Hope your Crimbo festivities are going well and such!
Here’s a phat Christmas hamper for all eclectronic music lovers out there, from our very good friends at DC.
All free and festive, and the usual high quality we have come to expect from this growing net label. Get downloading people!
Click on the Album covers to download, or go to www.dead-channel.com for even more free music. Happy New Year 😉
The second installment of Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror leads us to another implausibly grim vision of the future, but the main difference between The National Anthem and 15 Million Credits, is that the latter is actually rather good.
Co-written by Kanak ‘Konnie’ Huq (of Blue Peter fame) and directed by Euros Lyn (Doctor Who), this modern fable is a surprisingly entertaining glimpse at a possible future dystopia. We can only guess that what unfolds is society’s answer to the impending energy crisis, as people are put to work on millions of exercise bikes to fuel a hi-tech, computerised existence, obsessed with mindless entertainment and online living – distractions from their slavery.
The plot is much more emotive and engaging than the first episode, with characters you actually care about and everything – and it does what all great satire should do, which is to push the current way of things to the extreme, in order to reveal some hidden truths about their nature.
It’s also really heartening to see some proper Science Fiction back on the television. The best Sci-Fi uses the future to tell us about the present, and 15 Million Credits does this better than most. Its exploration of the cruelty innate within Reality TV shows like The X Factor is undertaken by pushing them further in that direction. Its subversion of the idea that social networks somehow bring us closer together, its parody of throwaway digital culture, web advertising and online pornography and its use of a Microsoft Points-style credit system in place of a currency – all have deep sociological and psychological resonances with the new ways we have begun to live our lives through technology.
Black Mirror’s dark future is like our own world with the volume turned up, and what is reflected back is not a pretty picture. Most worrying of all is how the technology is used to placate us, used to make the population do the bidding of the powers-that-be, by removing people’s freedom of choice and disempowering them, while making them believe they are actually getting exactly what they want. In full high definition. Just keep peddling and saving up those credits and all your dreams will come true, citizen. It’s the same lie we’ve always been told, and the black mirror of the ubiquitous LCD screen reflects both that, and a ghostly wan imitation of our vitamin D-deprived faces. Now plug in, shut up and resume viewing.
This is a very clever caricature of our increasingly digital world, the full consequences of which, we are still oblivious to. Let’s just hope Brooker and Huq’s vision of a malevolent force behind the network is just another dark fantasy and not a true sign of things to come.
Can’t wait for next one now…
Watch On 4OD
An exhibition of works by artist James Chadderton has gone on display at the Incognito Gallery in Manchester’s Northern Quarter. The images depict a post-apocalyptic vision of the city. Photographs have been shopped to great effect, transforming modern-day Manchester city centre, into an urban wasteland.
Chadderton said he was inspired by “the visuals and themes of post apocalyptic films, books and games. The quality of films like 28 Days Later, The Road, Children of Men and games such as Metro 2033, S.T.A.L.K.E.R and the Fallout series has given me a huge amount of inspiration for creating work”.
Hope I get to see it before it closes on the 4th Jan 2012!
I recently read online that the final episode of David Attenborough’s latest epic, Frozen Planet, would not be shown in the US or China due to it’s apparently “controversial” angle on climate change.
On Thin Ice says nothing we haven’t already heard a million times about the polar icecaps melting – but it tells the story with amazing pictures of global warming’s effects on these regions, a calm and concerned narrative by Attenborough, and a lot of incontrovertible evidence. This was too much for some it would seem.
The BBC defended it’s decision to sell the series to 30 countries as a six-parter, with the 7th episode missing – stating that this was due to a difference in style rather than content (bullshit).
The good news is that Discovery Channel has backtracked under public pressure, and has now decided to show On Thin Ice on the US network, after a Change.org petition gathered 84,000 signatures complaining about this apparent censorship. Discovery Channel denies that the petition had any influence on their decision (more bullshit).
The episode itself is awesome. I watched it last night on BBC iPlayer and it is the best in the series in my opinion. It should still be available there to watch for viewers in the UK. Check it out
Thom Yorke and 3D from Massive Attack DJ at the Occupy London Xmas Party at the old UBS building, the Bank of Ideas.
If you have not yet seen Adam Curtis’s 2007 documentary series The Trap now is your chance. All three episodes are included in full, below.
Here Curtis explores what we mean when we talk about Freedom, the ideas of negative and positive liberty, and the strange dichotomy between coercion and it’s apparent opposite.
It’s really interesting stuff whatever political side of the fence you prefer. The concept of freedom lies at the heart of many political ideologies, from the Neoconservatives and the Bush Administration to Anarcho-Communists to New Labour – what differs is how freedom is conceptualised and administered, who that freedom really benefits and what it is actually liberating us from…
A few months ago, I made the decision to leave the popular social networking site. I gave no explanation, or warning to my facebook ‘friends’, I just deleted my profile. It was quite a spontaneous decision, but left me with an immediate feeling of relief. Since then, I have contemplated about why I made that snap choice, and why I have a continuing feeling it was a very wise decision. This has led me to thinking about the very concept of facebook, the purpose intended by its designers and its global domination. It has brought me to consider the personal, social, and psychological effects it was having on me, my friends and the world at large. The more deeply I unravel its framework and the social processes it has unleashed; the more unnerved I find myself. The more I see people glued to their screens for a facebook fix; the more concern I have for people’s mental health and general social evolution.
