What do you think?
Rate this book
Make-Believe Media: The Politics of Entertainment
In Make-believe Media, Parenti turns his eye to entertainment for an absorbing, challenging look at the way America’s “free and independent” television and film industries actually promote the ideas of the economic and political forces that control them.
Through thoughtful analysis of specific entertainment programs from family sitcoms to medical dramas, cartoons, and blockbuster movies, Parenti explains why entertainment can alter our view of history, politics, race, sex and class differences. Although programs may seem apolitical in intent, Parenti argues that they have a powerful influence not only on how we dress, talk, and spend our money, but also on how we define social problems and which ideological images we embrace. Viewers who think what they’re watching is “only entertainment” are less likely to challenge prejudices implicit in the program—including militarism, xenophobia, and ethnic bigotry—and more inclined to accept a prefabricated understanding of the world as it is portrayed on the screen.
Even viewers who claim to be immune to the obvious messages of film and television will find Parenti’s analysis provocative and compelling as he urges us to become more critical about what we choose to watch.
Through thoughtful analysis of specific entertainment programs from family sitcoms to medical dramas, cartoons, and blockbuster movies, Parenti explains why entertainment can alter our view of history, politics, race, sex and class differences. Although programs may seem apolitical in intent, Parenti argues that they have a powerful influence not only on how we dress, talk, and spend our money, but also on how we define social problems and which ideological images we embrace. Viewers who think what they’re watching is “only entertainment” are less likely to challenge prejudices implicit in the program—including militarism, xenophobia, and ethnic bigotry—and more inclined to accept a prefabricated understanding of the world as it is portrayed on the screen.
Even viewers who claim to be immune to the obvious messages of film and television will find Parenti’s analysis provocative and compelling as he urges us to become more critical about what we choose to watch.
254 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 1991
15 people are currently reading
826 people want to read
About the author
Michael Parenti
54 books1,502 followersMichael John Parenti, Ph.D. (Yale University) is an American political scientist, academic historian and cultural critic who writes on scholarly and popular subjects. He has taught at universities as well as run for political office. Parenti is well known for his Marxist writings and lectures. He is a notable intellectual of the American Left and he is most known for his criticism of capitalism and American foreign policy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
March 30, 2025
American Intelligence: “After the Deer Hunter began playing in theaters in 1979, at least 25 viewers around the country reenacted the movie’s Russian roulette scene and blew their brains out.” “In Los Angeles, a maid caught a seven-year-old boy sprinkling ground glass into his family’s dinner. He said he wanted to see if it would work as it did on television.” John Wayne in the Searchers said, “There’s humans and then there’s Comanches.” From a Shirley Temple film, “If we don’t shoot him, he’ll shoot us.” From Guadalcanal Diary, “Besides, they’re not people.”
One of Gene Autry’s Cowboy Code is “a cowboy is a patriot.” Not mentioned by all-white faux cowboys was that 20 to 25% of cowboys in the West were black, while 1/3 were Mexican. “Tonto” is Spanish for “stupid.” The Lone Ranger TV show had him use monosyllabic grunts and riding behind the Lone Ranger in his dust plume. Did you notice how “Out of Africa” said nothing about Africans - servants and animals yes, but ignored the African people. The film Gandhi ignores explaining why the British were in India – no plundering, imperialism, or vast wealth differences, just unexplained resistance. In Apocalypse Now, Kurtz lies to the audience about Vietcong chopping arms off children as punishment for receiving vaccinations by the US – never happened, but the audience thought it did. Robert Duvall said in it, “I love the smell of napalm in the morning.” Note that Deer Hunter’s roulette scene never would have been accepted if white people were demanding the prisoner play Russian roulette; it worked for racist reasons.
We were taught by pseudo patriots that Jane Fonda is an unabashed commie Leftist, but in a 1981 publicity interview she said this, “If we aren’t afraid of Arabs, we’d better examine our heads. They are unstable, they are fundamentalists, anti-woman, anti-free press.” In Cold War movies our spies are heroic and thwart the enemy. Their spies aren’t. You couldn’t have “the Man from Uncle” series today because an American and a Russian couldn’t work together under 24/7 US Russophobia, unless it was maybe in a Donald Trump sex dream. When was the last film you saw that was about class? The rich against the poor? The subject is taboo.
“The Scarlet Pimpernel” favored the aristocrats and regular folk became the angry mob. Did you know that “the core of Hitler’s support actually came from the more affluent classes”? And that the majority of the German working class opposed Hitler’s accession to power, as did a majority of Italy’s proletariat oppose Mussolini”? “At least 85% of the fighting in the European war took place on the Eastern front” – thus, the Soviets won that war not the Yanks. Dropping the A Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the US planners desire to intimidate the Soviet Union and impress Congress. US planners knew Japan was ready to surrender – For propaganda/PR purposes, why have your war peter out in peace? When it can go from peace to pieces in a bang (actually two bangs) – If brutal world hegemony is your schtick, it’s better to be feared, not loved.
Desperately needed are more positive portrayals of production-line workers. 65% of Americans (workers) are thus portrayed by 10% of US film characters. And the 10% shown in films are usually waiters, bartenders or shop clerks.
M.I.A. Fantasies: Those still boldly flying their black MIA flags want us to believe, Vietnamese have been feeding and housing (at best 2,000) Americans in cages FOR FREE for decades, even though not one tourist has yet found an MIA. Never mind that WWII had 78,000 MIA servicemen and not one US “Patriot” saw fit to start a campaign saying that “they are being held in beer cellars in Germany or Toyota factories in Japan.” In 1988, 82% percent of Americans believed there were alive MIA’s in Asia – not explained was why poor farmers would want to feed white-assed freeloaders for decades. It’s expensive enough to feed their captive ducks. In Rambo III we see Russian torture (which didn’t happen) of US POW’s even though torture by US Special Forces was common practice, and we see Soviets dropping napalm when it again was the US which did so. The films Invasion USA and Red Dawn turn history on its head: the US invaded Soviet Russia 1919 to 1921 – Russia and Cuba NEVER invaded the US.
In Miami Vice’s eighteen episodes, Crockett and Tubbs “killed forty-three people, five times as many as the entire Miami police force killed during that whole year.” A related fact: “On average, a Chicago police officer fires his or her gun in the line of duty once every 27 years.” These shows NEVER point their fingers at white collar crime, but intentionally focus on the single guy who does wrong. White collar criminals, Michael artfully says, “are seldom caught, or if caught, seldom punished, or if punished, seldom severely.”
Race: Here are some old actual US silent film titles, “The Wooing and Wedding of a Coon (1904), For Massa’s Sake (1911), Coon Town Suffragettes (1914), the Nigger (1915), It took four decades before TV tolerated Black leads like Oprah, Arsenio Hall, Bill Cosby, Sanford & Son, Jeffersons.
Michael’s super cool point: “The average shot on a network show lasts about three seconds, and on a commercial about two-and-a-half seconds, thereby conditioning the mind to an endless flicker of changing pictures rather than developing its ability to give protracted attention to the one thing.” Like reading an actual book, or listening to a seminar.
Captain Kangaroo (Robert Keeshan) said when you are in front of a screen, you aren’t doing other things. You develop by experiencing things, real things. Note that on TV “it is never explained why evil forces want to conquer us. It’s just supposedly part of their nature.” “Along with the many acts of murder and mayhem, a child entering kindergarten will have seen 75,000 thirty-second commercials.” Young adults watching 1,000 ads per week. The film “Mississippi Burning” falsely has FBI agents being on the side of the civil rights activists when in fact they were the opposition. The murder of James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman was only solved (with a $30,000 bribe to an informer) because two of the victims were white. As columnist Richard Cohen explained, “it was not the FBI that desegregated the South. It was a handful of Black and White students who did, and they were joined by literally thousands of southern Blacks whose courage, even now, seems incredible.”
Note that it took independent film makers to give us actually important films like Missing, Sounder, Executive Action, Matewan, Silkwood, Norma Rae, The China Syndrome, Reds, and the Milagro Beanfield War. The problem is that majors control distribution; basically, majors finance and distribute films.
Why We Can’t Have Good TV: TV’s biggest advertiser for years was Proctor & Gamble which enforced a rule on its shows that they could not have any material that attacked business (e.g. portraying them as cold and ruthless) or have the armed forces ever portrayed as villains. In the series “The FBI”, there was going to be a fictionalized account of the 1963 terror bombing of a Birmingham church where four Black girls were killed. The writer was told “the church must be in the North, there could be no Negroes involved, and the bombing could have nothing to do with civil rights. When the writer refused to do that and wanted to do a show on police brutality, he was told only “as long as the charge was trumped up, the policeman vindicated, and the man who brought the specious charge prosecuted.” In 1982, the series Lou Grant was cancelled by pressure from right-wing groups offended by Ed Asners plans to help El Salvador with medical aid.
