Module 5! We did it!

Wow group can you believe it, this is our very last blog. During this last module I noticed some trends. The first trend I noticed was, much of what we talked about in previous modules built upon what we are learning now. The other major trend I noticed was we seem to trust the media more than we should especially the local news we watch frequently.

In the first set of slides on media and democracy what primarily stood out to me was the section on media consolidation. I had no idea that the majority of the media was controlled through a handful of billion dollar corporations. I was thinking to myself how I was so blind to how the media is run. I always assumed that such channels like ABC or Disney Channel just produced media for their broadcast. Each of these corporations dictates every form of media that gets released. TV shows, the movie industries, music producing you name it they control it. These large companies such as Disney are always looking for ways to expand making it merely impossible for independent companies to make it on their own. Another impact these so called mega-corporations have is influence on the news. These mega-corporations have become experts responding to the demands of what society wants to see on the news. However the demands are actually demands of what the media makers want to see as influential while we watch the daily news.  The main purpose of the “news media is to aim for the desired middle and upper-middle-class for their target audience” (McChesney, 2002, P. 374). As we’ve learned in module 3 when we discussed the lack of recognition the lower and poor class in the media the same subject is being brought up again. McChesney states that “Stories of great importance to tens of millions of American’s will fall through the cracks because those are not the “right” Americans” (McChesney, 2002, P. 375). The standards that are set by the media are only equal to some economic classes as we’ve seen.  Since that is the sad reality the poor and lower class isn’t receiving any support. I thought this section about mega-corporations related so closely to Sternheimer’s chapter 11 that reveals inequality is the real problem we face. Society let alone the media often does a low quality job providing equality to all people. The media likes to take sides (without you knowing) in representing what news stories are important over others.  The last section of the McChesney slides I thought made a great point. It says “we need to press for democratic values rather than the interests of capital” the way this countries morals are set. Media has taken away the right for its citizens to have a say in what goes. This is why it is important for us to push for supporting independent media makers it is more valuable and equal to all people in society.

The next section of slides titles Democracy and the News was a list of well thought out quotes of how the media shown on the news influences us with the little information they actually give us. The biggest harm media power can yield is not in creating killers, but in creating complacency. This complacency is not due to fictional entertainment, as we so often fear; it is created from news reports based on emotion and drama rather than citizenship. We are lulled not by music or movies or video games, but by programs passing as news that only skim the surface of what we need to know about our government, our corporations, our society (Sternheimer, 2003, p. 219). That quote by Sternheimer really shows how trusting we are of the media. It seems that most people have more trust in the media than they do about most things. The News on TV, on the radio, or on the internet is often poor representations of what the news story actually is yet we have so much faith in what we are seeing. The news picks out the bad and the fear and will leave us worrying when the next tragedy will happen. That is their goal to let them gain our control and influence about the news we are exposed to. But now let’s think of the flip side. We know that news that enables fear in us is shown everyday but what about the good news in the media, where is that? In Radford’s article “The News Bias Distorting Reality and Feeding Fears” addresses what happens to good news in the media. Radford states good news is no news in the media’s eyes. When was the last time we heard about something good happening in the news? If your answer is something other than once in blue moon then I would like to be directed to your source of news to make my news experience more delightful. Radford’s answer was simple good news doesn’t nearly get as much airtime as bad news, if the story “bleeds it leads” (Radford, 2003, p. 74). I think that quote is a disappointing reality about news, only if the news story seems fearful will it headline. However when a good news story is relevant it is placed on the back burner to replace it with the fear driven or negatively impacted message.  When a good news story is advertised instead of being uplifting it will be titled “some youth violence declines” it is rarely looked upon with a smile rather than passing off the story as less valuable.

The next sections of articles I thought were important touched upon the subject of who gets to speak on news channels, who is seen, and what point of view is the news taken from. In the article How to detect bias in news media mentioned a good point about the lack of diversity. The article says if you notice race and gender being unequally represented in the news outlet we watch that we should demand fairness. This article goes on to say that if there is a discussion panel of all men or an all-white crowd that they should alter their diversity to those in the public they serve. Which makes a valid point that if we sit back and don’t voice change how do we expect to see change? In an article that relates “who gets to speak on cable news?” by Peter Hart brings up a survey that was given over a five week period. After the survey was taken something major was noticed. Most of the news stories only featured men compared to women. The amount of male guest outnumbered women drastically, 730 men compared to 285 women a 72% of male population in the news (Hart, 2014, n.p.) But this wasn’t the only noticeable difference, 84% of the people on the news survey were white. This meant that only 16% of people seen were of color. These were shocking results about who is seen and speaks in the news. A third aspect to this article that I thought had value was the political party standpoint of which the message was given. In this survey the amount of republicans were outnumbered by the democrats on most news stations. The view is which a message is give is important since the republican and democratic views differ. The next article Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs can help us define what standpoint an article is coming from. A good example I found was on terrorism.  Terrorism from a liberals view will think that global warming is a larger threat than terrorism. Liberals don’t believe in relying on military forces to defeat terrorists, they think that leads to more terrorism. From a conservative view they think terrorism is the biggest threat to the U.S. Conservatives want terrorists stopped and destroyed. Using intelligence-gathering and military force is the best way to defeat terrorists. After reading this article it helped me better define the differences between the two and see the different views the news may have.

Continuing our discussion about the news and the media the GMMP (global media monitoring project) video we watched had a lot to say about gender inequality in the news. This video informed us that in their project only 24% of people in the news were women which meant men dominated the news at 76%. The project also found that 37% of reporters were female and 63% of men were reporters that took the crucial role talking about our economy, crime, and politics. Another important detail the video pointed out was that women are also misrepresented in the news. The news likes to reveal stereotypes about both men and woman, that women are seen as sex objects and men are seen as strong entrepreneurs. Women are seen as feminine and men are seen as masculine. They explained the news to be gender blind where the viewpoints of other genders such as a woman’s viewpoint won’t be shared. In the video we saw that men outnumber women in the media, especially in professions. Women are often shown as homemakers and not seen as independent which is very stereotypical. This video brought to my attention that news does more than give us news about the world but it also will categorize and stereotype to make stories sound more interesting.  And lastly this video represented to me that inequality in the news goes far beyond gender stereotyping. Inequality is all over the news in what stories are fairly represented in our media.

Based off the topic of inequality chapter 11 in Sternheimer’s book deeply touches upon the topic. I am again bringing up topic of poverty as I did earlier in this blog because Sternheimer brings up an excellent detail of how we view inequality in the media. Ads for starving children in faraway places might gain out sympathy, but poor American children are often seen as invisible or just seen as a threat to public safety (Sternheimer, 2013, P.275). This country’s media fails to recognize the 15 million children who live in poverty. When stories about poverty come up they often leave an emotional response in our minds (which it should) but instead of acting upon it, poverty is ignored and not further thought about. Ignoring an important part of our society will not make the problem go away but rather the problem of poverty will increase without any recognition. The lack of poverty in the news is an inequality. The media is ignoring a large group of people due to their ego in society. Sternheimer states it doesn’t have to be this way our media is “so enchanting, so attention seeking, it can be used to redirect our attention to the sources of our society’s problems and give a wakeup call about the persistence of inequality in the United States” (Sternheimer, 2013, p. 286). This statement proves that we need to keep our society’s real challenges in our view. This country is a democracy and we should be able to have a say in ensuring equality is provided for those who live and battle in poverty, because we are all equally important.

I saved the best for last chapter 10 from Sternheimer, A New Generation of Greed. When reading this chapter it reminded me the last module’s video the story of stuff. Both the book and the video revealed that we are living in a world where all we do is consume products. Sternheimer points out that we are a greedy nation that our happiness depends upon materialistic goods. But where do we get this greed from? Is it the influence from all the commercials and advertisements on the media? Many would answer that yes we (especially children) get our sense of urgency from the media items that are promoted to us. We seem to want the newest phone, the newest car, newest clothes but where the influence comes from isn’t all from the media. Our desires to fulfill our happiness stems from what others in society will think of us. Now relating to children, how much a child wants is in the control of the parents. If a parent is easily talked into buying their child a product then the chances of them asking for more is greater. A survey said that 94% of parents think children are spoiled but only 55% of parents think their own kids are (Sternheimer, 2013, p.251). I think parents are blind to how much money is spent on their child’s short term happiness. Children are becoming more selfish Sternheimer explains not because media is exploiting children to products but that parents are allowing it. Parents are all about pleasing their children and making sure they have new products so that their child doesn’t feel left out. But that is only part of the answer, since our society has turned into a consumption-orientated society or economy depends upon people spending money on things most of the time we don’t need. The economies forces shape our buying habits and pressure parents into “guilt money” to spend on their children to make up for time they lost while working more so they can buy more stuff (Sternheimer, 2013, p. 250). These facts brought out the ugly truth behind producers of products. They are successful making millions and billions of dollars while our society is over worked to provide for our materialistic needs. Concluding this last thought is that advertisers alone aren’t to blame for out consumption problems. Our social structure is distracted by the lust of materials causing us to make poor financial decisions and make us want more than what we have. This last section really name me realize how caught up in the world we are, and how there are influences all around us that encourage our motivations to buy excess products we don’t need.