World Television Day is celebrated on 21 November. A United Nations-proposed initiative launched following the First Forum on Television held on this day in 1996. The intention of this meeting was to recognize the medium as a tool capable of disseminating relevant information in a massive way, its direct impact on public opinion and the need for its use as a method of dissemination in a responsible manner. The UN invited member countries “to observe this day by promoting global exchanges of television programs focusing, in particular, on issues such as peace, security, economic and social development and the promotion of cultural exchange”. We have been predicting the death of this medium for years. According to a report by Zenith Media, the Internet for the first time surpassed TV as a favorite medium for consumers to use last year. Another remarkable piece of information from the same study (carried out to 50.000 people) is the time we spent consuming resources. Eight hours a day.

The difference between a tool and a weapon is the intention of the hands that hold it.

As early as 60, Mc Luhan, a scientist, professor and philosopher developed the term Global Village to explain the phenomenon of mass media development. He stated that this new method of transmitting information eliminated physical distances by allowing knowledge to be generated but in turn altered human essence and social organization.

He is considered a visionary, long before the explosion of tv as a mass medium, he reflected on how access to a huge stream of data “forced” to select them, and so was the projected small part that could show a distorted picture of reality. His aphorism “The medium is the message” is a mantra that is studied in all the faculties of Communication and Journalism.

The theorist argued that the only way to control the media is through public understanding of its effects. Teach to filter the eyes they look at instead of what they see.

In defense of the silly box.

Many voices claim not to watch television as an allegory for intellectuality. We return to the paradox of what was before, junk programming or the uncritical viewer. Does the decline of television programs correspond to a decline in a model of society?

Is this TV grid a response to our intellectual needs?
We have the power as viewers to change that trend, with our consumption we are fulminating programs, with our social media feedback, with our news clicks. We carefully select (create or not) the content we purchase.

Hell is not always the others.
These new trends are the result of the society of haste, of rapid rise. Are we looking for entertainment that doesn’t make us think, that doesn’t leave room for reflection?
We demand quality content. Let’s ask questions. Let’s doubt. Only the one who doubts evolves.