Great book. Everything I’ve read by Michael is great. It is sad people don’t discuss his ideas. Anyway, I really enjoyed this book, and you will too.
One of Gene Autry’s Cowboy Code is “a cowboy is a patriot.” Not mentioned by all-white faux cowboys was that 20 to 25% of cowboys in the West were black, while 1/3 were Mexican. “Tonto” is Spanish for “stupid.” The Lone Ranger TV show had him use monosyllabic grunts and riding behind the Lone Ranger in his dust plume. Did you notice how “Out of Africa” said nothing about Africans - servants and animals yes, but ignored the African people. The film Gandhi ignores explaining why the British were in India – no plundering, imperialism, or vast wealth differences, just unexplained resistance. In Apocalypse Now, Kurtz lies to the audience about Vietcong chopping arms off children as punishment for receiving vaccinations by the US – never happened, but the audience thought it did. Robert Duvall said in it, “I love the smell of napalm in the morning.” Note that Deer Hunter’s roulette scene never would have been accepted if white people were demanding the prisoner play Russian roulette; it worked for racist reasons.
We were taught by pseudo patriots that Jane Fonda is an unabashed commie Leftist, but in a 1981 publicity interview she said this, “If we aren’t afraid of Arabs, we’d better examine our heads. They are unstable, they are fundamentalists, anti-woman, anti-free press.” In Cold War movies our spies are heroic and thwart the enemy. Their spies aren’t. You couldn’t have “the Man from Uncle” series today because an American and a Russian couldn’t work together under 24/7 US Russophobia, unless it was maybe in a Donald Trump sex dream. When was the last film you saw that was about class? The rich against the poor? The subject is taboo.
“The Scarlet Pimpernel” favored the aristocrats and regular folk became the angry mob. Did you know that “the core of Hitler’s support actually came from the more affluent classes”? And that the majority of the German working class opposed Hitler’s accession to power, as did a majority of Italy’s proletariat oppose Mussolini”? “At least 85% of the fighting in the European war took place on the Eastern front” – thus, the Soviets won that war not the Yanks. Dropping the A Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the US planners desire to intimidate the Soviet Union and impress Congress. US planners knew Japan was ready to surrender – For propaganda/PR purposes, why have your war peter out in peace? When it can go from peace to pieces in a bang (actually two bangs) – If brutal world hegemony is your schtick, it’s better to be feared, not loved.
Desperately needed are more positive portrayals of production-line workers. 65% of Americans (workers) are thus portrayed by 10% of US film characters. And the 10% shown in films are usually waiters, bartenders or shop clerks.
M.I.A. Fantasies: Those still boldly flying their black MIA flags want us to believe, Vietnamese have been feeding and housing (at best 2,000) Americans in cages FOR FREE for decades, even though not one tourist has yet found an MIA. Never mind that WWII had 78,000 MIA servicemen and not one US “Patriot” saw fit to start a campaign saying that “they are being held in beer cellars in Germany or Toyota factories in Japan.” In 1988, 82% percent of Americans believed there were alive MIA’s in Asia – not explained was why poor farmers would want to feed white-assed freeloaders for decades. It’s expensive enough to feed their captive ducks. In Rambo III we see Russian torture (which didn’t happen) of US POW’s even though torture by US Special Forces was common practice, and we see Soviets dropping napalm when it again was the US which did so. The films Invasion USA and Red Dawn turn history on its head: the US invaded Soviet Russia 1919 to 1921 – Russia and Cuba NEVER invaded the US.
In Miami Vice’s eighteen episodes, Crockett and Tubbs “killed forty-three people, five times as many as the entire Miami police force killed during that whole year.” A related fact: “On average, a Chicago police officer fires his or her gun in the line of duty once every 27 years.” These shows NEVER point their fingers at white collar crime, but intentionally focus on the single guy who does wrong. White collar criminals, Michael artfully says, “are seldom caught, or if caught, seldom punished, or if punished, seldom severely.”
Race: Here are some old actual US silent film titles, “The Wooing and Wedding of a Coon (1904), For Massa’s Sake (1911), Coon Town Suffragettes (1914), the Nigger (1915), It took four decades before TV tolerated Black leads like Oprah, Arsenio Hall, Bill Cosby, Sanford & Son, Jeffersons.
Michael’s super cool point: “The average shot on a network show lasts about three seconds, and on a commercial about two-and-a-half seconds, thereby conditioning the mind to an endless flicker of changing pictures rather than developing its ability to give protracted attention to the one thing.” Like reading an actual book, or listening to a seminar.
Captain Kangaroo (Robert Keeshan) said when you are in front of a screen, you aren’t doing other things. You develop by experiencing things, real things. Note that on TV “it is never explained why evil forces want to conquer us. It’s just supposedly part of their nature.” “Along with the many acts of murder and mayhem, a child entering kindergarten will have seen 75,000 thirty-second commercials.” Young adults watching 1,000 ads per week. The film “Mississippi Burning” falsely has FBI agents being on the side of the civil rights activists when in fact they were the opposition. The murder of James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman was only solved (with a $30,000 bribe to an informer) because two of the victims were white. As columnist Richard Cohen explained, “it was not the FBI that desegregated the South. It was a handful of Black and White students who did, and they were joined by literally thousands of southern Blacks whose courage, even now, seems incredible.”
Note that it took independent film makers to give us actually important films like Missing, Sounder, Executive Action, Matewan, Silkwood, Norma Rae, The China Syndrome, Reds, and the Milagro Beanfield War. The problem is that majors control distribution; basically, majors finance and distribute films.
Why We Can’t Have Good TV: TV’s biggest advertiser for years was Proctor & Gamble which enforced a rule on its shows that they could not have any material that attacked business (e.g. portraying them as cold and ruthless) or have the armed forces ever portrayed as villains. In the series “The FBI”, there was going to be a fictionalized account of the 1963 terror bombing of a Birmingham church where four Black girls were killed. The writer was told “the church must be in the North, there could be no Negroes involved, and the bombing could have nothing to do with civil rights. When the writer refused to do that and wanted to do a show on police brutality, he was told only “as long as the charge was trumped up, the policeman vindicated, and the man who brought the specious charge prosecuted.” In 1982, the series Lou Grant was cancelled by pressure from right-wing groups offended by Ed Asners plans to help El Salvador with medical aid.
Great book. Everything I’ve read by Michael is great. It is sad people don’t discuss his ideas. Anyway, I really enjoyed this book, and you will too.
June 17, 2010
This book wouldn't really illuminate anything new for people who have been watching TV and movies critically all along, but it is useful for those who haven't. My problem with it ( why three stars instead of more) is I feel like Parenti wrote it much the way I would have--angrily, with many generalizations. I don't pride myself on my analytical, dispassionate writing skills.
I'll quote some of what he says on the last few pages, which can sum up the book as a whole:
"The media rely mostly on violent, shallow, contrived, formularistic plots and characters. The viewing public is bombarded with banalities, trivialities, imbecilities--but also with sociopolitical orthodoxies. Themes that raise questions about the existing arrangements of wealth and power are, with rare exception, kept out of sight and sound. The broader systemic causes of social problems must not be dwelled upon, although the symptoms may be bemoaned--but not too much. The injustices and inequities of the modern capitalist social order at home and in the Third World are glossed over or ignored entirely. In the fictional world of film and television, adversities are caused by happenstance or by ill-willed individuals rather than by economic and social forces. Problems are solved by individual efforts within the system rather than collective effort against it.
Above all, the existing class structure and prevailing distribution of economic wealth are either ignored or accepted as the best of all possible social arrangements. The media rarely attack the established institutions of wealth and power. The economic class structure must not be challenged in its fundaments."
I do appreciate his drawing attention to the fact that most of what gets accomplished in the film and television narratives is done so by individual rather than group effort, which is the opposite of how real life works. I don't think I've ever consciously noticed this myself, but it's an important point. It's also vital to question and challenge why things are the way they are, instead of accepting that they must be this way.
