Page 385 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2

| Pol t cal Enterta nment: From The West Wing to South Park

consumers aim to protect these universes from the semblance of “invasion” by
the world of politics. Particularly when entertainers espouse political beliefs,
then, pundits, letters to newspaper editors, and watercooler discussion alike
will often question the entertainers’ right or legitimacy to interject politics into
entertainment.
Proponents of political entertainment, however, point out that everything
is political. Admittedly, a great deal of any film, show, song, or other product’s
politics will be implicit, or subtle, and thus much entertainment will neither ad-
vertise its politics, nor necessarily be aware of them. Nevertheless, family sit-
coms, for instance, posit very clear notions of what a neighborhood, a family,
a man, and a woman are and are not; and even a seemingly escapist program
such as The O.C. makes numerous subtle statements about everything from ra-
cial politics to poverty to the role of capitalism. We may agree or disagree with
these politics, but they are always present, regardless of the product. Indeed, if
one ever finds oneself in the presence of a seemingly unpolitical text, this means
only that its politics are already one’s own politics, hence blinding the viewer or
listener to their presence. Therefore, instead of regarding political entertainment
as “pulling a fast one” on us by slipping a dose of politics into our entertainment,
we might instead see it as more up front and honest. Politics is about more than
just who to vote for in the next election; politics at base is about determining the
ways in which all institutions and individuals should interact in society. Poli-
tics thus entails everything from what rights a parent has over their children, to
what rights a community has over its public places and institutions, to millions
of other decisions about what the world should look like and why. Consequently,
politics inevitably fly by us in every which way in all entertainment, and so de-
fenders of political entertainment argue that politics are always already pres-
ent. We can discuss and debate which politics the media should embody, but we
cannot wish the political out of entertainment.

PoLiTiCs anD EnTErTainmEnT as a
DysFunCTionaL marriagE
Political entertainment has also been attacked, however, for being too weak.
This argument is most forcefully leveled by Neil Postman in his invective against
American television, Amusing Ourselves to Death. Postman charges American
television with having become nothing but entertainment. Hence, Postman ar-
gues that entertainment has colonized politics, reducing serious issues to silly
sound bites, flashy graphics, and popularity contests. To Postman, politics are a
serious matter, and hence must be treated as such, and the moment that they
are mixed with entertainment, the prerogatives of entertainment take over, auto-
matically simplifying and trivializing important points in the process. Postman
worries that such an approach to politics produces an apathetic and ill-informed
populace, who would rather have a good laugh than ponder our future with due
seriousness. A significant danger of political entertainment, then, is that in pre-
senting itself as entertainment and politics, as consumers we may be engaging
with entertainment alone, while only thinking that we are engaging with politics.