Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LS
I think on a rational basis, most of these people don't even THINK in terms of "what will red-state American say?" They assume that if their Hollywood buddies like it, we can be made to like it. Same with newspapers.

And it has worked for several decades? Correct me if I'm wrong but seems like I've read/heard that ALL media(save radio?) are experiencing difficulties retaining an audience. That is, their market penetration has been more or less steadily declining for, say, the last ten years or so? Rumblings are already coming from the innards of "newspapers" and the networks. I haven't heard much(with the exception of Disney) from Hollywood except to say that I believe movie attendance is down dramatically from a decade ago. And STILL they continue to fling their poo at flyover country.

So bottom line, I think both the news media and Hollywood, so long as they can show ANY profit to justify that they are "doing a good job" for the stockholders, will consistently be more affected by their culture and beliefs than by their wallets.

So, WHAT have they done? Shoot for the quickest, cheapest, easiest buck by catering to the dimmest bulbs amongst us? Filth sells......to some. And it's cheap to produce? Bottom line survives. The dimwits that continue to patronize this rubbish are what keeps Hollywood in business and the sewage flowing. Can Hollywood et al survive long term with this business plan? Will the fluff become self perpetuating; that is, will the MSM be able to skew cultural values downward simply by maintaining their position? God I hope not! And I wouldn't place a bet one way or the other....given what I know of human nature.

FGS

45 posted on 10/29/2005 8:28:13 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: ForGod'sSake
1) George Gilder predicted in "Life After Television" that cable/satellite would result in better programming, with great shows directed at 1% of the audience---but a hundred of them. To an extent, he is right. My wife and I watch "Food Network," "Tradeing Spaces," as well as some things that some conservatives might find offensive, but I find remarkably well-written and thought provoking, like "The Shield" and "Nip/Tuck." I don't think anyone would argue that these, and many History Channel shows, aren't of high quality, well-written, etc.

2) Movies are different: for the last five years, there has been a growing concern about the lack of plots, and rehashing used TV shows or even computer games ("Doom," "Resident Evil," "Mortal Kombat.") Now, for 90% of the movies that's true, and I think one of the big problems is that Hollywood has completely EXCLUDED ITSELF from ANY "conservative" themes. So it is always stuck preaching to only half the choir. I have a novel/screenplay for a 9/11 movie that is very "conservative" in its themes, etc., and which (so far) NO editor has said was not well written---yet no one will touch it because of the slant/subject matter (i.e., Americans are heroes, the jihadists are evil).

There are a FEW brilliant movies out there. For ex, I just watched "11:14" which takes a body falling on a car at 11:14 and then goes backwards to tie in the lives of four or five individuals as they came to that point. There have been some others like that---Johnny Depp was in one whose title escapes me. What is generally lacking, though, is the ability to tie these sophisticated screenplays/concepts to CONSERVATIVE themes.

47 posted on 10/30/2005 5:13:21 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson