My guess is that this attitude is where:
>In small town USA, the local culture usually is inferior.
Big cities often have people from many different cultures, including small towns, which is neat, and interesting things can happen when different perspectives collide, but, for the most part, cities just operate under the generic mass media American culture.
But, in my experience, people living in rural areas rely on their immediate neighbors for more than those living in larger developments. This is conducive to the development of a strong local culture, and outsiders who move in expecting the mass media American culture will likely not feel welcome.
Having lived a variety of places, I personally prefer the rural culture (at least here in Vermont), but I would not say big city culture is inferior...just different.
A tip: if you say a person's culture is inferior, they probably will not see you as worth listening to.
This might be true for some people in large cities, especially the wealthier and the transplants from other places.
However, poor people in cities have a huge sense of community. They rely on their community a ton, and everyone works together to survive. The neighborhood is the community, and it is much like a close knit rural community, only compacted into a smaller city neighborhood.
I think they would find neighors very welcoming - even the toughest cities and neighborhoods are mostly friendly people - but the culture would be unfamiliar and the newcomer would have to adjust.
> it may be easier to travel to an area of the city with more generic culture where they do feel welcome
I'm not sure where that is in many cities, other than suburbs. You can't escape the richness of large cities.
Sure, I agree, with emphasis on the newcomer adjusting.
>I'm not sure where that is in many cities, other than suburbs. You can't escape the richness of large cities.
To clarify, I just mean locations that attract people of a wide variety of backgrounds. That is not to say those locations are 'un-rich' or anything. I just mean that interactions there are governed more by mainstream American culture than by anything specific to that city or neighborhood or the people involved.
I would say it's the opposite. Cities are their own worlds and cultures (many, many cultures per city); they have the critical mass to ignore mass media. Mass media doesn't understand or address the richness of life in cities; it's for the suburbs.
But I certainly agree that mass media does not understand or address the richness of life in cities (or anywhere else).
Yes, I agree that many perspectives are omitted.
> mass media does not understand or address the richness of life in cities (or anywhere else).
It captures the suburbs pretty well, IMHO.
Boy, where do you get off?
>can't believe that there might be people who want to live another way
As it apparently goes for you as well. The fact that someone that would like to live outside of the city, but not want to adopt the "small town limited life experience while--knowing--their way is the only way". Anyone coming from other experiences is always a threat to these small towns so they are labeled as outsiders and always treated suspiciously instead of welcoming like they like to preach.