Posts

Module 2 Reflections

/in /by

Module 2 made me think deeper about the media and its affects on society. Like so many others I have gotten lost in the media and I am truly not a critical thinker. I simply believe everything I hear and see with out a second guess that it could be wrong information. Both Module 1 and 2 have taught that there could be far more to the story than one thinks. Tollefson (2008) states, “…that the biggest problem that Americans are facing is that we have a hard time believing in possibility and imagining that things could be otherwise” (p. 130). The first thing that I thought of when I saw this is politics. People can be persuaded and deceived very easily when they think that the person who is speaking is credible. As a critical thinker I ask, “but where is your credibility?” Persuasion and deception goes far beyond politics, what I found interesting, and actually never thought of was how easily supermarkets can manipulate consumers. When I moved to college my mom gave me a grocery-shopping hint: never go through the middle aisles! My first year, I didn’t listen to her, but then as I got into eating healthier, I realized she was seriously right. All of the unhealthy food is in the middle aisles of the grocery stores. Tuttle explains that supermarkets strategically place food items so that consumers can be drawn to them as they shop. What stood out to me the most in his article was his example of cereal boxes and how they are designed. I remember when I was little I loved Golden Crisp cereal (THE ONE WITH THE BEAR!) However, I did not like the Honey Smacks (the one with the frog), probably because when I was little, bears were a lot more appealing to me than frogs were. Once again, advertisement won me over. Anup Shah’s article, Children as Consumers, explains that children basically make the food market big money because they are so easily persuaded (2010). Cartoon characters don’t seem that harmful, however there are other sources of media that are far more dangerous for children’s developments, especially when deception is involved. Shah (2010) states, “…manipulation of imagery, fake news and more are so prevalent that young people in particular are vulnerable to a lot of influences from all angles” (p. 6). As I mentioned in my VoiceThread one of the biggest problems with media and young children is body image. I have seen so many young girls, look at themselves and absolutely hate their bodies simply because it doesn’t look like the photoshopped model on the cover of Victoria’s Secret magazines. Not only did Module 2 made me realize how deception in the media can be harmful to society, it also taught me the danger of social media and inequality in the media.

In chapter 3, Sternheimer asks the question, “Does Social Networking Kill?” This is still something that I struggle with understanding. I have seen how social networks can have a negative impact on your mental health and especially self-esteem. In my opinion social media is very harmful to young people. Sternheimer explains, “…the Internet allows for uncensored and seemingly anonymous speech, enabling angry, often hateful websites free rein” (p. 49). My question is, what can society do to change this negative aspect of social networks? I am a fan of social networks but I can see how they can be harmful. Media can also be harmful in the way that is lacks diversity and can extremely stereotypical. Americans spend many hours a day watching television (Gross, 2001, p. 407). As we scroll through channels we see how little diversity there is in the media, as we all saw in activity 12. Gross (2001) gives the idea that there are “elites are (mostly) white, (mostly) middle-aged, (mostly) male, (mostly) middle and upper-middle class, and entirely heterosexual (at least in public)” that dominate the media (p. 406). As I become more media literate, I will pay more attention to how the media plays a huge role in what we perceive. Not only will I be able to recognize lies within the media but I will be far more aware of the inequality that mainstream mass media evokes.

Module 2 Re-Cap!

/in /by

One of my favorite parts of this class is talking about marketing!  Therefore, reading about product placement and Shah’s article which describes children as huge consumers is right up my alley.  Although I don’t believe that it’s ethical to market to an audience that doesn’t understand why they want what they want, I find it fascinating to read the research which talks about how the characters on cereal boxes are designed to catch a child’s attention and how the ‘tween’ age is one of the largest spenders because they are constantly re-defining the meaning of what is ‘cool’ or in style.  It is so hard to be a parent in an age when your child is being marketed to all day long.  But who is to blame for our kids wanting the brand name ‘My Little Pony’ toys?  How much can we blame the media when we, as parents, just want to make our children happy when the industry is playing to that need?

