Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Blue Skies
Why do you think that Thomas Streeter titles his essay the way he does? What do “blue skies” and “strange bedfellows” have to do with 1960s discussions about the possibilities of cable television? Does the language used around cable at that time sound similar to the way new media technologies are discussed today? Explain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe Streeter titles his essay in such a way in order to convey the contradictory and unclear nature of cable in the 1960s. More specifically, “blue skies” is telling of the expectation of cable during this period, as it was a new technology full of possibilities. Many felt that cable could “magically resolve…racism, poverty and international strife,” and hence it would mend the harshness of society. Furthermore, cable advocates made the argument that it created an “impartial opinion” amongst powerful people such as scientists, businessmen, politicians, and journalists. Through creating this opinion amongst a group of such prominent people, a calm and happy “blue sky” was created. However, underneath the surface of this optimism surrounding cable, was the clashing of interests in the industry, whose participants could be seen as “strange bedfellows.” For example, during this rise of cable, cable operators were competing against commercial broadcasters and felt as if they were being wronged FCC regulations. Cable operators wished to remove restrictions onto the CATV. There was friction due to competing interests in 1960s cable that happened despite the fact that cable was meant to create “blue skies.”
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I feel as if the discourse around cable at that time is similar to the way new media technologies are discussed today because of the ‘change for the better’ attitude that each is believed to bring. In the 1960s, cable was believed to bring agency to audiences, as they became active participants of mass communication through “selection and dissemination.” In a way, cable served to empower the public who would otherwise be passive. Today’s new media technologies, bring people together under a collective media culture which is beneficial to resolving issues.
I think his use of "blue skies" is to talk about how policymakers at the time ignored many central issues with cable television. They acted as if there were blue skies, "systematically drawing attention away from political differences," and consciously ignoring the issues that were right in front of them when discussing new technologies. The new discourse created by these new technologies gave people a false sense that there was unity or consensus amongst experts, however, this was not the case. Rather than cable transforming the possibilities of communication, it was sold as a tool that would transform more than communication, but transform America; the blue skies masked what was really going on, making cable appear as a utopian tool that could solve racism, poverty, and bring the American people together. Cable was sold as the answer to all American societal tensions, acting as an eraser.
ReplyDeleteThe false sense of unity that these blue skies created was to cover the "strange bedfellows" that existed. Like Julia's comment above, I too think these strange bedfellows were the differing opinions that the blue skies masked. But I also think that the issues America thought would be solved by television were also considered "strange bedfellows": racism, poverty, gender inequality, etcetera. It was just an idealistic expectation that cable television would transform the country -- while it did in some ways, it certainly did not solve the problems.
Today, I disagree that the language then is similar to current discussions of information superhighways and other current evolving technologies. While we do recognize the power and influence that communication methods have on societies, I think that by now we are also familiar with many of the dangers. I do not think conversations about the information superhighway are seeing technologies as "blue skies" today, but rather tools to work towards change. For example, Twitter allowing people to coordinate revolts or protests. While Twitter allowed for people to do that, Twitter did not accomplish that itself. People using the technology did. I think there is a difference in how we saw new technologies in the 70s and how we talk about them now.
I agree with the idea above (in both comments) that the label of "blue skies" was a sense of utopian bliss that was 'sure' to come from the 'new' technology of cable. Cable was said to have "the potential to rehumanize a dehumanized society" (Streeter, p. 228). The ideas of a group of people who would ordinarily be very unlikely to come together is the idea of "strange bedfellows".
ReplyDeleteI do think that the rhetoric today is similar to that used around the idea of cable uniting the world. While there is perhaps more discussion of the disadvantages, such as internet stalking, where an untrustworthy contact is often harder to pin down since there is less literal contact. However, the idea that cable would empower the people to "no longer be the passive recipients of mass communications messages but would participate in their selection and dissemination" that was used to describe the potential impact of cable can definitoly be applied to Twitter and facebook and other internet ways of connecting, where people can stay in contact with hundreds of friends and 'like' and comment on pages based around different issues, promote their ideas and political actions, etc. (streeter, pp. 237). I agree that we're perhaps more wary sometimes of online communications, where privacy settings and such come in, but there's still a utopia feeling of the connectivity of the internet. Look at how attached people are to their phones, often focusing intently on them, even when interacting with other people who are physically next to them. No one talks (or at least significantly less so) anymore on public transportations - we're all glued to our smart-phones, checking facebook and such.
