Posts

Final Post – Module 5

/in /by

Like Sebastian, I was having an internal debate on whether to post or not. Part of me only decided to do this to get the points, to be frank. Truthfully, all of the modules during this short Summer session have encompassed similar, overlapping themes. Although I did not get the full points on any blog post, (I am okay with this, strangely enough) I feel I effectively gave my opinion in every single post. My voice is not lacking in those posts.

This weeks topic was influence, democracy, and agency. I think these topics were addressed in the previous weeks, maybe not directly, but they were definitely covered. However, I still have to respond to this weeks  texts, articles, and videos.

I will start with the article that showed opposing views. I do not need to go into in depth detail I think, but this article/web page did an excellent job of presenting opposing views in a non-biased manner. This is difficult to do in our modern media-centric world. I think presenting these views very plainly allows for viewers to have their own agency in choosing sides. Having agency in opinions is essential to growth and expansion of media literacy and education.

Bias is evident everywhere, especially in the media. This was made clear in the article about bias. Of course. In my opinion, however, this bias reflects our lack of representation of  minorities.

I think Sternheimer did a good job of showing desire in her last two chapters. Like my other classmates, I grew up on TV shows that gave kids super nice things. (i.e. Pimp My Ride, My Super Sweet 16, Cribz, etc.) I grew up poor, some nights I would not eat because we had no money to buy food. I wanted these nice things so I would whine to my mother. Adults want to give their children the best. My mother wanted to give me all of those things, she just couldn’t. Adults desire for nice things parallels their children’s desires. (2013, p. 245-256)

Module 5 (Last Post)

/in /by

In module 5 we covered topics such as consumerism and representation in the news and how these affect us in our lives. In Chapter 10 of Karen Sternheimer’s text, Connecting Social Problems and Populer Culture: Why Media is Not The Answer we found that children are a big concern when it comes to over-consumption and consumer knowledge. Sternheimer points out how easily we want to blame the media when children have a higher knowledge as consumers because “children are somehow untainted by consumer culture until advertisers enter their allegedly pure space” (p. 248). I found it interesting that we forget about the struggles that a large number of children in this country face while focusing on the numbers of children who overindulge as a problem. It is funny to think that as a society we worry about the manipulation and control that advertisements may have on children yet it has been found that “trade publications often speak of children as especially skeptical and difficult to address….children as often more independent than their parents are willing to admit…children are seen as a challenge” (Sternheimer p. 260). We tend to think that children are fragile beings that need constant supervision and protection from all things, but in reality children are able to distinguish nearly as much as adults when it comes to thinking critically about what they watch on television, if not more at times.

While reading through the different readings for this module, I couldn’t help but feel exhausted as I read about the different biases, misrepresentations, under/over-representations, and distortions found within news coverage. With Benjamin Redford (2003) stating, “the news bias distorts reporting and changes how we understand and react to the world around us” (p. 65) and Peter Hart (2014) writing,  “a survey of major cable news discussion programs shows a stunning lack of diversity among the guests,” I found myself increasingly discouraged about watching any news coverage. I never even considered the news lacking in diversity until taking this course and learning to actually read into what I saw in media. Even then, I wouldn’t have considered a channel like CNN to lack diversity being that it is supposed to be a more non-bias news station, yet it was found among other major news channels to lack in diversity in guests that were female and people of color. I found this shocking because I just assumed that in the news, especially on CNN, diversity should be ever present due to the fact we live in such a richly diverse country. Reading about the biases in news coverage and the disproportionate coverage of diversity really opened my eyes to what I have been watching, and makes me want to think more critically about what I am being told on the news.

Module 5 Reflections

/in /by

Throughout the course, the importance of media education and literacy continued to gain importance. In Module 5 we learned the role of media literacy and how it connects to democracy. With media having so much power over the content we interact with, their influence on society is undeniable. Media can cast attention on or away from something, it can influence behaviors by reaching different parts of the brain, and yet with so much power it is still the consumers responsibility to understand and make meaning. This course furthered my belief that like with food safety that consumers, with little knowledge, are the ones most at risk.

