I started off with the McChesney “The Rise and Fall of Professional Journalism” which was fascinating. Seeing the evolution of media from the 18th century to 20th century was really interesting and showed how much media has affected history. I pulled the quote from the 18th century that states, “It was understood that if the government could outlaw or circumscribe newspapers, it could effectively eliminate the ability of opposition parties or movements to mobilize popular support. It would kill democracy.” I thought this quote was so powerful; the last line was extremely impactful because of its claim. The article then goes on to discuss the 3 biases of professional journalism. Again, these ideas were really interesting because of the outrageous claims made. For example, “This meant that crucial social issues like racism or environmental degradation fell through the cracks of journalism unless there was some event, like a demonstration or the release of an official report, to justify coverage.” This shows media only wants to cover certain things and uncover others. I found the graphics to be helpful in visualizing what the article was saying. I also found it appalling when it talked about choosing the “right American” in corporate news media because it shocked me to hear there was even a phrase called “right Americans”.
I then read “Democracy and the News” which as well was fascinating and full of quotes I had never heard of before. I chose a quote that stood out to me the most and it reads, “Not everything you see on the news is newsworthy, and not everything newsworthy is on the news” (Radford, 2003, p. 67). I chose it because I thought it was completely relevant to present media and their choices they make on choosing what to broadcast or advertise. Something newsworthy is never shown but I found in the top 10 new stories that Pepsi now puts aspartame in their diet soda. This quote just seemed relevant to what we have been talking about, especially in bringing light to what media decides not to talk about.
The next thing I read was “Who Gets To Speak on Cable News” which shows outrageously low numbers of people of color and women. I didn’t know exact statistics but I knew that races other than white and women were media minorities. The fact that I knew this (prior to this course) yet really thought nothing of it shows how non-media literate I was. Now I am irritated when I turn the news on and see that women and most races are hardly even shown in media, whether it’s the news, television, movies or advertisements. Much like other races, when women are portrayed on these media channels, it’s often seen through a negative lens. I chose to ad this graph as a visual to really comprehend how little people of color and women (of color) are seen in media.
After getting annoyed from reading “Who Gets to Speak on Cable TV” I read “The News Bias” which was really dense but had some really interesting information in it. Page 78 of this article states, “Reporters in the media tend to highlight those interview subjects who
subscribe to their point of view” (78). I thought this was so interesting because now that I have read this, I can’t imagine how many interviews (etc) I have seen and or read about that are completely manipulated by media to make their interview, or ad, seem better. T
A few paragraphs later Giffel states that children are being stripped of their innocence due to acts of terrorism or anthrax scares but Radford argues this is not true. He states that children are more likely to get in a car accident than be faced with terrorism attacks. I agree with Radford because although we live in such a violent world, I do not believe this takes away a child’s chance of living a good life and I don’t think children are losing their innocence in these violent crime because I do not feel as though they are being targeted. I remember I was in second grade when 911 occurred. I didn’t really understand what was happening but by my parents’ reaction, I could tell it wasn’t good. After hearing about it at school and from my family, days later I completely forgot about it and lived my 7 year old life the same as I did before. Obviously as I got older I was appalled at 911 and other tragedies that occurred in our country but it did not strip away my innocence or put my life in any danger as a child. However, I do agree with Giffel in some ways because if I knew someone in 911 for example, I do feel as though I could easily strip me of my innocence or change my life forever. To generalize saying that these events ruin every child’s life or affects their innocence isn’t true but there are children who are effected by these events daily. Although I only spoke about few topics that were mentioned in this article, overall it was really interesting and I enjoyed this read.
I moved onto “Liberals vs. Conservatives” which was really interesting but I can honestly say I did not agree with a lot of it. Sometimes I lean more toward conservative ideals and other times I lean more toward liberal ideals so to generalize what every liberal or conservative thinks, does not seem accurate to me. For example, something controversial like abortion may vary on every person. Generalizing every liberal saying women should be able to abort her child may not be completely true. Although this article has good intentions, it wasn’t for me. I do not label myself anything when it comes to politics and may view one thing as a liberal and another as a conservative.
After I read “How To Detect Bias..” I was able to take information from McChesney and relate it to this article. I had never really thought to look at the sources of who is giving in formation and how the spokesperson may make bias claims which can change people’s views in they are unaware of the spokesperson’s beliefs. I found the quote, “Demand that the media you consume reflect the diversity of the public they serve. Call or write media outlets every time you see an all-male or all-white panel of experts discussing issues that affect women and people of color” to be so interesting. How can a white male talk about a Latino woman and have an accurate perspective on her life or her views? This shows truly how important diversity is in media. For example, how can news anchors talk about struggles of someone of a different race or gender, or both?
Although I enjoyed reading “How To Detect Bias..” it bothered me a little as well. After watching “Who Makes News” I got a little happier that the narrator brings light to how important it is to show women in positive light on media. The GMMP has a ton of volunteers who participate in the research which I thought was super cool! This video reminded me of the smurfette principal and how NOT okay it is to portray women the way they are currently being portrayed in media. The GMMP studies this over 108 countries, which shows how universal this conflict is. The GMMP aims for these resolutions: “To map the representation and portrayal of women in the world’s news media, To develop a grassroots research instrument, To build solidarity among gender and communication groups worldwide, To create media awareness, and To develop media monitoring skills on an international level.” If these actions are taken, then I believe women truly would be portrayed better than they are now.
I always read Sternheimer’s chapter last so I can relate her ideas with the prior articles. One of the first sections that caught my eye was when she writes about children. Sternheimer writes, “The fear that children are lured into our hyper consumerist society too soon draws on romantic notions of childhood innocence, in which children are somehow untainted by consumer culture until advertisers enter their allegedly pure space. In reality, consumption often precedes birth” (Sternheimer 249). I though this was so interesting because already newborn babies are being target for baby products, yet have no idea that they are. This reminds me of people who are not media literate and how media targets them, yet they are completely unaware of it. She then talks about how people play the blame game, which is very true! Although we like to blame media, it really may not be the answer. She mentions a 2006 poll where parents thought media was targeting children too much. She mentions an advocacy group called Stop Commercial Exploitation of Children. She states, “This group describes advertising as “$12.8 billion-a-year industry that targets society’s most vulnerable minds and deliberately excludes parents” (Sternheimer 255). I though calling children “society’s most vulnerable minds” was wrong and I feel as though adults are often just as vulnerable when it comes to being targeted. Sternheimer argues rather than blaming the advertisement, help your child become more media literate so perhaps media won’t as easily persuade them. Later in chapter 20, she mentions that children can start to critically think about media in schooling and I completely agree. After taking this course, I truly realized how important it is to become literate, not only for adults, but children as well.
Lastly, I read chapter 11 “Beyond Popular Culture” which was fascinating as always. In this chapter, I finally realized what Sternheimer meant when she says, “Why media is not the answer”. On page 273, Sternheimer states, “…popular culture is not the central cause of changes in childhood, bullying, suicide, educational failures, violence, sexual behavior, teen pregnancy, single parenthood, eating problems, substance abuse. Or materialism. It is not the main reason inequality, racism, sexism and homophobia persist” (Sternheimer 273). All of these topics are not direct results of media, leading me to believe Sternheimer is saying media is not the answer to these issues society faces. However, I do not feel as though her arguments are relating as much to readings in this module. I think these two chapters are relating to all of the articles and videos we have been discussing for these past 5 weeks. Media may not be direct results of all of these societal issues, but of course media has an impact on these issues. In the middle of chapter 11, Sternheimer mentions poverty again and shows a visual of a graph that shows how many children under the age of 18 are under the poverty line. I think she mentioned poverty again in this chapter to show truly how important it is to get more impoverished families stories out. Rather than talking about chemicals in Pepsi in top news, we can solutions to making sure no child has to live under poverty. But as Sternheimer and other authors had mentioned about issues like poverty an racism, we tend to not want to hear about their situations. We like to pretend we don’t hear when we know we do and we like to pretend there is nothing we can do when we know there is a lot we can do. Media doesn’t like to mention racism and poverty because no one wants to hear about it and all media needs is our attention. If they talk about things we don’t want to hear about, they will lose its views attention.
Overall, I really enjoyed all of the readings in this module but found it a little hard to connect these particular works with these 2 chapters. They all connected if we look at the course as a whole and to me that was really interesting to see how everything connected so well.
