Vl eW g g l n t s

S o c i a l C o n t r o l a n d t h e T u b e
ByBernard Sande rs
T
he function and impact of
television o n o u r society
cannot be adaquately discussed
in a few pages. All that this
article can do is to raise a few
basic points and, perhaps,
stimulate discussion on a
subject which has not received
the critical examination it
deserves.
There are several. major
functions of commercial
television, as it presently
operares. First, it is supposed to
make as much money as
possible for the owners of the
industry and for the companies
who advertise. Second, like
heroin and alcohol, television
serves the function of an
escapist mechanism which
allows people to "space our"
and avoid the pain and conflict
of their lives-and rhe causes of
rhose problems. Third,
relevision is the major vehicle by
which the owners of this sociery
propogare their political points
of view (including lies and
distortions) rhrough the
" n ews ,"
The major networks are owned
and controlled by some of the
most powerful institutions in
this COUntry. In 1974, the U.S.
Senate Committee on
Government Operari ons
reponed that the Chase
Manhattan Bank was rhe largesr
stockholder in CBS and NBC
and the third largest at ABC,
behind Bankers Trust and Bank
of New York.
The television industry earns
huge sums of money because it
can demand, and receive,
e x t r a o r d i n a r y r a t e s f o r
advenising time. The
companies pay the price because
television is (to say the least)
extremely effective in selling
products- be they underarm
spray deodorants, automobiles,
beer, cat food, politicians, or
whatever. Using the well-rested
Hitlerian principle that people
shou Id be treated as morons and
bombarded over and over again
with the same simple phrases
and ideas, the asrure minds on
Madison Avenue are capable of
convening millions of TV
viewers to one or another
produce in a matter of months.
W
hat is the relationship
between the kinds of
programming that appear on
commercial TV. the advenising
that appears on TV, and the
goals of the people who own the
networks? Is it possible, assome
people believe, thar commercial
relevision can be significantly
improved withour
fund amen rally changing rhe
ownership and control of the
networks-for example, by
taking rhem our of the hands of
rhe banks and gianc
corporations who' presently
control them?
Could AJ po Dog Food, Close-
Up Toothpaste, Ford Moror
Company, or Coca-Cola present
programming which attempted
ro allow Americans to
undersrand the world that they
are living in, and provide ideas
as ro how that world could be
significantly improved?
Like !Dany other aspects of
capitalisr SOCI~ty, there is a
fundamental contradiction in
the television indusrry. The'
owners of the television
industry, very consciously, do
not want to use that potentially
extraordinary medium (Q
educate people, to uplifr
people, or to improve the
qualiry of life in our society. To
do so would be ro act againsr
theis own best interests.
Whar rhe owners of the TV
industry want to do, and are
doing, in my opinion, is use
that medium to intentionally
brainwash people Into
submission and helplessness.
With considerable forethought
they are attempting to create a
nation of morons who will
faithfully go out and buy this or
that product, vote for this or
that candidate, and faithfully
work for their employers for as
Iowa wage aspossible.
A recent srudy has indicared
that the Scholastic Aptirude
Tesr resulrs of high school
students has declined
precipitously over the last
decade. Teachers throughour
the country complain that many
of their students ate unable to
read or concentrate for any
length of time on a concepr.
There is almost no American
politician alive who would dare
give a 30 minute speech on TV
for fear of "boring" hisl !J er
audience, and the 30 second
"spot" is rhe major means by
which candidates convey' their
weighry political analyses of rhe
world situation to the voters. (In
fact, some TV stations will not
sell a political candidate more
rhan a60 second block of tirne.)
N
Ottoo surprisingly - given
the narure of the medical
and psychiatric establishments
- very little attention has been
given ro the pscy hological
damage that constant
advertising interruptions have
on the capaciry of a human
being to chink. If one is
watching an hour-long
program, of whatever kind, and
one's thought pattern is
interrupted 20 or 30 times
within that hour by totally
separate concepts such as
talking cats, feeling free with
Coke and Pepsi, improving your
sex life with Close-Up
Toothpaste, gerting relief from
hemorrhoids: donating money
to wipe out cancer, doing away
with bodily odors, getting
whiter washes .. etc. etc etc -
whar happens to rhe abiliry of
rhe mind to think, to
concentrate, to analyze?
Could one conceive of a serious
program - something which
reflects real life and is produced
in order to have an impact on
people - being interrupted
every seven minutes by moronic
commercials? Obviously not.
People would be rotally
incensed, just as they would be
i f they were involved in a serious
conve rsanon which was
consrantly inrerrupred by
'extraneous nOise.
If rhe relevision indusrry
encouraged inrellecrual growth,
1
u
Bernard SandeN
honesry, and the pursuit of
truth, it would put most major
corporations out of business,
Most advertising consises of lies
designed to sell products which
are either idential to the
competition. totally useless.
grossly overpriced, or dangerous
to the human healrh or the
environment. The last thing
thar the owner of the TV
industry would want is for
people ro know the truth about
the products sold on the air.
"Good evening. I hope that
you will buy Coca-Cola.
Although we sell IIbot/Ie for 50
cents it only costs us 5 or 6 cents
to manufacture. In IIddition,
Coke is guarllnteed to rot your
teeth, find upset your stomach.
In IIIrgeIImounts the high sugllr
content can affect yOUIe brain
functioning.
,'Good evening. We hope thllt
you will buy Xautomob,le. We
sell it for ten times as much as it
costs to produce and, in
addition, have built it so thllt tl
will break down in a few year:
time so thllt you'll need another
one real soon. Furthermore, we
have converted the men who
buill the car tnto auembly I,ne
machines, and have senoYsly
polluted the city ,n which it is
manufactured.
We hllve also created a
situation in which incredible
amounts of energy are
consumed in one of the lellst
efficient forms of transportation
imaginable.
Rush out and buy X
automobile. Don't wait another
day. "
T
he potential of television.
democratically owned and
controlled by the people, is
literally beyond comprehension
because it is such a relatively
new mediu m and we have no
experience with it under
democratic control. At the least.
with the present state of
technology,' we could have a
choice of dozens of channels of
commercial- freeT V. ....
At the moment serious writers
are, by and large, not allowed ro
write for commercial television
for fear they mighr produce
something that is rrue and
hence. upsetting to the owners
of rhe media. Under democratic
control people with all kinds of
views could make their
presenrauons. and serious anises
would be encouraged to
produce work for the tube.
There is no question that
television has ali enormous
impact upon our society, and
that the controllers of that
medium have far more power
than almost any politician. For
those of us who are concerned
about living in ademocratic and
healrhy sociery, it is necessary ro
address the concrol of relevision
as a political issue. and organize
towin.
THE VERMONT VANGUARD PRESS II