Yes, yes… here harps on the technophobe hippy, full of conspiracy and with a failure to see how facebook is really connecting people. Actually no; I was as hooked to the website as everyone else for many years. I used it to keep in touch with old friends, promote music and community events, encourage political debate and thought, share photos of fun memories with friends. What I failed to see is the illusion facebook creates, and the damage it was doing to my own mind and my relationships with others, until a few online events and arguments caused me to open my eyes.
I could probably write a book on facebook, but sadly I do not have the time, or patience, so instead I will give a few snippets of what revelations caused me to be so against the website, and provide food for thought with a few links.
It seems pretty obvious to me how a tool such as facebook has warped the reality of social reaction. Your facebook profile is not you. It’s a representation of certain parts of your character and that includes what you write on facebook in statuses or to others. They are not things you’d just drop into conversation, they are snippets of your life and thoughts that you think are going to provoke a reaction from others in the facebook unreality. The very nature of facebook determines how you express your thoughts and ideas; you consider not just how you come across to others before you type, but how you come across to the unreal facebook community at large (the entirety of your friends). These are all very different people; who on a face to face basis you would talk to differently, depending on who it was and who was around. You cannot alter your language and communication to personally speak to 300 friends. In reality, you would be very unlikely to speak to that many people at once – so a strange facebook personality begins to emerge, perhaps without you even realising, and this virtual facebook you, does not react or communicate in the same way as the real you.
I find this pretty unnatural and also it has an effect on how we perceive others in reality based on the facebook unreality. For example, the idea of the facebook wall. We communicate to one another in personal messages and yet these are public to all the friends we mutually share. This includes people we both don’t know that well in reality, maybe we met them once at another mutual friend’s house, or they work in the next office, or they frequent the same club night. This is material that would not in reality be public knowledge and allows others to form opinions or prejudices based on this interaction. It is so easy for such information to be misinterpreted, especially as this is just disembodied text. These words never left your mouth, yet hundreds of people will be judging you on an interaction that wasn’t even intended for them. Or was it, the very fact that you know that this interaction is public will consciously or subconsciously affect the very nature of the way you speak to your friends through facebook. The special connections we share with our real friends are lost in translation with the very fact that it is all so public. This leads to feeling of social isolation, as special bond with friends seem less significant when they are public property. We can make sure our responses to people are witty and quirky, we could spend an hour getting funny quotes off the internet to make ourselves look more interesting; but that’s not the real you, is it?
This facebook unreality has slowly been taking over from real interaction with friends – there is less need to make the effort to see friends when you can chat online. It is all made too easy and this exacerbates social laziness, also as social interaction is always a click of a button away, it prevents us from spending as much quality time alone; thinking, creating, reading or whatever else. Time alone is important for reflection and learning and social networking discourages this activity. Why use your brain when you can spend some time blankly looking at your news feed and feeling closer to people who are physically further away. Or in the next room in some cases!
Facebook encourages prejudice. We judge others on their profile, their ‘likes’ and unreal facebook interactions instead of how they come across in reality, because we have much more contact with them through facebook, so of course it will colour our perceptions of people. Yet this is the unreality.
Facebook encourages narcissism, as each time we are logged in we come across the unreal projection of ourselves. We begin to see this projection as the reality. What our profile picture is becomes important and how this will make us come across to others. We start discussing trivial facts about our day because if it gets some ‘likes’ from your friends then it must be worth saying. But some people will ‘like’ anything. Because the very action of ‘liking’ something makes them feel connected as they have had some input in an unreal social interaction. It also makes us judge others for the stuff they post in status that is of no interest to ourselves. How dare they clog up my news feed with such trivia…. this in itself is another form of self-importance. We are essentially often projecting to others look at my beautiful holiday, look at my perfect loved up relationship, look how many friends I have and how often they post on my wall. I must let everyone else see how perfect my life is. I must prove to myself how perfect my life is by representing it in the best possible way on facebook. Deleting the unflattering photos. Being all slushy with your other half on their wall when in reality, you are both on facebook in the same room and not interacting properly with the person that is under your nose!
I’ll give you an analogy I thought of:
My screen tells me you had a sausage sandwich today and it was tasty. I think – god – so what? That’s well boring. That person is dull. Why do they need to tell everyone about a sandwich – they must really love themselves to think all their facebook friends need this useless information. However let’s transfer this interaction to reality. We meet for a coffee. It’s nice to see you – it’s been ages. We smile and hug. You tell me about your sausage sandwich. I say “right, fair play, cheers for that” (this info still isn’t fascinating) but I laugh in a joking way and you smile too at the lameness of your sandwich story. It actually turns out to be a funny moment. We share a little laugh and now the sandwich story is almost endearing rather than leaving me wondering why I am friends with you.
