Silly Girls In Dresses

So, ever since getting hired by (music venue which will remain anonymous) to try and make it cooler, I’ve tried revamping my own awesome-ness as well as the venue’s. Cause, y’know, I’ve got to be the image to sell the image. (I’m being slightly sarcastic if you can’t tell).One thing I’ve tried to do to make myself “hipper” and “indie-er” is read blogs (and start one, I suppose). Blogs are the new cool thing: they get you little known info faster than ever, and they deliver you pre-packaged, trendy opinions along with all the valuable info. So, in the blink of an eye, you can know what’s going on and have an opinion about it as well.Clearly, all your (their) opinions about the subtle trends in hipster world don’t mean anything unless you talk about it with other people and verify that you have the same opinion they do. This has led to a complete transformation in the way I communicate with some of my friends. I thought that instant message had de-humanized most of my relationships, but now I realize it can get so much worse. Blogs have de-humanized my instant messages (dehumanized my IMs? Wha?!) Here’s a typical conversation:

me (12:58am): yo, http://jezebel.com/gossip/live-nude-rape%21/big-brother-africas-resident-rapist-still-the-favorite-to-win-the-100-grand-318435.php
my friend(1:02am): yea well no wonder cause http://jezebel.com/gossip/i-work-retail/working-at-american-apparel-is-all-its-coked-up-to-be-316322.php
me (1:07am): well, its cause men are all http://board.crewcial.org/topic/221507/&r =149 and don’t get that http://futuryst.blogspot.com/2006/10/if-women-ruled-world.html and just think about getting laid.
my friend(1:10am): yea. But I still want http://mustreadfiles.blogspot.com/2007/
11/10-ways-to-build-a-good-relationship.html.
me (1:13am): yea. Feminism sucks. Lets get some www.benandjerrys.com.

It’s not only me, and it’s not only blogs. The New York Times says it all: if you’re not speaking some form abbreviated form of language by now, U R 2 Old (JK).

 

I’m starting to think the “Information Age” is a very ironic name for the current time period. Everyone touts the 20th and 21st centuries as being the easiest time in history to access information because of the abundance of new technology, but has anyone thought of why it is that in this amazing Age of Information, “the dumbing down of America” is occurring? The US is ranked #2 by The Economist in “e-readiness” (aka how easy it is to conduct business electronically), and is home for major online businesses (Yahoo, Google, eBay, etc). Yet it continues to lose ground in education rankings (CBS, “US Education Slips in Rankings” Oct. 29th, 2007). In 2003, the US ranked #9 in adult literacy, #12 in student reading ability, #24 in mathematical ability and #26 in problem-solving ability, according to the OECD PISA. Most surprisingly, the US came in at #32 in the Journalistic Free Press Index, (Reporters Without Borders, 2005): our media, the very thing that gives us information, is floundering when compared to other countries! This suggests we might want to look into the correlation between technology and information. At the very least, we must ask ourselves what it means to be informed.

When my parents were children, they had 3 channels on TV and one newspaper. During my childhood, I had over 100 channels, and could access any newspaper in the world from the internet. Yet, it seems like people are less and less informed about their world from one generation to the next. When access to information was limited, only the most important programs and the best entertainment was given a forum. So, people only really had access to the news and to innovative entertainment programs (“I Love Lucy” was pretty damn innovative, and I don’t care what you think!) Competition for the airwaves or space in print media was so fierce, that only the best won out. Now, anyone Tom, Dick or Harry can gain access to a wide audience. There is no more competition because there is no more lack of access. In one sense this is great; in another, it is terrible.

People are spending more time reading Perez Hilton than the New York Times. Bands that should never, ever be allowed to play instruments because they are so blatantly bad are booking nationwide tours based on the credibility they’ve gain from the amount of myspace friends they have. Youtube videos about dogs that can rollerskate frequently appear on CNN and FOX news. What is going on?!

Interestingly enough, the people I know with less access to technology are the ones who are more intelligent. My friends that grew up without cable TV watched PBS and the news instead of TGIFridays and MTV. Those who listen to National Public Radio are more interesting to talk to than those who listen to Q102. My friends who live in apartments with crappy internet connections read more books and study more for school. In this information age, it seems you are more informed if you have less technology.

This is why, when I read today in the New York Times that the FCC “is preparing to strike down thousands of contracts this week that gave individual cable companies exclusive rights to provide service to an apartment building” (Stephen Labaton, “F.C.C. Set to End Sole Cable Deals for Apartments” NYTimes, Oct. 28th, 2007), I had mixed feelings. The F.C.C felt that eliminating these contracts would increase competition and therefore lower cable prices by 30%. They thought this would help low-income families get cable television. I think it’s all well and good that they are trying to help low-income families. Putting socio-economic status aside, however, I don’t really think it is in the best interest of America to bring cable television to more people. That means more MTV more VH1, more distraction from…well….information!

I do admit that non-cable channels have crappy shows as well (all those gross sitcoms that I don’t even know the name of) and that cable not only offers 24/7 news channels, but informative channels like Bravo and the Discovery Channel, but I don’t think you can blame me for being a little gun-shy when it comes to giving Americans more options. When we’ve had more options we’ve inevitably chosen the worst. Starbucks gave us more coffee options: now we have people regularly scarfing down 400-calorie triple-mocha-skim-chai-double-iced-lattes. We can get any kind of fruit or vegetable year-round, but they are all filled with chemicals. Kids today can be anything they want when they grow up, but faced with the bazillion different options they wander aimlessly and unhappily until their thirties (David Brooks, “The Odyssey Years”, NYTimes Oct. 9th, 2007). Choice is killing our society.

The information age is not just causing political ignorance but artistic ignorance as well. Sean Agnew, founder of R5 Entertainment, posted a thread in BCO (http://board.crewcial.org/topic/225402/&r=50) talking about the current depression in the touring industry. Bands will pull in one thousand people at a venue on month, and two hundred the next month. There is no stability. Why? The abundance of choice and information about new music contributes to a “flash in the pan” culture. Average musicians can gain some notoriety for about 15 minutes, but because they were never really talented to begin with, they fade away. There is so much information being thrown around in blogs, social networking sites, and web media outlets, that people’s senses are overloaded and they can’t recognize true talent anymore. There is so much shit out there exposed for the world to see and easy to access, that when something mediocre comes along, it seems brilliant compared to the rest of the stuff we’ve been bombarded with. Let’s be serious: do we really think Amy Winehouse is a great musical innovator? NO! She’s a skinny crack-head with a hot voice. Unlike Sting, The Rolling Stones or Bruce Springsteen, will never sellout stadiums when she’s 50 years old because, y’know, she’s really good but she’s nothing to write home about. Will anyone be singing an Artic Monkey’s song in 30 years? I can’t even remember how their last single goes.

This is not just happening in music. It’s happening in all forms of art and entertainment. J.K. Rowling is no Virginia Woolf. The Simple Life is just not as good as M.A.S.H. Was Titanic, the top grossing movie of all time  (according to the USA Box Office) really as good as Casablanca? Let’s get real.
Perhaps I’m utterly Hobbesian but I don’t really trust the masses to make the most intellectual decisions in the face of all these choices, choices, choices. I also don’t really trust government or industry enough to want them to regulate our programming and feed us a healthy diet of information – they obviously won’t. In fact, they’ve already taken over everything and are merely feeding us the illusion of choice in some arenas. Awesome.

So, let the F.C.C. get rid of building-wide cable contracts. We’re screwed anyway.