At the very end, Parenti lists some things that the public can do to take back control of our airwaves. My favorite is:
"We need to exercise the limited consumer sovereignty available to us by voting with our pocketbooks and refusing to attend slick, superficial, Hollywood movies. Also we need to stop sacrificing large portions of our lives to the unsatisfying but addictive television set. We need to rediscover, or discover for the first time, the gratifying nourishments of reading and of engagement in community activities with other humans. There is much talk today about people taking control of their own lives. One way to start is by dropping out of the mass-media culture as much as possible and reclaiming our own brains and sensibilities."
I agree.
I'll quote some of what he says on the last few pages, which can sum up the book as a whole:
"The media rely mostly on violent, shallow, contrived, formularistic plots and characters. The viewing public is bombarded with banalities, trivialities, imbecilities--but also with sociopolitical orthodoxies. Themes that raise questions about the existing arrangements of wealth and power are, with rare exception, kept out of sight and sound. The broader systemic causes of social problems must not be dwelled upon, although the symptoms may be bemoaned--but not too much. The injustices and inequities of the modern capitalist social order at home and in the Third World are glossed over or ignored entirely. In the fictional world of film and television, adversities are caused by happenstance or by ill-willed individuals rather than by economic and social forces. Problems are solved by individual efforts within the system rather than collective effort against it.
Above all, the existing class structure and prevailing distribution of economic wealth are either ignored or accepted as the best of all possible social arrangements. The media rarely attack the established institutions of wealth and power. The economic class structure must not be challenged in its fundaments."
I do appreciate his drawing attention to the fact that most of what gets accomplished in the film and television narratives is done so by individual rather than group effort, which is the opposite of how real life works. I don't think I've ever consciously noticed this myself, but it's an important point. It's also vital to question and challenge why things are the way they are, instead of accepting that they must be this way.
At the very end, Parenti lists some things that the public can do to take back control of our airwaves. My favorite is:
"We need to exercise the limited consumer sovereignty available to us by voting with our pocketbooks and refusing to attend slick, superficial, Hollywood movies. Also we need to stop sacrificing large portions of our lives to the unsatisfying but addictive television set. We need to rediscover, or discover for the first time, the gratifying nourishments of reading and of engagement in community activities with other humans. There is much talk today about people taking control of their own lives. One way to start is by dropping out of the mass-media culture as much as possible and reclaiming our own brains and sensibilities."
I agree.
August 25, 2019
About corporate control over the "entertainment" media. While it's impossible to say how important it is that these mostly transmit reactionary messages relative to other factors, the fact that it's basically impossible to distribute more emancipatory and progressive material certainly has an important effect on our cultural imaginations. The book contains a good analysis of individual (representative) content, plus explanations of how to look at films from a Marxist perspective.
February 27, 2020
This is the book which taught me how to spot propaganda in even the most innocent looking Cinema. Very useful.
October 22, 2016
Charmingly dated in a superficial way (like when he keeps calling remote controls "zappers") and a little repetitive but still very relevant to the state of the mass media today. Very readable and of course if you've heard him speak it's impossible to read this without hearing his cadence in your head.
Read
January 10, 2021“We’re being more than entertained.”
•Hollywood and TV are permeated with class, racial, gender and other political biases.
•Am I brainwashed by the media to think that individual efforts are preferable to collective action?
•For manipulation to be most effective, evidence of its presence should be nonexistent- beliefs, attitudes and values are more palatable/credible to an audience when they’re molded/reinforced by characters and plots vs when they’re preached by a newscasters for a particular cause. THIS REQUIRES A FALSE REALITY.
• All perception of the world is colored by our exposure to the media. Media influence is scaryyyy
• Ghandi movie excerpt
• lol @ the “house of un-American activities committee.” What does it even mean to be American? Well apparently it means to be a Soviet/anti-communist Russian
• there is a fine line between Hollywood and the US government, growing fainter. There is hardly a difference between a Raegan speech and a Rocky monologue
•Hollywood and TV are permeated with class, racial, gender and other political biases.
•Am I brainwashed by the media to think that individual efforts are preferable to collective action?
•For manipulation to be most effective, evidence of its presence should be nonexistent- beliefs, attitudes and values are more palatable/credible to an audience when they’re molded/reinforced by characters and plots vs when they’re preached by a newscasters for a particular cause. THIS REQUIRES A FALSE REALITY.
• All perception of the world is colored by our exposure to the media. Media influence is scaryyyy
• Ghandi movie excerpt
• lol @ the “house of un-American activities committee.” What does it even mean to be American? Well apparently it means to be a Soviet/anti-communist Russian
• there is a fine line between Hollywood and the US government, growing fainter. There is hardly a difference between a Raegan speech and a Rocky monologue
December 11, 2022
Sixth book I’ve read from Parenti.
The analysis of many shows and movies is pretty good to be honest: it really shows how Hollywod produces ideological products to reinforce racism, sexism, patriotism, capitalism, etc.
Nothing new if you already have a critical view of the cultural reality we live in capitalist nations.
That said, the book isn't perfect: the analysis of 'Taxi Driver' and some cartoon shows is rather shallow (in the first case) and silly (in the second one).
Nonetheless, it is an excellent example of how marxism can be applied to analyse the ISA's products.
The analysis of many shows and movies is pretty good to be honest: it really shows how Hollywod produces ideological products to reinforce racism, sexism, patriotism, capitalism, etc.
Nothing new if you already have a critical view of the cultural reality we live in capitalist nations.
That said, the book isn't perfect: the analysis of 'Taxi Driver' and some cartoon shows is rather shallow (in the first case) and silly (in the second one).
Nonetheless, it is an excellent example of how marxism can be applied to analyse the ISA's products.
May 6, 2019
A very thorough look at American media depictions of various cultures, races, gender, class, and distortions of historical and contemporary issues. We need a 2019 version however--much has changed in the past 20 years.
July 7, 2021
First of all, Michael Parenti is such a great writer.
I feel like if you already look at films critically this may not do much for you, he basically goes over many films and discusses the propaganda aspects of them. I havent seen any of the things he talked about (I'm not from/living in the US, I'm 18, most of these actors and companies and films I didnt know about lol) but it was still interesting and easy to apply these to shows I see now on Netflix and tv (dynasty, brooklyn nine-nine, house md, all the superhero movies etc) because they do use the same plot lines over and over again.
This was still interesting, what was new to me were details about production and funding because I never really did have an interest in movies and shows like that to figure out more about that side of it, and this book basically helped me strengthen my understanding and made me feel not weird about being the person who "looks too much into it" sjdhdjd I do still enjoy b99 and dynasty but I can't really watch things like these without pointing it out because its literally right there, and now I have a much clearer understanding and a wider range of critiques brought to my attention so I will be all the more insufferable x
I did get a bit bored at some bits because I was already aware, and some types of films I hadn't seen before and had no interest to so I didn't pay attention at some parts haha but it was still great!
I feel like if you already look at films critically this may not do much for you, he basically goes over many films and discusses the propaganda aspects of them. I havent seen any of the things he talked about (I'm not from/living in the US, I'm 18, most of these actors and companies and films I didnt know about lol) but it was still interesting and easy to apply these to shows I see now on Netflix and tv (dynasty, brooklyn nine-nine, house md, all the superhero movies etc) because they do use the same plot lines over and over again.
This was still interesting, what was new to me were details about production and funding because I never really did have an interest in movies and shows like that to figure out more about that side of it, and this book basically helped me strengthen my understanding and made me feel not weird about being the person who "looks too much into it" sjdhdjd I do still enjoy b99 and dynasty but I can't really watch things like these without pointing it out because its literally right there, and now I have a much clearer understanding and a wider range of critiques brought to my attention so I will be all the more insufferable x
I did get a bit bored at some bits because I was already aware, and some types of films I hadn't seen before and had no interest to so I didn't pay attention at some parts haha but it was still great!
Read
September 16, 2020THE GOAT
April 26, 2022
A little dated in some regards, but the fact it is still so relevant despite being published over 30 years ago is pretty incredible.
March 3, 2025
I didn’t love this one as much as I’ve loved some of Parenti’s other books. This is a great read, but it is so dated!
March 13, 2017
Michael Parenti is extremely important to me. His books and speeches have had a huge influence on my thinking and intellectual development. I love this man.
That said, this book is not among my favorites. It was good, entertaining, and insightful as all of Parenti's books are. He clearly demonstrates how the dominant paradigm in our culture - free market capitalism and militarism - insinuates itself into mass media. You're unlikely to ever notice unless you pause to critically analyze the subtext of mass culture. The references seem very dated now, as you might expect almost 30 years after publication - but however dated they might be they are no less relevant. It would be very easy to apply these same critiques to modern examples with little revision necessary.
I think the reason that I didn't love this book is mostly personal. It reminds me of my college communications courses at University of Michigan. I learned about this topic then and it's hard for me to not to find the subject matter preachy. If you are unfamiliar with Parenti's work I would suggest starting with Democracy for the Few, The Assassination of Julius Caesar, or Superpatriotism. This book is a deep cut that might resonate more with a dedicated Parenti enthusiast.
That said, this book is not among my favorites. It was good, entertaining, and insightful as all of Parenti's books are. He clearly demonstrates how the dominant paradigm in our culture - free market capitalism and militarism - insinuates itself into mass media. You're unlikely to ever notice unless you pause to critically analyze the subtext of mass culture. The references seem very dated now, as you might expect almost 30 years after publication - but however dated they might be they are no less relevant. It would be very easy to apply these same critiques to modern examples with little revision necessary.
I think the reason that I didn't love this book is mostly personal. It reminds me of my college communications courses at University of Michigan. I learned about this topic then and it's hard for me to not to find the subject matter preachy. If you are unfamiliar with Parenti's work I would suggest starting with Democracy for the Few, The Assassination of Julius Caesar, or Superpatriotism. This book is a deep cut that might resonate more with a dedicated Parenti enthusiast.
March 9, 2020
BAM. A well rounded source that cover the HEART of the so-called (Great) American Hollywood. It even looks back at Representatives, On the Screen, AND Behind the Scenes. It opens the BLIND eyes of many who even today, may have (inherited) learned silent hatred but but all too deliberate. The many 'chaptered', examples throughout the book could also be read by actual TOPIC choice, however I strongly recommend the entire book that covers the NEWS, THEATER, FILM, etc., ..
Did I say, "NEWS"? Enjoy....I was also surprised that only ONE public library system, in the great state of Ohio owned a copy. Although I live in Columbus, I had to get a lonely copy sent to me from Toledo. Could it be, the very POLITICALLY RUN system in this State where public libraries are supposed to be allowed to represent: INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM, as well.... Enjoy. I did...
Did I say, "NEWS"? Enjoy....I was also surprised that only ONE public library system, in the great state of Ohio owned a copy. Although I live in Columbus, I had to get a lonely copy sent to me from Toledo. Could it be, the very POLITICALLY RUN system in this State where public libraries are supposed to be allowed to represent: INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM, as well.... Enjoy. I did...
January 16, 2024
I first read Micahel Parenti’s book “Make-Believe Media” about twenty years ago. The way that the author looks through everything presented in our media, be it movies, television, news or Saturday morning cartoons made me look at things I viewed with a more critical eye. Yes, even lightweight entertainment usually has a purpose even when it claims to not have. What exactly are we being given in the media? And why are we given this and not that? Are we being manipulated without knowing it (Short answer-Yes).
Parenti writes in an intellectual but easily understandable way. You won’t have to try to figure out his point of view. The book was published in 1992, so it still has a kind of post-Reagan hangover to it. Even though some of the movies may seem to be old examples at this date (Rambo) or TV (Miami Vice) or network news media outlets (this is pretty much pre-Internet), it is well worth your time to read today.
It does make you wonder what takes the author would have on cable news, streaming TV shows, and ubiquitous movies and online videos.
This book led me to read other works by Parenti (The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Contrary Notions etc.) and everything I’ve read by him so far is insightful and recommended.
Parenti writes in an intellectual but easily understandable way. You won’t have to try to figure out his point of view. The book was published in 1992, so it still has a kind of post-Reagan hangover to it. Even though some of the movies may seem to be old examples at this date (Rambo) or TV (Miami Vice) or network news media outlets (this is pretty much pre-Internet), it is well worth your time to read today.
It does make you wonder what takes the author would have on cable news, streaming TV shows, and ubiquitous movies and online videos.
This book led me to read other works by Parenti (The Assassination of Julius Caesar, Contrary Notions etc.) and everything I’ve read by him so far is insightful and recommended.
October 19, 2011
Absolutely amazing book on the politics of the media in America. Eye-opening revelations from 1992 that are still true and relevant in 2011. The media is not only conservative, but has been leading our nation to war and serving conservative and corporate causes since its incarnation. Very gripping read. Well written. I'm now a fan of Michael Parenti.
September 6, 2019
Excellent overview of the ideology and propaganda functions of all (pre-Internet) media - check out his recdommended film list.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews