We spoke about body corporate executive committees, democracy, and the social dynamics of groups. Should committee members be limited to a number of terms? If so, why? And what does this have to do with Aristotle? You can listen here.
'Limiting exposure to the commercial cacophony'. I'm exploring the effects, on consciousness, of advertising (e.g. junk food logos), and how we might avoid these. A sample:
Advertising involves a double threat. The first is that vulnerable groups, and children in particular, will be encouraged to buy unnecessary or unhealthy products - hence rightful calls for banning of junk food advertisements during children's programming, and regulation of so-called ''alcopop'' promoted to minors.
The second is that consciousness can be interrupted and corrupted by constant corporate stimulation. In the ''information economy'' there is plenty of data - what's scarce is attention, and companies pay top dollar for a share of it.
Governments are unlikely to regulate advertising on the latter grounds, if only because the effects are nuanced and contextual, and contact with them is seen as the responsibility of individuals.
This is not strictly true, since our media and cities are saturated with advertising, and children in particular are marinated in corporate sauce before they can even walk.
But assuming we want, as individuals, to avoid undue corporate and media influence, what can be done?