Photo credit Ctd 2005

Entertainment comes in many forms in contemporary society. Elsewhere I have opined that some self-help books should be considered entertainment, as should much published “advice.” Here I’d like to talk about entertainment and talk radio.

Much of talk radio is entertainment, that is, it is not about informing listeners about political or cultural issues, it is about entertaining them. Maybe that’s not a big surprise to you. But think about how this happens: it happens via the same patterns we observe in other forms of entertainment. Movies, for example, work by creating strong emotions such as terror or romantic passion, and then attaching these emotions to a suspenseful narrative. We watch in large part because we enjoy being drawn into the powerful emotional stream.

Talk radio is also about provoking strong emotions such as outrage, fear, sympathy, disgust…But instead of attaching these emotions to suspenseful narratives, the talk show host attaches them to beliefs, values, and ideas. This has the same effects that entertainment does. If you become caught up in a romantic movie, it tends to strengthen your faith in the ideal of romance. If a voice coming out of your radio is bashing some person and you fall in synch with the strong disdain for and anger at that person, you will tend to form a negative opinion about the person.

Why is this entertaining? Well, the fact is, many strong negative emotions are quite enjoyable so long as one knows one is not in any personal danger. People pay good money to experience strong fear and anxiety in horror movies and on roller coasters. Getting people riled up about political and moral issues is a time-honored way to provoke very powerful physical feelings, and many people enjoy those feelings.

Sometimes talk radio hosts are called demagogues—persons who attempt to gain political power by appealing to the prejudices and even hatreds of their audience. Radio talk show hosts may often use these techniques, but generally they are not doing so to enhance their own political power. They probably have a political agenda, but they also, like all entertainers, are primarily interested in making money by creating a big audience.

So is there any problem with talk radio as entertainment? The biggest problem I see–strangely enough—is a threat to our freedom of speech. Sure, talk radio hosts are free to shout their opinions, but does this really encourage freedom of thought and debate? It is more likely to encourage mutual hostility among our citizens. That’s not the product I would choose to sell in pursuit of my fortune.

Photo by Gisela Giardino

In interviews with people who have just done something great, you will often hear them say something like “and I’d like to thank my parents who always told me I could be anything I wanted to be…” I think to myself: That’s sweet, but your parents lied to you.

You can’t be anything you want to be. Consider those pathetic American Idol contestants, typically showcased in a season’s early episodes, who are interviewed by the host after howling tunelessly and being dismissed by the judges. Often in tears, many of them genuinely can’t sort out what has happened, and say something along the lines of “They don’t understand, this is my dream.”

Great TV—what could be better than watching people humiliate themselves in front of millions of viewers, right? But what interests me is that it seems these folks believe it’s the strength of their dream rather than ability to sing that should determine their success. But then I guess it’s no surprise they might think this, because in our society we are repeatedly told that we should pursue our dreams and let nothing stand in the way. Again, that’s patently untrue—even if it’s their dream, tone deaf people can’t be popular singers—and you have to wonder why something so false is so often repeated.

It’s repeated because it’s fundamental to our economy, our whole way of life. I’ve asked hundreds of people about this over the years and I’ve learned that most of us dream of transformation; although we may acknowledge that our lives are fine right now, we also carry around an underlying fantasy that things could be much better if only…I could finish my novel, get a date with Mary, win the lottery, you name it. Such dreams keep us going, they give hope, even to those who have little to be hopeful about.

So, what’s wrong with that? Well, two things. For those whose lives are fine right now, dreams of transformation create a restless dissatisfaction instead of appreciation of the here and now. And for those whose lives aren’t fine right now, what’s needed is not dreams, but realistic plans.

The advice we should give people is not “follow your dreams” but rather “follow your aptitude.” This would seem to be a simple thing, why don’t we do it? We don’t do it because we need to preserve the fantasy that is the basis of most of our stories, movies, and self-help books: “No matter how bleak things seem, what you dream about is ahead, just around the corner. Go to the movies, buy this book, join our church and you are guaranteed a place in heaven.”

This fantasy must be preserved at all costs, for if too many people started to suspect that their road to the top is effectively blocked, they might begin to question the entire economic system. Instead of going to the movies or buying the promises, they might instead organize political groups to address, for example, the spectacular income inequalities in our society. And we can’t have that, can we?

This blog is about “entertainment,” and in writing it I feel like a salmon trying to talk to other salmon about water. Not only is entertainment all around us, but various factors conspire to make it difficult to assess, even difficult to notice. For example, what we mean by entertainment is diversion, that which takes us away from serious pursuits. But one of the things I want to say is that entertainment has some very serious consequences for our culture and our way of life. In doing so, I may seem like someone who needs to loosen up. “It’s just fun! Don’t take it so seriously, dude!”

If you are an academic calling attention to entertainment, many people automatically assume you are a bore. There have always been plenty of people who do try and take entertainment seriously, pointing out, for example, that television watching is a less worthy pursuit than, say, reading poetry. Or perhaps that violence on television is bad for children. These commentators on entertainment often have valid and important points to make, but sometimes they are also sort of annoying, preachy even.

No preaching here, I don’t mean to tell you not to partake of entertainment. Instead, I just want to urge you to think about your engagement with entertainment. Like, let’s talk honestly about Brad and Angelina. You don’t give a shit about Brad and Angelina, do you? You’re not some tabloid junkie, you’re reading this for God’s sake, you’re a different demographic. Why then, if it so happened that you saw Brad or Angelina in an airport, would you tell everyone you could about it? What’s up with this?

You can at least begin to see how this sort of matter has some relevance for addictive behavior, because at heart this is question is similar to: “Why do some people keep drinking when they recognize that it would be better for them to quit? Why do some women keep dating the same sort of guy when they recognize that it would be better to change the pattern? Why are some people—you, for example—intrigued by celebrities when you recognize that really it’s sort of silly? Why is your behavior not entirely under your control here?

(This is a lightly edited version of a post that first appeared in Psychology Today, further comments available there)