As I read the assigned text for the class, I realize more and more how I wasn’t right in feeling like the media is to blame for all things bad.  I learned from Karen Sternheimer that contrary to my original belief, the American childhood is easier and more luxurious now than in the early 20th century.  I always thought it would have been so much nicer to be a child in a different time but the reality is that if I can grown up in the 1920’s, I would have probably been poor or working at a young age to help my family and probably wouldn’t have had the opportunity to finish school.  After completing the reading from Cortes (2000), I realized how many generalizations are taught within our schools and how I am guilty of generalizing so much and sometimes not really looking into something further to get the full story.  I agree with the reading that children (and adults) need to be taught the differences between stereotypes and evidence-based generalizations.  Making a generalization is something we have to do daily in order to survive.

For instance, if I am driving and the car in front of me hits the brakes, it generally means that they are coming to a stop and I need to follow suit or risk hitting them.  However, on the other hand, Larry Gross (2001) helped me to see that the media tells us what life is like through ‘reality’ television.  In my mind I know it isn’t real but there’s so much ‘reality’ TV that sometimes it’s hard to reject that it it’s only a charade.  For example, not every homosexual male is scrawny, emotional and weak which ties back in to the stereotypes.  The media expands on what the audience already thinks is reality and pushes the boundaries.  Tollefson (2008) and Foucault showed me that discipline isn’t a bad thing and that it may be necessary in order to regulate or help things run more efficiently and although I agree that we need a healthier system that isn’t based around the elite, I also think that the elite hold the money which equals power and that’s why things are a certain way.  The key is to have everyone on the same page and really help our educational system out: for the future of our world!

Module 2 Reflections

/in /by

This has been a very eventful learning week to say the least. After completing the readings and watching the videos my mind was a bit overwhelmed. However the concept of visibility is clearer to me now once I was able to dive on into the course material. Since the week started out identifying five key questions us media literate people need to ask ourselves while reconstructing a media advertisement. I realized my media literate skills could be using some improvement. The five key questions are as listed (1) who created this message, (2) what creative techniques are used to attract my attention, (3) how might other people understand this message differently than me, (4) what values, lifestyles, and point of views are represented or omitted from this message, and finally (5) why is this message being sent. These questions are vital in using the correct tools to pull apart an advertisement and see what is really about. After establishing the knowledge of these tools the once hidden messages will now be able to become visible to our eyes and identifying the true message. Another hidden message theory I learned about was the Smurfette principal. This principal has to do with the unfair casting of men in movies and TV shows. In more movies than we realize there are only men dominating characters. Media sends out the wrongful message that women are weaker and women only exist in relation to men. Media does a wonderful job stereotyping woman and their roles in media. The Smurfette principal reveals that women in movies are often only pointed out as sexy figures or a sidekick to a strong man. Many movies such as Transformers a hit movie appears to be sexist modeling the only woman as a sexual figure. Often times this principal is not pointed out too often since sexism in movies is so normalized in the media. Based off the Smurfette principal was the Bechtel test. This test will be able to help you identify the importance of women in movies. If the movie can pass three simple questions, then the movie may appropriately resemble women. The questions are (1) does the movie have two or more women characters that have names, (2) do the women talk to each other, (3) do women talk about something other than a man. Both the Smurfette principal and the Bechtel test reveal the ways genders are often unequally valued in media especially movies. I challenge you were there any of your favorite movies that passed or did not pass any of these two principals?

The next topic I found important in this week’s readings was stereotyping. In Cortes article Struggling with stereotyping it address the issue generalizing verses stereotypes. There is often a difficulty in distinguishing the two in media and their meanings are misunderstood. Generalization can be described as group common things or groups of people in the media. Stereotyping can be described as pointing out the differences in groups and are quick to assume things that may not always be true. Cortes used the words “some and many” to describe commonalities in generalization and “almost or all” to describe stereotyping. (Cortes p. 149) I learned that generalizing requires more media literate skills to help clue together common groups in what they might do, and having an open mind. Opposed to stereotyping where there is resistance to new knowledge. Certain groups of people ought to act and behave a certain way is stereotyping which is wrong. We can never assume anything about people or cultures and their norms just because media reveals it in a certain way. Media enjoys being stereotypical towards groups of people and does not realize the offense that is being made. No culture or any person should be seen in a negative light.

Another example of stereotyping within media is the norm of men and women’s sexual orientation. In Larry Gross’s article Out of the Mainstream: Sexual minorities and the mass media, Gross describes the hardships lesbian women and gay men go through since there are often picked out and placed in a negative light in the media. The two major ways I read about how these men and woman are wrongly stereotyped is their families are not classified as normal and the wrongful way they are portrayed in movies. “The process of identity formation for lesbian women and gay men requires the strength and determination to swim against the stream” (Gross p. 410). Society is failing to accept that there should not be such a label on the norm. This article describes gay people having to go the extra mile to feel accepted in society. We live in a day and age where there should not be a labeled norm on what a family is. Families come in all shapes and sizes and are a community of people who love each other and want to feel valued. Gross’s article also touched upon how gay people are very often seen as invisible in the media (Gross p.411). When a gay person is starred in a movie they are often victims of violence, ridicule, or villains. They are also placed as misunderstood characters that are silly or weak. Media has been in denial that they are attacking people that are part of our society. Media needs to take a change in the direction of how all people are represented. We are all humans and need to be respected for the way that we are.

In Karen Sternhrimer’s book Connecting Social Problems and Popular Culture another terrible topic was introduced. The topic was realities of suicide and cyber bullying of the LGBT youth community. Reading this section was heartbreaking to see how student aged children not part and parts of the LGBT community are cyber bullied. “In a Colorado county study found that LGBT youth were more than twice as likely to report electronic harassment than those who identified as heterosexual (nearly 30 percent versus 13 percent)” (Sternheimer p. 53-54). That statistic really crushed me. Today it is likely that there is growing awareness and acceptance of gays and lesbians in society over the past years. My hope is that teachers now will intervene in these horrible situations and help instill in students the harms of what cyberbullying can do to a person. This section of visibility has opened my eyes to the harms media places on individuals. We are all affected by the media in one way or another. Learning to be aware of our media surroundings and treating everyone with respect will help flourish our individual media literacy.

Nicole Greenberg Module 2 Readings

/in /by

Sorry for the late post, work has been unexpected and crazy lately!

I was mind blown after watching the Smurfette Principle and the Bechdel test. I was surprised, yet completely aware, of the fact that women are often never seen in media, but if they are, they are used more as a sexy prop rather than a character- who does not only talk about boys the entire time. I loved her questions, “Are women in the film? Do they have a name? Do they talk about something other than men?” because as I watch any movie and or TV show, it’s scary how easily I can answer no to those questions. To me it seems like typical Hollywood because as I am taking this class, and becoming more familiar with media literacy, I have been noticing a lot more about how women are portrayed in movies, ads, TV shows etc.

After getting a little upset over the way women are seen in media, I moved onto reading the Media Lit Kit. I thought the 5 questions and 5 concepts are really important while watching movies, TV or even just looking at ads around town. Now that I have read this kit, I can never stop thinking about these questions and concepts while I attempt to enjoy TV now. I am actually pretty happy about this though because just over two weeks of this course has really opened my eyes to the reality of media, which is really helpful for me as a future educator.

I then went on to read Chapter six “The Inversion of Disability” of your novel Volatile Knowing. I can honestly say I was a little lost because of the usage of higher vocabulary and that I lack knowledge of certain references in education but if I am correct some of the main ideas include that teachers and parents are lacking a conclusion of why education is the way it is today and possibly how media is effecting education. I really liked the question posed, “What possibilities might exist for children in neighborhood schools if parents’ and teachers’ interests were successfully joined?” because I too have wondered this. I am not exactly sure the context in which is behind your question but if I was asked this, with no prior knowledge of an answer, I would assume great things would come of parents and teacher uniting. I think children could have many new opportunities if their parents and their teachers were able to come together, rather than act as two separate forces. I believe positivity is one of the biggest key factors in a child’s education and I think if teachers and parents come together, it can motivate the community to become more positive and bring everyone together.

After being extremely enlightened by Chapter 6, I began reading Carlos E. Cortes’ “The Children are Watching”. One of the first terms Cortes mentions is stereotypes- something we can never escape, especially in media. Then he poses a really great question asking the reader, “How can students learn about gender differences, the basic belief of various religions, and the core threads of diverse ethnic experiences without developing group stereotypes?” He then informs us on two solutions, which he claims are not easy to grasp but one major solution is informing students on the difference between generalizations and stereotypes. He then states the second solution is for students to use the distinctions to somewhat challenge or critique media. I think both of these ideas are very important for children to learn and distinguish because being open to other people’s cultures or religions is important for a child’s perceptions on generalizations and stereotypes. And although these generalizations and stereotypes are inevitable because society uses labels for everything, they can learn when it is appropriate to questions the media and its uses of the two.

