How better off do you think society would be if we stripped celebrities of their statuses and finally halted the cycle of idolization that began in Hollywood?
I personally think that the obsession that man has over another man for their purported "artistic" merits is the final form of degeneracy. It wipes away any self-fulfilling potential in a person in favor of following the trends of their favorite celebrity.
I only see it becoming worse in the next coming generations.
Why is there this unhealthy obsession with other people's lives? Is it to detract ourselves from looking in or shaping ourself after the degeneracy that this century's "idols" put on display for us to digest?
infinitely better.
but you really can't get rid of it without destroying the technological infrastructure itself (including the internet as a whole)
internet people love to call out Hollywood for being degenerate, but really, what's the internet but just the next step down the degeneracy, where now every average person gets to whore themselves out just like a hollywood celebrity.
look at /pol/, all it is is people obsessing over and asking other strangers for their proposed "merits" but the other anon is just as much a scumbag as them
On the other hand I guess it could be said that in some ways anonymity is better, after all the great builders of the cathedrals in the middle ages didn't use their names
>>70341465
>Standing in checkout line at grocery store to buy stew ingredients yesterday
>The entire mafazine rack at the checkout is filled with magazines of who got divorces, who got married, who got divorces, new evidence P. Diana was murdered
I can't believe people are into this shit. I really can't.
>>70342442
>look at /pol/, all it is is people obsessing over and asking other strangers for their proposed "merits" but the other anon is just as much a scumbag as them
This is just a projection of their own insecurities and doesn't hold a representation to what they would be able to accomplish if they were to pose that same question to a stranger off the street they felt threatened by or judged by.
>but you really can't get rid of it without destroying the technological infrastructure itself (including the internet as a whole)
Instead of disconnecting from the internet, we should restructure the "like" and "share" culture of the internet that glamorizes this notion of becoming an internet celebrity through more authoritatively anonymous formats, just like you've suggested on your last post.
Jaron Lanier, the author who wrote "You're not a Gadget" has a pretty interesting model for social networks, in that they should be pay-per-use models for people that want to benefit for the free self-advertisement on a user role as they see fit. This could satisfy both means for those against anonymity and are for it.
You have to fundamentally remove the human mind from adoring or loving anything
>>70343316
>I can't believe people are into this shit. I really can't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzt7oCFN3ek
Wait, you're telling me that you don't care what ridiculous antics HBB is getting into on this week's new episode on TLC? She's so relatable! I guess we're all a little this stupid! It's okay to bathe in mediocrity, these people are on our magazine covers and our tv shows, they're human. I'm human. Aren't you human?
>>70341465
They're obviously sick of their own pathetic life so they have to live vicariously through someone else's. We would be better off but it's certainly not the only thing rotting people's minds.
>>70343600
Adoring and loving != obsessiveness and complacency
>>70343600
>Why is there this unhealthy obsession with other people's lives?
Of course people can like entertainment and think an actor is good at their job, but it's stuff like >>70343316 describes is what is in question.
>>70343316
how different is this from the Cruz/Trump stuff this board is all about though? Especially that divorce scandal
>>70344265
There is none. The people who start those threads are culpable to the same sensationalized strategy that you see on magazine racks. Only difference is that they're doing it for
F
R
E
E
>>70342442
>look at /pol/, all it is is people obsessing over and asking other strangers for their proposed "merits" but the other anon is just as much a scumbag as them
Hello fellow scumbag! I would like to ask you about your proposed ""merits"". Care to share?
People on /pol/ shouldnt act high and mighty
They would sensationalize in the same if lets say..... Nintendo's stock went down by .5%
>>70345894
Publicly traded company that offers a commodity that can be bought in retail stores that the consumer expends time + money to consume said product is upset to see the company that they've invested/bought from is performing badly is the same as starting a thread on /v/ about how Ayame's swimsuit isn't revealing enough?
>>70344265
>how are potential leaders of the country more worthy of talk and debate then celebrities
really retard? celebrities (like politicians) are professional liars, the difference is, politicians can actually affect your life
>>70341465
Where do you live OP?
I live within the Thirty Mile Zone and my work and social life occasionally interacts with the entertainment industry so my opinion on the matter will be different than the average person.
>>70347066
/pol/ cant even talk about politicians properly without posting memes every 2 posts
>>70347387
NYC. Currently work as a developer for a news publication, actually. The intersection in my life with this topic is probably more relatable than you'd think.
>>70341465
You know what time it is...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1ZtwMMujhU
