Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tickle Me Elmo and the Gangster Meme
Tickle Me Elmo and the Gangster Meme
Shared via AddThis
A really interesting post from Sociological Images, on how the idea of the gangster gets depoliticized and commodified, and eventually ends up as 6 yr olds making gang signs in a commercial for Tickle-Me-Elmo Hands.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
For-Profit Media?
This week we are looking at how media consolidation and the business practices of big media affect the content that is produced. This has different meanings and effects across different media- whether we're talking about music, the news, television, the internet. In your blogs this week, you might try to find your own evidence of the various concerns and effects Croteau & Hoynes bring up. Do you agree that media consolidation limits diversity of content? Do you see evidence of vertical and horizontal integration? How does media's dependence on advertising and the for-profit model infiltrate media across the board? Can you illustrate an example of synergy?
You can also contrast the for-profit, market model of the media with an alternative vision: the media as a public resource, an important place for different views to be expressed and for dialogue about important social issues. This is where the Habermas reading comes in- what does he mean by the "public sphere?" Do you think today's media can embody the public sphere? Or has the market model ensured that the view of the mass media as a public resource is lost?
If you want to focus on our viewing of Money For Nothing: Behind the Business of Pop Music, and our look at research in music diversity, here are some things you could do:
1. Test Robert McChesney’s argument in the film that MTV is basically a 24-hour infomercial. Watch MTV for a full hour and keep a running log of everything you see. Did you see anything in the course of the hour that wasn’t trying to sell something else? Was the so-called “content” itself a kind of commercial? If so, what do you think it was selling? What differences did you notice between “official” ads and this “content”?
2. Check out Billboard Magazine’s hit list for this week (http://www.billboard.com).Check out the top songs. Can you find out which record companies these artists are on? What do you find about music diversity?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
What Not to Wear...to be a good citizen
Here is another example of ideology operating in entertainment television.
Gitlin (1979) notes that one of the formal conventions in primetime TV that supports the larger hegemonic structure is genre: the types of shows we tend to see a lot of at any given moment say a lot about popular taste at the moment, and highlights shifting moods and sensitivities. Are we watching a lot of crime shows? Shows about young urban singles in the city? Gitlin suggests popular genres acknowledge our new concerns, while placating them.
Kristen brings up reality shows- which are certainly a hugely popular genre today! Which leads to the question- why? What are reality shows telling us about ourselves? What do they teach us? How do they reinforce hegemony?
Let's look at the makeover reality show (because we might not want to lump all reality shows together- there are many subtypes.) One interesting interpretation comes from "Better Living Through Reality TV," by Ouellette and Hay (2008). The suggest that these shows tell us how to be a good citizen in today's society- and what that means is ever more emphasis on individualism. We are more and more responsible these days for taking care of ourselves, as we come less and less to depend on the welfare state to do so.
A show like What Not to Wear, they argue, teaches us to view our selves as commodities "to be molded, packaged, managed, reinvented, and sold" (7). They show this to be an empowering process, in which you revamp your looks, even your personality, to better compete for jobs, or even love! In a world of outsourcing, job loss and corporate restructuring, it becomes each individual's personal responsibility to improve one's position, and keep oneself current (so we don't have to address those much more complex problems as a society!) And these shows instruct you exactly how to do it. That this happens to be through consumer culture (clothes, makeup) is not surprising. Yet shopping is reframed from being simply for pleasure to being highly rational: "...shopping ceases to be a recreational venue for escaping the drudgery of work...and becomes instead a route to carefully building an image that is salable in the marketplace of work." (115)
What are the other types of reality TV and what do they teach us?
Friday, September 25, 2009
Ideology and Hegemony
I encourage you to use your blog posts this week to continue to explore the concepts of ideology and hegemony in mass media, especially in the context of the readings this week. Feel free to ask questions, and incorporate them into your posts if you wish. And don't forget to comment on one of your classmates' posts!
I especially encourage you to discuss one of the questions that perhaps we didn't get to today in class. Certain issues that we didn't get to that I think bear more discussion:
I especially encourage you to discuss one of the questions that perhaps we didn't get to today in class. Certain issues that we didn't get to that I think bear more discussion:
- Mass media as a site for competing ideologies and cultural contestation- what role does the media play in these instances? What are some of the competing ideologies today, the controversies?
- How do the 5 areas of TV and film that Gitlin explores maintain the hegemonic ideology today? What are some modern day examples? (Can use one or two.)
- Are there hegemonic and/or counter-hegemonic representations and ideas in mass media? Or evidence of hegemonic struggle between the following, or any others you can identify?
• Patriarchy (traditional male dominance) and liberal feminism (gender equality)
• Ethnocentrism (and whose ethnicity ) and multiculturalism (respecting difference)
• Heterosexuality and homosexuality
• Liberalism (individual freedom) and conservatism (traditional ‘rules’ and morals)
• Importance of ‘image’ and importance of ‘intelligence’ (or ‘body’ and ‘mind’)
• Environmentalism (valuing environment) and environmentally ‘careless’ consumerism
• Free trade (no trade rules or concerns) & fair trade (a fair price for producers of goods)
• Religion and secularism (rejecting or ignoring religious concerns)
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Blog tip- Knowing when someone comments on your blog
Blogger doesn't automatically give you a notification when someone comments on your blog, which can be annoying. It means you need to be constantly checking your blog to see if anyone says anything. But, there is a way to set it so you will get an email recommendation when someone comments. I recommend you do this.
