TV Traps / There is a gap between reality and what we see on TV

According to Fars News Agency’s media correspondent, “Nahvand Al-Qaderi”, a professor of media and communication sciences, believes that television is a fact that has become very popular; So that there is no distance between man and what he wants, and the television acts directly, quickly and realistically, and completely in the direction of serving the camera and thus serving income or profit.

Al-Qaderi holds a PhD in Communication and Media Sciences with numerous individual and group works in the field of media and communications and its relationship with women, including “Reading in the Culture of Arab Satellites: Standing on the Boundaries of Separation,” “Women and Men in Media on Television,” and “Research.” About Maps and Situations “and many other works have been published by him.

In order to conduct research on coping with current violence against women in current Tunisian television programs, interview with Nahvand al-Qaderi, a media and communications expert and women’s activist. Online Facts Has been done and translated by a cultural consultant.

* What is your definition of a real TV?

Real TV is a new generation of TV. Television went through several stages, the traditional classics that the government used in terms of culture and education and what is called development. The TV was like an autopilot and was almost entirely and sometimes indirectly available to government departments. That is, what was expected of television was to perform a certain function. This is the first step, called old-fashioned television. Even in Europe, it could be said that this was the function of the old televisions, but it can be said that the situation in the United States was somewhat different. In Europe, television had to be run by the government, because the task of creating culture and educating the community was very important.

In the second phase of its activity, television came to the “new television”, which was somewhat different and showed behind the scenes. That is, there were no more scenes for television activity, and the behind the scenes became part of the scene. This is where the core of real television came into play. At this stage, the mode of operation of television was completely different from the past and television was out of the control of government institutions and was based on advertising and immediate profit.

Then we come to the third stage, the “trans-television” stage, which means that every element is served by the camera, and not only is it shown behind the scenes, but everything is shown in front of us on the TV screen. . Here the idea of ​​real television came to power, in which we say that everything is in the service of the camera, and in fact, we are referring to emotions, feelings and tears in the scenes, because otherwise this system will not work. Everything was served by the camera and everything appeared in front of us. There is no longer a difference between what happens behind the scenes and what happens in front of us. Here, everything is at the service of this glass plate, and all behaviors and feelings work in the same direction. Very private things are revealed to the viewer and we can no longer distinguish between the words of experts and the words of ordinary people, we can no longer distinguish between the feeling and the words of the elite. For this reason, real television has gained its glory and importance and has been greatly developed, so that there is no longer any barrier between man and his desires. This means that this television operates directly, quickly and realistically in order to serve religion and thus serve income and profit.

Q: What do you think is the role that real TV programs play in relation to society, especially “Andy Ma Movak” (I’m talking to you) programs that address social issues?

Real TV shows have brought with them a new form of television performance, and this new method is that this discourse no longer needs to be elite. Every normal person feels that there is and there is no gap between him and the people in front of him on TV, whether in the details of their lives or in their failures or in any other work they do, they feel that in this There are places, and they are the truth that the conditions speak for themselves. There is a big trap that people fall into here, because the first and last goal in these televisions is to attract advertisements, which is done in different ways from the logic of advertisements. Because in the past, television spoke differently from today, and there is no doubt that it was accompanied by successive economic developments and crises.

At first, TV commercials introduced us to a quiet and sweet life and a sweet and beautiful life, but married life on TV is different from what it really is. There is a gap between reality and what we see on television, because the logic of the media in the beginning was that it hated wars and crises, and therefore promoted a quiet and comfortable life by linking it to consumerism. می‌کرد. This means that the more we consume these goods, the better our life will be.

Today, with the new generation of television called “trans-television” and with the economic crisis and the intensity of competition and the new media New Media created by social networks, it must be said that the logic of media will undoubtedly be accompanied by these changes. Today, the technical meaning of consumerism is blurred, and it is not necessarily the case that all consumer goods belong to people who have material resources or a prosperous life. The media no longer just intends to imitate these people, but also tries to address all people so that it can reach as many audiences as possible. This is where the focus on social issues, poverty, deprivation and the problems of violence that occur in society comes to the attention of the media.

I believe that these issues are raised in the same way as consumption that can stimulate emotions. People do not engage in intellectual discussion in public and do not address the issues raised in their speeches, but the content is presented in a dramatic, engaging and provocative way in order to attract people. The audience also sees it and is entertained by it, saying, “Praise be to God, we are not like this.” These stories simulate a certain instinct in each person, until we finally reach a stage that we can call the business of problems. It is even said that those who participate in such programs and raise their problems, receive money in return for attending the program. That means nothing is free.

* Do those who work in real TV programs have to adhere to a set of rules in presenting such programs? Is there adherence to these rules regarding the presentation of real TV programs in the Arab world?

I think the operators of these TVs are part of the scenario that has been set for these programs and they have a predetermined role. Undoubtedly, this role, no matter how sudden and no matter how obvious and improvised in behavior and performance, attracts more audiences, and this issue goes back to the personality of activists in this field. But in general, the general framework of these activities is predetermined and clear, and the activists and those involved in these programs can not cross the lines that have already been set for them and their role. Regarding how the people and their feelings are captured and the power of these activists to show this ability with the dexterity and quality that enables them to enter the people and take all these interactions out of them, it must be said that this is the personality of those involved. The field returns. Some of them have high skills that enable them to overcome the barriers between themselves and their guests, while others do not. But I think their role at this point is very big given what has been assigned to them.

In my opinion, this kind of program is not the product of the Arab world’s thinking, but it is the result of a slogan that calls it “global thought and domestic action.” In other words, the idea comes from outside and we can take advantage of it according to our environment, culture and methods, without going beyond the framework of the masks defined for it. Because whatever it is, these are thoughts and ideas. How can all national and social issues be exploited for the purpose of profit through its direct, fast and humorous presentation? The important thing here is to use these types of programs.

In other words, the content of these programs was not designed by us or anyone in the Arab world who could make a claim about it. The design is not ours and the goals are not specified by us, but have come to us in a way that we can imitate. Nevertheless, we have the margins of internal maneuver to explain our characteristics and culture, although at times, the issues raised on real television are shocking to ordinary people in society, because such issues, especially if they concern women, They did not get used to it. This is not normal for the general public to some extent, but the audience and the general public are getting used to it, because everything around them has become global. Maybe everything is similar, and wherever there is a debate between the private and the global, there is a resemblance, but in a subtle way.

On page 172 of the book Media Men and Women on Television, you talked about the media and how they reproduce the capitalist ideology, stating that these media are managed and financed by investors. We also sometimes see in programs that the presenter uses a level of verbal violence in dealing with the women who are his guests, with the aim of repeating a kind of social control and deterrence. Are such behaviors, which are considered violent, methodical behaviors by program operators or did they occur outside the program?

These behaviors are not sudden. In one study, I came to the conclusion that the guest is exposed to a level of violence at all in order to understand the hierarchy of positions, positions that do not actually exist at all. Guests are asked to adhere to what is assigned to them during the program and to do their best to get the highest view from the audience, which in fact, is a superficial act of Violence is against him. This is not easy and the guest can not say no and has to comply with the wishes of the host even if it is not convincing.

For this reason, we see behaviors emanating from him that can be defined in terms of violence, violence against the person with whom he is in contact, violence that is the result of a hierarchy, and a hierarchy that has been created since the program was designed. There are degrees and classes of violence that reproduce and create themselves to reach the person participating in the program and at the same time are transmitted to the viewers after him. So can we deny in the Arab world that we are not exposed to violence? We are all violent!

End of message /

You can edit this post