Pope: No Dope

Unfortunately, though, (communications media) risk being transformed into systems aimed at subjecting humanity to agendas dictated by the dominant interests of the day. This is what happens when communication is used for ideological purposes or for the aggressive advertising of consumer products. While claiming to represent reality, it can tend to legitimize or impose distorted models of personal, family or social life. Moreover, in order to attract listeners and increase the size of audiences, it does not hesitate at times to have recourse to vulgarity and violence, and to overstep the mark. The media can also present and support models of development which serve to increase rather than reduce the technological divide between rich and poor countries.

The Pope. I hope those nincompoops who produce right-wing Catholic crapsheet for cannibals Alive! take heed of his message. I receive that particular periodical through my letterbox each month, and I always mean to comment on it here, but never seem to get around to it. Not now, though. Only to comment that whereas I might interpret the above as meaning that media production under capitalism serves capitalist interest, the columnist for Alive! takes it as meaning that the Pope is denouncing the gay agenda promulgated by the likes of Pat Kenny who interviews homosexuals on the Late Late show. He may, of course, mean both things.

Anyway, Ratzinger generally has interesting things to say, which is an improvement on the last chap.

Today, communication seems increasingly to claim not simply to represent reality, but to determine it, owing to the power and the force of suggestion that it possesses. It is clear, for example, that in certain situations the media are used not for the proper purpose of disseminating information, but to “create” events.

I can agree with that.


2 Responses to “Pope: No Dope”

  1. 1 Kevin January 25, 2008 at 12:29 am

    And I can, too.

    But thought the Pope might be infallible, his translators quite clearly are not. It’s agenda, not “agendas”.

  2. 2 Hugh Green January 25, 2008 at 8:20 am

    I think orthographic dogma hath thee in thrall there, Kevin. Or is it dogmae?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

I on Twitter

January 2008
« Dec   Feb »

%d bloggers like this: