The thing that interests me most about television is its relationship to reality. In the video, “Tuning into media: Literacy for the Information Age,” they discuss the blurring of lines between reality and the fictional TV world. They used Doogie Howser as an example of this, taking a real life event and having the fictional characters experience and react to this event that did actually take place in reality. This got me thinking about reality TV. Now we actually have shows such as Keeping up with the Kardashians, Love Island, Jersey Shore, Cheer, etc. Which claim to be reality. This takes blurring the lines of TV and reality to a whole new level. 

Reality TV is no less based in reality than that Doogie Howser episode was. Taking inspiration at most form reality yet crafting it in a way to make it most appealing to mass audiences. Things have to be interesting all of the time, there needs to be drama, comedic reliefs, tragedy. These things don’t always happen often and organically in real life situations. This is where reality TV comes in. It takes the real world and spices it up just enough to make it a little more interesting, jaw dropping and audience grasping. 

So, with reality TV we all know that it is not in fact reality, even though it is claiming to be. But now let’s think  about shows that do in fact claim to be fiction. Shows such as Grey’s Anatomy, How to Get Away with Murder, etc. These shows are similar enough to reality that sometimes it can in fact feel real. This is because TV often mirrors the world we live in. Society and TV have an interesting relationship where they both learn and take from the other. We get ideas such as stereo types and trends from TV shows which we then take over into our real life. And TV is often based on some form of reality because that is what we know. TV shows, even if fiction, can have an impact on reality. Shows that send political messages could in turn change the political ideas of its viewers. 

As we see with all technology and all forms of communication, music has evolved over the years. From live music performances, to vinyl, to CDs, to streaming iPods, to streaming platforms, and now at the center of many social media sites. In particular, TIkTok. TIkTOk actually started under a different name: Musicly. The idea of the app was to lip sync and or dance to popular songs. The app has evolved into something much bigger than that. Yet, still based on the premise of recording a video to a certain sound. 

The songs heard on TikTok often become famous because of who is posting the videos using the sounds or because of the creative dances made for the songs. As the songs go viral on the platform, they also become extremely popular across many platforms. TikTok videos usually quickly transfer to Instagram and Facebook. The songs also rise in the chart, are played more on the radio and go up in streams across streaming platforms. 

This has created an interesting phenomena where songs are gaining interest and popularity based on something more than just the song itself. Additionally, the song is often more linked to the TikTok trend or famous TikToker who started the trend, rather than the songs artist themself. 

This is similar to the advancements in technology that occurred at the end of the 20th Century. As mass communication increased, fans were able to gain greater insight into music artists lives. Because of this, there was a shift from music being appreciated for how it sounds itself to who was creating the music and what they were like. Is the artist attractive? Is the artist interesting? Does this artist have a lot of drama going on in their life?  None of these things mattered when your only access to music was the radio. Now, these artists are seen as idols and hold a greater social status because of their music ability alone. 

The recording abilities and streaming abilities for music are only increasing and becoming more advanced. And I think a lot of music is advancing along with the technology. However, the interesting point is that these artists are not necessarily getting as much recognition as before. 

With all of that said, I am only focusing on the TikTok songs. The advancements in technology and streaming has also resulted in a greater abundance of artists and songs available. There are many songs that don’t have anything to do with social media. 

My final thought on music is this: Unlike many other forms of entertainment, communication, or technology, I can confidently say that music will never become obsolete. 

Newspaper holds truth 

No one reads Newspapers anymore because we can get the news by turning on the TV or opening our phones. Both of which take a lot less effort than physically finding a newspaper and reading it. When we look at people who are sitting in waiting rooms or traveling on a train or even just walking down the street while texting, it is easy to point at it and say “technology is ruining our social world.” However, while this is definitely true, it is important to note that there are more similarities between now and the pre cell-phone era than we might think. For example, waiting rooms, train cars, and sidewalks were full of people reading the newspaper. Now, we see the same thing but the news is on our phones.

The quote, “truth is the best defense against libel” exemplifies how important truth is. Which brings up a good counter argument for what I just said. Yes, we get news on our phones, but is that news true? Consider the fact that anyone can go on the internet and write whatever they want. Is this really “news”? The abundance of stuff on the internet makes it very difficult and time consuming to actually find the truth. The idea of circulating news is that any average joe can get on the internet and post something false, claiming to be a news article. Other journalists could then find his story and post their own news article based completely on what this average joe said. Eventually, this cycle continues enough that for every post about this false topic has a multitude of sources that make it seem reliable, but really it is all from this one false post. So, some might argue newspapers are a better source for the news after all.

This is probably why Newspapers are still alive today. The fact that they cost money, are printed, and you know who the news is coming from, makes it a lot more appealing for those who do want the truth without having to sift through the entirety of the internet. 

I agree with this to a point. You can still find the exact news on your phone that is available in the newspaper. But, you do need to purchase a subscription. Once again, allowing access to the truth. So, I understand why Newspaper companies themselves survive. We all know how important truth is and we will be willing to pay for that truth. 

The 20th Century saw many changes in the role books played in society.  In the beginning of the 1900s, the production of books increased as the cost of production decreased.  The increase in production led to many changes in the world of books.  There was an expansion of genres that were able to appeal to more types of people with a diversity of interests and experiences. Just as the 20th Century started with an increase in book production, it  ended with an increase in a multitude of other forms of media that posed as strong competition for society’s attention (Understanding Media and Culture). The modes in which both information and entertainment are shared is changing. I was born in 2000 and books play a much smaller role in my life than they did in my parents’ and an even smaller role in my life than they did in my grandparents’. When I Google information, they read it in a book. When I am tired after a long day, I wind down with a TV show, whereas my grandparents would read a book. For entertainment on a rainy day, I enjoy a movie marathon, whereas past generations would read. 

It is important to note however that there are still people in my generation who do prefer books to TV, and plenty of people who still choose to read even though that is not the only option for entertainment or information. Yet, as “Out of Print” discusses, what might the relationship between three or four generations from now with books look like? If we think about the fact that entertainment through video games, tv, and movies has only been available for about 100 years, and are only becoming more accessible, along the fact that the internet has only recently been made easily accessible at the touch of a finger tip, and we already see such a dramatic shift away from books, we can only imagine how this relationship between society and books will evolve as technology continues to improve. 

While TV, movies, video games and the internet can be seen as a replacement for the same entertainment and or informational uses that books have, there is something different about books. The brain comprehends the information differently based on the mode in which it is received. Reading takes more active attention than watching does. When we are watching something, without actively paying attention, the brain is not completely understanding it. Technology allows for more multitasking than reading does. Multitasking allows the brain to do more things at once, but it is doing those things to a lesser capability than if it were doing just one thing at a time. Thus, overall,  it is more productive to actively focus than to multitask. 

Reading will always be an important mode of information sharing for human beings. However, that does not mean that books will definitely survive. Reading can happen through various mediums and though I hope that books do continue to thrive, it is absolutely a possibility that books will die out and our reading will happen solely on screens, or whatever technology comes next. 

Hi, I’m Greg, I’m from Boston and in my sophomore year, I’m an art major and my focus is in glass. I am also tiring to get a double major in glass science and engineering. I have a shih-tzu named Odin and a cat named “The Cat”. I have three sisters and I can do the splits in the air!