Chapter One MediaSociety in a Digital WorldNote Read the summ.docx

Chapter One: Media/Society in a Digital World
Note: Read the summary below and click on all supplemental
links as part of this lecture;the videos and articles provided will
assist with your understanding of this chapter.
Key Questions:
1. How can we understand the importance of media in
relationship to socialization, structure and agency?
2. How can a sociological lens help us understand the
relationship between media and social context?
3. What roles do structure and agency play in our understanding
of media culture?
Themes:
1.1 Definitions: Media vs. Medium & Interpersonal vs. Mass
Media
1.2 Technology, Interactivity & Consumption
1.3 Cultural Experience & Socialization
1.4 Sociology: Social Relations, Structure & Agency
1.5 Model of Media
1.1 Definitions: Media vs. Medium & Interpersonal vs. Mass
Media
Before we examine and critique the role(s) of media in our
social world(s), it is essential to identify and narrow our scope
by defining terms; after all, "media" is a term used very loosely
in contemporary culture. As Croteau & Hoynes (2019) explain
in your textbook , the term "media" is the PLURAL of medium
and is derived from medius,which is the Latin term for
"middle."
A helpful way to think about these concepts is
that mediumsfacilitate communication between (are in the
middle of) a sender and receiver; for example, television is a
medium that facilitates programming from
producers/creators/networks to audiences. Other mediums
include radio, print, film, and the internet, and notices that they
are both digital and non-digital (print).

The term "media" is the plural of these mediums, but is often
used incorrectly; although it doesn't sound like correct
grammar, the proper way (within the field of Media Studies) to
use "media" in a sentence is "media are" not "media is." When
individuals, including politicians, members of non-profits, etc.
say "media is" and fail to recognize that the concept of
"media" actually encompasses many different mediums with
various logics, there is an assumption that all mediums function
the same, include the same message, and follow the same
regulations and economic structure. For example, when "the
media" is blamed for violent action or political outcomes, there
is a misunderstanding that needs to be refined; are we talking
about film? Television? News media? Are we talking about the
digital edition of the news? Are we talking about the Tweets
that come from that news organization? In other words, it is
important to be specific about mediums when making claims
about impact, and when referring to "media" it is important to
remember that this is a plural term.
Now, the next step in introductory terminology is to identify
which media are "interpersonal" and which mediums are
considered "mass" - this course focuses on "mass" media. Some
of you may have taken Communications courses that focus more
on interpersonal communication, which is one-to-one, includes
a single known receiver, and is very interactive (may include a
conversation, for example). Mass communication, then, is
exactly what it sounds like: one-to-many, involves a potentially
large and unknown audience, and features limited, if any
interaction. Think about the film medium, which is typically
consumed in a theater, at home, on a device, etc. - is this
"interpersonal" or "mass" communication? Yes, it is considered
"mass" communication because you are not interacting with the
text and it is created for a potentially large and unknown
audience. Sure, you or someone you may know may talk at the
screen and argue with a plot point or character development, but
the characters are not talking back to you in one-to-one
communication; hence, film is mass communication.

Again, this course is particularly interested in mass
communication (and in particular, mainstream, mass
communication) because texts (both digital and non-digital) that
are designed for mass consumption will often lead to a variety
of social impact(s).
1.2 Technology, Interactivity & Consumption
But what about the internet? Isn't that interactive? Does that
mean that it's a form of interpersonal communication? As
Croteau & Hoynes (2019) point out, the internet offers
a blend of interpersonal and mass communication due to
technological features and affordances; in particular, the
internet blurs the boundaries between "private interpersonal
communication and public mass communication" (p. 9).
For example, the internet allows for email communication
(typically one-to-one or to various known users), which is more
interpersonal communication, but is also allows individuals to
engage in very public forms of interactive, real-time
communication via hashtags, viral videos, "likes," "retweets,"
etc. This very "active" form of participation with/in a medium is
extremely different than the consumption experiences of books,
magazines, films, television, etc. Croteau & Hoynes (2019)
stress that the internet has allowed audiences to be "users" of
media and can be active in various ways: choosing what media
content they will access, deciding when will use media rather
than depend on scheduled broadcasts,
sharing/promoting/distributing media content, responding to and
commenting, and creating their own media content (p. 9). For
this reason, the internet offers more "dynamic" opportunities for
interactivity than traditional media.
Not only has the internet offered applications and interfaces -
like Twitter and Instagram - that create dynamic spaces for user
interactivity - it has also created opportunities for fans of
television programming to engage in public conversations about
content. Before the internet, fans did not have the ability to
connect with other fans during/after consumption. Now,
the ability to comment, in real time, allows fans to engage with

community rather than rely on interpersonal communication
with those watching with them or someone sitting next to them
on the subway.
For example, think about the Super Bowl or Bachelor Nation.
The Super Bowl is an annual event that has become even more
exciting due to the use of hashtags and the sharing of memes,
commentary and reactions during the game itself. Bachelor
Nation, on the other hand, is the ecosystem of fandom that
exists in conjunction with The Bachelor and The Bachelorette,
and this "Nation" is the community of fans that enjoy engaging
offline and online in order to react to the weekly drama.
Navigate to Twitter and search for the hashtag
#bachelorinparadiseand look at the posts for a few minutes; this
is an example of fandom communication that operates both
during programming and before/after. You could also check out
#SaveAPBio to see how fans of the NBC series A.P. Bio have
engaged Twitter to launch support for the show after it was
cancelled recently:
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/05/ap-bio-
canceled-nbc-save-ap-bio-patton-oswalt-twitter (Links to an
external site.)
How has this ability to interact changed the consumption
experience of television, then? Are we now compelled to offer
our commentary of television on social media? Are we only
considered fans of a television program if we engage with its
network-sponsored hashtag? These are the types of questions
that allow us to explore the connection between media and
culture. How are media shaping and impacting our everyday
lives?
1.3 Cultural Experience & Socialization
It's no secret that media have had a profound impact on
socialization; from the moment we wake up to that last check of
our social media accounts before we go to bed, digital media
have become integrated in our everyday communication and
behavior. Many of us (depending on accessibility issues)
"search" for information daily and rely on Google (a for-profit

media company) for the answers to our questions
(click here (Links to an external site.) to read a quick opinion
piece about trends in "search"). Think about the Apple Watch;
a wearable device offers an (expensive!) alternative path to the
way we think about convenience, connection, communication,
health, and other facets of social live. Take a moment to scroll
through the website for the Series 4,
(https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-series-
4/?afid=p238%7CsJKznVXu8-
dc_mtid_20925qtb42335_pcrid_339078136212&cid=wwa-us-
kwgo-watch-slid---apple+watch-e (Links to an external
site.)). Which of these features to we need? Which of these
features may seem to impact our relationship to this device?
Check out some of the"films" associated with this
product: https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-series-
4/films/ (Links to an external site.)
More recent discussions of media technology and modern
culture have centered on the adoption of virtual
reality. Whether or not you have experienced virtual reality
recently, you've probably engaged in discussions, or read news
articles about the possible impact (both socially and
economically) that this technology might/will have on the way
we experience information. In fact, The New York
Times developed an application, as well as partnered up with
Google and their devices (Daydream &
Cardboard: http://www.nytimes.com/marketing/nytvr/ (Links to
an external site.)), that will allow their readers to experience
news via virtual reality. How might this change "news?"
Because of how fast mobile technology has become integrated
into our everyday lives, many researchers have
conducted studies on impact and behavior. Some issues that
have emerged as zero-TV households, time-shifted viewing,
and multi-tasked media usage(e.g., streaming television content
on your computer and texting with a friend at the same time).
Because younger generations, including yours, have grown up

using digital technology (to varying degrees, of course), many
journalists and academics track and analyze the consumption
habits and outcomes of teenagers. The following link takes you
to the results of a comprehensive study conducted by Pew
Research (http://www.pewresearch.org/about/ (Links to an
external site.)) on Teens, Social Media & Technology in (May,
2018):
http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-
technology-2018/ (Links to an external site.)
Here is another short article
from Wired magazine about teenage use of social media from a
different perspective:
https://www.wired.com/2016/08/how-teens-use-social-
media/ (Links to an external site.)
Take a moment to think about the ways that digital media
impact your life on a daily basis. Think about a world where
you didn't have a smart phone or computer: How would you call
a friend to tell them you're going to be late for a study date?
How would you get help if your car broke down on your way to
work? How would you figure out correct information during a
heated debate with a friend about the wage gap between men
and women?
With all this in mind, it is important to think conceptually, or
theoretically, about the relationship between media,
technological development, and society. One way to do this is
to consider socialization, defined by your book as, " ... the
process by which people learn the expectations of a particular
role" (Croteau & Hoynes, 2019, p. 177). In this way we can
think of mass media as socializing agents; but it's important to
keep in mind that we're all impacted by media/mediums in
different ways at different times in our lives. Think about it:
How have mass media shaped your values around what "beauty"
means? Or what "masculinity" looks like? You have
been socialized, by socializing agents, which includes the mass
media, to accept the norms of our culture.
And because of digitization, those norms, or what is culturally

"normal" have shifted as well. Think about relationships, dating
and apps such as Tinder (https://www.gotinder.com/ (Links to
an external site.)). Now think about online relationships on
discussion boards, chat rooms, social media websites, video
games, etc. Here is a link to a debate about if such relationships
are "real" from the "Room for Debate" feature in The New York
Times. The different views represent how we, as a culture, have
different (and strong!) opinions on the matter:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/03/05/real-
relationships-in-a-digital-world (Links to an external site.)
As mentioned before, many researchers (including those at Pew
Research) have taken a serious interest in the relationship
between media and society and because media are also seen as
socializing agents, it is a continued focus in academia as
well. Sherry Turkle(https://www.mit.edu/~sturkle/ (Links to an
external site.)) , a professor at Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT), wrote a book titled Alone Together (2011)
that received much support and criticism regarding the social
impact of digital media on our lives. Many of her points
illustrate the issue of socialization and media as a "socializing
agent," and I'd like you to watch her TED Talk:
http://www.ted.com/talks/sherry_turkle_alone_together?languag
e=en (Links to an external site.)
Also, check out this short (three-minute) film from Charlene
deGuzman that offers a similar take:
http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2013/09/05/2192
66779/our-cultural-addiction-to-phones-in-one-disconcerting-
video (Links to an external site.)
Do you support these perspectives? For many, this critical take
removes individual choice and responsibility. Both Turkle and
DeGuzman paint a negative picture of the impact of media
consumption on our everyday lives. Is there room for positive
experiences? How can we think about media consumption in a
more nuanced way? Media theorists will often point to the terms
"structure" and "agency" to describe the complex ways that
media and consumers interact; rather than think of things as

"good" or "bad," we can think about media consumption as a
practice that is influenced by structures such as the government,
capitalism, and social constructs (to name a few).
1.4 Sociology: Social Relations, Structure & Agency
For this section, I have prepared a short lecture video: Structure
& Agency.mp4播放媒体评论。播放媒体评论。
If you have trouble accessing this video, here is a link you can
use:
http://flashmedia2.du.edu/relay/Structure__Agency_-
_20150701_122700_25.htmlLinks to an external site.Links to an
external site.
Remember: Structures can be social and institutional.The family
is an example of a social structure; social patterns organize the
way we understand "family" while the government is an
example of an institutional structure that exerts measurable
power over our agency. "Self-branding" can be understood as a
form of agencywithin the constraints of the media
industry (tension between structure/agency), beauty industrial
complex, and other norms about the self; here, we are able to
curate and present a version of ourselves within the structure of
industry culture.
In fact, the concept of self-branding as it relates to digital
media and beauty has not only been deemed a space for
agency, but it is also a space that has created concern. The issue
over whether we are truly "choosing" (agency) how to "brand"
ourselves online has come into question due to the way that
applications (we can think of these as structures) encourage us
to alter our appearances based on cultural norms related to
physical beauty. New York Times reporter Amanda Hess
explores this issue in her beauty apps episode of "Internetting
with Amanda Hess"; while you screen this short video, I'd like
you to think about how it applies to the terms we've discussed
so far: socialization, medium, agency, structure:
The Ugly Business of Beauty Apps | Internetting with Amanda
Hess (Links to an external site.)
1.5 Model of Media

Your textbook offers a visual model (see p. 16) so that you can
begin to think about media in a sociological way, a way
that privileges social relations, socialization, structure, agency,
and context.
According to Croteau & Hoynes (2019), "Four
components, each represented by a separate box in the diagram,
make up the core of our model. All four elements
are simultaneously a part of the social world and surrounded by
the social world (the shaded area). The graphic organization of
these four elements is arbitrary; there is no 'top' or 'bottom' to
the process; rather, it is a circular process" (p. 16). This model
emphasizes relationships; for example, "users" influence
"technology" and "technology" influences "users," as I've
pointed out earlier in this (written) lecture.
It is important to keep in mind that just because the elements
aren't next to each other, that doesn't mean that a relationship
isn't present. In other words, Users have a relationship to the
Industry and Technology can have an impact on/relationship to
Content. The point is that we have to think about all of these
elements (Users, Content, Technology and Industry) as they
relate to one another to truly understand the complexities of
media culture. For example, Croteau & Hoynes (2019) point out
that within the Black Lives Matter
movement, new technology (Twitter, hashtags) allows members
of this movement to gather and share content to other members
of the movement, the public and news organizations alike (see
pages 20-21).
(Trigger Warning: shooting, racial violence)
Now, let's apply the model to the shooting on June 17, 2015, in
South Carolina, committed by white supremacist Dylan
Roof (who is now in federal death row), and how this social
event was mediated.
(Review of case and
sentencing: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/dylann-
roof-trial-charleston.html (Links to an external site.))

Remember, we need to start thinking about how
readers/audiences, technology, the media industry, and the
media message/product all impact each other. Therefore, our
questions change and we no longer think about these issues in
isolation. From a sociological standpoint, we need to think
about and question relationships, structure and agency. Here are
some questions we might ask about this event, using this model:
What messages did the media industry create about Roof's act?
How did these meanings affect how readers/audiences reacted?
How did readers/audiences use digital media to grieve,
communicate and spread information? How did technology
(such as social media) influence the media industry and
reporting?
One of the meanings that had a direct impact on this social
event was the term "terrorist" and why or why not this term was
used to describe Roof and his act. Was it a "terrorist" act? Why
or why not should this term be used? Remember, the industry
creates meanings about this event and those meanings directly
impact how audience members react, or understand, the events.
Based on information you've received from media outlets,
whether it be local news, Twitter, Facebook, NPR, or Fox News,
do you think that Dylan Roof is a "terrorist?" Here is a short
article from The Intercept exploring why he was not considered
a "terrorist":
https://theintercept.com/2015/07/22/department-justice-didnt-
charge-dylan-roof-domestic-terrorism/ (Links to an external
site.)
You can apply this model of critical thinking and relationships
to breaking news and information about violent acts more
generally, beyond the debate about "terrorism." Think critically
about mainstream media involvement in breaking news, how
survivors communicate, how the public is able to help, how
stories from survivors help the nation/world grieve, etc. How
does amateur video (technology) help journalists cover the
events of that evening?
Remember: By asking different - critical - questions that focus

