leisure activities. Seen in this light, their child watching the television or other home medias would be a preferable option than say, football to a parent.
Crime in general is reported in newspapers and on television much more than any other current affair as it makes for more interesting viewing or reading. More viewers means more money for media producers which leads to the fact that the television must present leisure opportunities to the masses whilst simultaneously trying to sell itself to ensure the next day’s quota of viewers.
Whilst we listen to CDs, watch television or go to the cinema we become part of a mass audience, united not thorough physical experience but ‘Cultural’ experience. Certain entertainment, once restricted to the art gallery, the opera house or the theatre can now be broadcasted in the same form to a cross-class, cross-culture audience of millions. Images and experiences that at one time were exclusive to the upper and to some extent the middle classes became more widely available to the masses through the radio and television. In the past, many of the high culture leisure activities we now take for granted such as cricket, opera, plays and art (though most of us only view these things second hand) were only accessible to those who could afford them.
Technological advances and legislative change have made these things available to all. Government policy and European directives on working hours have, over the past century, gone some way to increase the free time of the average worker. Acts such as the Minimum Wage Act have put many workers in a better financial position to be able to enjoy pastimes yet ‘minimum’ is the operative word. The masses may have the time yet statistics show they do not have the money (Enter – The television). Labour saving devices in industry have also assisted in the reduction of man hours (and also an increase in unemployment). Washing machines, tumble dryers, microwave ovens and dishwashers have eased the plight of the housewife. Industrial technological advancement have provided us with ready prepared meals as well as producing the cost of producing commodities like televisions, radios and computers. All of these factors contribute to the increase of available leisure time. Television alone could not be attributed with the improvement or even a change in leisure opportunities for the masses. Media consumption of all types would be considerably lower if the main consumer had to work longer hours for less pay.
The medias have become increasingly varied and interactive with the ability now to access different medias through one set or console. Televisions now have Internet and digital radio capabilities. It is possible to access television through a computer and films and music though the Internet. Games consoles not only play games but also CDs, DVDs and have Internet facilities. This is the age of multi-media where endless leisure opportunities can be accessed at the touch of a button or click of a mouse. It is possible that a number of varying reasons attribute to the existence of a mass media audience. People if they so wish can shop, order food, communicate with friends and family and watch movies from the comfort of their own home. The need, for many, to leave the house has lessened. Media scare tactics could well have made people wary of or think twice about leaving the house at night for example.
It is a fact that television claims the largest proportion of leisure time internationally but other sources of media must also be taken into account. Newspapers have continued to be popular, selling in there millions every day despite such new being available on the Internet. ‘The Sun’, Britain’s biggest selling newspaper sells nearly 3.5 million copies every month. Radio still has a vast share of listeners; this media however can be obtained through the television or the Internet – a method that has become increasingly popular. Marketing and promotion on television increases the popularity of other medias, including types of music and particular artists. The medias have become intertwined with one another. This is what Brian Grant refers to as ‘The Culture Industry’ or ‘The Commodification of Culture’.
The significance of television and its development during the 20th Century is unquestionable. It has created a ‘mass audience’- millions of people globally, receiving and experiencing the same images. The Globalisation and commercialisation of the world can be mostly put down to the existence of the mass communicator as a tool for marketing and propaganda. Aspects of culture which were previously unattainable or inaccessible to the ‘ordinary person’ have been made available. In this respect, television has almost certainly improved the leisure opportunities of the ordinary person.
As for the emergence of television improving leisure opportunities over the last century, it would appear that this is not the case. Television has (along with the internet etc) marginalized every other form of pastime. Superficially appearing to offer everything the consumer could want or need to have fun. Culture has been altered over the past 100 years in such a way that it is now the acme of deviance not to own or regularly watch television. It is possible that most people watch television, not solely for pleasure, but to ‘keep up’ with everyone else. In this media saturated society – conformity seems vital.
Television has most definitely changed the nature and scope of leisure opportunities for all people – but simply by narrowing the minds of most to believe that watching television and buying into what it has to offer is the answer to all life’s problems.
To access whether or not television has improved leisure opportunities, the word ‘improving’ must first be defined. If ‘improve’ is taken to mean widen and improve choice and quality of entertainment and leisure then it almost certainly has failed. This of course is subjective opinion; doubtless the millions of ‘happy’ consumers would disagree.
2371 Words
