Television not an art? No way.

In 1966, a New York Times Magazine article reported that: “TV is not an art form or a cultural channel; it is an advertising medium. It seems a bit churlish and unAmerican of people who watch television to complain that their shows are lousy. They are not supposed to be any good. They are supposed to make money.”

I disagree. Then again, I have never held a money philosophy. While it does rule the world, it is far from the root of my attraction or happiness and it rarely ever persuades me to purchase a product or sell me an idea.

I hold firm my beliefs that certain forms of media do retain a sense of art and sophistication. They also imply a great amount of culture while identifying a formulaic process.

Americans should especially expect TV shows to be “good.” They are certainly not watching for the commercials, what with today’s TIVO and DirectTV society, et cetera.

Yet that must be why this article had authority in 1966. Television was something relatively new. Today we can watch it on our cell phones.

Now there’s convergence for ya.

For a brief history of television, visit the link posted above.

PHOTO: Thanks, Google.


Leave a comment

Filed under 1966, Happiness, History of Television, New York Times Magazine, The New York Times

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s