Why is Hollywood primarily liberals?

[Temis the Vorta]

The main point is that conservatives tend to like their art as moralistic and ideology-driven as themselves. Great (dramatic) art reflects the chaos of life, but conservatives tend to like tidy moralistic parables without (realistic) depictions of liberal sexuality, adult language, etc.

That's probably the closest to an accurate answer in this thread so far.

The "Hollywood is liberal" myth is based on the assumption that Hollywood consists entirely of the people we see in movies and TV, the actors and name directors and producers, the celebrities.

You're begging the question. Why are the actors and other Hollywood celebrities more culturally liberal than Americans as a whole? Why do they not represent a cross-section of the country? Even Schwartzenegger and Eastwood are not cultural conservatives.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Well, as always, the code here is "liberal" for Left Wing and "conservative" for Right Wing, and the implication I got from the OP is that we're talking about the social aspects of the political spectrum.

But that's just it. When you reduce the discussion to Far Right and Far Left as the only options, that's not a spectrum. A spectrum is a continuum encompassing everything between the extremes. The kind of dualistic thinking that pundits today insist on, caricaturing every political position as one of two opposing extremes, is just a way of denying the truth that there is a spectrum, that both "liberal" and "conservative" encompass a wide range of different views, and that you can't truly understand an issue like this if you continue to define it in terms of crude stereotypes.

Eh, people reduce themselves to stereotypes. I never use the stuff myself. The point is, the notion of a "Liberal" [sic] Hollywood is founded on writers, actors, SFX people and other creative types; and the reason is that creative types have a tendency to be free thinkers, unless they're total hacks, and are therefore less likely to align with the social Right.

...but Heinlein was hardly a "social conservative."

Nor is Eastwood a "social conservative." He has supported conservative candidates who tend to be considered almost RINOs by the social conservative crowd - Schwarzenegger, McCain, etc. He's pro-choice, pro-civil rights and takes a rather jaundiced view of groups like the NRA.

There you go. When people talk of "liberal" Hollywood, they aren't thinking of lower taxes and trickle-down economics; they're thinking of uncensored Bohemian hijinks.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Ironic, since he is a Democrat.

Yeah, Keith is quite the cynic where his career is concerned.

So you're saying Democrats can't be conservative? NOW who's the absolutist?

There's more to the Toby Keith cynicism thing than that. He really has very little investment in the jingoistic, militant stuff he performs. It's simply become the key to his identity as a popular artist. He's actually quite a centrist and has been supportive of Obama.

 

[Aragorn]

Jerry Bruckheimer's stated some of the votes he's cast for Republican candidates, but I doubt he's the right-wing version of far-left Sherry Lansing.

 

[Nowhere Man]

Tobey Kieth has made a lot of money on pushing conservatives values on the rest of us

Ironic, since he is a Democrat.

Where did you hear that? And if he is, he's a poor example of a Democrat.Putting a boot up your ass is not the American way. His little war with the Dixie Chicks because they spoke out agianst the Iraqi war, that's straight out of Carl Rove and Dick Cheney's playbook. The " if you don't agree with us , you are against us" mentality is 100% conservative.If Tobey Kieth doesent believe in the things he's writing and he just say's it to make money, then he should not be writing songs and people like that are despiciple excuses for human biengs. I don't like Glen Beck, but atleast he dosen't pretend to believe in the things he complains about. He actually believes it.Tobey Kieth is a piece of shit who tries to squeeze as many 9/11 dollars as he can.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Because most people can take only so much 24 and Tom Clancy books/movies.

In defense of Clancy, I enjoyed all his novels up until Executive Orders. I thought they were really well-imagined spy thrillers. It wasn't until he blew up the government, made Jack Ryan president, and laid out his Etch-a-Sketch wet dream of government reform that I got turned off.

I'd rather read James Bond, thanks. At least he makes fucking sure that London doesn't get blown up and people die, and that he would leave MI6 and eventually become PM. That novel sounds a lot like The Purple Invasion storyline from the 1934-1939 Operator No. 5 pulp magazine.

 

[cardinal biggles]

^Well, Ryan was never a field agent like Bond. He was an analyst for the CIA who kept getting thrust into these big international life-or-death incidents. The chain of events that leads to him becoming President is almost hilarious in its improbability.

 

[T'Girl]

The main point is that conservatives tend to like their art as moralistic and ideology-driven as themselves. Great (dramatic) art reflects the chaos of life, but conservatives tend to like tidy moralistic parables without (realistic) depictions of liberal sexuality, adult language, etc.

But hollywood does make moralistic, non-sexual, mild language movies if that's what the ticket/DVD buyers want to buy. Parent don't want to take their children to R rated and increasingly to PG-13 rated movies. Look at this years top ten movies. Top money makers like: Harry Potter, Ice Age, Up (great film), Monsters vs Aliens, Night at the Museum, are all family values kind of movies. Both Transformers Two and Star Trek Eleven advances a clearly drawn good guys vs bad guys conservative ideology. The big names in hollywood may lean to the left, "But the customer is alway right."

 

[stj]

Cultural conservatism is pretty much reducible to bigotry of one form or another, whether racism, chauvinism, homophobia, jingoism, religious bigotry (decades ago, people had to prefix "racial" to bigotry, as the default meaning for "bigotry" was religious prejudice,) or any combination thereof. I don't think it's an accident that Nashville, capital of "country" music, which in practice seems to mean White and rural music, as opposed that other stuff, has more of the ostentatious cultural "conservatives."

Hollywood, instead, has aspirations of reaching a national audience, including the urbanites, including the minorities, including the majority sex. Being an open bigot really is not good sales practice. As for Hollywood's blatant use of sexuality, it also tends to tack on the crudest of moral messages to satisfy the conservatives. For example, in horror movies, the audience first gets to enjoy the sluts on parade, then gets to enjoy seeing them killed.

Prurience sells. Rural white audiences eat it up on shows like
Dangerous Housewives. And many reality shows are based on the crudest kind of prurient interest. As long as lip service is given to conventional morals, everything's good. Even the supposed sophisticated cable programming seems largely a matter of selling sex, with very little artistic innovations. And doesn't the obligatory terminal moral that's supposed to take the curse off show up there an awful lot as well?

In the nineteenth century, a culturally conservative time if ever there was one, prostitution was much more pervasive than today. Doesn't that tell you something about cultural conservatism?

Cultural conservatism is a phony concept, code for bigotry in my judgment. But selling sex is just business. Hollywood is not particularly socially liberal, either. The thread premise is nonsense.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

There's more to the Toby Keith cynicism thing than that. He really has very little investment in the jingoistic, militant stuff he performs.

I dare you to say that to his face. He wrote the song not only because of 9/11, but his father's death as well. Linky

He's actually quite a centrist and has been supportive of Obama.

He also supported GWB as well.

 

[TedShatner10]

Network TV in America are not run by people who are necessarily Conservatives in the social sense, but they're run by people who are very greedy and very short-sighted and very unethical, like most most other businessmen in the Anglo-American hegemony. MGM makes a profit, yet its crashing and burning all the same, while network TV will most likely be thrown on the scrapheap alongside the record labels, automobile manufacturers and newspapers, and just because of technology moving on. I don't like Moore, but I like his lecture on newspapers (his point about advertising smothering the point of enterntainment and media is dead on). I mean a once proud network like NBC alone has already been bought out, despite being a decent network even ten years ago. The Writers Strike was ultimately a self-inflicted fiasco on the part of the stubborn producers/executives and remember British industries that had serious strikes in the 1970s were swept away completely almost overnight in the 1980s and 1990s.

 

[Caliburn24]

I could care less about who Hollywood supports politically, but what I do care about is how conservatives and in particular Christians are portrayed in mainstream Hollywood these days. Almost always it is as liars, fools, hypocrites and villains. It paints an untrue picture and does a disservice to the political discourse.

I would love to see another Sergeant York or the like spring from Hollywood, but I have my doubts that a Christian painted in such a light will ever emerge from there.

 

[TedShatner10]

Don't you have your own stations, media personalities, schools, and of course Bibleman?

 

[Aragorn]

Don't you have your own stations, media personalities, schools, and of course Bibleman?

I guess this is what is known as "asked and answered."

 

[Nerys Myk]

I could care less about who Hollywood supports politically, but what I do care about is how conservatives and in particular Christians are portrayed in mainstream Hollywood these days. Almost always it is as liars, fools, hypocrites and villains. It paints an untrue picture and does a disservice to the political discourse.

I would love to see another Sergeant York or the like spring from Hollywood, but I have my doubts that a Christian painted in such a light will ever emerge from there.

Yeah he was a Christian, but thats not why they made a movie about him.

"Conservatives" have always been bad guys in Hollywood. Old Man Potter was no tree hugger,supporter of the poor and disenfranchised.

 

[Caliburn24]

First, the Christian networks/media/etc are what they are. I don't watch them or care about them. That argument would be akin to saying that since gays and lesbians have their own TV channel they don't need to appear on mainstream networks. Since blacks have BET they don't need to be on mainstream networks. What utter rubbish.

Second, conservatives have not always been the villains in Hollywood, and even today they are not always the villain of a piece. Sandra Bullock's new movie has a conservative family who are the good guys for example. Most movies and entertainment try to stay away from politics and religion because it limits the potential audience and might make people not want to watch whatever it is. But generally in Hollywood if politics do come up, nine times out of ten they'll be well left of center. And religious characters? From Quinn's parents on Glee to Lt. Scott's womanizing on Stargate Universe, Christians of whatever denomination do not come off well. I'm trying to think of a Christian character on network TV right now who comes across in a positive way and I'm drawing a blank. Odd for a nation that professes to be a majority Christian?

 

[Alidar Jarok]

While I tend to think the statement that Hollywood is made up primarily of liberals probably has some flaws in it, in the spirit of discussion in this thread, I will add another possible reason. A good possibility would be McCarthyism and how it basically attacked the movie industry. Certainly, after that, there would be a bit of paranoia of Republicans in film who might try and ruin their careers.

There were plenty of Republicans who disliked McCarthy's witch-hunt tactics and saw him as a liability to their party's credibility. He was not representative of the Republican rank and file, and the more free rein he was given to show what a creep he was, the more the Republicans themselves turned against him. Joseph Nye Welch, the man who famously chastised McCarthy by asking, "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?", was himself a Republican. Before that, seven Republican Senators had been openly protesting McCarthy's tactics for years. In 1954, Republican Senator Ralph Flanders compared McCarthy to Hitler and introduced a resolution to censure him. In the vote, 22 Republicans joined 44 Democrats and 1 independent in favor of the censure, while the other 22 Republicans present voted against.

All good points (except Welch, he was simply the army's attorney, he would have done that regardless of political party).

So I'm sure nobody blamed the Republican Party as a whole for the excesses of Joe McCarthy. That would, after all, be the same kind of paranoid, witch-hunt thinking that McCarthy embodied. It makes little sense to assume that his opposition would think the same way he did.

I don't think you should go as far as to say nobody blamed the Republican Party. Just because people renounced him doesn't mean that distrust couldn't build of a future person like him from that party.

 

[OmahaStar]

what I do care about is how conservatives and in particular Christians are portrayed in mainstream Hollywood these days. Almost always it is as liars, fools, hypocrites and villains.

Well, yes. That's because it's true. For the most part, they ARE hypocrites and villains and liars and fools. I'm not sure I understand your argument. It's sort of like Charles Manson complaining that a documentary made him look like he had bad hair.

 

[Aragorn]

Looks like some people really need their blanket statements and labels. In the name of diversity and tolerance, of course.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I could care less about who Hollywood supports politically, but what I do care about is how conservatives and in particular Christians are portrayed in mainstream Hollywood these days. Almost always it is as liars, fools, hypocrites and villains. It paints an untrue picture and does a disservice to the political discourse.

I would love to see another Sergeant York or the like spring from Hollywood, but I have my doubts that a Christian painted in such a light will ever emerge from there.

Yeah he was a Christian, but thats not why they made a movie about him.

"Conservatives" have always been bad guys in Hollywood. Old Man Potter was no tree hugger,supporter of the poor and disenfranchised.

That's an odd movie to cite (It's a Wonderful Life), given that both Jimmy Stewart and Frank Capra were Republicans.