Not just the news or some commentary show. I'm talking about so called "historical," "science," and nature programming?
Yes . . . I have incurable DISCERNMENT.
Short of a lobotomy or strapping me in a chair with my eyes taped open for non-stop viewing of CNN, Free Speech TV and "reality" TV shows, there are no 12 Step Programs for what I have.
I'm addicted . . . and I like it!
Recently, my discernment was a fever pitch. All day, someone else controlled the media input while I had catch-up duties after being away from home for a couple of days.
At first, the wild life programing was mostly background noise, somewhat entertaining and informative. Suddenly my discernment nerve got nicked about 5 minutes into a new program on mountain lions, of all things.
Having a background of almost 30 years in writing and producing video and TV programs, I recognized a sneaky bait-and-switch the writer and producers pulled on their audience. If they had shown their REAL intention in the first 2 minutes of the program, chances were high most viewers would have raced for remote control rescue.
The set up . . . a program on the life of American mountain lions.
The TRUTH . . . one man's life long obsession with mountain lions: his harassing, tracking and repeated tranquilizing of these cats in the name of "conservation" instead of leaving them alone.
No wonder these solitary animals were stressed out! This man, his camera crew, and his ATV were driving them crazy!
As the day and channels were cycled through, several shows claiming to be NEWS programs droned on. By mental calculation, they would pause between verbal gushing over one of two favored presidential candidates to give news updates -- 55 minutes gushing/5 minutes "oh, wait, there is something happening beyond your last Twitter post".
I'm also no stranger to the news room. Agendas are set by network owners and news producers. To slap a label on your network like "Most Watched" or "Fair and Balanced" does not reality make. It's what comes out of the mouth of the talent. AND the talent is complicit or they have no career.
Rising on-air media personalities pick their favorites. Gushing and favorable reporting, particularly in politics it may get them interviews with those people when they rise to power. Ignore the blemishes and questions in a candidate's background -- highlight the flaws and gaffs of an opponent. Roll the like-me-cause-I-was-nice-to-you dice and ride the ratings roller coaster to the top.
Without discernment, can the viewer or the voter get it wrong? Can the sound and fury of what we want to hear push us to make disastrous choices?
Days after I Want Scream At The TV, a number of significant historical events tumbled through my mind. Each case, common people felt down trodden, laboring under oppressive, ineffective government. Suddenly they were empowered and faced with a choice.
The French Revolution -- hm, didn't they lose their heads over that? (sorry, I couldn't resist the stab at bad humor).
Then, there were the post-WW I German people who rallied to a man who promised to cancel their national debt, return national pride, and deal the immoral and trouble makers.
Ultimately, I settled on a pivotal moment in history where two "candidates" stood on a stage, a moderator between them, the audience asked to choose. On the left was a man who appealed to heart and minds. His leadership style recruited a devoted following, but not by political insurrection. There was no doubt he wanted to change the status-quo. For that, power brokers of the day literally called him "the Devil." More than one occasion they hired "witnesses" and bribed members of his inner circle to attempt character assassination.
On the right, ironically, stands a man with almost the same name. He has truly been a "man of the people." One author understated his reputation by saying he was notorious. Riots broke out in popular support of his opposition to pathetic, oppressive government policies. As the crowd is asked to cast their vocal ballots, every single person knew of his reputation as as unscrupluous thief. He was loud and unapologetic in what he wanted and how no one would stand in his way.
Box One -- A man of conviction, appeals to the heart and mind.
Box Two -- A man of conviction, appeals the anger and frustration.
What was their choice? "Give us Barabbas!"
Yep! Their anger, their frustration with Roman rule and the vocal opposition by the religious-political leadership fueled them to back a candidate that would remain unknown to history save this moment on the stage with Jesus of Nazareth. Perhaps he continued his career as a Zealot (violent revolutionary) and member of the sicaii (dagger-men). Within 35 years, their violence would result in the full scale invasion of Roman legions and leveling of their beloved Temple.
It's not unusual for people . . . of all faiths, political convictions, and sexual orientation . . . to feel disaffected at one time or another. Election cycles in this county has a way of drawing out the best and worst in people. It also has a way of extracting WHO we really are rather than WHAT we claim to believe.
Without discernment, people empowered to choose are easily swayed by anger, gushing, mud-slinging and fear. If they don't get what they want, they resort to bullying and attempts at mob rule.
I've heard friends of strong moral conviction make excuses like "they all lie," while they would NEVER tolerate it in thier own family or circle of friends.
Discernment makes me want to SCREAM at them!
But, As I See It, discernment helps me keep my mouth shut!
Rome wasn't built in a day, but it's demise came from followers of Man who appealed to the hearts and minds rather than people's rage. They were known as Christians . . . no one knows who followed Jesus-Barabbas.
No comments:
Post a Comment