There are quite a few differences between what I'm saying and the rightist attack on rock 'n' roll:
1. I'm not saying MTV should be banned.
2. The product emanates from the corporate boardroom, not from Chuck Berry and Little Richard.
3. The product actually is destructive of childhood, and is _intentionally and planned_ to be so. The marketing strategy is to make late adolescence seem like Nirvana, and to draw everybody, including 11-year-olds, into aspiring to it, which, of course, requires purchase of its accoutrements and replication of its supposedly authentic attitudes.
4. Rock 'n' roll is largely about freedom and individuality and pleasure. MTV Spring Break is a means of behavioral programming.
5. Dude, check it out. Would you let your 11-year-old watch this? Are you happy that Viacom/CBS is targeting him/her with this stuff? http://www.mtv.com/onair/spring_break/2004/zoomify/index.jhtml
Peace, md
----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Corporate Porn to Kids
> Michael Dawson -PSU wrote:
>
> >Have you who are protesting ignorance and shock at Nader's phrase been
> >watching MTV? Try a little dose of that, especially during their Spring
> >Break beach parties, and put yourself in loco parentis to an 11-year-old.
> >"Corporate pornography directed at children" is a precise definition of
this
> >exploitative atrocity. (And please don't spout back the MTV party line
that
> >their target audience is 18-34. BS. It's 8-22.)
>
> Man, you sound like one of those 50s preachers, denouncing rock &
> roll as the devil's music.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk