|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
In doing research on the entertainment industry, I was frightened by my findings. It seems the industry clearly celebrates and glorifies bad behavior.
Kim Kardashian (Got famous from releasing sex tape)
Jersey Shore crew (got famous from bad behavior)
Paris Hilton (sex tape, drug busts, partying lifestyle)
Charlie Sheen (glorified for his no-limits, no excuses lifestyle)
Lindsey Lohan(drugs, arrests)
Charlie Harper from "Two and a Half Men" gets the girls, laughs and is viewed as the cool brother while Alan the father is viewed as the loser.
Barney from "How I Meet Your Mother" - celebrated for being a playboy.
Sam Malone from "Cheers" - his womanizing was celebrated.
Plus, the language during prime time is now surprising vulgar. It seems we are headed down a slippery slope.
Extreme Violence, Bad Behavior, Sexual Situations
Increased use and access of online pornography
Should we consider all of this "progress"?
Sex sell and anything "bad" is always interesting to many other people.
Again, it sells. No slippery slope involved. Everything is a choice.
Really? Would you prefer these people actually act out the extreme violence in public or on the general public?
So what, it's not actually harmful to watch.
Progress? It's not a word I would use. To use this word is actually foolish and distorts things.
What you have there is not "research." That is what's called "selective gathering." Which is fine, but when you call something like that research, you make it sound like you've got something that renders your opinion something than just an opinion.
Here's my opinion, since that's all this thread is: Human nature hasn't changed in 100,000 years.
A bunch of people terrified of their own bodies, shielding themselves with bronze age mythology isn't going to change the bad parts of human nature any more than a T.V. show showing some moron acting on his/her every sexual whim will increase them.
Good point yet isn't research information gathering and taking a fair sample of information to draw a hypothesis. Take a lousy athlete or actor yet if they are a badboy they sell magazines, etc. hence higher earnings
A fair sample, yes. The sample you have included is not what I would call fair. What I see in your argument is that you had an opinion and went and found examples to support it.
I could do the same for any other argument: Society is embracing marriage and traditional family values, as evidenced by the recent royal wedding and the weddings of celebrities X, Y and Z.
Take a good athlete or actor and "they" sell magazines, etc. hence higher earnings too.
Societal values are inextricably tied to human nature. Were there no human nature, there would be no societal values. To say otherwise would be like saying, "This garden isn't about root systems, it's about blossoms."
That said, regarding the tangents of pornography and dumbing down of society, that's all human nature too. Dumb people have always been dumb and unmotivated. Having stuff for them to stare at on TV gives them something to do. What really dumbs down a society is Utopian idealism that doesn't hold anyone accountable for laziness and sloth in school, and that blames teachers rather than worthless parents. It's not what's on TV, it's who is making babies and expecting "the village" to raise the kid they made. And pornography is just prostitution in a modern nuance. Charlie Sheen and Paris Hilton had no impact on that; it's been going on since the first female ape got it on with the first male monkey that stood guard over a banana tree.
The thread is about societal values not human nature. and morals come from many places, not just religion. I consider that there are ample ethical reasons why pornography devalues society, and how dumbing down overwhelmingly large sections of mass entertainment reduces the ability of society to reason.
Charlie is seen as cool because he makes the money. Alan is a loser because he and his kid have had to shack up with his brother for what, a decade now? He gets pushed around by his brother, his ex-wife, his kid, and even his brother's maid. That show is awful but just because Charlie is morally corrupt doesn't mean his brother shouldn't be viewed as a loser. I can't think of a TV character I've found more annoying than Alan, and that includes Steve Urkel and Kimmy Gibbler from the old TGIF days and even cousin Oliver on The Brady Bunch.
It has been going on for decades.
And yes the Liberals, Socialist Democrats, and Progressives, refer to it as "Progress".
I refer to it as another piece of the agenda. You control the Entertainment and Media and you control a lot of power to influence thought and acceptance... etc.
I look at the children of today with tattoos, piercings in various areas, pants sagging with underwear showing, the use of profanity, teen pregancy, rise in single parent homes and then think of the 50s, seems like so long ago.
I agree... America was not perfect back then... but we had no need to throw it all away, the good with the bad.
We have taken all things to extremes today, in the name of PC and acceptance of others, and the suppopssed guilt we should all have for the ills of the past.
I tire of the move to moral equivalence and PC... it has destroyed what good we had and were once.
I imagine many will yell about this comment... but... too bad.
