Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!parc!xsoft!kuma!ryan
From: ryan@xsoft.xerox.com (Michael Ryan)
Subject: Re: Media recursion
Message-ID: <1994Sep6.225624.16306@xsoft.uucp>
Sender: news@xsoft.uucp
Reply-To: ryan@xsoft.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox
References: <345otk$5po@mill2.millcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 22:56:24 GMT
Lines: 28

In article 5po@mill2.millcomm.com, hiro@mill2.millcomm.com (Hiroshima) writes:
[reasoning deleted]
>	I think that part of this is media recursion.  The media shows what
>it thinks kids want to see, which in many ways is kids like themselves.
>The bands that play the music and make the videos that the kids want to see
>make money, and the others either change their styles or die out entirely. 

good idea - i've seen it around  for some time.  for instance, the way that "Hair" and
Woodstock Classic (TM)  put "hippy" culture into the mainstream and, thus, created
a new "hippy-lite" (TM) culture (see the Turtles/the Monkees).  another example is
the way that 60s sitcoms affected the dress and mannerisms of housewives all
across the nation - and their buying habits.

the key idea is to feed a trend until it sputters then to create another.  in this way,
the media can manipulate the buying habits of its syncophants and continuously
generate revenue.  i think this idea is as old as mass media.

BTW, how do you want to apply this idea to artificial life?
//michael

---
::
:: michael ryan
:: ryan@xsoft.xerox.com
:: 415 813 7620
:: ob disclaimer: opinions expressed are not those of xerox, corp.


