Homeworks academic service

Since the invention of television sat essay

That's because my memory of childhood is in black and white, and that's because television in the 1960s and most photography was black and white.

Bill and Benthe Beatles, the Biafran war, Blue Peter, they were all black and white, and their images form the monochrome memories of my early years. That's one of the extraordinary aspects of television — its ability to trump reality. If seeing is believing, then there's always a troubling doubt until you've seen it on television. A mass medium delivered to almost every household, it's the communal confirmation of experience. On 30 September it will be 84 years since the world's first-ever television transmission.

  1. It also interferes with the sleep cycle of viewers.
  2. People spend a lot of time living in a fantasy world of actors, instead of following their dreams.
  3. With easy DIY tips people can create many things from recyclable material that they otherwise would have thrown away, saving them a lot of money in the process.

A Yorkshire comedian named Sydney Howard performed a comic monologue and someone called Lulu Stanley sang "He's tall, and dark, and handsome" in what was perhaps the earliest progenitor of The X Factor. The images were broadcast by the BBC and viewed by a small group of invited guests on a screen about half the size of the average smartphone in the inventor John Logie Baird 's Covent Garden studio.

Logie Baird may have been a visionary but even he would have struggled to comprehend just how much the world would be changed by his vision — television, the 20th century's defining technology. Every major happening is now captured by television, or it's not a major happening. Politics and politicians are determined by how they play on television. Public knowledge, charity, humour, fashion trends, celebrity and consumer demand are all subject to its critical influence.

More than the aeroplane or the nuclear bomb, the computer or the telephone, TV has determined what we know and how we think, the way we believe and how we perceive ourselves and the world around us only the motor car is a possible rival and that, strictly speaking, was a 19th-century invention. Not not only did television re-envision our sense of the world, it remains, even in the age of the internet, Facebook and YouTube, the most powerful generator of our collective memories, the most seductive and shocking mirror of society, and the since the invention of television sat essay virulent incubator of social trends.

It's also stubbornly unavoidable. There is good television, bad television, too much television and even, for some cultural puritans, no television, but whatever the equation, there is always television.

It's ubiquitously there, radiating away in the corner, even when it's not. The presence of television is so pervasive that its very absence is a kind of affront to the modern way of life. Not only has television reshaped the layout of our sitting rooms, it has also reshaped the very fabric of our lives. Just to take Friends as one small example. Before it was first aired back in 1994, the idea of groups of young people hanging out in a coffee bar talking about relationships in a language of comic neurosis was, at least as far as pubcentric Britain was concerned, laughable.

Now it's a high-street fact of life. Would Starbucks and Costa have enjoyed the same success if Joey and friends had not showed the way?

A history of television, the technology that seduced the world – and me

In theory we can choose more and watch less': The images were extremely poor quality, the equipment was dauntingly expensive and reception vanishingly limited. In since the invention of television sat essay, it didn't look like the future. One of the first people to recognise television's potential — or at least the most unappealing part of it — was Aldous Huxley.

Writing in Brave New World, published in 1932, he described a hospice of the future in which every bed had a TV set at its foot. Then, for reasons of national security, the BBC switched off its television signal and the experiment seemed to come to a bleak end. It wasn't until after the war that television was slowly spread out across the country. Some parts of the Scottish islands did not receive a signal until deep into the 1960s, but the nation was hooked.

Moran quotes revealing statistics from 1971 about the contemporary British way of life: This seems bizarre, if you think about society's priorities, but it's a common situation today throughout large parts of the developing world. I don't recall much anxiety about the lack of a bath, at least on my part, but I can't imagine what the sense of social exclusion would have been like, aged nine, if I hadn't had access to Thunderbirds and The Big Match.

The strongest memory I have of watching television in the early 1970s is in my grandmother's flat on wintry Saturday afternoons. Bill and Ben in the late 1950s.

SAT Critical Reading Practice Test 30

BBC Perhaps a clue to the vividness of that memory is the potent ambivalence it evokes. That has always been the nature of my relationship with television, even — and arguably all the more so — during my various stints as a TV critic. I love it and I hate it. Its indolent allure and its magical revelations. It can be enormously stimulating. Clive Jamesthe celebrated Observer TV critic of the 1970s, attributed his daughter's decision to become a scientist to the high quality of science programmes on British television.

And yet it can also be stupefyingly pacifying. Among the many things that TV has reshaped are the dimensions of our bodies. That we've grown visibly more obese in the past half- century is in large part due to the paralysing comfort of the armchair in front of the telly. So television is stifling, dull, lazy, formulaic, predictable, repetitive and queasily melodramatic; and it is stunning, original, transfixing, compulsive, mind-altering and magnificently verifying.

Even as it was, the moon landings managed to inspire conspiracy theorists who believed the whole thing had been staged on a film set. But imagine what that moment on 20 July 1969 would have been like without television — more like a fantastic rumour than a historic occasion witnessed since the invention of television sat essay the globe.

If that day, around halfway through TV's history, stood as the epitome of American power and humanity's instinct for exploration, then its counterpoint 32 years later on 11 September 2001 was a vision of American vulnerability and humanity's capacity for violence.

It was an awful crime but it was also, as its perpetrators would have known, an awesome televisual event.