Most of what you list is nothing more than style, and style changes all the time.
While I might find a piece of cotton (perhaps a bra strap) on someone disgusting it is simply style, not lack of morals. Ditto for tattoos, piercings, hair dye in garish colors and so many of the other adornments we "beautify" our bodies with. They are not a matter of degraded morality any more than modern swimsuits compared to those of 100 years ago are.
Profanity is language; should you be offended by particular words consider the source and ignore them. Sometimes it is used for shock value but more often it is simply a matter of language, expressing oneself in the only words we have.
Teen pregnancy is on the way down - education and availability of birth control have helped considerably. Yes, we could once more take away these "immoral" things and live with a quick rise in pregnancies but I would prefer not to.
Single parent families are indeed on the rise and I find that truly unfortunate. The problem isn't lack of morals as such, however, it derives from a lack of integrity and a refusal to put effort into our relationships.
I would also think that our parents (I'm from the 50's) had the same complaints about us as did our grandparents about our parents. It never changes; the new generation is not the same and the world changes, but that doesn't mean it is immoral.
Our ancestors not so many years ago did things that I would find to be extremely unethical and immoral. Things that make the "morality" of an exposed piece of cotton into nothing more than a silly complaint that never should have been voiced. We've actually come a long way in a short time.
The entertainment industry is no threat to family values whatsoever, unless that particular family chooses to allow it or is complacent in preventing it. These media figures are symbols or reflections of a physically obsessed world. As a parent or parental custodian, one has the ability and authority to influence the child one is parenting. The child will naturally draw his/her own concusions throughout their lives, but the parent if successful will have the kind of positive influence that the child will not search for role models in an imaginary world. If a child has a real role model (or godforbid 2 or 3 or 4)in his/her everyday life in the real world, the child will grow up looking for truth and wisdom in the real world and not through fiction or media sensationalism.
The "idyllic" 50's is the illusion of appearance. The need to appear to constantly embrace such morals and values was paramount, yet, we also dealt with the cold war, McCarthy fear-mongering, rising drug abuse and alcoholism, illicit affairs, teen pregnancy and much more. They were just covered and concealed a lot better then than now.
You can put blame on anything and anyone and become a victim and say it isn't your fault, it's someone else's. But the truth is, we are responsible for our own actions, attitudes and behaviors, no one else. No one "made" us do anything, in reality. So it just doesn't add up to but blame on someone/something else. Take responsibility for your own life and stop blaming everyone else.
It sure isn't a threat to my family values. Things like:
Understanding the difference between fiction and reality
Tolerating human diversity and open discourse
Taking responsibility for you own viewing habits and those of the children in the house
Considering nudity not sinful, and sex suitable for adults only but also not sinful
Cultures and societies are complex things - the information revolution that is happening now - with pretty much everyone having access to most knowledge - can only be controlled by dividing people from each other further and devaluing those things that hold societies together. This is done by disinformation, divisive actions and manufactured outside threats such as terrorism.
We are all sheeple with nowhere to go - fed on lies and deceipt and grazed by corporations and their corporate governments.
The answer is so simple it is laughable but any dozen people here will come up with a dozen different reasons why it is complicated and cannot be done etc. which is how the control works.
Kim Kardashian (Got famous from reality TV based on being rich and pretty, became famous and had a sex tape released)
Jersey Shore crew (got famous from behavior considered normal in their sub-culture, considered a bit of a joke)
Paris Hilton (got famous by being rich and pretty)
Charlie Sheen (got famous by being handsome and an adequate actor, went off the deep end, lost his job and is considered a joke and clearly a bit insane.)
Lindsey Lohan(Got famous by being rich and pretty, became famous and did drugs)
This isn't really new, we just get 24 news coverage of it. People have got famous by being rich and pretty since Ug the Cavegirl. Being famous has gone to peoples's head since Ug the Cavegirl went to rehab. No one forces anyone watch TV and read trshy mags, or care about what they see there.
People earn money from the entertainment industry by being entertaining. Wealth, riches, beauty and bad behavior are one class of activities people find innately entertaining.
But you can watch other channels and by other magazines with other material in theme. If there is no demand for it, it will stop being peddled.
Whereas I make some of my income from writing porn, like porn and watch porn in the privacy of my own home (and absence of underage persons).
Society currently allows us to choose entertainment that fits our personal and household values. Porn is not contrary to my values and I am allowed to have access to it.
