tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6710742878979631620.post498438790405235866..comments2022-07-20T23:45:34.369-04:00Comments on Praxis Habitus - On Race Religion & Culture: Muslim Televangelists Inspire Revival in the Arab WorldGerardo Martihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04461299713784020487noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6710742878979631620.post-31913653872932118772009-01-09T21:20:00.000-05:002009-01-09T21:20:00.000-05:00Thank you for your thoughtful remarks.Thank you for your thoughtful remarks.Gerardo Martihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04461299713784020487noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6710742878979631620.post-77310502060448941712009-01-09T21:18:00.000-05:002009-01-09T21:18:00.000-05:00Probably the only thing I might take issue with in...Probably the only thing I might take issue with in the article is the assumptive idea that media is not always liberalizing. Granted it may not begin that way but the truth is all change is in some way liberalizing. This is not to say that change or any liberalizing effects new media may have is innately bad, however I think it is important to point out that it is a reality. <BR/><BR/>With new media there is nothing inherently fundamental or liberal. However, it is by definition in no way traditional. In fact new media does exact fresh parameters on whatever content anyone may choose to share through it. This is not to say that these new parameters effective themselves on content from a philosophical or idealistic way, because in fact the changes that often occur do so from a technical purview more than from any other slant. Nevertheless, the changes are real and palatable to any such content and in the end will effect how that content is shared.<BR/><BR/>Television is a great example. Compared to the traditional church or mosque (which technically are also visual mediums of a more three-dimensional nature), emphasis can shift dramatically depending on the medium. How well any content may do through television will pertain to how well that content is applied to a television perspective. This fact alone shifts the onus of communication from the evangelist to the director. It also means that the focus on the traditional audience for a televangelist moves from the evident one in front of him to the electronic one that he just can’t see. In point of fact the existing audience actually becomes part of the show—with both their knowledge and consent. Whatever the message is, it is also being told by the camera angles, the cut-away shots, the editing and the graphics. <BR/><BR/>Time also becomes a much more important issue. All new media is inherently more expensive. Also, more visual mediums can’t hold the attention span of the audience as long as older forms often do. The content changes, like abridging a book to fit in a magazine article. In comparison to the very real and tangible church or mosque experience it can be easy to see why critics often refer to either experience as inadequate or ‘lite’. Yet with time as strong a factor as it is today, the popularity of the televangelist experience is also understandable. <BR/><BR/>Technicians also become part of the team it takes to share a message. Adding to or replacing more traditional roles of confidants for those tasked with the sharing of a message. For their part it is evident that while they may or may not believe in the message they do play a large factor in its expression because of their expertise. Given the non-traditional factors and effects on content and expression it is hard to see how new media wouldn’t have some effect on traditional content in that way eventually have a liberalizing effect on anything expressed through it.Kudohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16149769081378079281noreply@blogger.com