a thought-turned-neomarxistpinko-rant.

i put my computer to bed, then booted it back up cos i had a thought. i think that we put a hell of a lot too much stock in newspapers as a medium apart from television. (yeah, i know, not everyone puts a hell of a lot of stock in that anyways. but whatever, go with it.) sure, newspapers may offer a lot more in-depth content and thoughtful commentary than the television news. the 'liberal media' idea has largely been advanced due to the fact that sometimes, newspapers do the right thing. they go all anti-hegemonic and actually overcome some of the failings of the capitalist media.

but even as this crumbles, something more important should be considered. the evolution in the form of the newspaper brought about an emblematic transition from lots of small type to lots of big type and pictures (and ads). this is a pretty obvious shift toward opiate-of-the-masses slop shovelling into the collective mouths of the nation. it's part of a general transition from literary time in history to a more oral time. and by oral, i don't mean the fun kind.

oh, but form doesn't really matter that much, you say. it's content that does matter. sure it does. if you read it. when's the last time that anyone actually sat down and read a newspaper. like, the whole thing. every story, in every section. this is like, three, four hours of good reading. more if it's sunday. the times is like, a day's worth. even i don't... and i read a LOT. (*digression. i only skip the lame sections. sports don't interest me, business is like a conservative took a dump in the presses, and all those bullshit "travel" or "cars" type sections are just like crackers upon which fuckloads of ad revenue are smeared.)

most people just pick up the newspaper, rattle through it looking at the pictures and headlines, and picking out the odd story that catches their attention. i'm talking from observations of how people (don't) read newspapers. it's like, a bias toward news that's either photogenic, or really, really gross. the incisive commentary, the in-depth reporting, the broad analysis of serious global issues (*not some freak-of-nature wave... like, the poverty and hunger and constant widespread death) .... those supposedly redemptive aspects of newspapers don't have pictures of paris hilton or dumbfuck guns-for-hire getting strung up from bridges to attract the body politic's attention. not when distracted by the millions of other things that the postindustrial capitalist economy piles on us, anyway.

thus, these little nuggets of counterhegemonic gold get buried, where just sad, cynical, pseudo-intellectual weiners like me get to read them and brood. and also the widespread demographic of people with lots of time on their hands. like me, also. i guess. errr.. i don't really have that much time on my hands. i just waste it by reading.

note also, that thought turned into a rant. goddamnit i need to go to bed.

i didn't even read what i just wrote and i'm real baked. so i suppose that came off kinda snippy. ah well, snippy it is. the state of the world calls for snippiness.

peace.