Words Without Actions Are Dead

Image by MIC Oligar via Artjoh's Renderings

   In his book Culture Jam, activist Kalle Lasn addresses both the issues and the solutions related to the seemingly unbreakable cycle of America’s overconsumption and lack of true freedom production. Lasn illustrates that: “Identical images flow into our brains, homogenizing our perspectives, knowledge, tastes, and desires” (11). That basic pattern of uniformity that he describes holds true for almost all mediums of popular culture within the U.S. When people are taught culture instead of creating culture, they are essentially mindless consumers and actors who have to work harder and harder by the year in order to feed their cravings. Americans are generally addicts who feel out of place when away from the internet, TV, and stores that quell their existence. The well-worded ramblings on modern mental and physical pollution that constitute the first half of Lasn’s book don’t have to be taken negatively, and instead can be used to fuel understanding of new perspectives. In Lasn’s words, “If the old American dream was about prosperity, maybe the new one will be about spontaneity” (109). As the book asserts, America’s one-track culture desperately needs to be derailed through “détournement”, the challenging or “jamming” of monotonous media in order to create more genuine thoughts. Not everyone will be on board with Lasn’s opinions after reading Culture Jam, but even one broken wheel or axle can interrupt the mindless travel of the passengers consigned to the corporate-run train that controls America.

The most prevalent and potent cultural artifact within American culture is the illuminated screen. Technology has become an extension of oneself, to the point where the people controlling technology conduct decisions more than ones own soul. The United States prides itself on freedom of choice, but communication and journalism student Des Freedman argues that “Media power has frequently been seen in terms of the ability of one group or a single individual to command such a sizeable presence in and control of the media environment, and thus the public sphere, that it undermines both the pluralism of voice and diversity of opinion necessary for a democracy…Concentrated media power, therefore, is antidemocratic both because it hands definitional, analytical, and interpretive power to unelected organizations and because it undermines the ability of citizens to acquire and exchange the information and ideas necessary to make informed decisions about public life.” Increasingly mediated by media, Americans are so used to living virtually, living through others, and trying to emulate others that they have become detached from themselves and their ability to be democratic. The superficial plenitude and attitude that “everything is under control” that is featured in the media and mimicked by Americans continues to enforce the illusion that the American dream is still tangible; it also distracts from the country’s crumbling foundations. The big cracks in American democracy -- corporate personification, dissatisfaction with government, wealth distribution, environmental irresponsibility -- seem too big to patch. The feeling of problems being too big to fix is exemplified in the words of songwriter John Mayer’s song Waiting on the World to Change: “Now we see everything that’s going wrong, with the world and those who lead it, we just feel like we don’t have the means, to rise above and beat it.”  
If technology has such an impact on people’s lives, can it be used for good? Kalle Lasn warns that television can be too much talk and not enough action. He did mention scenarios such as the take down of the British Columbia logging industry's "Forests Forever" campaign through the jamming of television, but that is a different concept than using television to actually grow as a person. Philosophy professor Gerald J. Erion’s ideas in his article “Amusing Ourselves to Death with Television News: Jon Stewart, Neil Postman, and the Huxleyan Warning” are very similar to Kalle Lasn’s, except that Erion gives more discussion to the positive possibility of television shows causing change. Both authors recognize the negative impact of TV primarily filled with empty talk -- talk that does not bring about any real knowledge or progress. As someone who watches The Daily Show with Jon Stewart often, I’d have to agree with Erion that Stewart’s reframing of current news does spur productive thought. I’ll admit that The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are usually the only political shows that I turn to, but the shows don’t keep me contained to their information. If I feel that I need to obtain more information on a subject seen during one of the Comedy Central shows, I’ll look it up. The research that these entertaining shows motivates me to pursue is notable. Erion warranted this idea when he quoted Annenberg analyst Dannagal Goldthwaite saying, “The Daily Show assumes a fairly high level of political knowledge on the part of its audience”. Experiences are what you make them -- if you want to make them a learning experience or an instigator of action, then that’s exactly what they will become. 
And what about the internet? In the “Posthuman” section of Lasn’s “Autumn” chapter, life with internet comes across as miserable. Shocking but commonplace internet usage highlighted includes a man who is interested in nothing but surfing the internet, people who live only virtual lives, people’s experiences losing their validity unless they're captured by technology, computers regulating people’s moods, internet-induced depression, corrupted emotions, and humans wasting away in front of screens. Are these dim depictions the essence of the internet? Author Nicholas Carr’s conclusions about internet effects are similar to Lasn’s. He explains that, “...as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.” Others, such as digital creative director of ad agency Deutsch LA Josh Rose, are more optimistic about the internet. Rose feels that, “The Internet doesn’t steal our humanity, it reflects it.” The real question is whether the convenience generated by the internet is worth the unavoidable negative effects, i.e. decreased attention span and in-person experiences. I’d have to argue that it is- but only if used “responsibly”. My definition of responsibly using the internet would be: internet use without a loss of connection to the real world -- most likely only a few of hours a day. As technology becomes increasingly necessary for modern life, that can actually seem quite difficult. It takes focus and premeditation, but it is possible to complete many of the tasks people instinctively turn to computers for now without them. Try using a map instead of a GPS or Google Maps- it does wonders for navigation skills. Formulate your own recipe for dinner instead of robotically reading off of a screen. Get deep into the great outdoors, where you can rediscover a side of yourself that doesn’t rely on technology. 
“If the Earth felt less like something out there and more like an extension of our bodies, we'd care for it like kin.” (Lasn 6) The thought that earth’s environment is headed towards bankruptcy is considered pseudoscience by many. It is the most profound case of ignoring the truth that Americans, (as well as most of the world) have convened. “Fifteen hundred eminent scientists, including the majority of all living Nobel Prizewinners, signed a Warning to Humanity in 1992, and fifty-eight world academies of science released a similar document in 1994, warning that the human experiment on Planet Earth is veering out of control” (Lasn 201). World leaders announce the rising GDP with confidence yet there’s chaos going on all around us. The issue of the present human relation to nature tops the priority list in my opinion. After all, what will culture jamming do for us if the earth stops supporting our endeavors? The most encouraging aspect of the environment controversy is that huge changes would happen if individual consumers made better choices. If everyone stopped buying into the seductive idea of bottled water from Fuji or Mt. Shasta and just used filtered tap water, 9.67 billion gallons worth of water bottles and the heaping pile of plastic and pollution that goes along with that wouldn’t have to exist. Plus, the average American can drink tap water for a year for about 50 cents. There is a seemingly endless amount of similar examples that advertising companies work hard to keep in the background. Americans complain about the “burden” that is the responsibility to take care of the environment. Extreme plenitude -- the plenitude that keeps them from accomplishing any authentic changes -- is taken for granted. People just keep taking in and paying out in a robotic fashion. 
I recently spoke with a guy from Denmark who is wrapping up a three month trip to America, during which he visited around twelve states. He informed me that after asking countless Americans about the recent healthcare reform, only two people gave him any answer other than “It’s bad”. There is obviously some sort of disconnect from what is going on around Americans if they can’t even explain an issue as significant as their own country’s health care. Do Americans really want to emulate the negative stereotypes that other countries tag us with? Wouldn’t Americans rather “Disprove their false theories that are usually based on popular opinions without them ever scraping off the surface to look deeper into issues”, as suggested by the Dane? Perhaps the "Perpendiculaires" and Situationists are really onto something when they say that “...culture ought to be spread laterally (through salon-type discussions) rather than vertically (through TV and the Internet)” (102).
It can seem overwhelming to help trigger the complete reform of a country, but it is something that can be initiated by starting small. Individual changes, such as choosing local, organically grown food over fast food chains or talking to someone in person instead of watching reruns do make a difference. If everyone were to take actions such as those, there would be a noticeable transformation. Lasn rallies people to support advancement by proclaiming: “Instead of resisting this kind of fundamental change, let's embrace it. Let's cheer on our cultural rebels even as we fear them. Let's revel in (or at least not shy away from) the life and death of our paradigms” (113). Though Lasn is only one person, he has sparked some valuable changes, such as the Occupy Wall Street movement. If one does not at least try, then there is no chance for success. The validity of Ghandi’s words of wisdom, “Be the change that you wish to see in the world” has not expired. It is not as if there haven’t been victories already. On a modest scale, Arcata, California now has democratic control of the corporations within their community. A large scale example would be the enforcement of anti-smoking laws that largely limited tobacco companies’ ability to manipulate. Martin Luther King, Jr. understood the influence that an individual can have: “What affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality.” Avoid being overwhelmed, understand what you want to stand for, and just go for it. 
Works Cited:
Lasn, Kalle. Culture Jam: How to Reverse America's Suicidal Consumer Binge-and Why We Must. New York: Quill, 2000.

Erion, Gerald J. “Amusing Ourselves to Death With Television News: Jon Stewart, Neil Postman, and the Huxleyan Warning”. In J. Holt (ed.) The Daily Show and Philosophy (Malden, MA/ Oxford, UK: Blackwell), 5-15.

Freedman, Des. “The Puzzle of Media Power: Notes Toward a Materialist Approach”. International Journal of Communication. 2014. Web. 25 March 2014. <http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2081>.

Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”. The Atlantic. 1 July 2008. Web. 25 March 2014. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/>.

Rose, Josh. “How Social Media Is Having a Positive Impact On Our Culture”. Mashable. 23 Feb 2011. Web. 25 March 2014. <http://mashable.com/2011/02/23/social-media-culture/>

Hogan, Chris. “U.S. CONSUMPTION OF BOTTLED WATER SHOWS CONTINUED GROWTH, INCREASING 6.2 PERCENT IN 2012; SALES UP 6.7 PERCENT”. International Bottled Water Association. 25 April 2013. Web. 25 March 2013. <http://www.bottledwater.org/us-consumption-bottled-water-shows-continued-growth-increasing-62-percent-2012-sales-67-percent>.

Image by Peter Gleick via ScienceBlogs

vs.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Index for Sustainable Economic Welfare (GPI)

Image by Ida Kubiszewski via The Archilectural League NY