Taste. When we talk about “taste,” whose taste do we mean? Ours?Yours?Hollywood’s? This is a recurring problem in discussing the media and one we do not take lightly. In this volume, we have erred on...

Taste. When we talk about “taste,” whose taste do we mean? Ours?Yours?Hollywood’s? This is a recurring problem in discussing the media and one we do not take lightly. In this volume, we have erred on the side of public health and psychology in discussing what is questionable taste and what represents “good” versus “bad” programming. Although we have tried to give examples, we have left the discussion purposefully vague because we acknowledge that taste can vary considerably. But when it comes to “bad” taste or “questionable” programming that is unhealthy, we would tend to agree with a paraphrase of Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography: “We know it when we see it

a. Should the media be criticized on grounds of taste? b. If so, whose taste should be used as the “gold standard”? Is an objective standard possible? c. In making judgments about taste, what sociocultural factors enter the discussion? d. “Push the envelope” seems to be the new guiding principle for Hollywood writers. The writer of the hit shows 2 Broke Girls and Whitney is Whitney Cummings, who half jokingly told a New York Times reporter, “If one day passes without me writing any more vagina jokes, my career is blown” and noted that “our tolerance for what is edgy is changing” (M. E. Williams, 2011). Is it? Is this a case of the media leading society or mirroring it?