Post 5

Is it important for cultures to protect themselves from outside media influence?
My grandmother always said "Whats the point of learning inuktitut? it will die anyways"
Mind you that she said this in Inuktitut and that was my sloppy translation. Still, she had a point. She did not want anything to do with any more of that "eskimo" stuff. I understand people wanting to protect the Inuit culture, and I do wish I could speak Inuktitut, but I don't think we need to protect ourselves. People need to be informed on outside events and ideologies. American culture has made it into Canadian culture, but no one has died from it yet. Putting the word protection on something instantly brings up the word victim. The last thing that Inuit culture needs to be labeled as is victim. People have to be responsible for themselves and take initiative to be informed. On what to be informed of is each persons choice.
I don't like the idea of the media micro managing what I see and hear. If CBC dictates that I should see a certain percent of what I see to be Canadian then I'm sure they can dictate other aspects of my media experience. When a medium or organization decides to protect or exclude an aspect of human nature they become manipulative. They may have the best intentions but it still happens.
For example I'm sure a lot of people here know about the Rick Perry video on youtube. If not then I should inform you that it beat the world record for most disliked youtube video. That record was previously held by Rebecca Black, so you know that it was terrible.
Anyways, Rick Perry was saying that it was a shame that gay people can openly fight in the army, but Christians could not openly worship in schools. This was his way of "protecting" his religion, however by protecting his religion he immediately discredited gay rights. Maybe this is a weird tangent I'm going on but I just mean that the media is always going to be there, and people have a responsibility to uphold their self knowledge.