Journalism has changed over the decades from being a watchful eye to reflecting corporate ideals and agendas (McChesney, 2002). Popular media is not reporting on social justice or environmental issues but instead they focus on crime, royalty, celebrities, and lifestyle pieces (McChesney, 2002). The average consumer is missing out on so much knowledge and information in the world if they are not actively seeking different sources for media. We also learned that even if you change the channel a few times your likely rto be still watching the same corporate ideals do to conglomerate associations. The news focus on “hot” topics instead of “light” topics which bring light, context, and informative content to important social issues (Radford, 2003). It seems to be that our media sources are choosing information based on what people are enjoying the most instead of giving them real hearty information about society. Popular media is just skimming the top of citizens need to know about the government, corporations, or society (Tollefson, 2006). I’m curious to know what sources my classmates have searched out or will in the future to reach less bias content. 

As we learned in prior modules, children and teens are at the center of the advertising world. It is this reason that society worries that the younger generation is swept up in materialism (Sternheimer, 2013), and who is to blame? Shows like My Sweet 16 and other MTV or VH1 shows tend to be at the center of discussion instead of all the media corporations that have been trying to create brand loyalty from children since they could walk. The most important takeaway I got from this course is that usually there is much more going on than meets the eye. The simplest answer: to blame the media, TV, Instagram, or Facebook is usually not the answer. It is the structure of how this society views and consumes media and societal structures that influence the youth. I am curious to find out some of my classmates biggest takeaways from this course. 

LAST POSTING

/in /by

I was debating on writing a last post at this point because I feel that I have been repeating myself. I feel that I already have a good grasp on the world through the means of media from understanding psychology and from understanding that it is mediated by a corporate powers. Regardless, do not think I do not read because this post is not focused on adding sources to build up to context. I feel that at this point all I am reading is the same. It is just behavior that needs to be changed and the focus of media can be powerful if it is used to create more smarter people. Honestly, these readings upset me because there is so much to talk about that I feel that it all sounds the same at this point. The one thing that pissed me off was not realizing that news media stations only use men, but in college campuses I only see women. How the hell is this possible? I feel women are at the fore front of education now. I could see it in my psych courses. I was a minority in a room full of women learning the same thing they were and it was tough. Yet, I feel like as a society we feel we have came along way, but there is so much inequality that it pisses me off to even talk about it. I say that because I am the first to go to college and relaying this to those I know who do not know the struggle of being in school is hard. Why you may ask? People are turned off by the fact of knowing the truth or understanding the world differently than what they perceive it to be. I will say though that I enjoyed reading the book assigned. I feel like there were many points that stood out to me in each chapter. Yet, I feel like those points were already relayed to me within my psych courses. Behavior for example in my opinion is based on the learning habits you get from educated or none educated parents and your environment. Through behavior you get a malleable human being who can experience anything. Yet, it made more sense when discussions led to poverty, inequality, and why the cycle keeps repeating itself. I just get so frustrated knowing that our world is based on a consumer society. One in which we lie to the people about choices, and hide the dirty laundry of the world. We do not address are issues, we simply choose to keep things the way they are. It is not societies choice it is the corporate powers behind the media that masks and keeps us behaviorally tamed.  At this point I am disappointing in the route we are continuing to go in terms of economy and media use

Module 5 Readings

/in /by

There were some very interesting readings yet again this week which connected well and helped to tie everything up. Many of the same subjects appeared again including women, minorities, children, and the poor. Just as in other forms of media, these groups are all just as ignored or misrepresented in the news. The readings also go more specifically into biases in the news and the effects that those have upon it.

