Berner does great job of making the ridiculous sound good . The INVENTORS boasts a funny man too to sell what appears to be the stuff of new knowledge . What's really going on here? Is straight science too serious? The shows are good entertainment but not if you are a scientist and like to see scientists embarrassed. Its a party and we are all invited?
Berner can be so funny and reedeming, especially when the whole idea of presenting sound science on EINSTEIN FACTOR or ABCTV is still locked into some time warp of an often silly ( what was the name of a very very obsure fictional man known only to you and a few others ?) a pedantic trivia game show. ITs relaxing yes, but why do the panel of experts even show up ? CATALYST for all the expense sells the same quick fix story of science .
Does science need a lift, or are we just not presenting it in its own best light ?
The panel get so many answers wrong- thats to be expected. Yet they don't question the ridulous framework for this knowledge talk itself - presenting in line withy the myth that the show is about science by talking - their achievements in gene science ,biographies etc etc The experts seem blissfully unaware they are falling for the modern media myth ( that we KNOW it - THAT we create what we know about the world and all that is in it ? Bit over clever---- all of you?
Not to say the scientists aren't intelligent . Perhaps not wise to the bigger picture.
What these game show and the unresolved talk of "science", seems to say is that we don't really love science but something it brings us. Ellul was of course right; that the western world is always in danger of worshiping not science but the thrill of presumed knowledge and advantage.
Point is on the eve after 20-20 SUMMIT it is not good for the clever country to be so confused about the big picture road to progress with science - it NEEDS no quick fix its needs a world view of patience - the many mishaps and unproductive research before a winner arrives .
The last word on trying to make science popular? ---stop trying to make it popular.
( you heard it first on blogger)
New ideas are ALSO not in what the audience can see Mr Rudd , but in what the audience ( and therfore possibly most politicians and other wannabes) cannot see.
Let the debate continue -has it started or is there any tension and therefore any intension ? To really move on from old ideas like einstein factors and old inventions , we need tension, not just good intention
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Friday, April 11, 2008
Intervene and give someone other than Jones a go
Tony Jones is not one to shirk a tough question - or so it seems? . The trouble with the ABc is celaerly that they ( unlike Brockie ) think that real discussion ( is a luxury - something to only do when the sitauation is really bad .Their ecozone credentails shown to be suspect .
Like a nicer version of 60 minutes, the ABC probe the very private lives of others with persoanl with the "how does it feel" questions that probably make the participants throw up when they realise they might have all done it for the satisfaction of some audience ---out there.
Yes tony you are right - just as 60 minye and ACA are - "the audience want some answers". Some conveninet answers? I hope you heard the clear ones within the noise and confusion- that is if you believe ther can be direction - afte all thats what these kids need - boundaries ad direction .
Just in case you didn't notice ( no more supergroup models was ) the answers given in the program were pretty clear - reduce the politicall predicatable wastage of the system and grant the money to the people acting like parents and teachers in the world beyond home. The case workers on the street.
A problem properly described is a problem half solved.
Its not homelessness thats the issue --its kids finding a home.
Give the money to those who even now go out of their way to put in the tough boundaries that are not able to be put by all the dogooders and project dreamers who talk about these things from the comfort of their own offices . There has been progress over the last 20years. Every home has individual people in it and casework and care solution they devise-- must be the key .
Like a nicer version of 60 minutes, the ABC probe the very private lives of others with persoanl with the "how does it feel" questions that probably make the participants throw up when they realise they might have all done it for the satisfaction of some audience ---out there.
Yes tony you are right - just as 60 minye and ACA are - "the audience want some answers". Some conveninet answers? I hope you heard the clear ones within the noise and confusion- that is if you believe ther can be direction - afte all thats what these kids need - boundaries ad direction .
Just in case you didn't notice ( no more supergroup models was ) the answers given in the program were pretty clear - reduce the politicall predicatable wastage of the system and grant the money to the people acting like parents and teachers in the world beyond home. The case workers on the street.
A problem properly described is a problem half solved.
Its not homelessness thats the issue --its kids finding a home.
Give the money to those who even now go out of their way to put in the tough boundaries that are not able to be put by all the dogooders and project dreamers who talk about these things from the comfort of their own offices . There has been progress over the last 20years. Every home has individual people in it and casework and care solution they devise-- must be the key .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)