Break through the screen: The impact of studying media myths on me.

In week 1, I choose ‘Break through the screen’ as a title for my blog. It as a metaphor about how by exploring media myths it is possible to break apart issues in order to understand how the role of the media impacts our society.

The topic that has impacted the most on my perspective of the media, has been looking at media ownership.   Elizabeth Hart’s line “who owns the media owns the message” has challenged me to be more skeptical of the source of my media.  By engaging with media issues I have become more aware of ideological messages that are present in texts.

For example in ‘Out of Control’ the inclusion of CCTV camera footage as evidence of frequent drunken violence in Wollongong creates the impression youth in the area are troublemakers. The media  may not always present the full picture of a story.  I have learnt to question the media more.

Through studying media theories I have also become more savy in identifying techniques employed by the media to convey messages to an audience. I think that the use of semiotics in advertising is a powerful tool.  Particularly because of the connotations that may resonate with the audience.

The media is a dynamic entity and acts as a forum for ideas in the mediated public sphere. Through this assignment I have become more appreciative of the role of popular media about raising contemporary issues in society. BCM110 Tweets and blogs  were helpful examples of ways in which we can contribute to the debate  on media issues.

Through WordPress, I have been able to view a broad range of students’ perspectives on media issues, addressed in the readings and lectures.   Viewing others blogs has challenged me to consider other viewpoints. By commenting on blogs  I have had the opportunity to also  express  my opinion and explain my stance on an issue.

The examples of additional material on others blogs has broaden my outlook of the ways issues are portrayed in the media itself.

 

In the mediated public sphere we can all interact with the content on the screen.

Habermas’s developed the metaphorical term of the ‘public sphere’ to express the virtual space where people may discuss and debate issues in a democratic society. (McKeen extract , p4)

Our mass media is the channel through which the public are able find out about “affairs in common” that society can discuss. It is the ‘mediated public sphere’ that stimulates conversations amongst citizens.

Popular media texts such as Channel 10’s Current Affairs  program  The Project, is a catalyst for discussion.  The Project is able to cover a wide range of global and local news, current affairs issues and social hot topics. For example in the, 5th April episode –  stories from Julia Gillard’s visit to China to the issue of Racism  were  broadcasted. Although they do present stories as succulent news grabs, in a fragmented manner, they play an essential role in the public sphere.  By airing a range of stories they able to fuel debate on issues.  Through social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, their websites “Your Say” section, or by posting additional content web links, they are able to get people talking.

The Project panel from the Age image

One of the criticisms of light hearted news programs such as The Project, is that they are too trivialised. (McKeen extract, p2 )  The Project’s tag line is “News not as you know it”. It’s nightly recipe of current affairs, panel discussions and a hint of comedy makes a good toss up summary of the daily news.  For example The Project used news of Ellen’s visit as a way of raising the subject of gay marriage.  “New social movements” such as gay rights are not always presented in the media. (McKeen extract, p19) The Project by doing a segment on Ellen was able to cover this controversial issue  of marriage equality.

News needs to be talked about and debated in a healthy democratic society. We have the freedom to engage with a range of media outlet and then formulate our opinions. As long as popular media texts are able to raise issues and get the public talking, they deserve a good pat on the back.

Other references

Who ‘controls’ the information on our screen? Why it matters who ‘control’s our media?

The media is one of the primary sources of information in our lives. This body is  incredibly powerful and controls what and how information is delivered to the public.

So why does it matter who ‘controls’ the media?   As Elizabeth Hart notes in her article it is because “who owns the media owns the message”. Every piece of news that is presented to us, has an element of subjective opinion. The media carries the ideology of the source. The problem with the Australian media landscape is that it is one of the most concentrated in the world! This means that we are getting our information from a limited range of media magnets.   With extensive cross media ownership, there are few sources.

This is a concern regarding the way in which the public receives information about the government. The “media is the nervous system of democracy.” (Outfoxed)

We formulate our political viewpoints based on the manner in which the media portrays the government and politicians. The media acts as the mouthpiece of a political campaign.  It is essential to have a congenial relationship with the media in order to get votes. This issue was noted in the Finkelstein Review “a free press is a powerful institution which can, and does, affect the political process” .

The problem is that the full story cannot be gathered from a news broadcast. As what is broadcasted is controlled by the media owners. For example in Outfoxed, Rupert Murdoch’s news channel,  Fox News were primarily presenting their broadcasts from an Republican perspective. John Nicholas’s analogy summaries what the media industry does “the media market feeds readers , listeners and viewers a steady diet of the media equivalent  of grass. People feel as if they are partaking of news but they are actually starved for information”.

The media is always bombarding us with information and indirectly trying to influence the way we think.  ‘The 6 Monolithic Media Corporations that Control Almost Everything We Watch, Hear and Read’ provides thoughtful insight into how the six major media corporations control the way the US public think.

Media-Monkeys from wordpress blog Beyond the Curtain

Semiotics, How do we interpret the signs presented on our screens?

To discuss the theme of semiotics, I have decided to use the 2010  Antonio Federici gelato  ‘Immaculately Conceived’ campaign as an example.

Image

This advertisement is deemed controversial because of its use of Roman Catholic symbols to promote gelato.   (see Guardain article here)

As per Renee Magritte’s illustration a sign is merely a representation it is not the object itself. There are a range of signs in this advertisement. Some signifiers that trigger our consciousness are, words in Gothic font, ice-cream container, religious setting, the woman’s black and white clothing and the bulge!   These elements conjure mental images. For example the background of the poster is representative of a church. We can identify that the woman is a nun because of her habit. Due to the bulge we assume she is pregnant.

The association between the denotation and connotation of this advertisement makes it a controversial and arguably offensive.

The denotation is the simple meaning of the sign. In this poster the denotation is that there is a pregnant nun in a church setting eating Antonio Federici gelato. The punch line ‘immaculately conceived’, is commonly used in Catholicism to describe the conception of Jesus.

The main connotation that has been derived from this advertisement is that Antonio Federici is mocking the conception of Jesus. (see CNN report). This advertisement heavily draws on the myths and ideology of Catholicism. It has presented the words ‘Immaculately conceived’ in Gothic font which is associated with biblical text.  This may suggest that the ice-cream is heavily. However the ‘sign’ of a pregnant nun longing for the gelato may cause offence to the audience if they are Roman Catholics.

The company, insists that they did not mean to mock the faith. Rather they were using religious imagery to highlight their slogan that “Ice-cream is our religion”.  (UK’s Advertising Standard Authority ruling)

A blogspot comment on the advertisement was that by showing a nun with an enlarged tummy they were highlighting that eating ice-cream in large proportions causes’ obesity.

Our interpretation of this text is dependent on our shared knowledge and values.  Therefore we may comprehend the meaning of the signs in this advertisement differently depending on our exposure to religious ideology or our personal values.

References

Bowles, Kate. ‘Representation and Textual Analysis’ in The Media and Communications in Australia Stuart and Cunningham and Graeme Turner (eds) , Allen and Unwin pp49-63.

Mitchell Hobbs, Semiotics: Making Meaning from Signs in Communication, New Media and Everyday Life, Tony Chalkey et al Oxford Unviersity press pp 83 – 85

Week 3 BCM 110 lecture, ‘Media Mythbusting: The Image Cannot Lie’ http://moodle.uowplatform.edu.au/mod/folder/view.php?id=13153

Does the ‘magic bullet’ really fire through the screen? Questions to ask about the validity of media effects model .

The media is consistently firing information and messages towards audiences.  An undisputed fact!  However, what is questionable is the ‘media effects’ model’s assumption that mass audiences are influenced by what the media presents.

week 2 media effects model image

 

Take the ‘Magic bullet theory’ for example. It does not take into account the fact that each individual may interpret a message differently.  This is represented in Shannon and Weaver’s model which highlights that ‘noise’ interrupts the message and thus influences the way the message is received by an audience.  Therefore the idea that the media may instantly influence a mass audience in a unified manner is not a sound conclusion.

The key flaw of the ‘media effects’ model’ is its limited analyses of ‘the big picture’.  Gauntlett in his article is critical of the selective approach of media effects studies. He notes that many studies are carried out in, laboratory environments e.g.  Bandur’s  Bobo doll experiment. The ‘media effects’ model has been unable to accurately explain the link between the influence of media on audiences, carried out in an artificial environment.  None of the ‘media effects’ models we are examining in BCM 110, are current.   Could these research techniques be outdated?

How can the ‘media effects’ model, point fingers at the media for influencing the public if theorist do not explain the basis of their conclusions?

Gerbner’s cultivation theory is quick to critisise the media for wounding audiences with violent content. Gerbner’s theory claims that the violence on TV programs influences a child’s behaviour.   But, how does on-screen violence effect general audience’s perceptions or attitudes? What about violence on the News or documentaries, why are researches not concerned?   Do researchers think that real life violence does not pierce into the conscious barrier of a child, yet on-screen violence does?  The case of ‘James Bulger’, and similar cases indicate that offenders are wounded by scars of their childhood, not because of being ‘hurt’ through watching television.   The ‘media effects model’ needs to broaden its scope and look at a bigger picture.

Sources 

What is in a name? Why I choose the title of my blog ‘Break through the screen’.

I choose ‘breakhroughthescreen’ to represent what I think the BCM degree is all about.

The media is always trying to reach out to the public. With the emergence of digital media, we tend to view this information often through a screen. This is whether it’s our laptop, tablet , TV screen, or smart phone. The media is always trying to communicate messages and connect with people.

What we want to do as effective communicators is to send a message across a range of mediums. In order to do this we need to fill in the gaps or maybe add some spaces. So that what we are trying to get through is able to break    through   the   screen, so the public may understand what is being communicated.