I don't underestimate audiences' intelligence. Audiences are much

In the insightful words of Michael Mann, "I don’t underestimate audiences' intelligence. Audiences are much brighter than media gives them credit for. When people went to a movie once a week in the 1930s and that was their only exposure to media, you were required to do a different grammar," we are reminded of the complex and evolving relationship between media, audiences, and the way stories are told. Mann's statement reveals a profound truth: as time progresses, so too does the capacity of the audience to engage with and interpret the content they consume. In the past, when media was limited in scope, storytelling had to adhere to a set formula, relying on clear and simple techniques to convey meaning. But in today’s world, where the audience is exposed to a vast range of information, the methods of communication have evolved, allowing for deeper and more nuanced storytelling.

In the ancient world, storytelling was not just a form of entertainment, but a vital means of passing down wisdom, history, and values to the next generation. The Greeks revered storytelling, particularly in the form of tragedy and epic poetry. Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey were masterful works that did more than recount events; they explored human nature, morality, and the relationship between mortals and gods. These stories were not simply crafted for entertainment, but to provoke thought and reflection on the human condition. Similarly, Sophocles and Euripides used the stage not just to entertain, but to challenge their audiences, knowing that the Greeks were not passive recipients of stories, but active participants in the reflection of their own lives through the tragedies they witnessed. In this sense, the ancient world did not underestimate the audience's intelligence; rather, they invited them to engage deeply with the stories presented.

As Michael Mann points out, audiences in the past, when exposed to media just once a week, were limited in their access to stories. The grammar of storytelling in those days was simple, relying on clear narrative structures and familiar tropes to ensure that the message was understood. Film and radio were often the primary sources of entertainment and information, and content creators were bound by the need to communicate effectively within the constraints of a limited medium. The audiences had no choice but to engage with what was presented to them, accepting it largely at face value. In this context, media creators had to craft stories in a way that required little interpretation, using clear symbolism and predictable plots to ensure they were universally accessible.

However, as Mann emphasizes, the audience today is far more discerning and intellectually capable. The rise of the internet, television, and streaming services has exposed people to an overwhelming amount of media, resulting in a population that is far more critical and analytical of the content they consume. Audiences now have the ability to engage in discussions, share interpretations, and compare different perspectives on stories. In a sense, they have become co-creators of the narrative. This shift is not just a change in technology, but in culture. People today are exposed to a broad array of ideas, and with that, they bring their own intelligence, critical thinking, and personal experiences to the media they consume. The grammar of storytelling has had to evolve to keep pace with this new audience—no longer is a simple, one-dimensional plot sufficient to capture their attention and engage their intellect.

Consider the modern television show, The Wire, which exemplifies this shift in storytelling. The series is known for its complex portrayal of societal structures, morality, and systemic corruption, all conveyed through multi-layered narratives and a refusal to offer clear-cut heroes and villains. This style of storytelling demands an active, engaged audience—one that is capable of understanding the nuances of the story and reflecting on its deeper meanings. The intelligence of the viewers is not only respected but required for them to fully appreciate the themes explored in the show. Unlike the simple stories of earlier media, The Wire offers a narrative that challenges its audience to question their assumptions about the world, much as the ancient Greeks did with their tragedies.

The lesson we can take from Mann’s words is this: media today should not underestimate the audiences’ intelligence, for they are more capable and more informed than ever before. As creators of content, whether in film, literature, or art, we must embrace the responsibility of engaging our audience on a deeper level. Instead of simply offering entertainment, we must aim to stimulate thought, challenge beliefs, and encourage our audience to engage critically with the material presented. In doing so, we elevate the experience of consuming media from passive enjoyment to an active, transformative act of reflection and understanding.

In our own lives, we must also recognize the intelligence and potential in those around us—whether in education, family, or society. We must not treat others as passive recipients of information but encourage active engagement and critical thinking. Just as storytellers have evolved to respect the intellect of their audiences, we too must cultivate environments that foster deeper reflection, learning, and growth. Whether in our workplaces, our homes, or our communities, we must empower others to think critically, challenge the status quo, and seek out the truths that lie beyond the surface. Only then can we create a world that values intelligence, critical thinking, and the active pursuit of understanding in all aspects of life.