The chapter by Radford gave an immense amount of information that held a lot of importance with a number of the other readings. He talks about the various biases that are present in the news, how they come about, and what issues that causes. These are definitely important concepts to understand when it comes to media literacy. We always hear about news being biased, but it is always between one political spectrum over another. We never really look deeper to see and question in what ways the news may be manipulated and carry biases. This is extremely important because these biases and manipulations can change viewers’ understandings and reactions to the world. A short quote that particularly stood out to me was: “In a dictatorship, censorship is used; in a democracy, manipulation” (Radford 66). It is somewhat pessimistic, but it certainly gets a point across. One way in which the media manipulates is through the use of “sensationalized headlines,” particularly ones which can incite strong emotions such as fear. Fear is an incredibly powerful tool which can make people go to extremes in order to avoid the fear. It also definitely makes people tune in and listen. Another way in which news is obviously manipulated in is the careful selection of content, focusing primarily on unusual and extreme events in order to draw intrigue and more viewers. As Radford mentioned, the phrase “When a dog bites a man, that’s not news. But when a man bites a dog—now that’s news!” (67) truly embodies this idea. In general, the news focuses on these freak events rather than on the real problems of society. Sternheimer brings this idea up a lot as well. One instance was the chapter with violence. The news never talks about violence plague poor areas of cities and the effects it has, particularly on children. Instead they only focus on violence when it comes from someplace unexpected and in a way to garner attention. The media tries to draw as large an audience as possible in order to obtain the most profit. The major problem with this is that in order to meet this range of audience, news is manipulated to be dumbed-down and homogenized. Other ways in which news is misconstrued is when reporters focus primarily on subjects who share their views and when reporters ask “strawman questions”. All of these factors can bolster false impressions and the withholding of important information and answers to necessary questions. This occurs incredibly often, especially when it comes to powerful corporations and political figures. Radford expertly states, “ the obvious questions—the exact ones that need to be asked, the ones that get to the kernel of thorny assertions—are rarely brought up by the media, presumably to protect the veneer of objectivity” (90). There are two major problems with this that Radford brings up. The first is that this can become an issue of democracy. The reporters are supposed to represent the voice of the people who are not given the chance to ask the tough questions. But are things really going according to this idea of democracy when these powerful figures are so easily allowed to weasel their way out of these important questions? The second point is that when reporters do not get the answers to questions, that means that the viewers have to research and come to conclusions about what information is correct on their own. Very few people have the time, resources, or even desire on their hands to accomplish this either. This connects to the idea of data, information, and wisdom in media. From our experience and the readings, wisdom is often absent.

The slides from McChensey talked about very similar information. McChensey focused primarily on the biases of professional journalism in which it is supposed to remain “neutral” and yet contains an overemphasis of the views of the politically and monetarily powerful people. Just as Radford eluded, this allows for many questions to go unasked and topics to be avoided. While it technically remains politically neutral, the commercial aims are what are actually being attained. Powerful businesses have a consolidation over media in which they are able to manipulate it in order to shift attention away from their business affairs and onto other topics. Sternheimer also talks about this in terms of capitalism and popular culture. In the end, McChensey offers some possible solutions to fixing the problems with journalism today. These solutions are to support independent sources of media and to value democratic values rather capitalist values. By supporting other media sources, we will not be giving in to the monopoly of businesses over the media, allowing for varied sources and incentives for better journalism. Valuing democracy over capitalism creates a better environment for society rather than individuals with power and wealth.

The article, “How to Detect Bias in News Media” helps to consolidate ways in which to understand the various biases present in media. Of course it brought up a number of the same issues that Radford and McChensey did, a very beneficial part of the article was that it not only provided the questions to ask, but also solutions in which to combat these biases that the average person could take part in doing. One point that I found to be most interesting was the media’s use of “loaded language”. The way that information is worded can have a huge effect by giving “people an inaccurate impression of the issue, program or community” (How to Detect Bias in News Media).This kind of manipulation is very often used in political polls. The side asking the question will create a question with loaded words in order to favor their own, desired responses. Another of the biases the article dealt with had to do with representation in the media. The article by Harp and the “Who Makes the News” video both dealt with this issue of representation as well. All three sources pointed to how unbalanced representation is and how this affects those people and the correct portrayal of information. The study done by FAIR demonstrated the inequality on broadcasts with interview segments and the video mentioned their project in which they survey thousands of channels in order to gather data. When the majority of people found on the news are white men, often of upper classes, that leaves out a huge portion of the population. This is once again a threat to democracy and the voice of the people.

The article, “Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs” was definitely interesting to see. Putting the two points of view side by side for each issue gave a good contrast. The information was definitely very generalized though, but that is to be expected. It gave enough information that it could probably help people in getting an idea of where they stood on issues. What stood out to me the most from the article was the quote:

We all want the same things in life. We want freedom; we want the chance for prosperity; we want as few people suffering as possible; we want healthy children; we want to have crime-free streets. The argument is how to achieve them. (Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs)

This can be easy to forget, especially if your ideas conflict very strongly with the opposite side. Having this positive view of politics and of people is a nice change of pace. It reminds us that even if we disagree, we are all people and all strive for betterment in some form or another. Even if it seems like people are just out for themselves, we can’t give up hope and become complacent.

The two Sternheimer chapters concluded the text and material quite well. She always provides great insight into the real issues that are behind what is presented in media and society. Chapter 10 focused on materialism and about how the blame is often pushed onto children. As could be seen from previous Sternheimer chapters as well, children often get the short end of the stick. Blame is put upon children when adults act in the same or even worse manner. They are often looked down upon and their voices ignored when really, children are much more capable and aware than many people may expect. Many adults think that advertising has some profound effect on children which has caused an increasingly materialistic generation. This is a very flawed assumption though. Sternheimer mentions that, “children under six may be critical of ads, and by age eight nearly all children are skeptical of advertisers’ claims” (256). Children actually use consumption in order to further themselves and create an identity. They develop independence and can even form groups with people with similar tastes. The real problem lies not with children, but with America’s obsession with capitalism. The quote, “consumption is the building block of a capitalist society and has become the hallmark of American culture” (Sternheimer 255) articulates the point exactly.  In order to support a capitalist economy, people need to buy things and spend their money, otherwise the economy will fail. So rather than putting the blame on individuals for the supposed materialism of the generation, we need to look at the workings of society and our economic and political systems. Just as we learned from Christine’s lecture, Sternheimer talks about the importance of having balance in our lives. It is important to balance consumption choices, just as with everything else.

The final chapter from Sternheimer discussed popular culture and the effects of inequality. Like the previous readings, Sternheimer brings up the importance of media conglomerates in the equation. They scapegoat the blame for society’s problems onto somewhere else, which in the case of this chapter is popular culture, in an attempt to keep people off of their trail of any misdeeds or attempts at changing policies. Media is blamed for the woes of society including violence, school failure, obesity, etc. when the real cause of those matters has to do with poverty and inequality in society. By maintaining this single minded focus on media, we ignore the real, devastating problems that plague society. In the chapter by Radford, he mentions the quote: “Are we then turning our backs on a raging inferno while we douse the flame of a match?”  (72). This is a perfect demonstration of exactly what is happening. People are focused on the issues with popular culture, but completely ignoring the raging fire that cannot be put out on its own. If people continue to avoid those issues, one day it will really explode into something that will not be able to be ignored. Sternheimer tells us to not be afraid of media. We can be critical of it, ask questions of it, and even learn about these important issues from studying it. Sternheimer’s very powerful quote from the chapter, which was also included on the “Democracy and the News” slides, is very important to keep in mind: “the biggest harm media power can yield is not in creating killers, but in creating complacency” (285). We can’t give in to complacency. We can’t continue letting poverty and inequality go unnoticed and rampant in society and continue to blame bad media for society’s problems. Instead, media and being media literate can be a great benefit:

Because media culture is so enchanting, so attention seeking, it can be used to redirect our attention to the sources of our society’s problems and to provide us with a wakeup call about the persistence of inequality in the United States.

It is of utmost importance to hold on to everything that we learned about media literacy and to teach others of its importance. In spreading the knowledge of media literacy, hopefully we will be able to uncover and fix the true injustices in society and make the world a better place.

Module 5-Hooray!

/in /by

Wow, I truly cannot believe that our class has come to a conclusion.  It ended as swiftly as it began and I am sorry to see it go.   These 5 weeks were enriching and thought provoking to say the least and I come away not only with a more media literate mindset but with a deeper understanding of my views and perspectives.  Self awareness is unequivocally the greatest gift a college professor and course can bestow so with that, thank you Dr. Tollefson for a challenging and transforming experience!

Module 5 delve into the subject of media influence and where it derives.  Media ownership and consolidation were the most eye opening, and admittedly,  I was naive to much of the process. The most critical question behind media influence is who is at the hands of it?  As time ticks on and we become an increasingly profit driven society, the answer is those who are wealthy and  possess positions of power.  These decision makers seek to consolidate media channels making for a limited spectrum of different viewpoints and perspectives.   I believe George Gerbner summarizes the issue beautifully; “consider that for the first time in human history a child is born into a home which television is on an average of about seven hours a day. And for the first time in human history most of the stories are told not by the parent, not by the school, not by the church, not by the tribes or community, and in many places not even by the native country, but by a relatively small group of conglomerates who have something to sell” (Gerbner, George). 

