star flows from the media like a flood . This is a sign that star making in mass communication takes place without change and without end.
star is very often exaggeration, exaggeration, linguistic pomposity , because the original meaning of this word is 'star'. According to the definition of Gábor Nagy Tolcsvai's dictionary of foreign words, its first meaning is: 'a very popular person based on his outstanding performance, also through mass communication, especially an actor, athlete'. The definition also suggests role models. We use the members of the Golden Team - the best Hungarian football team of all time - as an example. The band members were marked with the names Grosics, Buzánszky, Lóránt, Lantos, Bozsik, Zakariás, Budai II., Kocsis, Hidegkuti, Puskás, Czibor.
As another refreshing example, let's mention three classical Hungarian writers (there could be many more). They are also real stars. Moreover, the word star in the original, true sense. As you know, due to their valuable creations and their exemplary humanity, they became extremely popular and well-read authors: Mór Jókai, Sándor Márai, Antal Szerb, Albert Wass (by the way, they are among our most popular authors - this is confirmed by the 2005 national survey called A Nagy Könyv; sa they are among the thirty most read Hungarian writers - according to the Antikvarium.hu website, which lists nine hundred thousand books. The list of 100 is headed by Jókai).
In other words, the star could be used only for persons who have created valuable works and are also very popular; they shine as fixed stars - primarily - in the sky of sports and the arts.
However, this double virtue is few compared to the amazing number of starred figures today. Nowadays, the media (the part that deals with such things) has already arbitrarily awarded this honorary title to a regimental person, regardless of the level of the person's role, performance, and production. And he slowly puts it next to every figure who appears in the programs of certain TV channels, on the media platforms of the world wide web, and there, due to the nature of mass communication, he becomes visible to the multitude of media consumers (TV viewers, users of the world wide web, etc.). Sometimes, indeed, providing such a "performance", the quality of which is better not to talk about here. Some shows, magazines, and internet sites are filled with today's " stars" . In the media - every day, whether we like it or not - we stumble upon a large number of "stars"... So in fact, the original, first meaning of the word hardly suits them.
We could say that the star is starting to lose its original meaning in the media language - at the same time in the conversational language strongly influenced by the media - and in its 2nd meaning in the aforementioned dictionary - 'a person popularized by mass communication for no particular reason' - appears more and more often. But that's not what it's about! The stars - shouters - by all indications mean what they say seriously, and - usually greatly overestimating the "performance" of the persons in question - they think of the first meaning when using this word. stars " appear, for example Question: what makes a (young) competitor, who is obviously a beginner in the field, a star? Even the best ones are more like saviours, promises of the profession.
Sometimes, just based on the paradoxical title, the reader may raise the question: how much do the subjects have to do with the original meaning of the word? To what extent are they obsessed with the profession, how role models can they be? Here it is: "The talent show star "; star disguised himself for years and deceived the readers " (he is an employee of a German newspaper, who then resigned from his position); "The talent search star !" (a singer who "changed his profession": joined a second-rate band).
And the net expansion of the meaning is that the media often uses this term for content that is star miles away from the original concept quoted by the star : " The student who spoke to the teacher became a star Why did it happen? That's why: "he carefully assigned the teacher, because he thought the lesson she was sent from wasn't interesting enough." After the video made about it, the American young man "became an internet star " and was "interviewed by several news channels". "The the star of ," reports the newspaper. " The 90-year-old woman in a bikini became star - shouts the media, with this huge title. And explain: the aunt, instead of choosing a swimsuit "suitable for her age", chose "something really surprising" at the urging of a friend. "Let's just say, he took the figure to be youthful".
It is not enough that the few-minute "stars" frequently appear on some mass communication forums today, and becoming a star is the work of a moment (just as "stardom" can disappear in a minute), in the media - it seems - today that is also enough a star in minutes , but the absent crew member was removed from the series". We are talking about the fact that the person in a T-shirt and jeans who inadvertently showed up on the set of the Star Wars series "quickly became an audience favorite". (Eventually "digitally removed".)
Shouldn't we go back to using the word in its first meaning? Or will the media wait until there are more "stars" than those who are not concerned about this designation? As you know, if you were to use a precise term, you would only call a celebrity (that is, a famous, well-known person) a star who, above all, has provided and continues to provide significant performance in a certain field - so his activity has a chance of proving to be of lasting value - and, moreover, is a sympathetic personality, individuality, ideal for many , people like it.
In other words, only those who are real stars , in the original meaning of the noun, could be called this word. But if someone didn't put any value on the table, we can remember many things, but hardly the star . And the fact that he was a shining star in the sky of some area, never.
Author: Lajos Arany