on structural and social "relationships," we can have a better
understanding of the intersection between media and culture.
Chapter Two Lecture: The Evolution of Media Technology
Note: Please click on all supplemental links as part of this
lecture; the videos and articles provided will assist with your
understanding of this chapter.
Key Questions:
1. What are the key characteristics of media/mediums and how
did they impact history and culture?
2. How does the presence of media affect the phenomenon that
we wish to stake a claim in?
3. What are the main theoretical approaches to the study of
media and how might this awareness affect our day-to-day?
Themes:
2.1 Deconstructing the term "technology"
2.2 Theoretical approaches to technology and society
2.3 The historical development of media technology and
cultural/institutional impact(s)
2.4 Wu: Cycle of technological innovation
2.5. Noble: Algorithms of Oppression
2.1 Deconstructing the term "technology"
Close your eyes (after reading this quick prompt) and think of
the word "technology" - what comes to mind? Do you see a
circuit board? A cyborg? A robot jumping onto a box? This
chapter unpacks the relationship between media culture and
technology; and as you've noticed, the authors work to broaden
your scope to think beyond just scientific innovation.
Remember that model of media from the last chapter (p. 10
text)? Technology is connected to our social world(s) and
impacts sites such as Users and Industry; therefore, we have to
think about how technology shapes, and is shaped
by issues such as media ownership, cultural meanings,
historical/cultural context and consumer behavior.
According to Croteau & Hoynes (2019):
1. Technology includes scientific innovations used to shape,
impact and/or improve human life;

2. Technology makes every medium unique;
3. Technology is influenced by a variety of social
forces (adoption, regulation, accessibility);
4. Technology accumulates, does not always eradicate older
developments.
With this in mind, we can start to think more critically about
therole(s) of technology in contemporary culture, not just
simply as an "advancement" for humankind. Think about home
assistants or "smart speakers" such as Google Home or
Amazon's Alexa (examples of the term autonomous
technology, as discussed in your textbook). Both are
technological developments that grew out of supposed societal
needs (from a consumer standpoint) yet have also made impacts
on societal behavior (again, this has to do with consumption).
They are extensions of other technological assistants such as
Apple's Siri, yet are unique in their physical presence.
How necessary are these assistants? Do you have one in your
dorm/apartment/home? Think about the cultural implications of
these assistants: How does privilege and affordability factor in?
How does this increase our dependence on technology? How
might hacking and privacy factor in to our evaluation of these
assistants? We have to start thinking beyond just the "science"
of technological innovation to include more society/cultural
questions (sociology).
For this section, we have prepared a video lecture:
"Perspectives on Technological Development:
2.2 Theoretical approaches to technology and society
When we start to include more of a sociological orientation
toward our understanding of media and technology, the issue
of "impact" is not far behind; in other words, the question
of "how does technology impact us" is a central question of
Sociology, Media Studies, and Communication Studies. Your
textbook identifies two main theoretical approaches that have
developed as a result of this question: (1) Technological
Determinism; (2) Social Constructionism.
1. Technological Determinism:

Technology causes change in ways that people don’t intend or
are aware of; is the primary causal element of social change;
focus on the role of technology.
Scholars who are technological determinists include: Marshall
McLuhan and Neil Postman, who have very different
perspectives (see text, pp. 32-34). McLuhan was
an optimist about media technology and the way a new medium
disrupts tradition and reshapes social life, extending our senses
and connecting us to create a "global village." He posited that
"the medium is the message," meaning that the technology itself
(such as TV) is what has an impact, regardless of the content. In
contrast, in his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil
Postman was very critical of technology and particularly
television, arguing that the rise of this medium was contributing
to the erosion of democracy with a decline in the seriousness of
public life and participation.
2. Social Constructionism:
Emphasis on the role of active human agents in the
determination of how technology is used; social forces (cultural
norms, economic pressures, legal regulations) fundamentally
shift the ways technologies are designed and developed; social
reality is socially constructed - humans “normalize” technology
consumption.
Note: Remember, context is KEY to social constructionism.
What are different forms of context that could impact the way
society uses and adopts technology? Historical, right? A large
issue relates to nation; and in particular, cultural norms,
regulation, government structure. So because "social
construction" is a theory that asserts that humans are active in
the determination of how technology is used, we can't leave out
differences in the environments in which those humans are
making those decisions.
Raymond Williams, a longtime media scholar contended that the
use and impact of media technology is shaped by social factors
and processes that transform an innovation into a useful
technology. For example, Williams asserted that preexisting

cultural values and practices shape the way that technologies
are adapted and used. He compared the individualistic values of
the United States and how citizens/government created a more
commercial media industry and then the collectivist values of
the UK society and how citizens/government created a more
state-controlled media industry. Williams' example showed
that the "technology" did not impact the US and the UK in the
same way (technological determinism); rather, it was adopted in
particular ways due to social forces and human decision-
making.
Here, you can see that both of these theoretical frameworks
have very different approaches to the issue of human
agency(independent human action); determinism implies that a
force outside humanity "determines" outcomes
while constructionismimplies that humanity plays a role in the
development and need for technological consumption. This can
create tension between the two theoretical perspectives. Both
frameworks have developed based on historical and cultural
outcomes as well as organized research and observation; in
other words, both theories reflect the conclusions of theorists
that are trying to make sense of humanity's relationship to
technological innovation. As you can see, not all theorists agree
on this. Within the field of Media Studies, most theorists fall in
the middle of these frameworks/theories; they agree that media
technology influences us to a degree, and that we influence
media technology to a degree as well.
Scholars are divided on which theory they support, although
most fall somewhere in between.
One concept that is explored within the area of technological
determinism is materiality, a term that refers to the tangible and
physical characteristics of a medium/technology that enables
capabilities and limitations. Materiality is a helpful way to
identify the characteristics of innovation that have led to
societal change, including consumer behavior, trends, and
cultural development.
Let's think about the materiality of the media technology that

Beyoncé has used to distribute her creative work(s), and how
the "tangible and physical characteristics" of each technology
have been a response to both fandom and innovation. Discussing
and evaluating "materiality" offers a way for us to consider
physical characteristics and their relationship to impact, social
change, etc.
Questions of materiality:
What are the capabilities and limitations of listening to
Beyoncé's songs on the radio?
What are the capabilities and limitations
of streamingBeyoncé's Homecoming on Netflix?
Trailer for Homecoming:Homecoming: A Film By Beyoncé |
Official Trailer | Netflix (Links to an external site.)
How does themateriality, then, of each technology (radio vs.
online video streaming) create different experiences for the
user? What is the role of user agencyin both of these
experiences? And how is Netflix responding to the limitations
of other mediums when it comes to user experience; in other
words, how might audio + visual + interactive (user is able to
pause, watch on their own time, etc.) be a reaction to the needs
of contemporary culture?
2.3 The historical development of media technology and
cultural/institutional impact(s)
On pages 36-59 of your textbook, the authors offer a brief
historical overview titled "From Print to the Internet" that not
only highlights technological innovation, but also describes the
ways that each development in media technology contributed to
social change.This is a sociological approach; by evaluating the
"tension between media technology and the people who create,
regulate, and use it" (p. 36), we are able to understand and
articulate the ways that media impact culture.
Building on the issue of sound recording (from our Beyoncé
example earlier in the lecture), Croteau & Hoynes (2019) point
out how the ability to record music, which was previously only
consumed in live performance, impacted artists (musicians were

