Let's use a stool for an example. By itself, it is harmless; neutral in its influence on the environment around it. It is until a person (a user/influence/mindset) comes into the picture, that the stool is given an identity of sort. It can be "good" in the aspect that it offers the said person something to rest on or someplace to sit and read a book, perhaps. The stool can also be labeled as a instrument of evil, or bad, if the person, rather than sitting on it, picks it up and, say, smashes it on a poor unfortunate fellow's back, rendering him unconscious and then sits the victim on the seat to allow him/her to recover. So, is a stool a good or bad thing?
(Source: my dA)
As Hamlet said, "... there is nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so." It is up to the person on the receiving end to determine the moral weight of something. It is dependent on how he or she views it. Things are not always painted black and white, good or bad. There are different shades of gray in between, especially in the aspect of the media, for it is vast and varied in its forms and may be interpreted in a plethora of ways. One may be more susceptible to being influenced by a certain program or show if he or she is insecure about him/herself, compared to one who has a defined sense of being.
It is much too difficult to separate and sort the media into what is right and what is wrong. There are too many factors separating them.
No comments:
Post a Comment