I am trying to highlight the differences between real interaction and facebook interaction – obviously not all sandwich stories would play out like this 🙂
Then of course the facebook addict. I have my theory on facebook addiction. I think it comes from a cycle of feeling alienated or isolated so therefore needing the constant flow of social interaction, this in turn makes you more isolated because you spend all your time alone on the computer, so look to facebook to allow it’s perceived social fix. There are also laziness cycles in place. It is so much easier to log into facebook and chat or spy or post than to put your efforts into things that require more patience, concentration or effort. Facebook decreases your attention span because it’s all there on a plate… and the more you do it, the less arsed you can be to put this time into things that require more effort. This could include creative outlets, or going and seeing friends in person. Why go out when you can chat in bed? Facebook also because of its unreal nature makes people more comfortable with this false interaction than real interaction. It makes people more fearful or ill at ease with real interaction.
It can be argued that facebook allows free flow of ideas to lots of people at the click of a button. But using politics as an example, don’t you ever feel like your preaching to the converted? The ‘likes’ are always from the same people and those that don’t agree will use the opportunity to troll, to argue, to vent how they are right and you are wrong. Is that really a positive force or does it just further cause social divides. People don’t listen on facebook. They rant, they show off, they express what media they like or dislike, but they certainly don’t listen in the same way you would to a person you are talking to in reality. You can argue, be mean, be pig-headed to a disembodied profile – it takes a lot less courage than arguing to someone’s face. And it is easier to forget compassion when all you have is some text and a cheesy profile picture of that person in front of you. That sense of ‘unreality’ again stopping your tact and preventing the usual censorship you would normally use to spare people’s feelings.  You are almost ranting to yourself not the individual(s) in question.
Facebook is changing the way we interact as people. That’s certain. But why do the creators want to manipulate the way we interact; to control, to mediocritize and ultimately to create unthinking, unquestioning consumers. If you learn about the background behind facebook they will tell you themselves; facebook is used as an advertising tool and to sell and spread consumer information. Of course you’re being manipulated, even if you like to think it’s not affecting you; it will be, especially if you have this stuff in your face for several hours a day. John Smith likes Smarties and X Factor. Lucy Jones likes Pirates of the Caribbean and Primark. Every day. In your face. Personalised adverts.
You could convince yourself that as long as you still have lots of facebook interactions you have a relationship with those people. They might be just as bored and unfulfilled as you, and you happened to post something that caught their attention for a second so they commented. Does that equal a lifelong friendship? With real friendships you don’t need facebook. Remember phones, and going to see people, even email? Leaving facebook will only destroy your social life if it was all an unreality in the first place. And I don’t know about you but I’d rather know who my real friends are and be free from a fake social circle that leaves me feeling paranoid about true intentions and allows me to be manipulated by the Facebook Corporation and their business contacts.
Technology can be shared in person. Get off your arse and watch those funny videos at your friend’s house. You’ll enjoy it more. I’m not preaching here, and if people want to continue using ‘the book’ that’s their choice. But from what I’ve seen facebook users aren’t any happier or more life enriched. I care about people; and long for a society with improved links and bonds between people. Social gatherings, community groups, artistic workshops and real life social interactions a plenty. I miss those archaic, outdated times of yore before facebook. I certainly feel like I did more in those days. Or maybe I’m just living in the past?
Some links (some questionable – but I read them.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b017ywty/Mark_Zuckerberg_Inside_Facebook/
http://rield.com/faq/why-is-facebook-bad
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-05-03/tech/29974530_1_zuckerberg-open-graph-facebook-s-ceo
http://socialmediacollective.org/2011/11/28/in-defense-of-friction/
http://www.doncrowther.com/facebook/is-facebook-ruining-your-life
http://www.thecrowned.org/how-facebook-is-killing-real-relationships
Unbelievable, nauseating and bleak are all suitable adjectives for the description of Charlie Brooker’s latest satirical drama, Black Mirror. When I heard about the premise, I suppose I was hoping for something akin to a dramatised Brasseye Special, or Nathan Barley with added politicians and bestiality – but struggled to find the humour in it to be honest.  The TV-crime-drama aesthetics and tempo also put me off a bit, and the implausibility of the plot left me cold.
Having said all this I will still be watching the next two instalments of this mini-series, as I’m interested to see where he takes it next. Certainly, the YouTube generation is ripe for satirical analysis, and holding up a “Black Mirror” to the unseemly side of our digital lives and the effect it has on society and politics, is virgin territory that needs to be charted. And who better than Charlie Brooker to have a go!
I hope the next one is either more believable or more comedic, as I think The National Anthem fell between two stools, in so much as it was neither, and needed to be both, to be all that effective as a satire on our networked zeitgeist. The first episode felt like watching someone’s dark fantasy made real, rather than a future history playing out – but maybe that was the point Brooker was trying to make – that the internet age can bring that dark fantasy one step closer to being real. And that people will watch it. In their millions…
The Red Eye Portal 