now able to record their work and distribute it) as well
as users(recorded music was played at social gatherings instead
of live music, which actually became controversial because
many saw this change as a threat to live performance), and
impacted/created an industry that led to record labels and
eventually, streaming services (see p. 43). Here, you can see
how media technology impacts and is impacted by society, but
that these impacts are not in isolation, and they include other
elements such as context, regulation, and the interests of
capitalism.
In the section on the internet, two key terms are introduced that
are fundamental to understanding the contributions of this
technology: digitization and convergence.
Digitization: "The shift from analog to digital media" (p. 58).
Convergence: "The blurring of boundaries among types of
media" (p. 58).
As Croteau & Hoynes (2019) state: "Digitization sets the stage
for convergence ..." and they use the medium of print, and
newspapers in particular, as an example. As the newspaper
industry started taking advantage of digitization and the
availability of digital websites to deliver content, many outlets
made the shift from being purely analog to including digital
distribution (the problem they had was how to monetize it!).
This process of digitization (shift from just print stories to
including digital stories on their websites) led to
the convergence of print stories, embedded video, hyperlinks,
interactive discussion boards (comment sections), and digital
photography on their websites.
Questions to consider: How has digitization shifted the media
landscape? What opportunities has digitization created? What
pressures has digitization
created? Has digitization determined the industry or has
is enabled opportunity by human agents? Or both?
2.4 Wu: Cycle of technological innovation
Another theory that is worth noting from this chapter is Tim
Wu's (2011) Cycle of Technological iInnovation, in which he -

from a social constructionist perspective - identifies a "cycle"
of impact on technology from markets and standardization. This
impact is important because mediums have been industrialized
and are marketed, and therefore considering this "cycle" offers
us a lens into thinking about how media technology changes
based on consumer and market needs:
1. Introduction of innovation begins period of idealistic
experimentation;
2. When technology threatens to displace/render obsolete older
markets/revenues, companies seek to control or “tame” it
through standardization;
3. Novelty wears off, users are familiar with flaws and
limitations, dissatisfaction grows.
Wu argues that media companies, in various mediums, stifle
true innovation and creativity because they work
to standardize innovation rather than promote competition; in
other words, companies would rather pour capital into the mass
marketing/production of a successful technological advance
rather than pour capital into experimentation. Wu says that this
type of intervention on technological development works
to slow down innovation and leads to dissatisfaction once users
are bored with mass production.
Let's think about virtual reality for a moment, as a technological
advance. There was a period of idealistic experimentation,
where Google, Samsung, Microsoft and Oculus emerged in the
marketplace and offered consumers a way to experience this
emergent technology (which was now becoming mainstream).
We can think about Facebook's purchase of Oculus as a way to
"tame" this emergent technology and make sure that it supports
existing technology (social media, FB) rather than offer
competition. Do you feel that the novelty has worn off of virtual
reality? Have you tried virtual reality? If so (and many of you
might as a supplement to gaming), has dissatisfaction grown?
Using Wu's theory, we might be able to argue that because
virtual reality has been integrated into the marketplace, and
developed by mainstream, mass, media companies, the interest

is more in "standardization" and marketability rather than
innovation, and therefore dissatisfaction(not complete) has
grown among (some) consumers.
At the same time, virtual reality is being used in alternative
spaces,such as film festivals, as consumers continue to be
interested in more interactive experiences. So, while the
mainstream market can often stifle new media technology in an
effort to standardize it, non-mainstream efforts continue to use
media technology in creative, disruptive and accessible
ways. Check out this articlefrom Wired (2019) on the use of
virtual (and augmented) reality in film festivals:
"Film Festivals Move to Make Virtual Reality a Marquee
Event (链接到外部网站。)"
Here is an article with links to the several immersive VR/AR
works from this year's Tribeca Film Festival: "This year’s
Tribeca Film Festival uses AR and VR to explore music-making
and empathy. (链接到外部网站。)"
2.5. Noble: Algorithms of Oppression
Now that you've familiarized yourself with the relationship(s)
between innovations in media technology, context, industry, and
social relations, there are additional considerations to raise,
especially as we, as a culture, continue to rely on technology for
everything from counting our daily "steps" to organizing
playlists to share with friends to storing our financial
information.
Some of you may already be aware of the growing concern over
technology and gender and racial profiling; in particular, this
comes up in search engine results, but also in facial
recognition as well as courtroom sentencing software.
"A Popular Algorithm Is No Better at Predicting Crimes Than
Random People (链接到外部网站。)"(Links to an external site.)
Dr. Safiya Noble (USC, Annenberg) wrote a very
successful/widely cited book titled Algorithms of
Oppression (2018) that details some of these issues, and I'd like
you to watch a short video of her discussing them. How does
her work contribute to existing theories such as technological

determinism and social constructionism?
Algorithms of Oppression: Safiya Umoja Noble (Links to an
external site.)Chapter Three Lecture: The Economics of the
Media Industry
Key Questions:
1. What is a production perspective and why is it important to
understand the media from this reference point?
2. What is the political impact of concentrated corporate
ownership of news and other forms of media?
3. What is the relationship between media ownership and and
diversity in media content?
4. Does advertising negatively influence media contents?
Themes:
3.1 Production perspective
3.2 Concentration of Ownership & Conglomeration
3.3 Vertical & Horizontal Integration
3.4 Advertising & Content
3.1 Production Perspective
Why is it important to understand the media industry from
a production perspective? First of all, and most importantly, the
media industry is an industry and therefore profits play an
essential role in the production and distribution processes.
When profits play an essential role, is becomes important to
think about economic constraints as well as the social and
economic processes that play a role in the production of media
texts. Think about it this way: Media products are not "free-
floating texts," rather, they exist in a context of economic
interests, constraints, and processes. Our job now is to become
familiar with this context and begin to think about the media
industry as inextricably linked to an economic
structure. Remember, from a sociological perspective, we
cannot understand the media industry without understanding the
forces and relationships that affect that industry.

This quote, from Gillian Doyle (Glasgow University), offers a
helpful - and critical - way to think about this context: "The
general aim is to make intellectual property, package it and
maximize revenues by selling it as many times as is feasible to
the widest audience at the highest possible price."
Here, Doyle is describing the "commercial mandate" of media
culture, which highlights profit as the primary motivation, or
goal, of a media company. A "non-commercial mandate" is
when a media company operates for outcomes other than profit,
including educational, community-based, etc. Beyondmedia
Education, a non-profit out of Chicago, is an example of a
media company with a non-commercial mandate:
http://www.beyondmedia.org/ (Links to an external
site.) (notice the .org domain)
When we think about the media industry from a production
perspective (which includes analyzing business models), we can
begin to understand why news media companies, for example,
are taking the following steps to cut costs:
1. Cut the number of journalists; multi-use of journalists
2. Decrease investigative reporting
3. Use frequent wire service (ex. Associated Press) reports
4. Use video public relations segments
5. Rely on a small number of elites for news sources
6. Focus the news on preplanned official events and on certain
institutions
BUT REMEMBER!Producing media, especially on a large scale,
depends on funding ($$), so seeking profit - or having a
commercial mandate - does not necessarily mean that the
production itself is problematic, or "selling out." Media
producers contend with development costs, production costs,
marketing and distribution costs, as well as overhead costs
(lawyers, publicists, etc.); in other words, when we think about
profit generation, we have to think beyond "good" or "bad" and
start to critically analyze the costs of being part of a
conglomerate, or the costs of a newspaper being owned by a
hedge fund, which is the case with The Denver Post.