AP There was something disturbingly pornographic about the need to see more and different angles of the impact over and over again. Yet television fed that insatiable need and the world came back for everything television could offer. This is why I've never understood the question: It was in more ways than the obvious the opposite of the normal way of watching television.

Typically we watch TV alone or in a small number and gain a sense of being part of something much larger.

In Praise of Folly: Writing the SAT Essay

But I was part of a large group silenced into being separate individuals. I remember feeling that I wanted to go home. And here, I think, we see television's distinctively domesticated quality. For there's an intimacy to watching television, a comforting security like a glowing hearth.

The very worst news can be absorbed and normalised in the familiar surroundings of your own abode. An earthquake in Asia? What's on the other side?

  • I am giving them a formula, and when they follow it, my students consistently score 10s, 11s and 12s on the essay, helping them to achieve strong scores on the writing section of the SAT;
  • In line 11, the term "wire-pullers" refers to the A;
  • According to it, watching television not only underminesLine30 the viewers' ability to criticize and differentiate, along with the moral and political fiber of their being, but also impairs their overall ability to perceive;
  • Let us then celebrate our pervasive materialism and acknowledge its efficacy and virtue.

A famine in Africa? Let's put the kettle on. Like listening to a storm from within the safety of a sturdy building, watching television is both unsettling and reassuring. While the content may be moving, you always remain at home. Again it's an attraction that can also be repulsive. I recall watching Live Aid in 1985 and feeling distinctly nauseous when film of starving Ethiopians was shown with the Cars' song "Drive" "Who's gonna drive you home tonight?

That event, too, was an example of television's curious paradox — the way it bring us together in our separate homes, unifying and atomising at one and the same time. There have been countless predictions and received wisdoms about television since I first started taking notice of what was said about it. When I was a child it was trumpeted that British since the invention of television sat essay — gritty, naturalistic and socially engaged — was far superior to that of, well, anywhere else, but in particular television in America.

But if that were ever true, it became progressively less true, especially in the 1990s, and then became an exercise in the most deluded wishful thinking when HBO and other American cable stations brought us The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, The Wire and several more expansively ambitious series.

As American cinema, which once produced intelligent adult films, has regressed into childish absurdities, so has American television revived the fortunes of creative filmmakers and an industry-load of talented but largely unknown actors. It's hard to imagine that British TV, despite its enormous wealth, will ever produce something of a similar scope and brilliance.

There are signs that, as in the case of this year's insidiously terrifying The Fallit can still do a very slick version of gritty. But will it ever rediscover the glory days of The Singing Detective and Boys From the Blackstuff, complex, authored pieces that spoke of our times and our memories and the culture at large?

It would be nice to think so. But there's much more to television than signature dramas. There is, for instance, sport. Critically speaking, no one seems to take televised sport very seriously. Thanks to Nick Hornby, we may have come a long way since Martin Amis complained of "intellectual football lovers" being forced to "cringe and hide".

But the idea still persists that televised sport is just sport captured on camera. Apollo 11 astronauts land on the moon in 1969.

  • Among the many things that TV has reshaped are the dimensions of our bodies;
  • Every major happening is now captured by television, or it's not a major happening.

AP In fact televised sport is much more than that. When I first started watching, the viewer was left in no doubt that he was in a far inferior position to a spectator. Nowadays you pity the poor fan at the match missing out on the divine pleasures of seeing the same event on TV. Yes, because modern televised sport — and specifically modern televised football — has turned the viewer into an omniscient, if not yet omnipotent, god.

But credit where it's due.

  • And how the anti-materialist philosophers have waned in influence and been discarded to the waste bin of history;
  • Now it's a high-street fact of life;
  • Not only has television reshaped the layout of our sitting rooms, it has also reshaped the very fabric of our lives;
  • One of the first people to recognise television's potential — or at least the most unappealing part of it — was Aldous Huxley;
  • Either the theorists make no use of television at all in which case they do not know what they are talking about or they subject themselves toLine55 it, and then the question arises through what miracle is the theorist able to escape the alleged effects of television?

Up until its disastrous live-studio-audience launch of its Premier League coverage last month, Sky Sports has scarcely put a foot wrong — Richard Keys notwithstanding. Yet more than sport, British television's greatest and most consistently groundbreaking offering has been its coverage of the natural world.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Television in Our Lives

Life on Earthfirst broadcast in 1979, was a landmark in television and remains the benchmark of the natural history genre. Even coming in an era of excellent documentary series such as Civilisation, The Ascent of Man and The World at War, it stood majestically alone.

By 1979 most of the country had gone colour just 10 years earlier black and white was still overwhelmingly the norm. And how every colour was needed to appreciate the mountain gorillas meeting that greatest of living Englishmen, David Attenborough. It was a quintessential TV moment — us, the humans inside, being visited by that other, mysterious world out there.

Back then there were still only three television channels in this country Channel 4 was three years away from its first transmission. Today, with satellite technology, there are hundreds available from around the globe. That diversity has inevitably led to a certain amount of fragmentation, as well as huge variations in quality. We are no longer one-nation viewers, but instead a multiplicity of niche targets who, thanks to TiVo and iPlayer, can watch our favourite programmes at any hour we choose.

  1. Should we look to our elders for wisdom?
  2. How did she come up with that?
  3. Every major happening is now captured by television, or it's not a major happening.
  4. Let us then celebrate our pervasive materialism and acknowledge its efficacy and virtue.