Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Boston’s most radical TV show blew minds in 1967 (bostonglobe.com)
70 points by tintinnabula 7 months ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 12 comments



Speaking of radical TV from 1967, this was pretty radical, and still worth watching:

https://dangerousminds.net/comments/this_is_marshall_mcluhan

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9404250


Reminds me a lot of a bit from Edmund Carpenter's anthropology book They Became What They Beheld (1970). I'll have to copy it out of the book so please forgive any transcription errors:

"In the 1968 elections the McCarthy campaign staff was approached with a suggestion for crossing media. In the United States no law prohibits the mating of radio and TV. In Southern California, for example, Spanish-speaking sportsfans watch the picture on TV but listen to a Spanish-speaking sports broadcaster on radio.

So it was proposed that the New York-New Jersey area be offered a night of radio sound & TV picture. Five commentators were to provide the audio; John Culkin, Jean Shepherd, Marshall McLuhan, myself & Tony Schwartz, who originated the idea and had a sound studio equipped to handle the project. A bank of small TV sets offered simultaneous coverage of all principal TV stations in the area; each would be kept on its particular channel. From these the connentators would select programs shown on a master TV set & toward these programs would direct their comments.

The plan was to announce in the New York-New Jersey newspapers that at 7 P.M. on a certain night a local radio station would provide that evening's TV audio. For example, the audio for a TV cigarette commercial would be one minute of coughing via radio. If there was a laughshow, it would be pointed out that the laughtracks were copyrighted in 1935 & that most of the people one heard laughing had been dead for some time.

Then listeners would be asked to turn to a channel showing Walter Cronkite, at which point they would hear a taped "countdown," first in English, followed by a A-blast; then in Russian, then Chinese, each followed by blasts & more blasts & finally only a child's cry.

Finally, and this was the point of the whole project, listeners would be encouraged to turn to a channel with Hubert Humphrey speaking. Instead of his speech, however, they would hear - on radio - the four letters he wrote to his draft board gaining exemption from duty in the Second War - one letter citing two lectures he had delivered to an ROTC class, while in the background would be played Hitler's ranting, bombs & screams; then Humphrey's pro-Vietnam War speeches - "A glorious adventure and great fun, isn't it?" - while in the background the guns & screams continued.

The McCarthy team, mostly literate men, saw something profoundly immoral in the suggestion. New forms always seem immoral or chaotic since they are unconsciously judged by reference to consecrated forms. But a curious contradiction arises: New forms are condemned, but the information they disseminate is believed, while the old & valued aren't even seen."


Wikipedia reports quite a different story about HH and WWII service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Humphrey#Marriage_and_e...


I'd make a couple of guesses there:

#1. Edmund Carpenter's writing style always seems a lot like he's writing things from memory and potentially embellishing a bit along the way to make a point. Fact checking for writer and reader wasn't so easy in the pre-Internet days.

#2. This was a proposition from the opposition, and even Wikipedia says "all through his political life, Humphrey was dogged by the charge that he was a draft dodger", so the team may have intended to bend the truth on purpose.


These should be put online before they are lost, seems like it was an innovative time in TV


Where can I find this show / episode? I've been looking but to no avail...


experimental media is important, and so is a public-media world it can exist in. support shows your local public stations motives other than profit are necessary for culture.


Is TV important for this, nowadays when we have YouTube / Vimeo / Dailymotion?


No but who's going to fund the non-commercial streaming videos?

Public (in the American sense, viewer supported) broadcasting like NPR and PBS develop excellent digital content that we would not otherwise have because it's not advertiser friendly.

If you hate clickbait, fake news, and spam, you should support public media.


Unrelated:

  You're using a browser set to private or incognito mode.
  To continue reading articles in this mode, please log in to your Globe account.
Haven't seen this one before. No, I don't want you tracking me, and no, I'm not going to view your article because of it.


You can still get around it by disabling javascript completely. Will load a text only version.


I opened the page in Firefox in a private window and did not get that message. I did get it in Chrome.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: