PRESS.PAUSE.PLAY Response…June 26,2016, by Ahmed Malik Braxton
Directors David Dworsky and Victor Kohl documents the transformation of media due to the rampant increase in accessibility in the interrogative film documentary “Press.Pause.Play” (2011). The directors allowed for well-known media makers and those involved in the market for media creation to give their view on what the evolving technology and its increase in accessibility means, assessing whether or not this could lead to an artistic cultural revolution or on the opposite end of the spectrum if this means the demise of the arts as the cultural producer that it has proven to be. Essentially, the question underlying the film is does mass accessibility equate to the destruction of culture.
Throughout the film, I kept thinking about the concept of the subjective vs the objective such as that we discussed in class; as a sub-theme one could say was the notion of “talent”. One quote near the introduction during the panning of the library scene along the lines of what was considered good media (or excellent) has historically been dictated by those in power and historically from the manner in which we typically analyze (that of Euro-centricity) has been at the helm of white men. For this reason, a terrible loss has been affronted to those who do not have access to the circles, they must hide their identity to become a part of the “canon” or not be seen as great producers of media. This idea is why there are a great bit of talented people who are not archived and/or awarded. Take for example the Oscars and Grammys, in the history of the Oscars only 32 media engagers won some form of award, four of those thirty-two were lead actors and one of those thirty-two were lead actresses, this isn’t to complain about the situation merely to point out that certain folks are marginalized within the ranks of consolidated media. The beauty and power of media now is that anyone has access to it and being that anyone has access to it, more pools of judges can get to it. This allows for more creativity to not only blossom but to flourish, for the next Scorsese filmmaker (in terms of acknowledgement granted) to come from someone who doesn’t represent the dominant face of America. What mass media does is decentralize the media marketplace.
What I found an overwhelming amount of, was criticism of media evolution by those who feel that they are experts or who are current members of the industry. They spoke as if they had some sort of supreme authority over the media creating processes and the arts. Their main thing was that the mass access to technology essentially has the potential to disrupt the canon and it is my belief that this is exactly what needs to be done. In terms of media and entertainment accessibility (at least here in the States) has been one of privilege and/or pure fortune especially when it came to music. Also, in terms of music it has been severe limitations to who and what gets heard through the mass commercialization of music. Technology has the ability to fragment the sounds of what exists and create something new, destabilizing existing categories. Technology without mass access is what has made it impossible for a new cultural innovator as it has standardized the sound of tons of music. The same can be said of film, the blockbuster in American film is simply who can do the best of about six different narratives. The interference to the marketplace through mass technology has proven to create great music and films. It is that which its outside the norm which characterizes the mold for greatness. In consolidation of technology and thus media creation both creative processes and artistic ability has been perverted into a distasteful science.