I disagree entirely. This quote explains my view better than I could word it:
> The term culture industry (German: Kulturindustrie) was coined by the critical theorists Theodor Adorno (1903–1969) and Max Horkheimer (1895–1973), and was presented as critical vocabulary in the chapter "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception", of the book Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), wherein they proposed that popular culture is akin to a factory producing standardized cultural goods—films, radio programmes, magazines, etc.—that are used to manipulate mass society into passivity.[1] Consumption of the easy pleasures of popular culture, made available by the mass communications media, renders people docile and content, no matter how difficult their economic circumstances.[1] The inherent danger of the culture industry is the cultivation of false psychological needs that can only be met and satisfied by the products of capitalism; thus Adorno and Horkheimer especially perceived mass-produced culture as dangerous to the more technically and intellectually difficult high arts. In contrast, true psychological needs are freedom, creativity, and genuine happiness, which refer to an earlier demarcation of human needs, established by Herbert Marcuse.[2]
Like anything else this is just my opinion, but I do think being more connected to nature would improve our lives vs what's now being normalized: working in an office all day, commuting, and staring at various screens in your free time. I believe the modern lifestyle contributes a lot to the chronic stress, anxiety, etc that are so common nowadays. This is quantitative, to an extent: spending time in nature has a measurable and positive impact on your well-being:
> Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing
I'm sorry but I find self reported data about wellbeing hard to believe in most cases. There is such a cultural pressure to associate nature with wellbeing that I find myself being very wary of such reporting.
I think I agree and disagree with you. I agree with the value of preservation, as a hobbyist collector and archivist myself. However I agree with the notion that all culture and aspects of a particular culture are of equal worth. If I had to choose in a house fire, I'd take a hard drive full of my favorite youtube videos and movies, and leave behind the hard drive full of mobile game advertisements and mid level marketing media. Would you do the same, or would you actually have a hard time choosing?
> notion that all culture and aspects of a particular culture are of equal worth
I never made such a claim.
The problem is that everyone has their opinion on what needs to be preserved. I might not care at all about what you have on your hard drive, and vice versa.
Archive and libraries aren't Eternal and Forever Storage. Future archivist might as well prune them (as they do).
However, at the current time we don't have enough data to decide which things are worth preserving, and which are not.
I'm aware of the value of old game ads and I have many myself, both physical and digital. But I'm talking about relative value. I would gladly leave my old Nintendo Powers behind if it meant I could take my actual games or movies with me, for example.
> The term culture industry (German: Kulturindustrie) was coined by the critical theorists Theodor Adorno (1903–1969) and Max Horkheimer (1895–1973), and was presented as critical vocabulary in the chapter "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception", of the book Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), wherein they proposed that popular culture is akin to a factory producing standardized cultural goods—films, radio programmes, magazines, etc.—that are used to manipulate mass society into passivity.[1] Consumption of the easy pleasures of popular culture, made available by the mass communications media, renders people docile and content, no matter how difficult their economic circumstances.[1] The inherent danger of the culture industry is the cultivation of false psychological needs that can only be met and satisfied by the products of capitalism; thus Adorno and Horkheimer especially perceived mass-produced culture as dangerous to the more technically and intellectually difficult high arts. In contrast, true psychological needs are freedom, creativity, and genuine happiness, which refer to an earlier demarcation of human needs, established by Herbert Marcuse.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_industry