Dumbing Down

Yokel

LE
Every so often there is an ARRSE thread about dumbing down - in education, in the media. But what answers do these things suggest? I am thinking of @Magic_Mushroom and his comments about Blue Peter (and John Noakes visiting the Red Arrows) compared to the latest documentary about HMS Queen Elizabeth.

Could part of the problem be that less people have experience of practical things and therefore things need to be explained? Could it be that social media has reduced the public ability to think? Are the public dumbed down? Does it matter if the average person has a shorter attention span than the average Goldfish? I am sure I read (possibly on here) of jurors who posted questions about a case on social media.
 
Last edited:
I don’t understand :wink:
 
I got half way through the first paragraph then my mind drifted off as I got a 'ping' on my WhatsApp...

What was the question again?
 
You only have to look at the rise in popularity of reality TV to that the public has the attention span of a gnat
 
No one knows anything any more. The attitude is that all knowledge can be accessed on your phone so knowing things is a waste of time you could be thinking about fat arsed Kardashians instead.

Doccies start with the assumption most folks have some basic knowledge, but as that's no longer the case, they have to cater for the cabbages.
 
I think a large part of the issue with attention span is that people are constantly on phones / tablets and therefore don't spend time LOOK! A SQUIRREL!
 

Yokel

LE
For an example of dumbing down, just look at comedy. Shows like The Young Ones or Bottom did require the viewer to think, and to understand the puns, innuendo. Not Going Out was a recent example.

But what of the like of Little Britain or The Royle Family? Not much engagement needed there. Where are the contemporary comedies? Has political correctness killed comedy?

Officialdom seems dumbed down now - Government policies are made with as much intellectual effort was a lazy teenager, and feelings count more than facts in any sort of complaint process - see the Identity Politics thread.
 

Ritch

LE
Every so often there is an ARRSE thread about dumbing down - in education, in the media. But what answers do these things suggest? I am think of @Magic_Mushroom and his comments about Blue Peter (and John Noakes visiting the Red Arrows) compared to the latest documentary about HMS Queen Elizabeth.

Could part of the problem be that less people have experience of practical things and therefore things need to be explained? Could it be that social media has reduced the public ability to think? Are the public dumbed down? Does it matter if the average person has a shorter attention span than the average Goldfish? I am sure I read (possibly on here) of jurors who posted questions about a case on social media.
Bananas.
 

Yokel

LE
No one knows anything any more. The attitude is that all knowledge can be accessed on your phone so knowing things is a waste of time you could be thinking about fat arsed Kardashians instead.

Doccies start with the assumption most folks have some basic knowledge, but as that's no longer the case, they have to cater for the cabbages.
Are there smaller arsed ones instead? Just asking....

I think a large part of the issue with attention span is that people are constantly on phones / tablets and therefore don't spend time LOOK! A SQUIRREL!
I wonder how much of it is that modern technology gives fast access to information in a way that people neither value it, or stop to think "Am I sure about this?" Is the melting point of Copper really four? People mindlessly spout nonsense without thinking about it such as "you only use ten per cent of your brain".
 

endure

GCM
No one knows anything any more. The attitude is that all knowledge can be accessed on your phone so knowing things is a waste of time you could be thinking about fat arsed Kardashians instead.

Doccies start with the assumption most folks have some basic knowledge, but as that's no longer the case, they have to cater for the cabbages.

"Albert Einstein was once asked: “What is the speed of sound?” Without batting an eye he answered cheerfully: “I don’t know. I don’t burden my memory with such facts that I can easily find in any textbook.”"
 
"Albert Einstein was once asked: “What is the speed of sound?” Without batting an eye he answered cheerfully: “I don’t know. I don’t burden my memory with such facts that I can easily find in any textbook.”"
Albert Einstein also said that in the near future we will have so much information available we will be unable to process it.
 

Yokel

LE
"Albert Einstein was once asked: “What is the speed of sound?” Without batting an eye he answered cheerfully: “I don’t know. I don’t burden my memory with such facts that I can easily find in any textbook.”"
Yes but there is something to be said in being unwilling to believe some who tells you it is four miles per hour. Are people able and willing to take what they are told and think about whether it makes sense?
 

endure

GCM
The world is as it's always been. There are bright people and stupid people. Anyone who tells you that it's 'dumbed down' when we're surrounded by ideas and developments that were undreamed of 50 years ago is walking around with their eyes shut.
 
You only have to look at the rise in popularity of reality TV to that the public has the attention span of a gnat
I think it's got more to do with people flushing goldfish down their toilet and their DNA getting into the drinking water and then into us, leaving us with the attention span of a goldfish :)
 

gorillaguts981

War Hero
Laziness and lack of curiosity. When I read 'speed of sound' I thought, through what medium? assuming air, at sea level or altitude, high or low humidity?
 
TV used to try and educate. Now, it talks down to us. Channel 4's laughable recent programme about the Civil War was a good example of this - too simple for anyone with more than a passing interest in the subject, yet not basic enough in terms of seeking to explore why the war happened, to be useful to a person as an introduction.
History is an area where YouTubers are besting the traditional media, hands down. Yesterday, Lindybeige uploaded a nearly two hour-long discussion of Gladiators in Ancient Rome - no talking down, just an assumption that the viewer is intelligent and wants to learn. TIK has begun his Stalingrad series (he is nearly two hours in and still on the start of the operation). Military Aviation History; Drachinifel, Military History Visualised; The Chieftain, etc are all good and cover a subject in depth.
Had the Lindybeige video been a TV programme, it would have lasted 30 mins. Producers would have insisted he dressed as a Gladiator, or visited the Flavian Amphitheatre, or have hired actors to recreate fights, etc. We would have learned much less than in his YouTube video. If something is interesting, people will listen/watch and not need gimmicks. TIK's series on Operation Crusader is him talking over maps, for nine hours. If people are interested, they will watch.
 
A question in a pub used to create a discussion about what was the correct answer, nowadays it's a simple click end of discussion with 'who knew?'

Google 'The Truth About ?????' you end up with 22 million pages of anything but the truth unless you are into conspiracy theories in which case they are all true.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top