Amusing Ourselves to Death

Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business was written by Neil Postman in 1985. It stands as one of the most prescient works of media criticism in history. Postman strongly advocates for media literacy and demands that we become at least acutely aware of how our technological tools shape our minds.

Despite the book being written over four decades ago, Postman’s critique remains more urgent than ever as we move into an era dominated by media.

1984 (George Orwell) vs. Brave New World (Aldous Huxley)

George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World are two influential classics written in the mid-20th century. They are dystopian fiction and depict totalitarian control from opposite directions. In 1984, the government controls people through pain and fear, while in the Brave New World, people are controlled through pleasure and distraction. Postman argued that Huxley’s vision was the one unfolding in America.

A Migration: The “Age of Typography” To The “Age of Show Business”

Postman wrote his book during the height of network television’s influence. He explained that we were moving from an “Age of Typography” (a culture shaped by print and analysis) to an “Age of Show Business” (a culture shaped by passive, image-based entertainment).

Postman asserts that every communication tool favors a specific form of thought. For example, in print culture, linear thinking, patience, and logical analysis are encouraged. On the other hand, visual culture demands more immediate attention, emotion, and visual appeal.

The “Peek-a-Boo World”

Postman introduces his concept of the “Peek-a-Boo World” in which he describes a media ecosystem where news and information pops into our view for a brief second to capture our attention, before vanishing without much context or meaningful impact. This is similar to a peek-a-boo game with an infant.

When one combines telegraphing (information without context) with photography (immediate visual absorption), there are three distinct qualities that the viewer takes in:

• Irrelevance: We cannot actually use a lot of the information we take in through news in our daily life.
• Incoherence: Events are given in isolated chucks.
• Impermanence: New information moves so quickly and in continuous streams.

This isn’t to say that we should turn a blind eye to what is happening around us. However, the human brain was not designed to take in this much information. For example, within the span of minutes, we can see that there was a flood in Asia, followed by a celebrity divorce, followed by a local fire, with no overarching narrative. We end up with a vast storehouse of trivia, but almost no deep comprehension or capacity for meaningful action.

The 21st Century: Tik Tok, Instagram, and X

Nowadays, we have algorithmic feeds (a set of programmed rules and models that analyzes personal activity and displays content you are most likely to engage with). This is a version of Postman’s “Peak-A-Boo World” that is highly personalized. Platforms like Tik Tok, Instagram, and X present content in endless and disconnected 15 second cycles that are optimized purely for rapid dopamine hit and context-switching. This forces our brain to constantly reset its emotional baseline every few seconds which makes it nearly impossible to maintain sustained critical thought or emotional resonance on any single topic (without further pursuit of research). With these algorithms, it is so easy to “doomscroll” mindlessly and forget about time.

Everything Must Entertain

Movies and television shows are a great form of entertainment for pleasure, and there is nothing inherently wrong with it. It’s always fun going to the theaters or having a movie night with friends. However, when every other human enterprise (politics, news, religion, education, law, etc.) are forced to adopt the same rules of show business and entertainment to get attention, there becomes an issue. This is because entertainment naturally thrives on having heroes, villains, and conflict for views, while nuance makes for poor show business. Therefore, it is much easier to pick a basic, polar opposing side which is destructive when attempting to understand complex matters. When entertainment becomes the mandatory filter for all thought, a society will lose its ability to distinguish what is amusing and what is important.

The Death of A Shared Reality

When politics and law, for example, follow the logic of entertainment – which survives by giving people context that feels good and validates their emotions – society fractures. The human attention becomes the product that is being manipulated because entertainment media conditions the brain to crave instant gratification and constant novelty. Algorithms deliver personalized and hyper-entertaining bubbles that are designed to confirm what users already believe. This is known as the “filter bubble,” and a state of intellectual isolation.

A public that cannot agree on what is happening ultimately is unable to cooperate on what to do. This leads to an incapacitation of self-governance.

Conclusion

This isn’t to say that we should all avoid social media or forms of entertainment, but rather be more aware of our engagement with these platforms when we address nuanced societal topics. As we grow increasingly intertwined with technology, it is important to recognize how our daily tools shape our habits and mind. It is important to demand context. And finally, it is important to regulate passive consumption.