"Blue Skies and Strange Bedfellows" was meant to illustrate the magical effects that cable television was supposed to bring to the American populace. In the most literal terms, this meant the clearing of the airwaves and the movement towards wired television. In a more figurative sense, this meant using the wide range of broadcasting to unify the different cross sections of America. This is where "Strange Bedfellows" comes in. This refers to the FCC interactions with cable companies, who became close friends out of necessity for the cable companies. This also refers to the notion that television was going to change race relations, although strange becomes a "strange" (no pun intended. except it was) word to use as opposed to "new".
ReplyDeleteThese words actually greatly differ from how we talk about new technologies in the present. New technologies seem to revolve around streaming, namely Netflix and its competitors. These services are mostly regurgitating the programs that already are available on cable. Moreso, every Netflix Original Series was fought over by premium channels before Netflix outbid them. Cable terminology revolved around the mass amounts of new content, whereas present terminology seems to revolve around the easy availability of content that has already been created for cable television.
Not to beat a dead horse, because it seems we have established what the “blue skies and bed fellows” title is saying, which to me is optimism in new technologies with support from people who normally would not come together. I just found this article cery interesting, as I it reminds me of the internet media and how much of a wild west it is. In the same idea of cable being able to bring so much material to different people, the Internet can bring that and much more. And it doesn’t stop at what the cable company provides, but whatever might possibly pop in your head. The regulations surrounding it, as to whom can do what with it or for how long reminds of the FCCs policies on cable in Streeter’s essay. How much bandwidth a person is allowed to use, or websites you’re allowed to view (The Deep Internet) comes to mind are deterrents for the free information age. As well as the wiki leaks scandals that have been happening the past few years and government regulation. Basically what I want to conclude with is that although cable during the 70s was thought to be an issue for broadcasters and shut down, new technologies stemming from the internet or just the use of the internet are similar and regulations are constantly changing and being look over to the point that Streeters article brings up points that we could use today.
ReplyDeleteI honestly did not know what strange bedfellows was, but after it was looked up, it turns out to be the title of a movie in 1963 where there is a couple that divorces, then gets back together repeatedly throughout the film. This seems similar to the conflict that was with the cable; the relationship between the popularity of cable with people was very unsteady. Especially since it was originally called CATV, then advertised as a new invention when it had been around for many years. The language used around cable at that time was very different than what is said now. One reason is because now there is much more explicit language that is acceptable whereas back in the 1960s, the people were very conservative on what was allowed to be said on television. They were even at some times too sensitive (in my opinion) to what was allowed to be said on television. For example, the Smithers brothers were mostly kicked off of the air because they were saying thing sthat were their opinion but were too biased, especially one was possibly talking as if they were on the wrong side or made some comments that were not 100% on what everyone ekle thought.
ReplyDeleteAs has been said many times, the “blue sky scenario” was a reference to the exaggerated jargon used to describe new technology in the 70s. There was nothing but blue skies and high hopes in the future of cable.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, Streeter discusses the “reference to the ‘next generation’ of high-capacity, two way cable systems”. Today, everything new in technology is labeled as “the next generation” and “revolutionary” (as Streeter also references). Whether it’s a new smart phone that doubles as a watch or a TV that you can talk to when trying to find a movie, every large technological stride is made to seem as if it is the most brilliant creation to ever exist. A “next generation” of iPhone would be one that can now scan your fingerprint when trying to unlock; VERY advanced. He also mentioned that cable was intended to help create “a nationwide integrated telecommunications grid,” or a way to keep all humans unified. Since then, a lot of technology is there to keep the general population unified. Cell phones went from helping us call each other, to allowing texting, to making video chatting, e-mailing, and social networking readily available at the touch of a button. New technology keeps us integrated on the grid, just like cable was meant to back in the day. We still have quite a "blue sky" attitude towards today's technology in the sense that we never know what crazy creation will come up next.