3. Effects of mass media?
Two views:
1) Non literate peoples have benefited
as television and radio make for a
more democratic flow of information-
John Fiske
2) Those who control television and
radio gained more control over society
by duping consumers who consume
their produced images.
4. Media operate in the context of other media
and we are aware that they are not neutral in
conveying messages.
In terms of information… a documentary on
the JFK assassination is very different from
Oliver Stone’s JFK, which we may know is
staged, but still may influence our
perception of the historical event.
The way we rank media is based on
where that media stands in relation to
older and new media - and whether they
are primarily oriented toward
entertainment, news or information.
For example, news on the internet has come
to be associated with speed of transmission
and a global scope.
5. The original sense of mass audience
was an undifferentiated vast audience of
people with little individuality.
Mass media is also synonymous with
the rise of television.
Of course, now we have a much more
fragmented audience…. A range of
multidirectional media and choices for
communication have replaced an older
model of mass media.
6. Media, both news and fiction,
facilitate the social sphere for
public debate and action.
We are also aware that the
broadcast media pitch their
shows to viewers with buying
power. Middle class youth 13-
26 are sought after…
Thus we are influenced -and
we influence - broadcast
media in the ways we use it.
7. The computer and Web allow anyone
to become and author/producer, thus
giving rise to international
subcultures.
Satellite technology gave rise to
global communications and the end
of narrowcasting for some 20 years,
until community television rose again
in the form of “minority” networks
appealing to narrow
demographics/cultures, especially
through cable television.
There is no longer a single mass
audience, but perhaps multiple
audiences who are the products of
narrowcasting.
8. Critiques of mass media
Critics argue that the new electronic
technologies are powerful new tools for mass
persuasion (or propaganda) allowing for
political oppression and control.
Viewers, they fear, are gullible recipients of
media messages.
This chapter discussed one of the primary
examples of modern propaganda, Leni
Reifenstahl’s Triumph of the Will, a
documentary account of a Hitler rally in Sept
1934.
The point is that this film encourages overt
nationalism and idolatry of a political
leader.
This film, along with the Nazi’s introduction of
television as something to be viewed
collectively in public spaces, helped forge a
collective ideology.
The collective practice of looking was a major
tool in Josef Goebbels’ propaganda ministry
in Hitler’s Germany.
9. Guy Debord understood the effects
of collective practices of looking.
His group Situationist International,
noted how the social order of the
late 20th c global economy exerts
influence through representations.
Thus, the spectacle, ie, the image
and the practice of gazing as
central, becomes the instrument of
unification.
The Situationists, or Situs, were the first
revolutionary group to analyse capitalism
in its current consumerist form.
10. Debord noted that experience has
been reduced to representation.
Jean Beaudrillard continued his
theory, believing that simulation
transcends the real. (Simulacra are
copies without originals)
This allows for a replacement of
the real in every relationship.
For example, the virtual worlds of
Disneyland, computer worlds’
virtual reality, Internet, etc.
11. A spin-off of this was the realization
that TV was a narcotic that was, by
unifying and consolidating masses
under a single political belief, was
replacing actual participation in
organized politics, hence leading to
more and more disaffection.
12. The Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Walter
Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse) criticized post WW2 capitalist and
consumerist orientation of popular media forms.
The culture industry creates and caters to a mass public that cannot
distinguish between reality and illusion.
They found the culture industry generates a false consciousness,
encouraging consumers to buy into the belief system that allows
capitalism to thrive. (They were strongly influenced as victims of the rise
of Nazi Germany in the 30s)
13. As universalists, the Frankfurt School used Marxist ideology to explain how the
dominant class who own the media, control the content and sell the masses ideas
that perpetuated the domination and oppression inherent in a capitalist economy.
They were concerned with the effects of the media on the masses, not vice versa.