As I began reading Larry Gross’s article titled “Out of the Mainstream” I was again a little confused because of his usage of high vocabulary but one thing I picked up quickly was his clear argument that people are very into television, which is not good. He writes, “The average American adult spends several hours each day in this television world, children spend even more of their lives immersed in its “fictional reality.” I feel as though adults get sucked into media very easily, which shows children get even more sucked into it to the point where they’re in a “fictional reality” because they are not yet aware of media literacy. Another major factor of his article talks about minorities and claims their positions and interest will not only be ignored, but as well will be discredited. I feel as though there was a slight connection between this idea and the assignment where we channel surfed and look at races, gender and disability. As I wrote in that, I only saw 3 minorities on the TV- 2 African Americans and one Latino male who were all on the news because they were being portrayed as criminals. I am not positive this connection works but I feel as though minorities are not portrayed positively on TV, if at all. Therefore, their responses to media and claims then become disregarded. Again, I am not positive if this is what Gross is trying to claim but that is how I comprehended it.

I then chose to write about Common Sense Media because the title “Advertising to Children and Media” really caught my attention in a somewhat negative way. I always find it chilling to hear about how much TV children are exposed to. The article shares several ways in which advertising to children can be done. For example, they can see ads on television, or gaming or completely away from technology like going to McDonalds and getting a free toy with their meal.

The article discusses all of the ways children are exposed to media and advertising and concludes by saying the media and ads are at an all time high. They claim, “…recent years have seen an explosion in new avenues for young people to be

exposed to advertising through media.” Children involved with social media, television, restaurants, movies, etc. are all being exposed to the media and most of them are still very unaware of media literacy or the effects media has over them.

This leads me to the last and most broad reading of all, chapters 3 and 4 of Sternheimer’s novel Connecting social problems and popular culture: Why media is not the answer. Again, this text is very dense and full of some really great points but I am going to discuss ideas and points that I found most intriguing through reading the text.

One of the biggest issues Sternheimer discusses in chapter 3 is suicide. She writes several news headlines such as “Mean Girls: Cyber Bullying Blamed for Suicide” which shows how much attention these suicides get. She then quotes The Washington Post who claims, “It’s just a matter of when the next suicide’s going to hit, when the next attack’s going to hit.” This quote is truly devastating because of the truth that lies behind it. Everyday there is another innocent child who commits suicide due to cyber bullying and it is becoming out of hand. Chapter 3 is full of statics on cyber bullying which is chilling just to read it.

Then I read Chapter four, and almost giggled to myself, because as I was writing this entire blog post I had television going on in the background and got distracted by my cell phone a handful of times. Then I read the first couple sentences of chapter four and almost spit my drink out when I realized how not-funny it was and how serious it actually was. I couldn’t answer one color she had asked of us. After I look at my phone or watch TV, I realize how zombie like I become afterwards. It drains my energy and I forget that I am sitting with my friends or my family. I am aware of my wrong doings and after I have been in this class I have been trying a lot more to stop sitting on my phone while doing homework because it takes up more time once I have to go back and reread each article several times! Then when I read the line, “Most recently, TV has been blamed for ADHD and even autism” which was sad to hear. Whether the research proves this or not, the fact that it’s even a controversial topic is scary. Sternheimer then moves on to an even touchier subject, which talks about low-income families. She writes, “Clearly, low-income families have more pressing needs, like food and rent, before buying a computer or buying internet” which shows how much technology has an effect on society. This can lead students to have an unequal learning experience because they are not caught up with technology.

Overall, media and advertising has a huge, often negative, effect on society. Thought all the readings, it is seen that children are most commonly targeted by advertising and media which is terrible because they are vulnerable and naïve. With more readings like these, society can become more aware of media’s power and effect it has over everyone.

Reflection on Module 2 Readings

/in /by

One of the ideas in these readings that I found interested was the way products are marketed to children and teens. Children and teens tend to be the most impressionable so it is easy for companies to advertise to them. They also spend a lot of time looking at media. According to the article, Advertising to Children and Teens: Current Practices, one of the ways products are being advertised is directly in the shows they are watching (2014). For example, a logo will appear on something a character is consuming in a television show they are watching.  This could be one of the tools of persuasion such as using celebrities to promote a product and make it look cool or even the bandwagon technique where if these people on TV are doing it then I should too. I find this really interesting because I have actually noticed this on children’s shows. One thing that I see the most advertised on media children are using is food. Usually sugary foods, candy bars, and fast food restaurants. We see this in the article, Why that Creepy Character in the Cereal Aisle is Eyeing Your Child. This article states that sugary cereals are placed at eye level for younger children instead of up higher for adults (Tuttle, 2014). He says that they characters are actually looking downwards so they make eye contact with children. This is really creepy to me, but it shows how easy it is to market to children. Fun characters and yummy flavors are things children want. This is an issue because according to the article, Sugar Season. It’s Everywhere, and Addictive, sugar is an addictive substance and could possibly one day be listed in the DSM as a substance abuse disorder (DiNicolantonia & Lucan, 2014).

Media often promotes stereotypes and generalizations. Often times media, such as the news, show people of certain races or cultures committing crimes and other bad things, but don’t show any other positive things about these people and this unfortunately tends to lead to stereotypes (Cortes 148). In schools, one of the possible stereotype and generalization issues relates to gender roles. According to the article, Out of the Mainstream: Sexual Minorities and the Mass Media, gays and lesbians are a group that have been stereotyped heavily in the media (Gross 410).  The gender role stereotypes are a huge issue right now. Boys are supposed to like blue, trucks, and sports while girls are supposed to like pink, dolls, and dancing. Mass media stereotypes are something that I believe could be to blame for this issue.

The reading that stood out to me the most this week was the reading from the textbook about cyber bullying. I think this is such a huge issue in our society today and that is why it stood out to me. Teens and young adults spend so much time on social media today that they are bound to experience some type of cyber bullying. I know that I have experienced it in my life. To connect the reading to media and gays and lesbians, the text states that the internet is a new way to express homophobia (53). I don’t think we need to protect children from cyber bullying, but I think we need to teach them to be aware of it and that saying mean things over the internet is just as harmful, or more harmful, that saying it to their faces.

Module 2

/in /by

Module two’s reading and videos were about lies within images, cyber bullying, dumbing down of America and many more. Although the information varied in subject everything is able to be tied because of the overall media usage. Let’s begin by talking about the Smurfette Principle.

The Smurfette Principle was an eye opener to myself. I have seen plenty of movies where there is only one female character surrounded by male characters but I wasn’t aware of the term created by Katha Pollit in 1991. An example of the smurfette principle is Transformers; where Megan Fox is surrounded by only males. In the second video, The Bechdel Test, the narrator talks about a test that can be used to assess the presence of women in the movies. There are three question that a critical viewer can ask to see if the movie or show have enough women presence. The first question is: are there two or more women I the film that have names? Secondly, do they talk to each other? Thirdly, do they talk to each other about something other than a man?  These videos tie up because if one is alert and informed on how to distinguish the smurfette principle then slowly it will diminish and we will see more female leads.

Additionally, inversion of visibility is one of the primary purpose of media education according to Kaia Tollefson. To be honest I tried to understand this article more but I hope that one of my classmates will be willing to further explain it to me. After reading this article I was able to grasp that in order to have an inversion of visibility the 5 core concepts must be understood. Also, I understood that Foucault’s theory is the inversion and that children should have the same achievement regardless of resources. This reminds me of chapter four, What is Dumbing Down America? ;In this chapter it is discussed how there were many media announcements that TV tends to dumb down America, but there is no scientific research behind this claim. I actually have heard of the “research” where someone claimed that watching Spongebob made one dumber. Another claim is that watching Sesame Street or that surfing the web has made it easier for students to look up information and has removed their ability to remember. I agree with the statement regarding the web because when my mom was attending school she had to physically attend the library to obtain information whereas, we are able to ask Siri and she responds in less than a minute. Another false claim that was stated in chapter four was that ADHD was linked to the amount of TV watched. I completely disagree that this is true. Working with students who have ADHD I have learned that if some cannot spend more than 30 min watching TV they have to be active and have a routine to match each individual.

Chapter three, Does Social Networking Kill? talked about cyber bullying and internet predators. I have had past experience in cyber bullying so this chapter really hit home. Although social media is increasing, I think that cyber bullying has decreased. This is because of bills that were passed to hold the proper party responsible for the damage of their cyber bullying. This chapter talks about suicides as well, how they are the third leading cause of deaths from adolescents. Additionally, it talks about how many fear the media because of online predators. I do not agree that the internet gives predators an easier access because there is research proven that usually children are abducted by someone they know. The only problem that I agree with is that there is no sufficient supervision or knowledge of parents on what they’re children are doing on the internet.

Another article that I found very interesting for module 2 was Advertising to Children and Teens. This article talked about embedded advertising where product placement is branded product placed in a production. Whereas product integration is the incorporation of product into the dialogue or plot. I knew about advertising but I found the direct definition of each advertising skill intriguing. I think advertising is taking over the media specially the internet; this is called online advertising. Online advertising is a game changer because it is interactive, immersive, and built data such as interests, location, and demographic characteristics. This article relates to the article NMMLP Tools of Persuasion because it talks about different types of advertisement images.

Module 2 Reflection

/in /by

During my experience with researching our material for module 2 I found myself questioning each article with my own experiences. With every question came great concern towards how to negate mass media makers influence on society. More importantly, how could one learn to redirect his/her attention to see through what society considers a standard norm of living. Would education be the answer to allow individuals to be more media literate? What I learned shocked me in terms of education with Tollefson (2008) article titled, “The inversion of visibility. In Volatile knowing: Parents, teachers and the censored story of accountability in American public schools”. Within the article many ideas were presented.

Firstly, there was a lack of collaboration between both teacher and parents towards changing educational as a whole. Secondly, the structure of education was based on corporate power. Lastly, individuals were inhibited from believing that they could make a difference in changing the Panopticon structure. However, what spoke to me more was the structural analogy used to explain Michel Foucaults term Panopticon aka the “perfect prison”. In hindsight the prison is structured to keep individuals inline by forcing individuals to go against their moral responsibility by using the accountability spot light effect to force self-policing behavior to allow one to feel comfortable with the current ideology of discipline fixes implemented within the structure of power. Additionally, this discipline fix is what we see in current media that disallows community based systems to work together due to private corporate interest groups. Therefore, in summary this is a form of behavioral change.

Once I had wrapped this around my brain around this idea, along with the countless statistical data that showed we are consumed by media, it all came together. By considering this structure of power I realized that this was used not only in our education, but within our media outlets. This had answered my question on why people accepted mass media as it was. As a result, I saw the challenge that laid before us all. What if Tollefson statement were true, “If we have accepted the conditions of our own objectification as natural and inevitable, we will have relinquished our authority to define” (130). Would this be our undoing? No, I would like to argue that people could realize that this is all an illusion to distract us from pressing matters. Tollefson article does state if parents, educators and students work together to purpose dialogue on education than there would be progressive results. I say this because it makes sense, if you disconnect one another than you have won by allowing humans to be only individuals. Again, I feel as you read through all the reading you can get quite upset with the reflection of your own subjective life. I reflect and wonder how my life would have been if I was media literate growing up. The amount of time wasted, is disgusting. Yet, considering this course is granting me an opportunity to put it all together. I too want to help others see through the blight of corporate intellectual property.

I now want to ask about your thoughts. What do you feel you have gathered thus far from our reading? Do you feel the same as I do?

-Sebas

 

Module 2 Reflections

/in /by

The inversion of invisibility refers to the modern phenomena in which attention is focused on the people instead of those in power (Tollefson, 2008). The powerful carefully construct messages that represent an idea, and send those messages to the people using media, such as advertising. These messages, while focused on the people, are primarily created to benefit the powerful. Therefore, it is important for people to deconstruct these messages in order to understand who is sending them and why (Tollefson, 2016). It is important to keep in mind that these constructed messages are merely representations of reality rather than reflections. For an example, a drawing of you is not as accurate as your reflection in a mirror.

One example of a constructed message is the use of stereotypes in advertising and entertainment. Tropes are recognizable patterns used in storytelling to convey information to the audience about the characters. While tropes can be useful, they often tend to enforce stereotypes that put certain groups in a negative light. The Smurfette Principle is a trope in which a story contains a predominantly male cast with only one female character (Sarkeesian, 2011). The Bechdel Test is used to measure female characters’ importance and involvement in movies. Movies pass the test if they contain two or more female characters with names, if they interact with one another, and if they communicate about something other than the male characters (Sarkeesian, 2009). It would seem that the underlying message is that men are more superior than women, but who would send this message and why? One explanation is that the media chooses to tell stories that enforce stereotypes because they want to meet the audience’s expectations and illicit a desired response (Cortés, 2000).

My biggest question in this module is how do we teach children about deconstructing messages from the media without making them feel like they are victims? Children are often the target audience when it comes to advertising, and children are mostly likely to have the most time to watch movies and television. According to a recent study, children watch and average of 15,000 to 18,000 hours of television per year (Shah, 2010). So how does one teach children about the inversion of visibility without making the child distrustful and cynical? Also, how do parents bring up the issue of stereotyping and gender bias in entertainment with children in a way where they can still enjoy their favorite movies, such as Star Wars?  Perhaps parents can begin by permitting young children to watch television and movies with them, and by asking them innocent yet thought provoking questions. Also, maybe parents can start differentiating between reflections and representations in terms of pretend and real life.

Also, how do we as consumers help those in power change their messages? As previously stated, the media will only tell a story if they think people will listen. Therefore, it appears that the consumers are actually the ones with the power. We can exercise power by refusing to buy into negative messages, and therefore forcing companies to alter their message in a way that reflects us, rather than misrepresents us.

References

Cortés, C. E. (2000). Struggling with stereotypes. In The children are watching: How the media teach about diversity. New York: Teachers College Press (pp. 146-161).

Sarkeesian, Anita. [FeministFrequency]. (2011, April 21). The smurfette principle: Tropes vs women. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM3T2__lZA Retrieved May 31, 2016.

Sarkeesian, Anita. [FeministFrequency]. (2009, December 7). The bechdel test for women in movies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLF6sAAMb4s Retrieved May 31, 2016.

Shah, A. (2010). Children as consumers. Global Issues. Retrieved from http://www.globalissues.org/article/237/children-as-consumers

Tollefson, Kaia. [Kaia Tollefson]. (2016, May 26.) On the inversion of visibility. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVoQ8Z3x6zM Retrieved May 31, 2016.

Tollefson, K. (2008). The inversion of visibility. In Volatile knowing: Parents, teachers and the censored story of accountability in American public schools. Lanham, MD: Lexington Press (pp. 125-134).

Module 2 Wrap Up

/in /by

After finishing up these readings and the videos, I did take in quite a bit of information. In the video that Tollefson posted, the principles of media education were talked about. There was the five core concepts and the five key questions and it was emphasized that you want to ask those key questions when you are looking at media.

What really got my attention though was the video Trope vs Women. Before this video, I have never even heard of the word trope. Just looking at the title I asked myself “what the heck is a trope? According to the video, a trope is “a common pattern in a story or recognizable attribute in a character that conveys information to the audience.”  This video I found very interesting because it really opened my eyes about how women are rarely the main role and really showed the Smurfette Principle. This principle mentions how there is one female among a group of males. An example that was used was “Big Bang Theory” and used Penny among the group of guys and they make her seem like the “dumb blonde” compared to them. Another thing that was mentioned was how women are usually the sidekick or the sexy accessory, this is very noticeable in the James Bond movies. There was a test created by Allison Bechdel called the Bechdel test which is a “simple way to gauge the active presence of female characters in Hollywood films are just how rounded and complete those roles are” (feministfrequency, 2009). Overall, both videos are very eye opening and made me really aware.

When I opened the book to the required reading chapters, chapter 3 title really got my attention, “Does Social Networking Kill?” Throughout chapter 3, it is repeated a couple of times that with the internet and our smartphones, it is hard for parents to monitor these messages. One thing about this chapter that really stood out to me was the story Tyler Clemeti’s suicide. His story was about his roommate setting up a webcam in his room to catch him with another man and streamed it online. After this story though, really shocked me. It says that it is hard to get a solid number, but it is assumed that “30 percent of all youth suicides involve LGBT individuals” (Sternheimer, pg 54). Another thing was how she mentions that teenagers are actually the least likely to commit suicide, which honestly surprises me because when news stories about suicide are published, most of the time it seems like they are teenagers. Moving on to chapter 4 was a huge jump, going fro suicide to a question “Is popular culture turning us into a nation of shallow idiots?” (Sternheimer, pg 71).  What I liked about this chapter was how it contrasted some of the articles we read in the last module. It mentioned how there were some studies done that proved the opposite of what those articles were talking about. One that I really liked was “Sesame Street viewers had larger vocabularies and showed grater readiness for school than other children.” (Sternheimer, pg 75). Something that really stood out to me that even though the that the SAT scores have been declining, its shows a positive trend. Sternheimer stated that there are more students taking the SAT and plan on going to college, which to me was interesting. But with these conflicting studies, who should we actually believe?

Out of all of the articles that we read, the one that I found the most interesting was Struggling with Stereotypes: Uses and Abuses of a Critical Concept by Carlos E. Cortes. The reason that I say this is because it really differentiated generalizations and stereotypes. Cortes pretty much said that generalizing is good and help us create labels (that sounds kind of contradicting, but its true).  He says that without labels, we would be unable to communicate among each other. One thing that I found interesting that he said was “generalizations provide clues to individuals who belong to different social groupings, but stereotypes those clues tend to be assumptions.” Before reading this article, I thought generalizing was the same as stereotyping, but it really isn’t.

All of the articles that we have read so far are very interesting, some more confusing than the others, but very interesting. Every article that was I read, I learned something new, which is great. They are making me more aware of things and really opening up my mind and making me think.

Module 2 Readings

/in /by

This weeks module was very eye opening for me. For starters, I don’t watch a lot of television or spend a lot of time keeping tabs on what is going on in the media so once it was assigned in this module it blew my mind. It was sickening to see the numbers/data presented in front of my own two eyes.

The reading that stood out to me the most, was “Struggling With Stereotypes”. This stood out to me the most because it did not start by saying “STOP MAKING STEREOTYPES!”, because this is unrealistic. Instead, it made the point that generalizations and stereotypes are a part of our society, and the world we live in. Stereotypes are broken into three different categories, which are generalizations, labels and depictions. It started by saying that not all generalizations are negative, and that some are needed. For example, if the generalization is evidence based then it is good. However, the issue with generalizations and stereotypes in the media that that it serves as “a circular source for generalizations about diversity”. Which means that a particular piece of media can contribute or cause a stereotype about a group, even if that particular piece of media isn’t stereotyping. This stood out to me, because this happens all the time in the media(particularly the news), however the media outlet always plays victim. The article went on to say that the issue isn’t if the media is stereotypers, but if they are contributing to the stereotype. To tie this back to students, and the young children the article made the important point that it is unrealistic to teach you students to not stereotype. However, instead we should be teaching them the difference between accurate/useful generalizations and negative/hurtful ones.

Another part of the reading that stood out to me, was “Out of the Mainstream: Sexual Minorities &Mass Media”. This article stood out to me, because I found it to be highly accurate. For starters the article pointed out that the media plays a crucial role in enculturation and in the process of social definition, which is rarely a positive one. The main issue with this is that the media uses stereotypes as a “code”, that they know their audience will understand. This is a huge issue because this causes the circle of stereotypes to continue. Another point this article made, that I had never considered before was that that media decides the norm because most people now a days receive their information from television, and it’s “fictional reality”. This gives the media, (or whoever is releasing the information) to determine “where the center will fall”. Meaning, that whoever is the source of the information determines that their information is accurate and others are the extremes.

Lastly, Karen Sternheimer’s Chapter Three was by far the most intriguing and interesting read we’ve had so far. The chapter titled, “Does Social Networking Kill?” shines a fresh light on what others believe to be true about the new fad of social networking/media. Social media/networking has taken over, in terms of how people communicate. Most people that grew up in a different generation, where technology wasn’t as advanced and social networking was nonexistent, have a negative connotation about what social media has become. Most people assume that with this new outlet, and “this ability to invade each others privacy” the suicide rates have skyrocketed. However, Sternheimer puts this thought to rest. She claims that their is no factual evidence to support this claim, and that in fact suicide rates have gone down. However, she does make it clear that “new media takes a school yard taunt and gives it a new meaning when electronically”. She states that, “spoken words may fade into the past eventually, but electronic messages never die”. This statement stood out to me, because although she is saying that social networking does not kill, it still hurts a lot more than prior to the technology. Overall, she makes the point that there is no factual bases to the claims that suicide rates have risen, and that the only thing that has changed is our heightened level of care taking.