When signed in and looking at your blog, you should see "Customize" in the upper right corner. Click this.
Click the tab in the upper left that says "Settings."
Below the Settings tab, you will see a number of links. Select "Comments."
The very last option on this page allows you to enter email addresses that should be notified when someone posts a comment. Enter your preferred email address and click SAVE.
When signed in and looking at your blog, you should see "Customize" in the upper right corner. Click this.
Click the tab in the upper left that says "Settings."
Below the Settings tab, you will see a number of links. Select "Comments."
The very last option on this page allows you to enter email addresses that should be notified when someone posts a comment. Enter your preferred email address and click SAVE.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Nice to meet you
I enjoyed your introductory posts, for those of you that did them. We've got an array of interests and specialities but it seems like most of you consume an array of mass media.
(And just a note, when we use the word "consume" or "consumption," we're not simply talking about the act of purchasing something, but about consumption in a larger sense. We mean the act of using something, the manner of receiving and interacting with media and other products. There doesn't even need to be an act of purchasing in order to consume many media texts.)
Some highlights from your posts:
I love hearing about the experiences many of you have of other cultures, and difference in mass media from the U.S., and I hope we'll continue to hear about them. (Jen has lived in Egypt, Joakim in Denmark, Mi Seok from South Korea, among others.)
For those of you who have been in the U.S. your whole lives, it is also possible to notice how mass media's role changes depending on the social world you are inhabiting at a given time. A number of you note how mass media plays into college life- whether it means there is always a TV on somewhere in your dorm, or perhaps your media consumption shifts away from entertainment to more school-oriented purposes once you're on campus. Logan talks about having to go to the library if he wants to be able to get away from media bombardment and be able to focus. This is a good example of how we each have the opportunity to shape our own relationship to the media, and the tensions we often feel, not just with the messages themselves, but the sheer volume of them. It also shows how living on a campus like BC is its own, interesting microcosm of a social world. You're living in close quarters with a LOT of other people your age, you have a lot of media at your disposal 24/7. You also have many opportunities to be creative and productive. How is your experience of media while at school different from when you're away from school, in the "real world"? How is it influencing you?
(And just a note, when we use the word "consume" or "consumption," we're not simply talking about the act of purchasing something, but about consumption in a larger sense. We mean the act of using something, the manner of receiving and interacting with media and other products. There doesn't even need to be an act of purchasing in order to consume many media texts.)
Some highlights from your posts:
- Andy identifies himself as a producer of media. He directs and edits a student TV show (Would love to know more about this!) and writes for The BC Observer.
- Chris ruminates on the future of 3-d movies. It's interesting how this retro-fad technology has made a new and improved comeback, but Chris questions whether it will stick around this time.
I love hearing about the experiences many of you have of other cultures, and difference in mass media from the U.S., and I hope we'll continue to hear about them. (Jen has lived in Egypt, Joakim in Denmark, Mi Seok from South Korea, among others.)
For those of you who have been in the U.S. your whole lives, it is also possible to notice how mass media's role changes depending on the social world you are inhabiting at a given time. A number of you note how mass media plays into college life- whether it means there is always a TV on somewhere in your dorm, or perhaps your media consumption shifts away from entertainment to more school-oriented purposes once you're on campus. Logan talks about having to go to the library if he wants to be able to get away from media bombardment and be able to focus. This is a good example of how we each have the opportunity to shape our own relationship to the media, and the tensions we often feel, not just with the messages themselves, but the sheer volume of them. It also shows how living on a campus like BC is its own, interesting microcosm of a social world. You're living in close quarters with a LOT of other people your age, you have a lot of media at your disposal 24/7. You also have many opportunities to be creative and productive. How is your experience of media while at school different from when you're away from school, in the "real world"? How is it influencing you?
Friday, September 18, 2009
"He was such a nice guy."
Pertaining to our discussion about violence in the media, and its effects on behavior, another aspect is the portrayal of violence in the news, and the way in which "factual" violent events are reported. Many of us come to conclusions and beliefs about how violent the world is, and who is violent, through news reports. Even though most of us realize that stories about violent crime often lead newscasts because of their attention-catching nature, we are often less aware of the way standard news reporting misleads us about the nature of violent crime. It seems like such an individual, agentic act, doesn't it? And it often seems totally random. News reporting often does little to dissuade that.
The emerging story of the murder of Yale graduate student Annie Le points to one common occurrence in such reports. Once a suspect has been identified, the first move for the news media is to try and find out more about the suspect- what was he like? who knew him? What led him to do such a thing? And quite often, the media can find someone who knew the suspect in some capacity who claims he was "a nice guy," who they never would have guessed would do such a thing. Such reporting makes the violent crime seem even more random and unpredictable, an effect that can lead the audience to believe violent crime itself is unpredictable and therefore, more threatening to them.