3.2 Concentration of Ownership & Conglomeration
After the passage of the the Telecommunications Act of
1996(more on this in the next chapter), the media industry
within the United States has become more concentrated, and
now only a handful of firms, or conglomerates, dominate the
media industry. A conglomerate, such as The Walt Disney
Company or Time Warner, Inc.,owns several different media
companies across mediums,meaning that they own companies in
movies, television, film, publishing, etc. Examples of
conglomerates include: Comcast, The Walt Disney Company,
21st Century Fox, and Time Warner, Inc. We can also consider
Alphabet/Google as a digital conglomerate as well. (Links to
an external site.)
(Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.)This is
from Vox's "Recode" and is a timely, comprehensive ownership
map because it includes content, distribution and streaming
video:
One consequence of a concentrated media environment is the
promotion ofpolitical and/or ideological agenda(s). Here, media
outlets may promote an owners' specific political alignment; for
example, your chapter mentions Berlusconi and Bloomberg.
This undermines citizen monitoring, alternative media, and can
threaten democracy. On the one hand, shouldn't the owner of a
company be able to make decisions about their product? On the
other, if we rely on news media outlets to inform us about
political representatives and their platforms in order to vote,
how does the promotion of an owner's political agenda threaten
democracy?
The film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on
Journalism focuses on Fox News and how Rupert Murdoch's
(who was the CEO of 21st Century Fox at the time of the
documentary but is now co-executive chairman of Fox
Corporation, the company that remains after 21 Century Fox
sold the majority of its assets to Disney in 2018 ) politically
conservative agenda has impacted the way this company frames

the news. Here are a few clips from this film that help explain
the intersection of concentration of ownership, politics and
power.The filmmakers, who belong to the non-profit media
watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (Links to
an external site.), interviewed several journalists who had
worked for Fox News in order to understand how the company
creates their political agenda (note: this is an older film, but the
techniques they use are still used and relevant to this
discussion):
Peter Hart on media consolidation (Links to an external site.)
Frank O'Donnell on Fox News' political agenda (Links to an
external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLthBfWnHlA&index=18&l
ist=PL54FC814AE797FA21Another wide (Links to an external
site.)
Related: Fox News Network has updated its tagline to "Fair &
Balanced" to "Most Watched. Most Trusted" as of June
2017: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/fox-news-
is-dropping-its-fair-and-balanced-slogan.html (Links to an
external site.)
Also Related: As you probably noticed, this documentary has a
particular, critical take on Fox News, so it is important to
reflect on how this genre (documentary) often reproduces
particular viewpoints, but also works to uncover information not
widely shared in mainstream media via interviews, case studies,
etc.
Another widely discussed consequence of concentrated media
ownership is thelack of diversity, whether it be type of content,
those who work in the industry, or viewpoints/voices. Your
book reminds us that this varies by medium; in other words, due
to technology (streaming services, lower cost to produce music,
etc.) there seems to be more content diversity in the music
industry, while concentration has led to less political
diversity in news media. Review studies by: Entman (1989),
Peterson & Berger (1975), Lopes (1992) & Dowd (2004) in your
textbook for more detailed information. There are many

organizations that fight for increased media diversity, including
Free Press.
Take a look at their
campaign: https://www.freepress.net/issues/media-
control/diversity-media-ownership (Links to an external site.)
3.3 Vertical & Horizontal Integration
Two business strategies that media conglomerates benefit from
are vertical and horizontal integration. When companies are
able to integrate in these ways, they can:
1. Self-promote their products across mediums
2. Minimize costs
3. Maximize profits
STRATEGY: VERTICAL INTEGRATION
Production & Distribution of a single media product
Example: Film Company
Talent agencies, production studios, manufacturing plants,
venues (theater chains, Internet-streaming services, etc.)
STRATEGY: HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION
Company acquires ownership across different types of media
rather than within one medium/industry
Example: Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Vertical integration: This film was produced by Lucasfilm Ltd.,
which is a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, and was
distributed by Walt Disney Studios, which is another subsidiary
of The Walt Disney Company. Thy were able to produce and
distribute a single product (a film) using all of their own
holdings, or subsidiaries, and did not have to outsource or hire
any media companies outside of the conglomerate.
Horizontal integration: Due to its diverse, cross-medium
holdings, Disney is able to promote the film using its television
networks, radio stations, magazines, etc. For example, Star
Wars was subtly promoted on ESPN's Insta page (ESPN is a
subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company):
Here, Disney is able to produce their own media products within
the conglomerate and self/cross-promote using their own

holdings!This is synergy: They dynamic where components of a
company work together to produce benefits that would be
impossible for a single, separately owned unit of a company.
Think about it, how can a small, independent film studio
compete against the production and distribution power of
Disney? This is why indie studios have to work hard to secure
distribution from a major media company so that they can
maximize exposure despite their lack of synergy.
Look at following poster for "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D" and let's
think about synergy and horizontal integration. What media
companies do you see on this poster? Which media
conglomerate owns both? Why is it to their advantage
to combine their resources in this way?
Now, what is potentially "lost" when cross-promotion and
commercial interests drive media production and certain
companies benefit from this synergy?
Consequence: LIMITATION of alternative discourses, identities
and narrative strategies in media production.
Which ideas are given more visibility?
How does this visibility create normalization (we will discuss
this term later in the course)?
3.4 Advertising & Content
As the authors (2019) of your book point out, "The media
industry is, in large part, an advertising-funded business ... In
2016, online advertising overtook television as the world's
largest advertising medium" (p. 81). For those of you who
frequent social media applications, you are no stranger
to digital advertising, including sponsored advertising and
native advertising. Have you ever checked out the policy on
sponsored advertising on Instagram?Here is a link to their FAQ
page; click on the down-arrows under "Learn More about Ads"
to learn more about the
process: https://help.instagram.com/1415228085373580 (Links
to an external site.)
Next, screen this clip from Last Week Tonight with John

Oliver on native advertising:
Native Advertising: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
(HBO) (Links to an external site.)
After viewing this clip, explore Buzzfeed and see if you can
locate sponsored advertising:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ (Links to an external site.)
Finally, it is important to note that not only has the internet
created platforms and opportunities for conglomerates to
increase their power, and for companies to advertise directly to
us based on our searches and clicks, it has also created
tremendous opportunities for up-and-coming producers.
For example, you may be familiar withIssa Rae's show on
HBO, Insecure (https://www.hbo.com/insecure (Links to an
external site.)), which was based on her YouTube
series/channel, The Misadventures of Awkward Black Girl
(https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL854514FC0EBDCD8
E) (Links to an external site.). Rae used this platform to
produce her show, and develop her voice, and was eventually
picked up by a major network. According to Rae: "If it weren’t
for YouTube, I would be extremely pessimistic, but I’m not
anymore. YouTube has revolutionized content creation. If it
weren’t for YouTube, I would still be at studios trying to
convince executives that Awkward Black Girls really do exist
… Online content and new media are changing our
communities and changing the demand for an accessibility of
that content” (2015, p. 125). I've included an excerpt from her
book (which includes this quote) in the Supplemental section of
this module.
And not only do up-and-coming and aspirational independent
producers utilize YouTube as a distribution platform, we've also
seen the rise of problematic content that has been reported
to radicalize users. If you're interested in reading more about
this, check out this story from The New York Times that
profiles a young man who experienced the exposure of extremist
content (and in particular, alt-right content) on YouTube and
actively began seeking out content based on what the platform's

algorithm suggested for him:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/08/technology/yo
utube-radical.htmlChapter Four Lecture: Political Influence on
Media
understanding of this chapter
Key questions:
1. What are the major government regulations on media?
2. Do regulations apply the same to all media?
3. What are the arguments for and against regulating in the
"public interest"? How does this compare with the arguments
put forward by those who support a "free market" approach to
mass media policy?
4. What are political forces other than government that affect
media?
Themes:
4.1 Relationship between Government & Media
4.2 Regulating Ownership
4.3 Regulating Content
4.4 Regulating for Access & Distribution
4.1 Relationship between Government & Media
In addition to the limitations that a commercial (for-profit)
media system creates, governments are understood as structures
that constrain media production. One global issue at the
intersection of governance and media culture is free
speech; many countries operate with state-controlled
media industries that exist as the voice of the political
establishment while others, like the United States, support
a commercial media industry with laws in place that protect free
speech. Reporters Without Borders, a French non-profit that
consults the United Nations, circulates the "World Press
Freedom Index" each year as a way to rank which countries are
the safest for journalists. Based on a questionnaire that was sent
to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights defenders,
Reporters Without Borders worked to measure freedom for