They believed consumers of “high culture” (classical music, art in museums, an educated
viewer) stood above those of “low culture” whom they considered mindless dupes of culture
industry and industrial capitalism. (who loved popular music, “kitsch” art, and had low
education)
14. Frankfurt School’s belief in top-down
culture is weak in its universalizing
tendency and failure to note how
consumers of culture have distinct
negotiating patterns and are part of
many cultures.
In short, there is no unified mass
culture and a singular media industry.
The culture industry realizes this
and produces products for niche
audiences, including a counter-
hegemonic approach to challenge
dominant ideologies.
15. The mass media and democratic potential
Will new media serve as a promising tool for democratic ideals?
With such a diversity of programming possible how can we be sure about “public” culture?
Marshal McLuhan believed that media were simply extensions of our natural senses, helping
us to connect with distant communities and bodies.
16. McLuhan, as a technological determinist, was not
as concerned with the content of a message as the
medium through which it was received.
This empowers individuals, whose own body is
extended throughout the world.
In the late 60’s this meant guerilla tv was possible,
and lots of people could become producers.
And he anticipated the power of instant circuitry
where nothing in the world is any longer remote in
time or space.
McLuhan was a harbinger of cyberculture.
17. Television and the question of sponsorship
Broadcast advertising has been the US paradigm
for the media of radio and tv from the earliest years,
and serving the corporate sector’s interest was the
route preferred, not vice versa even though
“regulation” was allegedly in the public’s interest.
The consumer was to be exposed to the medium as
advertisement more than entertainment.
Television delivered people (audiences) to the
sponsors….
18. In early years of tv in the US, corporate sponsorship was explicitly part of program and
sponsors closely controlled what viewers saw.
This ended in the early 50s with shows getting longer and out of the reach of one
sponsor; this put shows back into the hands of the networks.
After quiz show scandals of the late 50’s (sponsors rigged shows) the sponsors no
longer programmed shows.
When networks laid down coaxial cable in the 50’s, this linked 600 stations to the three
major networks, thus ending possibilities of local programming and creating national
network programming.
19. Since the 70’s explosion of
cable systems may have
multiplied the number of network
and program choices ie,
specialty channels, but it has
given rise to media
globalization as is seen by the
reach of CNN as a world wide
casting of news.
Britain’s government launched
the BBC in the 30’s and had a
monopoly on tv until the mid 50s
with the introduction of
commercial tv.
BBC [which charges viewers a
viewing license fee annually GE]
contracts with producers.
Channel 4 (a government
owned operation too)
introduced in 1980s to allow
for independent producers
and alternative viewpoints.
20. Public broadcasting model was also
adopted in Canada, France and
Germany.
In US the PBS network tried to be non
commercial and allowing for minority
viewpoints, but corporate sponsorship is
today very important for its survival,
even though voluntary viewer support is
there too.
21. Media and the Public Sphere
Viewers often experience interpellation, ie they
see themselves as members of a national
audience.
This is a reflection of what Jurgen Habermas
called ‘the public sphere’ which in the 19th c
was a physical place where middle class men
assembled to discuss matters of public interest,
but in the late 20th c this sphere is truly public,
involving women, minorities, the poor, etc. and
involves many media.
Is this a single public or a multiplicity of publics?
TV helps create the idea of a national culture
even though it moves images around the
planet. The tv talk show has gained inordinate
power in influencing public debate.
Authors fail to mention that the level of debate
and discussion tend toward the lowest common
denominator, not to the educated mind. This is
often referred to as “the dumbing down of the
American mind”
22. New Media Cultures
Traditional distinctions among
media are less definable; media
can be less monolithic and
centralized as we see with uses of
the WWW (web).
There are now many local and
national responses to what is seen
as American cultural imperialism.
Protest, media appropriation and
mediated debate are now the
opposing polarities to the old
centralized control of powerful
entities.
23. Lets look at four media examples of what we have discussed:
1. The dissemination of news in schools via Channel One - that carries
commericials
2. How War is presented for public debate
3. An example of guerilla type TV
4. An example of radio as a public sphere as well as propaganda
This DVD will be reserved at Bailey Howe Media for reviewing.
