I haven't finished watching it, about 11 minutes in - interesting discussion. I would say that there's some truth to this, but I don't see it the same way. The problem with statements ( bp ) like capitalism -> unacceptable income disparity -> pop culture quashes revolution is the subtext that it's by design. Our increase in our standard of living can account for that just as easily. Freedom of speech can as well ( we can freely see we all disagree - revolution requires cohesion to flame ). Plenty of "poor" kids in this country wearing brand new $1,000 shoes. Which came first - the demand for popular culture or the design/selling of popular culture. We're going to see all kinds of patterns in complex connected systems for which modern democracies have grown up to be. Patterns can be organic, circumstantial or simply perceived falsely - conspiracy is a common conclusion of the those "interested" but not interested enough to round out their research.
Well, first, I think you need to place the concept within the frame they were looking at it in. That is, within the frame that consumerism is a sort of "panacea" to the alienation of being sort of "estranged" to your labor. So, (and I think he does cover this later in the video) capitalism requires that estrangement, that estrangement leads to alienation, consumerism (and a materialistic way of thinking) is what is "offered" in recompense.
I don't think it is incorrect to challenge Adorno and Horkheimer's notion of it being specifically counter-revolutionary (like you allude to, we don't need to assume everyone is revolutionary until dissuaded to be) however that doesn't mean that what they are sort of "documenting" with the concept of the culture industry isn't happening, it just might not be happening for the reason they thought it was.
Anyways - I'm going to finish it and spend more time on my thinking, just wanted to jot this down so I don't forget my first impressions. It's good stuff, I'm not being "critical", just adding to the conversation that many observations on our culture/reality have some truth and interesting insights, but none seem to capture the whole picture - maybe because we honestly don't agree, honestly can't see the same things and the complexity of life is simply too much for any one "capture" to be accurate - and even if/when someone does "speak truth", change makes it harder still ( what's true today may not be tomorrow ). I think it would be a more powerful presentation without judgement ( don't use words like bleak, etc ).
Even if it's all true - maybe worth it to have a life with decreasing civil violence, stability, time for family, etc. I would happily throw all of this in the trash for time with my family, etc.
First, I think we should always be critical. In fact, to me, that is the whole point. Second, of course, nothing can capture the complexity of the whole, minus the whole itself. So, every philosophy, science, whatever, is always going to be a sort of heuristic attempting to make something sensible by looking only at certain particulars.
See, to me, it doesn't need to be some conspiracy theory, or a shadow plan by evil agents. It is as simple as "good business." Media conglomerates don't need to meet in dark rooms at odd hours, to simply perpetuate a system that does what was outlined above. They don't need specifically counter-revolutionary ideas, or ideology. All they need is profit motive. It's not really media conglomerates who alienated labor, it isn't them who made it the case that consumerism is need as the amelioration to that. No, they are just trying to make money.
The issue though, bottom line though, is, as you point out, you'd throw it all away for time with your family. Why does the whole thing alienate us from them though, in the first place? That is really where the critique starts, right? Why do we lapse to consumerism at all, when what we really wanted was community/family/genuine interaction. Does that make sense, in a way, to see why undertake the critique at all?
Far be it from me to think that the concept of Culture Industry is anything like an "answer." To me, it is just an observation, one that rings true to me in a lot of ways. But, like anything else, it is not perfect. Not by a longshot