ResultsYour search for "media theory"

A couple of days ago, I stumbled upon an interesting post by Jonathan Stray about journalism as an editorial search engine. It describes journalism as a system for learning about the world.

Recently, I have been dealing with the question of whether a film is capable of conveying scientific knowledge. By this, I do not mean the more or less reputable science programs on television, which tend to contribute to the popularization of scientific knowledge. Nor do I mean film as the object of scientific study in film studies. Rather, I am concerned with the question of whether film can adequately convey a scientific, controversial subject matter. The starting point for this was a study that has not yet been published and that was conducted in the Department of Education at the University of Trier: a comparison of the teaching methods of film and text in terms of their effectiveness in learning when dealing with scientific knowledge.

The Blogpiloten are currently covering the topic “Television is dead”. Over the last few days, several guest authors have published their thoughts on the subject, such as Thomas Praus with his four theses on the art of television survival or André Krüger with his astute analysis of current developments in television.

The tenor of these posts is usually that television is changing or needs to change. And although I agree with this opinion as a long-time non-television owner, I would like to put myself in the shoes of “the others” for a change: namely those who do not generally leave their computers switched on and use the web, but see it as a pure work tool. So how dead is television for a television viewer?