Episode Name: The Academy
Premise: Blank Reg is accused of zipping (hacking) Network 23's transmissions, but the real culprits are students at the network's Academy of Computer Sciences, for whom Bryce is covering up.
Theme explored: Logic versus emotion. Bryce, in his attempts to cover up for the academy students, uses logic to determine that there is no harm in diverting attention to an innocent person because the evidence will show the person is innocent. However, Blank Reg is different because, given that he chose to wipe out his entire record, the networks use a "criminal profile" to determine the likelihood that he may have committed the crime -- a profile also based in logic. Or in other terms, a computer algorithm determines the likelihood of guilt.
It raises the question about the usage of computer alogrithms to come to conclusions. We have seen this become an issue in how posts are removed from social media accounts, or said accounts are suspended, based on what an algorithm determines, rather than an actual person examining the post or account to determine what is really being posted. And given the nature in which the academy teaches its students, in which they are taught to think in terms of logic rather than emotion, how that may not be a good thing when some situations may require a determination of "right or wrong" that is based more on emotion than logic.
Also critiqued was the trend at the time of broadcasting court cases for entertainment purposes (The People's Court was in syndication at the time this episode was taped). The critique comes in Blank Reg's trial, which is broadcast on the Network 23 show "You The Jury," in which the prosecutor and judge behave more like game show personalities and everything is treated as an event. It begs the question about how far you go in taking legal cases and broadcasting them for entertainment purposes rather than informational.
Max Headroom quotes:
"I happen to be living above the mainframe and just watched the show."
"As they said to King Charles I on the scaffold, are you going to go quietly or do you need a push?"
"Me smirk? It's not in my program."
Personal observations: This was one of the better episodes of the series. The writers were hitting their stride by this point, exploring a main theme that wasn't solely about critiquing television but finding a way to fit a critique of the media into the show. And in our debates today, there's always the struggle between using logic (data, algorithms, etc.) versus emotion (feelings, conscience, etc.) to determine what is the best solution to a problem.
Sunday, October 15, 2017
Sunday, October 8, 2017
Max Headroom Episode Six: The Blanks
Episode name: The Blanks
Premise: A group of Blanks (individuals who have wiped out their personal information from all databases) threatens to take down all computer systems unless Blanks who have been detained without cause be released by the government.
Theme explored: The episode focuses on Simon Pellar, an elected official who doesn't agree with those who choose to remove all identifying information from technological systems and seeks to have them arrested simply for choosing to be a Blank. Meanwhile, Blank Reg -- who runs his own Big Time Television network -- wants to reach a wider audience and agrees to work with Blank Bruno to sabotage all other network systems. But Reg has second thoughts when Edison Carter confronts him about it, but promises that he will talk to Bruno and find a way to get Pellar to release the Blanks who have been detained.
The theme is summed up by Edison's remark to Reg: "I believe in the principle but the method stinks." In other words, it's questioning what methods are appropriate to further principles that people hold. Pellar represents the government's side of things (wiping out your personal info from databases should be a criminal act) while the Blanks represent an example of what may be an individual or group's perspective (we don't want that personal info kept and want to live as we choose because we aren't hurting anyone). But in the end, each side uses a questionable method.
And those questionable methods certainly hold relevance in today's society. Pellar has Blanks arrested and detained after a tainted judicial procedure, which is easily comparable to the idea of holding a person accused of a crime without a speedy trial. Meanwhile, the method employed by the Blanks to achieve their ends would be described in today's world as "cyberterrorism." And the question to ask when these viewpoints come into conflict is this: Who should really prevail?
Max Headroom quotes:
"You want me to pretend to be a horse? I saddle up for no man!"
"I'll let you know if there's life after the off switch."
"What are you laughing about? Brice just tried to kiss me!"
Personal observations: I didn't find this to be as good of an episode as the others so far in the series, but the theme remains relevant today. The question we should always ask is the same thing Edison asks of Reg: While we may have certain principles we believe in, we should think carefully about the methods we utilize to advance them.
Premise: A group of Blanks (individuals who have wiped out their personal information from all databases) threatens to take down all computer systems unless Blanks who have been detained without cause be released by the government.
Theme explored: The episode focuses on Simon Pellar, an elected official who doesn't agree with those who choose to remove all identifying information from technological systems and seeks to have them arrested simply for choosing to be a Blank. Meanwhile, Blank Reg -- who runs his own Big Time Television network -- wants to reach a wider audience and agrees to work with Blank Bruno to sabotage all other network systems. But Reg has second thoughts when Edison Carter confronts him about it, but promises that he will talk to Bruno and find a way to get Pellar to release the Blanks who have been detained.
The theme is summed up by Edison's remark to Reg: "I believe in the principle but the method stinks." In other words, it's questioning what methods are appropriate to further principles that people hold. Pellar represents the government's side of things (wiping out your personal info from databases should be a criminal act) while the Blanks represent an example of what may be an individual or group's perspective (we don't want that personal info kept and want to live as we choose because we aren't hurting anyone). But in the end, each side uses a questionable method.
And those questionable methods certainly hold relevance in today's society. Pellar has Blanks arrested and detained after a tainted judicial procedure, which is easily comparable to the idea of holding a person accused of a crime without a speedy trial. Meanwhile, the method employed by the Blanks to achieve their ends would be described in today's world as "cyberterrorism." And the question to ask when these viewpoints come into conflict is this: Who should really prevail?
Max Headroom quotes:
"You want me to pretend to be a horse? I saddle up for no man!"
"I'll let you know if there's life after the off switch."
"What are you laughing about? Brice just tried to kiss me!"
Personal observations: I didn't find this to be as good of an episode as the others so far in the series, but the theme remains relevant today. The question we should always ask is the same thing Edison asks of Reg: While we may have certain principles we believe in, we should think carefully about the methods we utilize to advance them.
Sunday, October 1, 2017
Max Headroom Episode Five: War
Episode Name: War
Premise: Network 23 investigates how a lesser rival network seems to always be on the scene of terrorist attacks during a global ratings sweep.
Theme explored: Media access is the issue at hand here. Breakthru TV, a less influential network, obtains exclusive rights to story packages involving the White Brigade, a terrorist organization railing against the heavy influence of television networks. But it's revealed that White Brigade and Breakthru TV are actually working together, with Breakthru TV's CEO hoping to get Network 23 to purchase the rights to the story packages. It escalates to the point that the Brigade unleashes an attack on the "ad market," this world's version of the stock market, in an attempt to discredit Edison Carter revealing the White Brigade's intentions in staging its attacks.
Though the theme of media access is taken to an extreme in this episode, there are questions that must be asked about how important access is. Is it worth it to give favorable coverage of a government agency in order to maintain access to it? Or the same involving a corporation? Or a non profit agency? Or a political organization? At what price does the quest for ratings (or whatever factor is used to measure audiences) must be questioned when those the media has access to engage in questionable behavior?
Max Headroom quotes:
"If I could get a hold of Breakthru TV, I wouldn't touch them with a bent TV antenna."
"The rigors of investigating, so tiring."
"For those cold mornings, why not try Chrenobyl Pops? They'll give you that warm glow all over."
"If they think I am endorsing car accessories, they've got another dipstick coming!"
Personal observations: Media today would be well advised to ponder the question about the importance of an audience above all else, especially if it means only favorable coverage may be given of any entity in exchange for access to those with the entity.
There's also an interesting exchange in which Edison Carter asks, "Since when did news become entertainment?" and Murray replies "since it was invented." Today's media environment arguably is the perfect example of "news equals entertainment" and it's something everyone should think about when it comes to the news they consume. And when it comes to media access, it often means the media further perpetuates the idea that news should be entertainment, lest its access be lost.
Premise: Network 23 investigates how a lesser rival network seems to always be on the scene of terrorist attacks during a global ratings sweep.
Theme explored: Media access is the issue at hand here. Breakthru TV, a less influential network, obtains exclusive rights to story packages involving the White Brigade, a terrorist organization railing against the heavy influence of television networks. But it's revealed that White Brigade and Breakthru TV are actually working together, with Breakthru TV's CEO hoping to get Network 23 to purchase the rights to the story packages. It escalates to the point that the Brigade unleashes an attack on the "ad market," this world's version of the stock market, in an attempt to discredit Edison Carter revealing the White Brigade's intentions in staging its attacks.
Though the theme of media access is taken to an extreme in this episode, there are questions that must be asked about how important access is. Is it worth it to give favorable coverage of a government agency in order to maintain access to it? Or the same involving a corporation? Or a non profit agency? Or a political organization? At what price does the quest for ratings (or whatever factor is used to measure audiences) must be questioned when those the media has access to engage in questionable behavior?
Max Headroom quotes:
"If I could get a hold of Breakthru TV, I wouldn't touch them with a bent TV antenna."
"The rigors of investigating, so tiring."
"For those cold mornings, why not try Chrenobyl Pops? They'll give you that warm glow all over."
"If they think I am endorsing car accessories, they've got another dipstick coming!"
Personal observations: Media today would be well advised to ponder the question about the importance of an audience above all else, especially if it means only favorable coverage may be given of any entity in exchange for access to those with the entity.
There's also an interesting exchange in which Edison Carter asks, "Since when did news become entertainment?" and Murray replies "since it was invented." Today's media environment arguably is the perfect example of "news equals entertainment" and it's something everyone should think about when it comes to the news they consume. And when it comes to media access, it often means the media further perpetuates the idea that news should be entertainment, lest its access be lost.
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
A Reminder Why Kaepernick Took A Knee
Whether you follow the NFL or not, you no doubt know about the remarks Donald Trump made about NFL players who kneel during the national anthem as a form of protest and the responses ranging from NFL owners with carefully worded statements critical of Trump's remarks to players criticizing Trump in various forms to the gestures ranging from kneeling to linking arms to raised fists.
All the while, people are up in arms about disrespect to the flag, disrespect to the military, disrespect to the country and how football games are not the time or place to do such a thing. And then other people use it as their chance to bash Trump and blame everybody who voted for him for everything that's happened, while others still talk about how unified the NFL was and how great it was to see everyone standing together.
Meanwhile, what got lost in the shuffle is the man who started it all more than a year ago and what he was really wanting to draw attention to. The man is Colin Kaepernick and the issues he wanted attention drawn to were police brutality and racial inequality.
All the while, people are up in arms about disrespect to the flag, disrespect to the military, disrespect to the country and how football games are not the time or place to do such a thing. And then other people use it as their chance to bash Trump and blame everybody who voted for him for everything that's happened, while others still talk about how unified the NFL was and how great it was to see everyone standing together.
Meanwhile, what got lost in the shuffle is the man who started it all more than a year ago and what he was really wanting to draw attention to. The man is Colin Kaepernick and the issues he wanted attention drawn to were police brutality and racial inequality.
Sunday, September 24, 2017
Max Headroom Episode Four: Security Systems
Episode Name: Security Systems
Premise: When Edison Carter sets out to investigate who is the mystery bidder for Security Systems Inc., he learns that the company's AI has him listed as committing the most serious crime of all: credit fraud.
Theme explored: The question raised is what happens when one entity is given control over personal information and security and the dangers that come with it. Security Systems Inc. touts that "your inalienable rights are consumer credit, unlimited TV and personal security" and that only the company can ensure them all.
But as we learn from the episode, when somebody seeks a monopoly over such information, there's no telling what that person might use it for and how that person might use it. Edison Carter learns that quickly after the AI falsely designates him as wanted for credit fraud (a crime described as "worse than murder" in this dystopian environment) and he must now go underground to uncover the truth behind Security Systems Inc.
Another issue touched upon is the risks involved with artificial intelligence and how it can do the unexpected -- but while many stories tend to explore the idea of the AI turning against its users and causing harm, in this case, the AI serves a purpose in helping Edison Carter, thanks to the convincing of Max Headroom. Though an unusual twist, one can still ask whether it's wise to let a computer algorithm decide everything.
Max Headroom quotes:
"I'm glad that's over. Some of us can't cover our eyes, you know."
"You call this space? And I though the Network was cramped."
"I wonder if security guards ever hold a party and, if they do, do they let each other in?"
"As they say, when you're buying suppositries, with friends like that, who needs enemas?"
"You know what security guards are like -- shoot first and still argue about whether you can come in."
Personal observations: This is a good example of why Max Headroom was ahead of its time in many ways. Personal information, who is entrusted with it and who is able to access it is a major concern, but tends to get overlooked in our quest for security. Whether it's the government or a private company being entrusted with that information, there are plenty who worry about who controls it, what gets shared and whether it's really being protected by those people. And it's a reminder that we shouldn't just use "security" as a reason to believe that certain individuals or entities must be trusted at all times with such information.
Premise: When Edison Carter sets out to investigate who is the mystery bidder for Security Systems Inc., he learns that the company's AI has him listed as committing the most serious crime of all: credit fraud.
Theme explored: The question raised is what happens when one entity is given control over personal information and security and the dangers that come with it. Security Systems Inc. touts that "your inalienable rights are consumer credit, unlimited TV and personal security" and that only the company can ensure them all.
But as we learn from the episode, when somebody seeks a monopoly over such information, there's no telling what that person might use it for and how that person might use it. Edison Carter learns that quickly after the AI falsely designates him as wanted for credit fraud (a crime described as "worse than murder" in this dystopian environment) and he must now go underground to uncover the truth behind Security Systems Inc.
Another issue touched upon is the risks involved with artificial intelligence and how it can do the unexpected -- but while many stories tend to explore the idea of the AI turning against its users and causing harm, in this case, the AI serves a purpose in helping Edison Carter, thanks to the convincing of Max Headroom. Though an unusual twist, one can still ask whether it's wise to let a computer algorithm decide everything.
Max Headroom quotes:
"I'm glad that's over. Some of us can't cover our eyes, you know."
"You call this space? And I though the Network was cramped."
"I wonder if security guards ever hold a party and, if they do, do they let each other in?"
"As they say, when you're buying suppositries, with friends like that, who needs enemas?"
"You know what security guards are like -- shoot first and still argue about whether you can come in."
Personal observations: This is a good example of why Max Headroom was ahead of its time in many ways. Personal information, who is entrusted with it and who is able to access it is a major concern, but tends to get overlooked in our quest for security. Whether it's the government or a private company being entrusted with that information, there are plenty who worry about who controls it, what gets shared and whether it's really being protected by those people. And it's a reminder that we shouldn't just use "security" as a reason to believe that certain individuals or entities must be trusted at all times with such information.
Sunday, September 17, 2017
Max Headroom Episode Three: Body Banks
Episode Name: Body Banks
Premise: Edison Carter investigates the disappearance of a young woman, which leads to the discovery of a body bank involved in organ theft.
Theme explored: The episode focuses on medical technology and questions how far one should go with it. In this case, a wealthy individual pays a large sum to a body bank for a pituitary gland to save his mother's life and insists it be found at any cost. It leads to the body bank declaring that if it cannot find a matching organ from a dead person, it will extract one from a living person -- in this case, a person in the lower class. The question that is asked: If saving one person's life must mean taking another's life, is it worth it?
Along with the plot involving the young woman's disappearance -- a kidnapping in which her organs are sought to save a wealthier person's life -- a member of Network 23's corporate board is blackmailed to acquire the technology that made Max Headroom possible to save the mind of the wealthier person. This not only furthers the theme about how far one should go with medical technology and who benefits from it, but touches upon bribery and corruption among the wealthy. This is further explored, to an extent, in a subplot in which Network 23's executive board attempts to get Max Headroom to become a spokesperson for the Zik Zak Corporation when Max has his own ideas about being a spokesperson.
Class warfare is also touched upon -- those who benefit are the elite and well connected while those who are exploited are described as the "fringes" of the city, which is another way of describing those in the lower classes who don't have the connections or resources those in higher classes do.
Max Headroom quotes:
"They're interested in me? They want an audience -- I'm like an audience."
"Zik Zak, the corporation that makes you give your money away the nicer way."
"Forget what I said about those Zik Zak burger packs. Don't go for your wallet -- that's just what they taste like!"
"Asking is just polite demanding."
Personal observations: Debates regarding medical care, ranging from who really gets access to life-saving treatment to how far we should go in exploring new medical achievements (stem cell research is a good example), haven't gone away in today's society. The question posed about "whose life matters more?" is one we must keep asking ourselves as well, especially when the question comes down who happens to have better access to medical care.
Premise: Edison Carter investigates the disappearance of a young woman, which leads to the discovery of a body bank involved in organ theft.
Theme explored: The episode focuses on medical technology and questions how far one should go with it. In this case, a wealthy individual pays a large sum to a body bank for a pituitary gland to save his mother's life and insists it be found at any cost. It leads to the body bank declaring that if it cannot find a matching organ from a dead person, it will extract one from a living person -- in this case, a person in the lower class. The question that is asked: If saving one person's life must mean taking another's life, is it worth it?
Along with the plot involving the young woman's disappearance -- a kidnapping in which her organs are sought to save a wealthier person's life -- a member of Network 23's corporate board is blackmailed to acquire the technology that made Max Headroom possible to save the mind of the wealthier person. This not only furthers the theme about how far one should go with medical technology and who benefits from it, but touches upon bribery and corruption among the wealthy. This is further explored, to an extent, in a subplot in which Network 23's executive board attempts to get Max Headroom to become a spokesperson for the Zik Zak Corporation when Max has his own ideas about being a spokesperson.
Class warfare is also touched upon -- those who benefit are the elite and well connected while those who are exploited are described as the "fringes" of the city, which is another way of describing those in the lower classes who don't have the connections or resources those in higher classes do.
Max Headroom quotes:
"They're interested in me? They want an audience -- I'm like an audience."
"Zik Zak, the corporation that makes you give your money away the nicer way."
"Forget what I said about those Zik Zak burger packs. Don't go for your wallet -- that's just what they taste like!"
"Asking is just polite demanding."
Personal observations: Debates regarding medical care, ranging from who really gets access to life-saving treatment to how far we should go in exploring new medical achievements (stem cell research is a good example), haven't gone away in today's society. The question posed about "whose life matters more?" is one we must keep asking ourselves as well, especially when the question comes down who happens to have better access to medical care.
Sunday, September 10, 2017
Max Headroom Episode Two: Raking
Episode name: Raking
Premise: Theora Jones' younger brother Sean is caught up in raking, a youth sport with a violent twist.
Theme explored: The main focus of the episode is how violence is used to exploit youth. The episode revolves around raking, a sport in which youth use motorized skateboards and attempt to knock each other down, but is exploited by adults and turned into a spectacle in which youth are encouraged to injure each other and bets are placed as to who will survive.
But the critique doesn't stop with a sport that's turned violent -- throughout the episode, Max Headroom is asking questions about a show called Missile Mike (a clear reference to Rambo) that is considered "children's programming" on Network 23, which happens to be negotiating for the rights to broadcast raking events (along with its primary sponsor, Zik Zak, agreeing to sponsor events). It raises the issue about how media companies seek programming to draw viewers without always considering whether it's appropriate for a particular audience or something that should even be aired to begin with.
Max Headroom quotes:
"Is fond the same as fondle?"
"The kids like killing? Who told them about it?"
"I'm looking for something with action, excitement and taste -- a taste of blood."
"Do you know that in Chinese, there are 30 different ways of saying one word? Is that why their population is so big? Chinese men just don't know when to take no for an answer."
Personal observations: Another episode with a theme that is still relevant today -- violence and its impact on not just youth, but all people, is something we still struggle with today. That many of the most popular movies, shows and video games today are violent in nature begs the question about how far media should go in using violence to appeal to audiences.
Premise: Theora Jones' younger brother Sean is caught up in raking, a youth sport with a violent twist.
Theme explored: The main focus of the episode is how violence is used to exploit youth. The episode revolves around raking, a sport in which youth use motorized skateboards and attempt to knock each other down, but is exploited by adults and turned into a spectacle in which youth are encouraged to injure each other and bets are placed as to who will survive.
But the critique doesn't stop with a sport that's turned violent -- throughout the episode, Max Headroom is asking questions about a show called Missile Mike (a clear reference to Rambo) that is considered "children's programming" on Network 23, which happens to be negotiating for the rights to broadcast raking events (along with its primary sponsor, Zik Zak, agreeing to sponsor events). It raises the issue about how media companies seek programming to draw viewers without always considering whether it's appropriate for a particular audience or something that should even be aired to begin with.
Max Headroom quotes:
"Is fond the same as fondle?"
"The kids like killing? Who told them about it?"
"I'm looking for something with action, excitement and taste -- a taste of blood."
"Do you know that in Chinese, there are 30 different ways of saying one word? Is that why their population is so big? Chinese men just don't know when to take no for an answer."
Personal observations: Another episode with a theme that is still relevant today -- violence and its impact on not just youth, but all people, is something we still struggle with today. That many of the most popular movies, shows and video games today are violent in nature begs the question about how far media should go in using violence to appeal to audiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)