 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published
annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume Three
Spring 2004
Sly Fox : The Cultural Impact of One Network - Page 1
by Reina Singh
Television has evolved into one of the most powerful mediums of information: it is a venue that allows viewers to gain maximum exposure to popular culture, but more importantly, it also acts as a gateway into the elite echelon of the American, and foreign, intelligentsia. However, despite its ability to transcend popular and elite programming, television networks commonly choose to inundate the market with shows that amuse the audience rather than inform them. Major networks are not entirely to blame because our society has an insatiable need for outrageous television content. Viewers are often bombarded with disturbing news and therefore use fiction to whitewash the perils of reality. This sort of escapism is in accordance with the times; political awareness becomes obsolete in the face of entertainment. Viewers inadvertently allow networks to successfully broadcast marginal political coverage by accepting the proposed low standards of political sophistication. Politics do not excite the average American; low voter turnouts are one of many examples that are indicative of the general malaise Americans have towards politics. Consequently, the television news networks have creates a winning formula to promulgate the charade of political awareness in this country. Politics has evolved into a diversion tactic rather than a proprietor of realism in America. Political talk shows once held the responsibility of tackling issues within the social gamut; however, it is apparent that the media inadequately fulfills the role of social watchdog and satirist. The Fox Broadcast Network serves as an interesting example of this social quandary because it is the home of the ultra-conservative Fox News and the relentlessly satiric show The Simpsons. That a cartoon show presents a serious commentary on American life and politics and a news network generates right-wing propaganda is a sign that America’s social and political climates are drastically changing. The attenuation of serious political content in the media and the subsequent popularity of Fox News marks a new era in American culture. It is yet to be determined as to whether or not The Simpsons successfully undertakes the role of political commentator that should have been fulfilled by its network sibling, Fox News. John Fiske’s theory of cultural commodification explains how entertainment plays an integral role in Fox Network’s economic and public success.
Culturally significant institutions are typically evaluated on their relevance and value within a given society. In other words, the worth of a particular cultural institution is based on what and how much it contributes to society. The media is a very powerful and influential institution in our country because it is aligned with the ebbs and flows of popular culture; however, it is the concept of popularity that jeopardizes the integrity of the American media. The business sector and the audience serve as a duality within pop culture. The average American deems something “culturally valuable” when he or she finds a program worthwhile, entertaining, or significant. Businessman Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox, will categorize a show as popular when it generates money. Hence the concept of cultural value and economic value become intertwined. Anything that has an economic value can be categorized as a commodity. Since Fox News is in constant competition with other networks for ratings and higher revenue, it along with all broadcast media is considered to be a product. John Fiske theorizes that America’s mass culture produces cultural texts simply for the sake of maximum profit:
Mass culture produces cultural commodities, high culture produces artworks or texts. The cultural commodities of mass culture—films, TV shows, CDs, etc ¾ are produced and distributed by an industrialized system whose aim is to maximize profit for the producers and distributors by appealing to as many consumers as possible. (Fiske 55)
Fiske observes that high culture encompasses art and literature, which can be considered “high culture” because they aim to educate their audiences rather than to generate profit. Yet The Simpsons cannot be celebrated as a elite culture because its producers seek to gain profit. The show is a part of a collective identity that is in an infinite cycle of competition with other opponents. There would not be a merchandise franchise or television syndication if The Simpsons did not want to gain profit; however, it is much closer to achieving high culture status than Fox News because it does not jettison its urbane content that appeals to an erudite audience. The term “culturally significant” would be a better way of describing the cartoon. Conversely, Fox News strives to instill a false notion of political elitism within mass culture, creating a standardized and myopic vision for its audience whilst eliminating any competition that might threaten its popularity, and as a result is not culturally significant. The specificities of Fiske’s idea of “high culture” are more apparent when applied to the Fox Network. Television broadcasting is a business, and therefore its association with profit excludes all programs from high culture.
Page One - Page Two - Page Three - Page Four - Page Five - Page Six