CEO and Owners and Cultural Influence

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

CEO and Owners and Cultural Influence

#1  Postby Edpsy77 » Oct 02, 2012 2:43 pm

If an institution projects either a negative image of another group or shows bias towards another group, does it matter if the victimized group is underrepresented in "power" positions which promote such a bias or negative image? For instance, if Jews are over represented in the vast majority of owners of movie studios and movies originating from these movie studios paint atheism in a negative light and Jews as the reason why Christ was killed, are Christians free of accountability because they are underrepresented in these "power" positions? IN other words, are Christians less responsible for this antisemitism because jews are owners and CEOs of studios which promote such anti-semitism? How much do "power" positions in corporate(i.e. media) and political positions influence the culture and economics of a society?

Note: I find it absolutely irrelevant that jews are over represented in "power" positions in banking, adult movies and mainstream movies, the group does not carry the sole responsibility of negative and positive things which come these media outlets. I contend negative and positive images towards one group originates from society. This type of attitude is responsible for annoying antisemitism.
Edpsy77
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 21

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: CEO and Owners and Cultural Influence

#2  Postby melonkali » Oct 10, 2012 5:34 pm

When the movie "1776" was released in 1972, producer Jack Warner insisted that the musical number "Cool Cool
Considerate Men" be not only edited our of the movie, but all negatives destroyed, because his friend Richard Nixon felt that it reflected badly on political conservatives. But an assistant film editor hid a set of negatives in the studio's salt-mine long-term film archives. The movie was fully restored in 1992.

Here we have the CEO blatantly (and tastelessly) influencing culture and politics, as happened with many, many Hollywood films; there were few crafty film assistants willing to take risks to save art and integrity. I would say that in those days, CEOs and owners had too much cultural influence, and should be held accountable.

However, today's international culture has probably changed the old Hollywood scenario, don't you think?
melonkali
 
Posts: 3

United States (us)
Print view this post


Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest