The health of the media is wealthily dependent upon the production of contrived notions. This proposition is likely to be admired by the media scientists, because they’re capable to cognitively deconstruct my critical assertion. Since the audience or the mass society is continuously engrossed with the roller-coaster ride driven by the media, questioning its relation with media becomes a heroic act. This isn’t to say that the audience lacks the rational power to deconstruct the politico-media complex, but in some contemporary cases the mass audience selectively negotiates with the message presented by the media from their conditioned profile. Considering this exordium, using my own critical consciousness as a variable, I intend to deconstruct the so-called aesthetic parameters set by the media and subconscious society in this article.
Aesthetic constructionism, in my view, is a superficial reality perceived by many uncritical thinkers. It has lynched the process of individuation-ism and replaced the vacuum with herd mentality, because without aggregating the demand the supply of messages is dawdled. Its social experiment is tested on mass society whose expectations are horrendously defined by exothermic authoritarian-entities. It is mainly backed by commercial factors, mainstream expectations, regulated parameters and controlled thinking. To begin with, it is unfair for a girl to scorn “lovely products”. In order to be socially accepted, she has to accept the advertisements or messages “as it is”. Any of her attempts to break the “spiral of silence” is considered as anti-social. Considering this illustration, I acknowledge that media plays the role of agenda-setter in the society for sustain-ing the culture of “conspiracy of silence“. Including some women magazines, aestheticism in it is preconceived as an order of “size-zero culture” than individuation-ism.
As far as my observation is concerned, this aesthetic culture doesn’t entertain “skinny” men too. It is asocial for men to ignore buying sexual appeals. By and large, this culture reminds me of broken-window fallacy. Is social approval more salient than self-realisation? Rather than seeing a way of critically questioning the metaphysics of aestheticism, I am seeing a society of “pauperisation of individualism”. No doubt to note that axiological study is subjective, but it is vile to construct “featured expectations”.