journalists in 180 countries in their World Press Freedom Index
(for more information on their methodology, click here (Links
to an external site.)). Surprisingly, despite our laws protecting
free speech, the United States was ranked #45th. Why? Here is a
link to the rational given and information on the
US: https://rsf.org/en/united-states (Links to an external
site.) (here is the link to the entire
Index: https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table (Links to an external
site.).
As you can see from the Index summary (2020), despite the
First Amendment, journalists have been arrested and treated
unfairly within the context of the Trump Administration -
including being denied entry to White House briefings -and
messages of distrust (media as "enemy of the people") has
impacted their professional lives, which suggests that even
democracies experience a complex relationship between the
government and media industry. So while the commercial
system places economic restraints on the media industry, the
government acts a structure that places additional legal and
political restraints. It is important that we understand how these
structures both limit and facilitate media production, and how
media producers navigate this complex landscape.
Freedom & the "Public Interest"
According to the US Constitution:
First Amendment: Government should have a "hands-off"
approach to the media environment.
Section 8, Article 1: Congress can intervene on account of the
"public interest."
So what exactly is the "public interest?" It is monitored and
served by Federal Communication Commission
policy (independent US government agency), who attempts to
balance the interest of various groups, highlighting that there
is no single public interest. According to your textbook, "The
FCC supports the viewpoint that the government cannot write
media regulation in stone for all eternity because technological
and economic changes are constantly occurring. Finally, they

believed that regulation that promotes diversity in programming
and services is in the public interest (2019, p. 112). As your
textbook points out, approaches to the "public interest" have
changed over time, and the 1980s was a turning point in this
history; it was at this time that the FCC pivoted to the notion
that media were in less need of protection and should be
classified more as commodities in a marketplace.
Remember, regulation is inherently political (in all policy areas)
and therefore definitions can change based on leadership and
power.
For a list of current FCC leadership, check out this
link: https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership (Links to an external
site.)
Therefore, the government/FCC has been charged
with balancing the protection of free speech
by limiting government interventionwhile at the
same using intervening on behalf of the "public interest" (which
is often cited as regulating for balance and diversity) as they
see fit. And on top of all this, our country operates in a
capitalistic system, which promotes a "free
marketplace";therefore, media producers and consumers are
often against media regulation. A simplistic way to think about
these competing interests in the regulation debate is:
Regulate or Deregulate? As Croteau & Hoyes (2019) argue, "...
in various ways, the relationship between government and
media in U.S. society involves balancing the protections of free
expressionby limiting government intervention with
theprotection of the public interest by using government
intervention" (p. 110). And what about the role of
the marketplace? Should we just let purchasing power determine
the fate of media products and companies, not regulation
(deregulation approach)? As Croteau & Hoynes point out,
"Supporters of deregulation generally assert that the 'free
market' system is adequate for accommodating the needs of both
media producers and media consumers" (p. 110). But what about
the "public interest" and ensuring diverse opinions? How might

leaving this in the hands of the marketplace complicate things?
Would all opinions be heard? How might recent issues with
Facebook, YouTube and Twitter highlight the need for
regulation; particularly when it comes to extreme political
viewpoints, hacking and hate speech. In 2019, YouTube
announced that it was going to remove videos related to
extremism and hate speech; this is an example of self-regulation
working to preemptively act before the possibility of
FCC/federal regulation:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/05/business/youtube-remove-
extremist-
videos.html?emc=edit_na_20190605&ref=cta&nl=breaking-
news (Links to an external site.)
Also, the historical case study on microbroadcasting (in your
textbook) and the eventual passing of the Local Community
Radio Act is a wonderful example of the nuance of media
regulation (see p. 119).
4.2 Regulating Ownership
There have been many changes in the media environment since
the Constitution was written, including media technology and
ownership patterns. Several updates to legislating ownership
have taken plan in the form of Telecommunications Acts, and
the trend now is deregulation, which favors free market
capitalism (fosters competition in a less regulated marketplace),
which created a context for an increased concentration of media
ownership. The environment for media policy deregulation was
solidified with the passage of the 1996 Telecommunications
Act, which was designed to meet the new digital media
marketplace and promotedsynergy(vertical and horizontal
integration through conglomeration) as the way of the future.
For more detailed information on this Act, click here (Links to
an external site.). Also, page 123 of your book offers an
overview of how the 1996 Act is different than the 1934
Telecommunications Act.
Less than two years after the passage of this Act, there was a
12% decline in the number of radio stations due to an increase

in ownership (larger radio companies purchased smaller
companies nationwide). Thisconsolidation directly effects
access to local radio stations; if there is an increase in national
radio there is less of an opportunity for local music, weather,
and news to be heard. Despite this trend in deregulation, and an
increase in mergers and cross-ownership,the government will
continue to prevent monopolies in accordance with the public
interest.
4.3 Regulating Content
Take a moment to think about the creation of content: Are you
an artist? Have you ever written a song, performed it, or
produced a film? Think about the creativity that was involved in
that project and how much time you spent on its production.
Now think about whether or not you pay for creative work: Do
you illegally download music? Do you use Spotify; if so, do you
know how much artists get paid per play? What does it mean
when you illegally download music, television or movies?
Questions such as these are central to debates regarding the
regulation of media content. You are most likely familiar with
terms such as "copyright infringement" or "trademark"; these
are all connected to the protection of artistic works by the
government.
Your textbook mentions a film, Copyright Criminals, which is a
very interesting documentary that explains the relationship
between the hip-hop industry, sampling and regulation. Please
click on the following link and watch the three short videos as a
way to understand this complex and controversial issue:
https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/d0bc17ae-d82c-
4220-bc02-e832056d2739/hip-hop-sampling-copyright-
criminals/ (链接到外部网站。)
If you're having trouble accessing the videos through the PBS
site, here are some links through the PBS YouTube page:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2SmmLJSbEU (链接到外部网
站。)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdMVxSP_4x8 (链接到外部网
站。)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kldKdSmgaYU (链接到外部网
站。)
(Links to an external site.)(Links to an external site.A recent-
ish case of copyright infringement was brought up against
Robin Thicke, TI, and Pharrell Williams for their track "Blurred
Lines." Marvin Gaye's children brought the case to court
because they believed Thicke, TI and Williams committed
infringement by using their father's song "Got to Give it Up" for
"Blurred Lines."What do you think? Listen to both tracks
Got to Give It Up: GOT TO GIVE IT UP - MARVIN
GAYE (Links to an external site.)
Blurred Lines: Robin Thicke - Blurred Lines (Clean) ft. T.I.,
Pharrell (Links to an external site.)
In 2015, the jury awarded the Gaye family $7.4 million and they
sought for an injunction to temporarily prohibit sales of the
track. Click here (Links to an external site.) to read a New York
Times interview with Robin Thicke published after the verdict.
FAKE NEWS
Fake news has become a major issue in politics in the US but
also around the world, and in some cases is being used as a
political weapon. Watch this video lecture for an exploration of
the issues.
Regulating for Diversity & Morality
As we've seen, the issue of content "diversity" in media
coverage is cause for debate; the overall consensus is
that concentrated media ownership threatens diversity of
information by putting the media industry in the power of a few,
wealthy companies. However, there was an attempt made by the
government to promote diversity by protecting the industry
against any single viewpoint from dominating media coverage.
This attempt was called The Fairness Doctrine, and
unfortunately, this policy was revoked in 1987 due to the fact
that broadcast scarcity seemed to no longer be an issue.
According to Croteau & Hoynes (2019), "The goal in the
application of the doctrine was to ensure diversity of
views within the program schedule of a station. The Fairness

Doctrine, for example, did not interfere with conservative radio
talk show hosts but rather required the station to provide other
programming that included differing points of view. Thus, the
Fairness Doctrine never suppressed views, but it
sometimes required additional speech for balance" (p. 94).
Think about "balance" for a minute and connect to
the concentrated media environment. Media conglomerates are
owned by CEOs with particular points of view and without a
policy like The Fairness Doctrine, are allowed to project such
views with little protest, right? Think back to Fox
News; many criticize this news media company because
they favor Republican and socially conservative guests while
only minimally offering the Democratic and socially liberal
point-of-view. Here is an example of a study conducted by the
non-profit organization Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting on
the guests on Brit Hume's talk show: http://fair.org/extra-
online-articles/foxs-slanted-sources/ (Links to an external
site.). So where do we see diversity in media content?
Is identity representation the first thing that comes to mind?
Indeed, being able to watch programming with increased racial
and LGBTQ identities, among others, is important, but what
about political diversity? This is an important issue to think
about, and with the failure of The Fairness Doctrine, we have
a lack of protective policy.Think about how any lack of
regulation in this area has impacted the amount of coverage
devoted to presidential candidates in 2016. Due to the
popularity of President Donald Trump's controversial
rhetoric, ratings skyrocketed whenever he was featured on
television, which led to an increased amount of ratings and
advertiser support. According to the New York Times, he
received$2 billion worth of "free" media during the election
season: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-
donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-
media.html?_r=0 (Links to an external site.) When ratings,
advertiser dollars, and profit become the driving force behind
political coverage, whose voices are left out? How might we see

this already happening with 2020 candidates? Which voices are
being covered and which are being left out?
On the other hand, we certainly experience the regulation of
morality in the United States; more specifically, violence and
sexuality. Media industries experience either direct
regulationfrom the government/FCC (example: broadcast
networks have to abide by profanity and indecency regulation)
or they self-regulate,as is the case with the Motion Picture
Association of America.
Your textbook mentions the self-regulation of the video game
industry and television industry, but what about the regulation
of controversial digital content that emerges so quickly that
policymakers and the government are stumped over what to do
about it? The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of
1998 was created in order to help regulate copyright
infringement online, but there have been other issues related to
digital content in the realm of morality; for example, online
harassment and revenge pornography. Often, regulation cannot
keep up with emergent digital practices due to the steps it takes
to sign a bill into a law, which is why music piracy was an
unregulated issue for en extended period of time.
Another interesting case in media regulation is thepornography
industry, which has no formal regulatory body; rather, this
industry is able to generate content that meets the demands of
the marketplace. However, there are laws that regulate child
pornography as well as age restrictions and HIV/AIDS/STD
testing for performers. Additionally, there is a limit to content;
a lawsuit can be filed against a production company for
producing what may be deemed "obscene" content. It is
important to keep in mind that not all pornographic content is
legally "obscene" unless it is deemed so in the court system -
you may personally find it to be obscene, but "obscenity" is a
legal term that, once applied to a work, has direct repercussions,
which includes that the work be officially removed from the

marketplace.
4.4 Regulating Access & Distribution
The issue of net neutrality manifested as a debate over access
and distribution, and highlights the impact of deregulated
political context. As Croteau & Hoynes point out net neutrality
is, "The idea that ISPs (Internet Service Providers) should
simply offer access to the internet and be 'neutral' in their
handling of internet traffic ..." (p. 136). Although the 2010
Open Internet Order (issued by the FCC, see p. 137), failed to
comprehensively support net neutrality, in 2015, the FCC ruled
in favor of classifying the Internet as a "common carrier"
(here (Links to an external site.) is a link to an article with more
information on this ruling). This effectively preserved net
neutrality and worked to treat it as a public service like mail or
the landlines, which allowed us all to breath a sigh of relief;
ISPs (Internet Service Providers) were prohibited from creating
"fast lanes," which would allow their content to stream faster
than content from their competitors. For example, Comcast
would stream content that they created (NBC, Bravo,
etc.) faster than content from Netflix, Hulu or Amazon.
Therefore, if Comcast was our ISP (Comcast billed us for
Internet service, cable, etc.) in our homes, we'd be able to
watch The Real Housewives without a problem, but if we
wanted to stream Empire on Hulu, we may have to sit through
buffering and lagging. Here is a short video (Links to an
external site.) from The New York Times on the that decision
regarding net neutrality.
Also: Here is a link to WIRED magazine's guide to net
neutrality: https://www.wired.com/story/guide-net-
neutrality/ (Links to an external site.)
However, when current Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Ajit Pai took office, he was immediately interested in
reversing the Title II classification of the Internet as a "common
carrier" in favor of turning over governance of the Internet to
the Federal Trade Commission (America's consumer protection
agency that also governs the advertising industry). Many ISPs

feel that they should not experience government regulation, yet
the public benefits from a regulation if it does, indeed, preserve
net neutrality. Remember, the regulation of media is a political
issue, so it would make sense that a pro-business administration
would favor less regulation, just like a pro-government service
administration would favor more regulation.
In May, 2018, Senate Democrats voted to overturn Pai's
overturning of the Obama-era protections of net neutrality (in
other words, to restore net neutrality), but it did not pass in the
house, so as of June 11, 2018, media companies and
conglomerates are now able to operate without any
restrictionsrelated to fast lanes, etc.
Week Nine Lecture: Audiences, Creators & Media Influence
Please read the following sections of Chapters Eight & Nine
from Croteau & Hoynes (2019):
Chapter Eight: pp. 268-281; pp. 283-290; pp. 295-6
Chapter Nine: pp. 300-320; pp. 328-331
Key Questions:
1. What does the term "active audience" mean and why does it
matter?
2. How do human agency and social structure interact in an
audience's reading of media texts?
3. What kind of roles do fantasy and pleasure play in media
consumption?
4. How might media exposure affect individuals and societies?
5. What are the major tenets of major media effects and
mediatization theories?
6. In what ways do media - and social media in particular -
impact political processes?
Themes:
8.1 Defining the Active Audience
8.2 Encoding/Decoding

8.3 Fan Communities & Disrupting Bias
9.1 Theorizing Media Influence & Effects
9.2 Effects, Mediatization & Politics
9.3 Social Media Logics & Deepfakes
8.1 Defining the Active Audience
At this point, your textbook - and this course - have explored
media culture from a more institutional perspective, and have
foregrounded structures that create both limitations and
opportunities for media producers. Now that you're familiar
with those forces, it is essential that we pivot away from
production and focus on consumption; and rather, how
production and consumption are related processes that influence
one another - from the audience perspective. This chapter
positions the audience as both "active" and as "content
creators"; while audiences have always been actively
consuming, it is important to remember that their new role as
creators, as well, is directly connected to digitization and
increased access to the tools of production (e.g., GarageBand).
Because audience members have such active roles in
contemporary media culture, Croteau & Hoynes (2019) make the
case that we should refer to ourselves, and audience members,
as "users" and state that: "User has the advantage of being open-
ended, so it can include both our roles as audience members and
our various roles on the internet. 'User' also implies active roles
in both interpretingexisting media content and creating our own
content" (p. 268). As they suggest, we both interpret and create,
and both activities are influenced by various social forces.
Later in the chapter, Croteau & Hoyes (2019) identify three
main motivations for audience creation online:
1. Self-expression/identity formation;
2. Interaction/community building;
3. Sharing (p. 294).
Think about yourself as a "user" on the internet. Which of these
motivations do you feel summarizes your experiences? Do all
three of them? Think about the last time you created something
online (snap, tweet, IG story, etc.), what was your motivation?