You, likewise, are allowed to not have contact with it and V-chips and net nannies can help prevent accidental encounters.
the reality is a alot of kids come from broken homes with absentee parents. We all know all the safeguards in the world does not make a difference in these situations. In addition, there is unquestionably some sick people in society who have a switch "clicked" when exposed to certain things (Columbine for instance). I just don't see us better off now than 50 years ago.
We have to take ownership that there are some weak people out there and access to porn, drugs, violent content creates animals. Also, I think we make certain things the norm, it changes our society.
Thanks for your feedback. I hope you can appreciate some healthy respectful debate - no flame throwing on my end.
There are weak people, but there is a balance. So far the amount of harm done versus the exposure and amount of good done has lead us to allow everyone to have high fat foods(which torture and kill more people than porn ever will IMHO), everyone adult to have porn, and everyone adult and sane to have a gun (not so keen on that one, but hey--some people like guns). There are also obscenity laws, speed limits, licenses etc to put some outer limits on things.
I, personally, think the balance is about right.
And you would need to take my porn from my cold dead hands.
I know a lot of friends of my Mum thought I was a delinquent because I was a goth chick who liked violent computer and horror novels. I always had good grades, never had trouble with the law, got a PhD in psychology and have always been gainfully employed in a productive trade. Some of their Ken/Barbie kids... not so much.
People who think that there being a being counter-culture, market for celebrity news or sex/gay/porn-products is destroying society have, in my opinion, made a few false assumptions about what a healthy society really is.
I mean, you wouldn't catch me going to a church but I totally defend the right to have them on the main street, advertising on TV and having their own shows. If that's what makes some people happy and productive, more power to them. I can always change the channel. I don't hold it against church that some weak minded people get addicted to religion and use it as an excuse to commit abuse and murder.
Entertainment is one of the things that is supposed to change societal norms. All form of art (T.V. grudgingly included)is historically created by those who see the world slightly differently than normal. That's what makes it interesting. A painting by someone who saw the subject the same as everyone else would be pointless.
Right now, society has no real unifying set of beliefs, so the effect of art is magnified. It's not much different than periods like the Renascence. Until society stabilizes, we will not fully understand the negative and positive effects of this time period... but those will be largely subjective anyway.
I like to think that when we stabilize, it will be on a global level. I'm an idealist like that though.
Um, Sheen himself is seen as uncool because he lost his mind in a broadcast interview and flipped out so badly they took his kids away.
Entertainment today is just hype and glorified publicity for its own sake. I do not watch television because most of the shows are totally insipid and immature. Entertainment today does not threaten family values but the values of intelligent, thinking, and mature people. The majority of the television shows today exhibit a preadolescent mentality. If you wish to watch shows with integrity, try the PBS stations in your area. PBS have great shows and documentaries which appeal to your values and mind.
I think parents need to get their kids to be over a certain age before they're exposed to too much of that stuff (from outside and from the entertainment world). Parents have a whole lot of influence over younger kids, and if they get to be a certain age and have a "good head" they aren't impressed by that stuff.
It takes paying attention from the time they're little. It takes finding ways to encourage them to be involved in play and/or other activities (outside entertainment). Preschoolers and the youngest grade school shouldn't be exposed to that stuff at all. Older grade school kids have homework, after school activities, and friends (and parents need to pay attention to who's in what house and what is allowed in that house. (I don't think a little exposure at a friend's house is going to do anything, but if the friend's parents see no problem with a couple of thirteen-year-olds spending their time involved in some of "that stuff", then that's not the house your kid should be spending his time at.)
Kids with low self-self esteem are far more likely to be influences by "unappealing" stuff than kids with high self esteem. Addressing self-esteem issues and getting to the root of them, as well as (sometimes) supervising an easily impressed kid a little more are things parents can do.
So, no. I don't see the entertainment stuff as the main problem. I see kids' peers, some messages schools send, and even other parents who worry so much that they're kids (or they) won't be "cool" they won't set the kind of boundaries that kids under about 15 need based on their developmental stage. A lot of parents don't know enough to set boundaries/limits early enough. No young kid needs to be watching the Kardashians or playing SOME video games. A lot of kids are more impressed by their older siblings' behavior and want to be like them; so I think if a seventeen-year-old sibling watches the Kardhashians it ought to be watched away from where younger siblings will join in. Too many parents won't say, "You can have that 'whatever' when you're her age too, but for now you're still too young. You have your own things to play and do."
As for that seventeen-year-old who watches that stuff, at that age he's either already a solid kid or else he's already "Kardashian Material" himself. If he's "Kardashian Material" I don't think the fault is anyone's but his own parents'. (The poor Kardashians! I've never even seen their show(s), but I have a rough idea... It's pretty unfair of me to use them as this particular example, though. )
The entertainment industry created to major obstacles for me:
1. The role models created by this industry is not the kinds of people we want our children to be when they grow up.
2. Children learn by example, so the parenting role has just increased 100 folded. Our children will be looking at these role models and we as parents will have to play an active role in explaining why they should not be considered role models.
The media focuses on a lot of the possitves and negatives. Highlight some of the negatives to your children as well. Lyndsay dying at age of 37 - is this good?
I have read a bunch of posts on this thread, but not all. So, I am not responding to any one person, just the thread in general.
ThaiValentine did do research, and the fact that she found so much degradation in the media is that is is so high statistically. In general, turning off the tv and media in favor of interaction with others....following our passions (like taking a cooking class or becoming involved with a community theater group)...is better for us, as relatively intelligent life-forms.
Television and the Computer do have an effect on our nervous system...on a variety of levels, so the best way to influence our children's "morality" is to be good examples ourselves....and do things with our children. It may take more energy...but my daughter is a great influence on me - because of her, I spend more time outside, exercising and interacting. We don't watch television in our house. Last year, while she attended Kindergarten, we also didn't. We played, visited the library, attended dance classes, and talked as a family around our dinner table...or ate dinner with our cohousing community.
In terms of influence....the television does more good to marketers and sellers...never to the general public...it's a big "advertisement machine" that tries to get people to "buy, buy, buy," whether it be a product, a lifestyle...or others. As a family, we watch movies, selectively, but not tv.
The way we exercise restraint and good judgment, and pass them on to our children, is to surround ourselves with those who do the same...people we admire because they are honest, grounded people. They may not be what "popular culture" says is cool...they may even sport tattoos and/or are "bookworms," but they have a solid sense of integrity that we hold a high value to. We are who we surround ourselves with....it is possible to live a solid, grounded, sensible lifestyle in the 21st century...but we need to be thoughtful about it. Even the people we most admire may not have opinions we agree with. We can still admire them and be their friends, but we need not mold ourselves into their likeness...we can be ourselves (which is why they like us, hopefully).
It's funny, my mother thinks my daughter had more friends when she was "in school." My daughter thinks she has more friends now that we are home-schooling. I know that home-schooling is not a viable choice for many families...both spouses need to work...and I have work I do at home, too...but we need to test out others' perceptions instead of taking everything we see and hear at face value...thinking for ourselves is what may help future generations out of the cycle of violence and substance abuse (referring to popular culture, not the general public or anyone on HP)
So ***five stars for the "thoughtfulness" camp.
In the past movies were very sexual and the ratings were lower than it is now. In the past it was easier to steal pornography and sneak into places you shouldn't be. Video games couldn't really be violent because video games were just starting to appear and be created. The internet is starting to get better, but you have to also teach children how to use it properly, or put those parental locks on it.
The people you mentioned to be honest I don't follow the media and I didn't know how many of those people got to be where they are by what they did. Like the sex tapes and what not. The only reason why the media also puts stuff like that out there is because it makes for good stories like murders, rapes, and kidnapping.
All of this plays into the fact that people have to teach their children to do this and not that, and the parents have to be good examples as well for their children. If you make a big deal out of something then they will think it's a big deal and look into it more.
by William R. Wilson7 years ago
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor … =126653602Turns out the states that vote Republican have higher rates of divorce and teen pregnancy. They also consume more porn, according to another study. ...
by Josak4 years ago
I often see these hubs they have variation but the thrust is the same, if we get rid of religion society will collapse and morality will disappear, let's analyze that. Crime rates are higher in US states with highest...
by seyiari8 years ago
i will really like to know your own opinion about gay marriage . are you in support of it or not?
by Susan Reid5 years ago
If you are a pro-life Tea Party Republican like Scott DeJarlais,your family values include having not one, but 4 documents extramarital affairs.At least one of them with a patient (isn't there doctor/patient relations...
by India Arnold6 years ago
Why are equal rights the cause of eroding family values in the western world?
by TammyHammett7 years ago
My middle child, currantly 6 years old, has an explosive personality. By this, I mean, at any given time over any given matter, she will explode. She beocmes belligerent, mouthy, yell hurtful phrases, such as "I...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.