• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Does the "Lowest Common Denominator" exist?

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
We hear about it all the time. "This news program" or "that reality show" was marketed toward the Lowest Common Denominator. The low-attention-span, mindless, self-narcotizing, gullible, gratification-seeking citizens that absorb their info-tainment like sponges, oblivious or apathetic about how uneducated they are. *swirls wineglass*

But... Do they really exist? Is there really a huge mass of frivolous apes - or whatever snarky moniker you might want to apply to them - that drives TV executives or movie studios to lower their standards and avoid controversy and subversion of expectations? Or is it an image present only on the minds of higher-ups who underestimate the intelligence of their viewership? Brazilian newscaster William Bonner compared the average viewer of his news program with Homer Simpson (no joke!).

Are there thousands of Homers among us? Who are they? Where are they? Are they truly objectively inferior in intelligence - or even inferior, period? How do you know when you are one? And, in that case, do you have the duty - or even the capacity - to become educated?

Will the real Homer Simpson stand up?

(This thread brought to you by Viridian Feels Confused About Academia Inc.)
 

miss fortune

not to be trusted
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
20,589
Enneagram
827
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
being the type who is easily amused by most things, I probably fall into one of the lower common denominators camp... gotta love pawn stars, storage wars, parking wars and any food network competition that ever has existed... not to mention the try out rounds for american idol :blush: I always want to slap the idiots on things like the real world, jersey shore and big brother- they are just so DRAMATIC about everything! :doh:

I also always enjoyed beer and bacon cheeseburgers, love baseball, have attended a few indy car races and actually cared who won and am mesmerized by the paternity tests on maury :cheese:
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
We hear about it all the time. "This news program" or "that reality show" was marketed toward the Lowest Common Denominator. The low-attention-span, mindless, self-narcotizing, gullible, gratification-seeking citizens that absorb their info-tainment like sponges, oblivious or apathetic about how uneducated they are. *swirls wineglass*

But... Do they really exist? Is there really a huge mass of frivolous apes - or whatever snarky moniker you might want to apply to them - that drives TV executives or movie studios to lower their standards and avoid controversy and subversion of expectations? Or is it an image present only on the minds of higher-ups who underestimate the intelligence of their viewership? Brazilian newscaster William Bonner compared the average viewer of his news program with Homer Simpson (no joke!).

Are there thousands of Homers among us? Who are they? Where are they? Are they truly objectively inferior in intelligence - or even inferior, period? How do you know when you are one? And, in that case, do you have the duty - or even the capacity - to become educated?

Will the real Homer Simpson stand up?

(This thread brought to you by Viridian Feels Confused About Academia Inc.)

The real Lowest Common Denominator is Television in general. Not to imply that television is detestable, but that it is more common to own a television than it is to watch a "lowest common denominator" program. I bet we all have little homers inside of us confusing our belly buttons for donuts and our brains for cotton candy. Mmm...
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
Yes, there are sheep. Sheep eat what they are fed. So if shepherds can make and save money by feeding them cheap food, then, in a capitalist economy, they will. But sheep can be trained to eat all kinds of foods, even those considered expensive.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
This is a bit like that book The Middle Mind and the debates it sparked off, the premise that low quality or unchallenging and mind numbing TV is what the majority really wants is possibly just an anti-democratic hating on the masses.

On the other hand I do think that there's formulas employed by producers or suppliers to try and minimise costs and maximise returns and sometimes when that's really obvious its peevish.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
lol.. some of you people are too much.

i don't like reality tv either, but it isn't my business what other people watch. i think my own life is enough to handle, at the end of the day. of the people i know who do enjoy some of these shows, i wouldn't say they're apes. it's mostly late 20s/30 something women (mostly married with kids) who are at home often and just find some of it funny. some of them are smarter than me too. then again, maybe i'm the ape.
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This is a bit like that book The Middle Mind and the debates it sparked off, the premise that low quality or unchallenging and mind numbing TV is what the majority really wants is possibly just an anti-democratic hating on the masses.

On the other hand I do think that there's formulas employed by producers or suppliers to try and minimise costs and maximise returns and sometimes when that's really obvious its peevish.
It might be more of a greatest common factor. Each person, individually, might prefer something different, something better, something . . . else. Programming must attract a large audience to make money, however, which means it must appeal to large groups of people. Being overspecialized, or having content rich in a particular area, might have too narrow an appeal. Producers then make something most people are willing to watch, though it may be no one's first choice.
 

Nicodemus

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
9,756
Mmmhhh, could you please elaborate on this sentence?
If there were no worthless programs, people would watch better ones. They do what they do because they have learned it over time, but they could just as well have learned other watching patterns to which other programs would be better suited. There is simply no necessity to any of the programs now running.

I believe it is possible to have multi-layered productions that can be enjoyed on different levels, like a Mozart piece. Even good lowbrow shows are possible.
 
F

figsfiggyfigs

Guest
being the type who is easily amused by most things, I probably fall into one of the lower common denominators camp... gotta love pawn stars, storage wars, parking wars and any food network competition that ever has existed... not to mention the try out rounds for american idol :blush: I always want to slap the idiots on things like the real world, jersey shore and big brother- they are just so DRAMATIC about everything! :doh:

Amen for crappy tv shows!
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Slumming

It wasn't so long ago that the working class imitated the middle class, and the middle class imitated the upper class. But things have changed and it has become chic to imitate the working class.

This gives a frisson to the upper and middle classes, and appeals to their vanity. But really it is just reverse snobbery and and another form of slumming.
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
It might be more of a greatest common factor. Each person, individually, might prefer something different, something better, something . . . else. Programming must attract a large audience to make money, however, which means it must appeal to large groups of people. Being overspecialized, or having content rich in a particular area, might have too narrow an appeal. Producers then make something most people are willing to watch, though it may be no one's first choice.

So the reasoning is: thousands of "Meh."s > a few "Oooo!"s?

If there were no worthless programs, people would watch better ones. They do what they do because they have learned it over time, but they could just as well have learned other watching patterns to which other programs would be better suited. There is simply no necessity to any of the programs now running.

I believe it is possible to have multi-layered productions that can be enjoyed on different levels, like a Mozart piece. Even good lowbrow shows are possible.

What you're saying, then, is that "There's nothing better to watch currently, so they/we make do with what's there" - is that correct?
 

Such Irony

Honor Thy Inferior
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
5,059
MBTI Type
INtp
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
being the type who is easily amused by most things, I probably fall into one of the lower common denominators camp... gotta love pawn stars, storage wars, parking wars and any food network competition that ever has existed... not to mention the try out rounds for american idol :blush: I always want to slap the idiots on things like the real world, jersey shore and big brother- they are just so DRAMATIC about everything! :doh:

I also always enjoyed beer and bacon cheeseburgers, love baseball, have attended a few indy car races and actually cared who won and am mesmerized by the paternity tests on maury :cheese:

I'm pretty easily amused too. I'm sure some of the things I like fall into the 'lowest common denominator' category. Then I again I like some highbrow intellectual stuff too. I don't fit into one neat category. I like what I like and don't want to be judged for it.

I have intellectual interests but don't wan't to be intellectual all the time. Sometimes I just want to relax and put my brain to rest and watch a stupid sitcom. I don't think this is a bad thing.
 

miss fortune

not to be trusted
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
20,589
Enneagram
827
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I'm pretty easily amused too. I'm sure some of the things I like fall into the 'lowest common denominator' category. Then I again I like some highbrow intellectual stuff too. I don't fit into one neat category. I like what I like and don't want to be judged for it.

I have intellectual interests but don't wan't to be intellectual all the time. Sometimes I just want to relax and put my brain to rest and watch a stupid sitcom. I don't think this is a bad thing.

I'm rather well read and know my wine and art as well- it just doesn't pay to show that off in mixed company nearly as well as having an idea of who did what on whichever show :newwink:

plus, it's brain candy, like you said! :cheese:
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
So the reasoning is: thousands of "Meh."s > a few "Oooo!"s?
Yes. But most importantly, very little outrage/WTF's?

What you're saying, then, is that "There's nothing better to watch currently, so they/we make do with what's there" - is that correct?
Nicodemus is correct here, to a point. Some of us just don't watch, and find something more productive and entertaining to do with our time (like make fun of the TV-viewing sheep on online forums).

I'm rather well read and know my wine and art as well- it just doesn't pay to show that off in mixed company nearly as well as having an idea of who did what on whichever show :newwink:
So, just what are the wages of staying current in contemporary TV drivel?
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
it pays my wages... if I couldn't identify with everyone I would be screwed! :)
Perhaps I should feel lucky that I don't need to worry about such things at work.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
If not for my son and DVD movies, my TV would be used on average for around 4 hours a month. Too much garbage to sift through to bother most of the time. I watch documentaries, some sports, some news and some political satires.

TV is numbing.
 
Top