On television: Pierre Bourdieu

1
Attack to French journalists and cartoonists – discussion

Hinder – obstruct
hackneyed positions – overfamiliar throught the overuse

2 – world ruled by being fear of being boring and anxiety and being amused at all cost

3- entertainment instead of depth-discussions shallowness

4 – political debate – discusion of ideas or defense and accusations?

5- politicians adopt the philosophy of doubt – such rivalries of parties.

Brazilians TV presenters salaries

http://diversao.terra.com.br/tv/faustao-ganha-r-5-milhoes-por-mes-veja-salarios-da-
tv,ad2997f6e1987410VgnVCM10000098cceb0aRCRD.html

6 – TV and the mechanisms of depolitization

7 – TV raises the panic and the endless parades around the world (Brazil)

8 - the journalistic evocation of the world does not serve to mobilize or politicize; on the contrary, it only
increases xenophobic fears, just as the delusion that crime and violence are always and everywhere on the
rise feeds anxieties and phobias about safety in the streets and at home.

9 - Anyone who thinks otherwise has simply surrendered to a populist version of one of the most perverse
forms of academic pedantry.

O the prologue the author reminds how the means of communication impose ideologies specially
political.
The fear of population of the boredom takes the media to avoid programs that allow
reflection and the rise of a critical sense, exploring the entertainment above all things. That is one
the reason of the tv presenters are so well paid: the power to keep people entertained.

11 – debates on USA nobody must to talk more than 7 sec

13
Talk about tv cannot be on tv
The freedom on tv is under certain conditions
Why do people accept these conditions?

To be is to be perceived. - Media exposition, one of the reasons to accept the limitations imposed by
to communicate things. Narcisistic necessity of seen themselves.
Journalists are also pushed to communicate things and to push people to say the things according to
higher orders.
Considering the tv range, is it possible to be understood by everybody? Is it worth?

Should we just steer out of tv and join the artists, writers and top intellectuals? Can we do this?

15
open access to TV is compensated (offset) by a powerfull censorship
Economic censorship – advertisers

Political control of what is said on tv driving to the political conformity. Economic censorship.
Companies pay for the ads and government give subsidies.
Tv has an important role – keeping the symbolic order.

17
The people who manipulates are also manipulated

They manipulate even more effectivelly the more they are themselves manipulated and the more
unconscious they are of this.

Highly paid tv producers. Personal corruption only masks structural corruption.

Tv through its ways wield with symbolic violence.
Symbolic violence is violence wielded with tacit complicity between its victims and its agents,
insofar as both remain unconscious of submitting to or wielding it. Sensational news.
18
time on tv is precious- if you say banal things on tv they become important.

Tv has a monopoly on that people think considering it is the main source of information.

Stopped on p. 18.

what we see on TV is through the journalists eyeglasses - and what they consider exceptional

21 - How can we make the ordinary extraordinary and evoke ordinariness in such a way that people will see
just how extraordinary it is?

Reality effect

22 - ultimately television, which claims to record reality, creates it instead.

23- homogeneization of opinion for different and competitor newspapers

25 – censorship – big names that sell

IDEOLOGY – Van Dijk

p. VII Ideology – Cognition, Society and Discourse