Despite presenting as a "nice guy" to some people, stopping there would be a disservice to victims of violent crime and to our better understanding of such crimes. Those who commit acts like this murder more often than not have some past indications of mental instability, tension with the victim or others, reports made against them, or records of previous violent acts. Though it is too soon to say much about Raymond Clark III, other reports have begun to emerge to suggest that though this attack was shocking, there may be a history of escalating issues that led to this point. These issues seem to be related to Clark's role as a lab technician in the lab where Le worked. This leads to interesting questions about the nature of the workplace, a sometimes insular, high pressure environment. How might structure have interacted with agency here?
This New York Times article takes an interesting, more sociological perspective on this incident by focusing on the workplace. By focusing on the relationships between two groups of workers - the lab technicians and the researchers- they paint a picture that is larger than two individuals. There are stressors and competition attached to this world, and perhaps tensions arise as a function of the structure of this microcosm of a social world.
Yet the article still ends with an ominous note of randomness: "The killing 'could have happened in any city, in any university,' [the Yale president] said. “It says more about the dark side of the human soul than it does about the extent of security measures."
One more note: This type of reporting has been a target of those who seek better reporting on domestic violence for quite some time now. It is viewed as a disservice to victims of domestic violence, and an (often inadvertent) effort to blame the victim, when a perpetrator of domestic violence is described as a "nice guy." For those who would like to put a stop to domestic violence, portraying it as random, and as committed by nice guys who were simply pushed over the edge by their victim, does little to address the root structural causes of domestic violence.
A sympathetic view of the perpetrator: "Johnson wrote that many statements about the perpetrators "had an overly sympathetic quality and implied an element of victimization of the murderers, either by circumstances or frequently by the adult female," such as one killer's mother describing her son as "a victim of divorce." A source said of another assailant, "To him [marriage] was a sacrosanct institution and to violate it was the end of his world."
Also interesting is the racial double standard, which is definitely at play in the Le case: "The survey found a racial double standard. When the perpetrator was a person of color, violence was presented as expected and typical. When the perpetrator was white, the violence was presented as unexpected, out of character or inexplicable, as when the Chronicle included the quote, 'Things like this don't happen in Fremont.'"
We are certainly seeing a huge amount of media focus on this one case, when violent crime, and murder, happen all the time. Why?
The emerging story of the murder of Yale graduate student Annie Le points to one common occurrence in such reports. Once a suspect has been identified, the first move for the news media is to try and find out more about the suspect- what was he like? who knew him? What led him to do such a thing? And quite often, the media can find someone who knew the suspect in some capacity who claims he was "a nice guy," who they never would have guessed would do such a thing. Such reporting makes the violent crime seem even more random and unpredictable, an effect that can lead the audience to believe violent crime itself is unpredictable and therefore, more threatening to them.
Despite presenting as a "nice guy" to some people, stopping there would be a disservice to victims of violent crime and to our better understanding of such crimes. Those who commit acts like this murder more often than not have some past indications of mental instability, tension with the victim or others, reports made against them, or records of previous violent acts. Though it is too soon to say much about Raymond Clark III, other reports have begun to emerge to suggest that though this attack was shocking, there may be a history of escalating issues that led to this point. These issues seem to be related to Clark's role as a lab technician in the lab where Le worked. This leads to interesting questions about the nature of the workplace, a sometimes insular, high pressure environment. How might structure have interacted with agency here?
This New York Times article takes an interesting, more sociological perspective on this incident by focusing on the workplace. By focusing on the relationships between two groups of workers - the lab technicians and the researchers- they paint a picture that is larger than two individuals. There are stressors and competition attached to this world, and perhaps tensions arise as a function of the structure of this microcosm of a social world.
Yet the article still ends with an ominous note of randomness: "The killing 'could have happened in any city, in any university,' [the Yale president] said. “It says more about the dark side of the human soul than it does about the extent of security measures."
One more note: This type of reporting has been a target of those who seek better reporting on domestic violence for quite some time now. It is viewed as a disservice to victims of domestic violence, and an (often inadvertent) effort to blame the victim, when a perpetrator of domestic violence is described as a "nice guy." For those who would like to put a stop to domestic violence, portraying it as random, and as committed by nice guys who were simply pushed over the edge by their victim, does little to address the root structural causes of domestic violence.
A sympathetic view of the perpetrator: "Johnson wrote that many statements about the perpetrators "had an overly sympathetic quality and implied an element of victimization of the murderers, either by circumstances or frequently by the adult female," such as one killer's mother describing her son as "a victim of divorce." A source said of another assailant, "To him [marriage] was a sacrosanct institution and to violate it was the end of his world."
Also interesting is the racial double standard, which is definitely at play in the Le case: "The survey found a racial double standard. When the perpetrator was a person of color, violence was presented as expected and typical. When the perpetrator was white, the violence was presented as unexpected, out of character or inexplicable, as when the Chronicle included the quote, 'Things like this don't happen in Fremont.'"
We are certainly seeing a huge amount of media focus on this one case, when violent crime, and murder, happen all the time. Why?
