I go on the internet daily, listen to music everyday, and watch television from time to time. I could spend hours on the internet with always finding something to do, even though if that 'something to do' is just clicking on anything and going back and forth to various sites. However I wouldn't feel devastated becaused I missed a show or couldn't use the internet for a few days. I even feel that I should put my eyes and ears to rest from all the information I need to process(I'm just a consumer and don't make any contents except for a few blog entries, so the relationship between the media and me would rather be one way). But even so I would feel left out if there is somekind of new information, such as news, a new drama series, or a new on line site. That is, I have a hard time 'ignoring' information-even though it would not effect my life in any way whether I know it or not.
I felt this strongly when I saw the 'Blue Man Group' show. In the middle of the show the three Blue Men each held a set of pannels that had something written on it. The first pannel read that we could choose only one pannel to read, and we would not be able to read all three because of the limit of time. And then, every 7 or so seconds, the Blue men turned each pannel they had. And I couldn't help myself from trying to read all three pannels even though I knew I wouldn't be able to 'process' it all. And it wasn't just me, since everyone laughed at a funny joke written on one pannel. The Blue Man Group even pointed this out, as one of the pannels read that people have an anxiety to consume all the information around them, even over the limit of conception.
Was it because I was just curious what was written on other pannels? Or was it because it was just 'there'?
The Blue Men only had three pannels, but in real life, there are millions of pannels of info. Do I choose from the flood of information, or do I try to get all the information out there, or, am I half forced to see information(with ads popping out of everywhere, ads everywhere outside, television dramas on the internet and portal sites having info about everything crammed into one page)?
I feel that with the overflow of information, the ability to find out what you need efficiently without the pain of seeing other information is truly a great one. Otherwise we would be overwhelmed by the superabundance of information, and become passive receivers or just come to totally ignore it. But ignoring the information we get through the media, though it may bring the peace of mind, is not quite pratical. Using the information can be helpful whether it's the info on the internet and ads, or the entertainment we get from television.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Capitalism and Consumerism-An inextricable relationship
To keep the economy growing, people must keep on consuming. Advertisements and other media show products that would make people 'unhappy' unless they have them. So we are living in a society of consumerism. We are buying more than we need, and we are never satisfied with what we have. We would be more happy and less broke if we 'break out' of consumerism and the standards the media has set.
But is it that simple?
Is sustaining consumerism for the growth of the economy? I would rather put it that it's to keep the economy from collapsing. The development of technology has brought an abundance of products, and the products need to be sold, in order to earn the profit a company needs to pay off the expense. If people start consuming less, sales will go down, companies would lay employees off, the layed off employees would not the money to buy products, and the situation will get worse. This is what caused the Great Depression of the 1920s.
The desire to buy, or the superabundance of products-which comes first is hard to know. However I think that the scale of the economy now relies on excessive consuming and the endless desire to have more and have better. This is where the millions of ads and media exposure comes in. Each ad may just be promoting their product, and dramas(such as Sex and the City)and reality shows(such as ProjectRunway and America's Next Top Model) may just be trying to please sponsers. But on the whole, it works as an effort to not stop the cycle of consuming and producing. Or otherwise, the whole system may crash down.
Of course I am not saying that consumerism is 'inevitable' and we should just live with it. I myself try not to buy things I really do not need. I am exposed to ads, dramas, and other media, and I have my own list of what I would like to have-but I try to think more before I consume. However, I just wanted to point out that by just changing how people consume will not solve consumerism-the structure of the economy itself may crash down even before consumerism does. Little changes made can be effective on a long run, but I think the 'producing' part may have to change. Small stores spreaded out rather than big retail stores, independent producing and catering rather than one large source of products may be an alternative.
But is it that simple?
Is sustaining consumerism for the growth of the economy? I would rather put it that it's to keep the economy from collapsing. The development of technology has brought an abundance of products, and the products need to be sold, in order to earn the profit a company needs to pay off the expense. If people start consuming less, sales will go down, companies would lay employees off, the layed off employees would not the money to buy products, and the situation will get worse. This is what caused the Great Depression of the 1920s.
The desire to buy, or the superabundance of products-which comes first is hard to know. However I think that the scale of the economy now relies on excessive consuming and the endless desire to have more and have better. This is where the millions of ads and media exposure comes in. Each ad may just be promoting their product, and dramas(such as Sex and the City)and reality shows(such as ProjectRunway and America's Next Top Model) may just be trying to please sponsers. But on the whole, it works as an effort to not stop the cycle of consuming and producing. Or otherwise, the whole system may crash down.
Of course I am not saying that consumerism is 'inevitable' and we should just live with it. I myself try not to buy things I really do not need. I am exposed to ads, dramas, and other media, and I have my own list of what I would like to have-but I try to think more before I consume. However, I just wanted to point out that by just changing how people consume will not solve consumerism-the structure of the economy itself may crash down even before consumerism does. Little changes made can be effective on a long run, but I think the 'producing' part may have to change. Small stores spreaded out rather than big retail stores, independent producing and catering rather than one large source of products may be an alternative.
Technology-a possibility ?
Even though I have my own MP3 player, cell, and laptop, I tend to perceive technology in a negative way. Technology seems to alienate people when I see half of the people in the subway(back in Korea actually)absent mindedly watching something on their phone or PDP player(something like an iphone). People don't seem to talk to each other, and turning on their high tech gear has become a habit and some kind of ritual. Turning on the television, going on the internet seems to the same-how many people actually use technology just as much as they need? How many people are actually in control of the technology surrouding them? I think not many. Many people have come to rely on technology for spending their free time. People experience music, film, sports and maybe human relationship through technology. Wii sports, Wii fit might provide something similar to the 'real thing', but it's definitely not the same with playing sports outside with your friends or family.
Some people even say that it's lame to go to the movies and pay 7-10 dollars when you can download it onto your gadgets for less money. But when did people just catch a movie just to see the movie, and (absolutely) nothing else? Hanging out with people, getting something to eat, or going somewhere else in the end out of impulse is all a part of human experience technology can't do for you.
However, while there are some points that technology seems to ruin the human experience, there are some ideas interacted with technology that seem to enhance it. Recently while surfing around the internet, I saw a video about a 'phonebook', which uses the iphone to make picture books more interactive. Children can play with the moving characters, or move the book around and the video on the iphone will play suit. This kind of technology would be something that helps children experience more than they can when just reading a plain book. Technology not made just for convenience but for interactiveness will have a greater possibility in making our lives better.
iphone phonebook video
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)