“Popularity May Have Doomed Chinese Talent Show” by Andrew Jacobs
Title: “Popularity May Have Doomed Chinese TV Talent Show” – The death or end of a talent show brought about by an extensive coverage or a resulting popularity or attention on the show itself.
Words:
Doomed, Pulled the plug, Bracing reminder..heavy hand guiding popular culture, Raised hackles, blanket prohibition, tight leash, lambasted, terribly radical
The write adopts a very stylistic choice of words, choosing to replace common-used adjectives with words and expression with harsher tones such as “doomed” or “tight leash” especially when making references to the China authorities – one can sense disagreement from the writer who seem to disagree with the control that exist even over something like a TV reality-show that was not even “terribly radical”.
Claims:
China government censors claim that “producers had simply let the program warble on too long” Evidence: Spokesman for the company apologized for exceeding the state-imposed 90-minute limit
The suspension has produced shock and heartache. Evidence: Interview with a fan – “I will never be happy again”
·
“Heavy hand guiding popular culture” Evidence: One-month ban by authorities on a channel in Hebei one day after “Super Girl” was suspended
·
Communist Party was unnerved by the success of the show. Evidence: Television executives and cultural critics suggestions
·
Show could have been banned because the “reliance on voting by audience members was dangerously democratic” Evidence: Based on historical events, regulators banned text-messaging voting in 2007
·
Ban “reflected the growing chasm between Chinese youths and the conservative bureaucrats who keep a tight leash on the production and dissemination of popular culture” Evidence: Interview with Zhan Jiang, journalism professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University
·
China’s cultural authorities were unhappy about being cut out of the selection process and threatened by the kind of women who rose to the top. Evidence: Online essay by one of the show’s judges, Song Shinan
·
Response:
In general, the writer has amassed a series of claims; all with the consistent underlying message of pointing out the control that the China government censors have over their popular culture. I find the argument decently crafted and the writer did not let too much of his personal disagreement get in the way of putting forth a convincing and fairly non-bias report.
One point that I would like to develop however would be on Zhan Jiang’s postulation about the state of popular culture in China. The main point that I think deserves pushing is, with regards to prizes, how far can a competition and the “decision-making” process for the prize-winner be used to push the strict control that authorities may have over their media and popular culture.
In this case, another point worth mentioning is the potential suspicion that the authorities felt threatened by the voting process – this reveals volumes about the extent of which even the voting process of a competition may actually bring about ideological and political repercussions in a nation.
Hi Zul, you point out that the author has carefully "crafted" an argument (in support of the claim in his title). The fact that he uses a hedging word, namely "may" communicates his effort to be balanced and open to disagreement. However, as you also point out in your list of words with strong associations of negativity, his language betrays his own negativity. This is, of course, acceptable, as he takes a stand on this debate. His evidence supports his position, though some of it carries greater weight. Quotes from people on the internet is suspect, but cultural critics and academics have greater credibility. As you perceptively point out in your reflection, what is most signigicant is that a supposedly frivolous talent show (see the author's rather dismissive tone in the first paragraphs) can be regarded as a threat. Good post!
ReplyDelete