Another problem is within media ownership there lies a lack of diversity.  It is well documented and indisputable that minorities and women are underrepresented in the media resulting in a predominately masculine and white media ownership.  All of these flaws result in the sum known as media news bias.  News bias can be seen in arguably every aspect of reporting from who gets to speak at a round table discussion with Anderson Cooper to myths that are created by the media “that come to [define] our world” such as the “soccer mom phenomenon” (Radford, 2003, p. 65).   “It is essential that news media, along with other institutions, are challenged to be fair” and taken to task.  “The first step in challenging biased news coverage is documenting the bias [itself]” (FAIR).    The Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) have gone to great lengths to expose media misrepresentation and bias in efforts to end gender and ethnic inequality and discrimination (Who Makes The News).

In Chapter 10 of our text, Karen Sternheimer discusses A New Generation of Greed.  To echo Gianna, I too was reminded of “The Story of Stuff” video series when reviewing this chapter.  Sternheimer states that we our a materialistic society rooted in consumerism and the notion that “more is more.”  Once again reverting back to her constructivist tendencies, she explains that while people wish to place blame on the media for this issue, she argues that the problem is found within the home.  Sternheimer believes that in today’s society parents shower their children with material items condoning a consumer heavy lifestyle.   While I agree with her views on the matter and believe that parents are often at the root of children’s material expectations/wants, I think the media does tap into our neurological tendencies.  As we explored in the module 5 voicethread, neuroscience can help us better comprehend the influence of media on our thoughts, behaviors, and habits.  It enhances our understanding by illustrating that the brain is composed of different systems that serve different functions.  For instance, the limbic system controls our emotions.  When we intake media, those influences appeal to that system and our emotions sometimes resulting in impulses that override our functional thinking (cerebral cortex).  When this happens, imbalance is created.  As we discovered in the Media and Health guest lecture with Dr. Christina Pabers, we seek a balance of yin and yang.  It is my hope that through the tools of media literacy, the mass media can attain balance as well.

Module 5! We did it!

/in /by

So from the readings I noticed that they focused a lot on the underrepresentation of groups of people from the media, specifically the news. The video of Who makes the news was really interesting, it really went into detail about this underrepresentation. They did a study with  16,734 new stories and out that data into four major categories: underrepresentation of women, misrepresentation of women, gender blindness, and gender awareness. What really stood out to me in this video was how in the underrepresentation of women it was 26% to 76%, from the reporters it was 37% to 63%, and of all of those stories only 65 of them highlighted the issue of gender inequality. That was very shocking. Which kind of links to the article Who gets to speak on cable news. This article written by Peter Hart talks about the comparison of different news channels and their representation of different groups of people.  Five weeks of broadcast was surveyed with 1,015 guests. Out of that large number, women were out numbered 730 to 285 and 85% were white. Those are shocking numbers.

When reading these articles and learning some of the numbers, How To Detect Bias in the News from FAIR.org made me double think about those numbers and recent news stories that I have read. So what are some ways to detect the bias? FAIR.org have a list of questions, but here are a couple that stand out: is there a lack of diversity? Are there double standards? Do stereotypes skew coverage? I think that knowing some of these questions is a good source of information to have. Since the news likes to sway and change our opinions, these are good things to keep in mind.

So I have always been confused on who the liberals and the conservatives are and what they each believe in about serious topics. Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs from Student News Daily really helped clear that confusion up for me.  This article really opened my eyes but I have to say that some of these arguments are pretty silly, sorry. But overall, this has helped me straighten out my views politically.

In chapter 10 of  Karen Sternheimers book, it uses a work called “kidfluence” and I thought this was a very clever word. But what does this mean? “…estimate of the amount of purchases children influence range from $100 billion to $300 billion annually” (Sternheimer, 2013, p247). I thought that is a crazy number. I knew children have an influence on what parents buy but I didn’t realize how much of an influence, sorry mom and dad. Another term used that stood out to me was “guilt money” Sternheimer described this as being money that parents spend on their children because they are too busy to spend time with their own kids. I understand that parents are busy with work and other things, but you should always find time to spend with your children. “We need things, we are making statements about who we are as individuals, and we are affiliating ourselves with certain groups, making status distinctions” (Sternheimer, 2013, p254), and this is why we consume things. After reading this statement, I realized how true it is. What we buy is making a statement, we buy certain clothes to fit into a certain group. That’s a prime example. We are constantly consumers to help hold this statement that we send out.

I will admit that chapter 11 was a little difficult for me to get through, as we have covered popular culture a lot in this course. It felt a little repetitive to me. But just because I hate the idea of monopolies, the 1996 Telecommunications Act kind of stood out to me. This act “enabled behemoth media conglomerates to become even bigger, to create even larger monopolies in the production of media culture” (Sternheimer, 2013, p274). Whether it in in the media industry or not, the ideas of monopoly kind of disgust me. Like why cant smaller/other companies be on their own? I get that companies let larger companies take them over for money issues, but have they ever thought that those smaller companies might want to be left alone?

 

Module 5

/in /by

      One thing that really stood out to me in the slides titled, “The rise and fall of professional journalism” was the emphasis on the need to better media. The section, Media & Democracy confirms my beliefs that the media is affecting society in more negative aspects than positive. Throughout this semester, I have experienced a more negative outlook and impression of the media. It has made me believe that the media does not have good intentions. I know this may appear to be a bit pessimistic, however, the point I am trying to make is how the media uses us in multiple ways. Throughout the course, I have really opened my eyes to how much influence media has on its audience.  I’ve  learned that people need to educate themselves better because with out proper knowledge, media will just destroy us and cause more violence than it has already antagonized.

      According to FAIR and the article titled, “How to detect bias in the news media?”, an effective way to become familiar and educated with the medias’ public agenda setting is to question yourself. They to believe, just as Sternheimer might agree, that the media has a huge amount of power and emphasis in shaping political discourse. These questions consist of considerations such as, keeping an eye out for stereotypes, double standards, and a reoccurring lack of diversity. Also, pay close attention to whose telling the story and what their point of view is. It can be really important to pay attention to the language and whether or not the story remains consistent. Becoming active readers, media literate, and educating ourselves can be a start to improve media and democracy.

         The Media & Democracy slide states that it is impossible to get to a better world without creating some changes in the media.(McChesney, 2002) I couldn’t agree more. I really came to the conclusion that the media uses us and needs us, therefore we have the power to stand up and change media for the betterment of society. Out of curiosity, after taking this course do you have any different opinions/thoughts about the media, since taking the course, or still the same?

     People of different races, ethnicity, gender groups, and cultures, are not feeling welcomed. I would say that the majority of society feels excluded and judged by the outnumbered, “ideal american”. In the class we focused on several activities and readings where it was apparent that society has expectations of society. We can see this, because it is everywhere. It is in movies, shows, magazines, and it is the “ideal american” The Caucasian family . A survey of major cable news stated that programs and shows display a “stunning lack of diversity among the guests.” (Hart, 2014)

     Media advertises models such as, the 5’9 100 lb Victoria secret woman and puts an impression among others that being thick or overweight is not acceptable way to look. From this, people can develop insecurities and can hurt themselves to “fit the look” . Some examples of what people with body image issues due to cope with their issues is develop anorexia or bulimia; just to keep up with societies expectations.

        Media also has a large influence on preteens. The trends and attitudes they are influencing preteens are causing them to growing up faster than they once did in the past. If you take a look at the clothing trends for example, in comparing a 16 year old in the early 90’s and her fashion versus a 16 year old fashion in today’s society, it is dramatically not the same. Showing more skin, cleavage, curves is what is in in today’s fashion. What happen to modestly and self respect? Sternheimer discusses reality shows and their influence on teens, which relates to my opinion on the influence of media and preteens. An example given in chapter 10 was the show My Super Sweet Sixteen. In this show kids are given Bentley’s and Million dollar homes and parties. What happen to the good old fashioned family dinner and an outfit as a birthday gift? After this show aired, a survey was conducted on preteens. They found that 74 percent teens and 66 percent teens agreed they would be happier if they had more money to spend on themselves. (Sternehimer, 2013, p. 246) Going on a tangent here but something that raised a question for me was when reading this chapter I noticed this survey didn’t state how many teens and preteens were surveyed. Do you think that is Lying with numbers to persuade you because of their own bias? Just a thought..

One thing I found really interesting that linked to another classmates voice thread was the idea of media, poverty, and young mothers. Chapter 11 in the text discuses how media discourages young mothers and that they make feel that having a child is more of a disadvantage than consider it positive. (Sternehimer, 2013, p. 278) Because of this mindsets it basically sets young mothers up for failure. In a voice thread, a student had shown us an ad where a baby was crying “I’m twice as likely not to graduate high school because you had me as a teen.” This advertisement was so shocking and awful and yet a perfect example of the discouragement Sternheimer refers too.

One thing all these readings have in common is the idea that the media enables violence, crimes, racial bias and stereotypes, poverty, and so on. They all also connect the way the media portrays and represents women. I loved how all our readings really coincided with the lectures.

References

Global Media Marketing Project. (2015). Who makes the news. Retrieved from http://whomakesthenews.org/gmmp

Hart, P. (2014, July 1). Who gets to speak on cable news? Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. Retrieved from http://fair.org/extra/who-gets-to-speak-on-cable-news/

How to Detect Bias in News Media. (n.d.) Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. Retrieved from http://fair.org/take-action-now/media-activism-kit/how-to-detect-bias-in-news-media/

McChesney, R. (2002). The rise and fall of professional journalism. Into the buzz saw: Leading journalists expose the myth of a free press. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books (363-381).

Radford, B. (2003). The news bias: Distorting reality and feeding fears. Media mythmakers: how journalists, activists, and advertisers mislead us. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, pp. 65-101

Sternheimer, K. (2013). Consumption and materialism: A new generation of greed? Connecting social problems and popular culture: Why media is not the answer, pp. 245-268.

Sternheimer, (2013). Beyond popular culture: Why inequality is the problem. Connecting social problems and popular culture: Why media is not the answer, pp. 273-287

Module 5 review

/in /by

For the Module 5 readings, I found the discussions of the impact that media has on our brains to be especially interesting because of the significance that media, specifically social media plays in our current lives. In the article, “The News Bias: Distorting Reality and Feeding Fears”, by Benjamin Radford, it is explained how news biases distort reports and change how we understand and react to the society and world around us. After reading his explanation of what media and news can do to our society, I began to think about significant things that have taken place and how the news and media may have controlled society’s understanding and reaction to them. Although, it is a scary thought that news can control how we understand their reports, we can detect them, as explained in the article, “How to Detect Bias in News Media.” This article discusses the types of questions we can ask, such as, who are the sources, if so is there diversity, whose point of view is it from, are there double standards, if so is there stereotypes, is there loaded language, or a lack of context. I now find that these are important questions to keep in mind when watching the news.

Then in the article, “who Gets to Speak on Cable News?”, we are made aware that different news stations are placed onto different political spectrums. In regards to watching the news, Republicans and Conservatives believe in personal responsibility and limited government, while Democrats, or Liberals, believe in strong government and equality for everyone; news channels will display more of one of these ideas than another, which will help to see their political spectrum (Student News Daily, 2010). From Karen Sternheimer’s slides, she explains that what we see in the news is only a small part of what we, as a society, need to know that is occurring in our government (P. 219). Because media has so much power it is crucial to be media literate and be aware of biased news.

Continuing with Sternheimer’s readings, Chapter 10 discussed consumption and materialism. Having media of famous people and their lavish lifestyles causes both children and adults to dream of things that they cannot afford. I found it said that teens specifically said that they would be happier just if they had more money to buy things (P. 246). Then, Chapter 11 discussed, that although media has a big influence, it is not to blame for everything, there are other causes as well.

 

module 5

/in /by

I voted for Katlyn Fahl’s final project Women in Society. While I believe this voting process was supposed to be private I wanted to reveal my vote for many reasons. I am a transfer student from SDSU and had taken a few women study courses from that University. I have always felt as though I was cheated out of the credits I deserved since CSUCI did not have the equivalent classes to match. Secondly after taking Politics in Film this summer session I am horrified by all of the films that were shown. They all showed women in a demeaning light. Every time I brought this up to the professor he glossed over this topic saying “this is just how it was back then”. All of the other students went along with the Professor, he is the teacher. Some students wanted to open a conversation but were shut down and pushed toward other topics that the Professor leaned on. I did not want to sound like a loud feminist bringing up women’s issues every time we talked about a new movie. Katlyn brought up a good point in her final project, women are still struggling to earn equal pay and other equalities today. Only 24% of the people in the news are female. Shouldn’t taking one course in women’s studies be mandatory in higher education? How is it possible that CSUCI does not offer women’s studies at all, not a single class?

As we march through the centuries of time it is hard not to notice that the media has turned information into entertainment. In the eighteenth century people understood that journalism was to be politically neutral and even objective. It is our first amendment right in the Constitution to have a free press. This protects dissident political viewpoints. During the nineteenth century the press grew financially solid but still remained politically neutral. During the early twentieth century commercials were taking affect on people’s lives. First Amendment rights of a “free press” were essentially being changed around to protect media corporate investors and managers in noncompetitive markets. “The problems with our journalism are not because the people who run our newsrooms and media corporations are bad people. That is mostly irrelevant. They do what they do because they are rationally following the cues they are given”. (McChesney, 2002) I believe we would be better served if we had more PBS news stations. How about more independent media stations? They could give us their opinions without having corporate sponsor backlash. Edward Murrow was the type of journalist that believed in telling the real story. He paved a path for journalism that is still blazing today through courage. Murrow had many shows throughout his career but none as personally touching as See It Now where he would sign off the show with good night and good luck. “The only thing that counts is the right to know, to speak, to think — that, and the sanctity of the courts. Otherwise it’s not America”. (Edward Murrow Democracy and the News)

The media has honed in on ways to get our attention “The media profits from fear mongering through sensationalized headlines.” (Radford, 2003) The scarier the headline the more viewers they will get. Views see a scary headline and want to watch in hopes of saving their family from the same problem. The media has learned this scare tactic and is relentless. Ratings are the goal and they will stop at nothing to obtain them, ratings equal money. “Television news has abandoned its responsibility to do serious journalism in favor of sensational video.” (Redford, 2003) Television considers crime reporting as news worthy, instead of chasing the story and having to do follow ups. John Ruscio, a social psychologist, has a view on the media paradox. He says, the more we rely on the popular media to inform us, the more apt we are to misplace our fears. The paradox is the combined result of two biases, one inherent in the news-gathering process, the other inherent in the way our minds organize and recall information. (Radford, 2003)

After evaluating the news in module five and reading Who Gets to Speak on the News, it is more than evident that broadcasting on the news is not diverse. “Eighty-four percent of guests were white (848). The most and least diverse shows in terms of ethnicity were both on MSNBC: People of color were 27 percent of guests on All In and only 6 percent on Maddow. Just three of Maddow’s guests were people of color; none of these were women”. (Hart, 2014, http://fair.org/extra/who-gets-to-speak-on-cable-news/) I watched Megyn Kelly on Fox news during my own evaluation of the news in module five. Being a media consumer I noticed that white males have a large audience and platform to speak. When you branch out to other jobs in front and behind the camera, reaching trillions of viewers white males are predominantly producers, actors, camera “men”, etc.

While on the same topic of stereotypes I wanted to talk about a small part of our reading that I found to be unfavorable. “Do stereotypes skew coverage? Does coverage of the drug crisis focus almost exclusively on African Americans, despite the fact that the vast majority of drug users are white?” (How to detect bias in the news, http://fair.org/take-action-now/media-activism-kit/how-to-detect-bias-in-news-media/) This part of the article is highlighting and raising one race by putting down another. This is sad and unfavorable in my opinion. We should be stating the truth, yes, but not by putting others down. The definition of one love is universal love and respect expressed by all people for all people, regardless of race, creed, or color. I want to be the change I want to see in the world. It starts with you and me.

Last week’s read had to do with recycling and where it all goes is the perfect introduction to materialism. Children and adults on average want more. According to Sternheimer (2013), “Kidfluence: the power children have to influence their parents’ purchasing decisions”. Media focuses a large portion of their advertisements on getting children’s attention. They know the power children have over their parents. Children and teens are believed to be easily influenced. Parents do not know how to say no to their children. On the complete opposite end of this belief some parents believe their children are being affected by affluenza. However there are more households under the poverty line than past polls have shown.

Popular culture is not to blame for the many let downs in our society. According to Sternheimer (2013), “young viewers will imitate what they see, popular culture is not the central cause of changes in childhood, bullying, suicide, educational failure, violence, sexual behavior, teen pregnancy, single parenthood, eating problems, substance abuse, or materialism”. I agree with everything she listed except for materialism. We have parents who shape who we are, TV does not raise us. How can we blame popular culture for one of the biggest let downs in our society, poverty. According to Sternheimer (2013), “48 percent of children under three live in low-income families”.

Student News Daily is part of our reading this week and what a great read! One of the most interesting liberal versus conservative talks was over private property, in my opinion. Liberal opinion is that the government should be allowed to seize private property to accomplish a public end. What does this public end mean? I’m assuming this mean, for the public’s use. The conservative opinion is that seizure of private property is wrong and should not be used for private development. This can be a tricky situation but I do not think that the government should be able to set an amount that your private property is worth forcing you into a sale.