Remember, while economic and political forces shape media
culture, the "active audience" framework suggests that
users/audience members have agency and have an active role in
both use and interpretation. To explore the dynamic nature of
audience activity, your textbook includes two main theoretical
orientations to the "active audience" framework in this chapter:
(1) uses and gratifications (What are people doing with media?
Why are they using media?); (2) critical cultural studies (How
do people interpret media?).
One of the major motivations for pursuing audience research is
the observation that media are polysemic texts; in other words,
multiple meanings can exist within one media text. Therefore,
the way that users interpret those texts are worth exploring;
social location/experiences of the audience member, editing
techniques from the producers, the use of music to connect with
emotions, etc. For example, if a student had lived through a
school shooting, their interpretation of a violent film scene
involving a similar weapon would be different than the
interpretation of a student that is a gun rights advocate. And it
may be more subtle; for example, humor is subjective, and
something I may find funny may not be funny to the person
sitting next to me - for a variety of reasons.
For example, consider Between Two Ferns on the website Funny
or Die. Here's a clip that includes an interview with Barack
Obama(you only have to watch a minute or two):
https://www.funnyordie.com/2014/3/11/17736628/between-two-
ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-president-barack-
obama (链接到外部网站。)
(Links to an external site.)
Did you think this was funny? Some of you may have, some of
you may not have enjoyed the dry humor; this is how
"polysemy" works. Beyond comedy, think about complex
filmmaking from directors such as Lars Von Trier or Paul
Thomas Anderson. Think about the film Donnie Darko (2001).
The considering of our individualistic meaning-making, in a
particular historical and cultural context (structure) is the basis

of the active audience - we are not passive audience members
that interpret and use media in the same way. Another example:
Consider the film Zero Dark Thirty (2012). Was this film a
depiction of the effectiveness of interrogation techniques or a
portrayal of the brutality and moral complexity of torture?
Despite the director's intention, it's important to remember that
audiences are thinking while they view media texts and can
interpret and create meaning as an individualistic exercise.
Here are the four main ways that audiences are "active":
1. Interpretation: Audiences may not construct the meaning
intended by the producer; may make their own meanings.
2. Social Context of Interpretation: Media use is not just
individual, but is also social.
3. Collective Action: Audiences sometimes make formal
demands on media producers through protests, boycotts, or
campaigns.
4. Audiences as Media Producers ("Prosumers"): Audiences
create their own media outlets and products.
An important reminder, however, is that audiences are not just
"free agents" with unlimited agency. There are structural and
interpretive restraints on meaning-making; for example, your
social position, experiences and cultural surroundings. For
example, depending on your identity, you could be offended by
particular portrayals of race, gender and/or sexuality. Take the
program Game of Thrones, for example; some viewers may be
triggered by some of the sexual violence due to previous
experiences while others may interpret the sexual violence as
just part of the narrative structure of the program.
8.2 Encoding/Decoding
The Encoding/Decoding model is a theory that supports
the active audience framework, yet also recognizes structural
influences on user/audience interpretation; it is a model that is
widely used in Media Studies/Cultural Studies, and was
introduced by theorist Stuart Hall in the 1970s. Although dated,
it continues to offer helpful language and reminds us that there's
a limit to audience agency. Here is a short lecture video that

works to explain this theory:
Remember, social position - including class - plays a major role
in decoding practices. In their discussion of David
Morely's (1980) research on interpretations
of Nationwide, Croteau & Hoynes (2019) remind us that,
"Social class, Morely concludes, does not determine how people
interpret media messages. Instead, social class - and we would
add age, race, ethnicity, gender, and other central markers of
identity - plays a key role in proving us with the cultural
'tools' for decoding. Often, these are discursive tools, giving
people a language and framework for understanding the world"
(p. 273). Think about the oppositional reading in the
Encoding/Decoding model; what "cultural tools" may lead a
person to oppose a particular text? For example, why might a
group protest a particular musician or film opening?
What "tools" have led them to oppose those texts? Perhaps it
was an experience, their access to critical social theories, or
perhaps what their grand/parents have taught them about certain
issues that are brought up in the lyrics/scenes.
8.3 Creators: Fan Communities & Disrupting Bias
While some audience members participate in resistance/culture
jamming (see p. 287 in your textbook; click on this link (Links
to an external site.) to Adbustersas an example of this, or visit
Banksy's website: http://www.banksy.co.uk/ (Links to an
external site.)), others participate in fan communities/fandom
(see p. 295 of your textbook), which is a large step beyond
consumption. According to media scholar Henry
Jenkins (1988), a person is considered a fan, " ... not by being a
regular viewer of a particular program but by translating that
viewing into some type of cultural activity, by sharing thoughts
and feelings about the program content with friends, by joining
a community of fans who share common interests" (p. 8).
Fan communities are:
1. Formed within and outside of popular culture;
2. Producers of their own media and build connection to
community and promote social activity.

Examples:
Twilight Fan Fiction (Fun fact: 50 Shade of Grey was based
on Twilight fan fiction!):
https://www.fanfiction.net/book/Twilight/ (Links to an external
site.)
Harry Potter Alliance:
http://thehpalliance.org/ (Links to an external site.)
Comic-Con International:
http://www.comic-con.org/ (Links to an external site.)
Remember, media culture also offers opportunities for audience
members/users to disrupt ideology (as discussed in Chapters Six
& Seven) - also known as engaging in cultural resistance - and
this chapter includes a section on Black Twitter, and argues
that, "Black Twitter is often used to directly challenge
perceived biases in mainstream media stories" (p. 280). Another
space that offers opportunities to directly challenge bias
is Tumblr, although it has recently experienced restrictions on
sexual/adult content that has had an impact on sexual
subcultures within the community. Can you think of other
online spaces that offer opportunities for ideological
disruption?
(Links to an external sitBlack Twitter brings visibility
to "counter-narratives" (Croteau & Hoynes, 2019, p. 281) by
allowing users to construct and distribute stories, comments and
observations that are often overlooked by mainstream media.
Please watch this short video and while you watch, think about
the ways that concepts such as ideology, social inequality,
decoding, active audience, social location, and digitization
connect:
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000003841604/blacktwitt
er-after-ferguson.html (Links to an external site.)
9.1 Theorizing Media Influence & Effects
The previous chapter explored questions of agency as it relates
to the active audience, or "users," as Croteau & Hoynes (2019)
have articulated, including the process of decoding, resistance,
and creation. This chapter extends this discussion to the issue

of "influence" at the individual and societal level, as questions
about how media affects individuals has been at the center of
various research studies, policy initiatives, organizational
missions, political platforms, and so on. As Croteau & Hoynes
(2019) state, "Welcome to the complicated, often ambiguous
world of media effects where nearly everyone
knows something is going on but where it is
notoriously difficult to pinpoint exactly why, how, to what
degree, and on whom media may be having an influence" (p.
301). They go on to argue that "negative behaviors" (e.g.,
violence, substance abuse, hate-group radicalization and
consumerism) as well as democratic influence get the most
attention, and that in the end, effects research suggests "more
complex and subtle influences"than direct, easy-to-identify ones
(p. 301).
So why is it so complicated to determine effects? Remember
what we explored in the last chapter: decoding/interpretation,
social location, and cultural context are among the various
variables that influence influence/effect. However, what
researchers to look for are patterns, and they identify these
patterns through audience research, which
includes methods such as polling, interviews, focus groups, pre-
test/post-test experimentation, surveys, etc.
For example, we know that cyberbullying happens, and that it
can have a negative impact for some individuals, but what can
we say about effects on a mass scale? Pew Research Center's
work on cyberbulling
(https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/09/27/a-majority-of-teens-
have-experienced-some-form-of-cyberbullying/ (Links to an
external site.)) has identified that 56% of US teens have been
bullied or harassed online, but there is a lack of concrete
data that suggests exactly howthis cyberbulling effects
individuals or groups. The next step in research would be to ask
these same teens who have identified that they've been
bullied how they feel after the bullying takes place, and then
see what patterns arise. For example, perhaps a majority of

these teens then feel "self-conscious" or "depressed." What are
some questions you might ask?
Additionally, we know that that seeing an increased amount of
the“thin ideal” imagery (mostly on visual social media websites
such as IG and TikTok) is having an impact, but it is hard to
measure.
One possible answer is self-objectification; but does not impact
everyone the same way (social location, socialization). Self-
objectification is when an individual begins to judge
themselvesbased on the ways that they are taught to judge
others, including celebrities, friends, etc. So, if we, the public -
and girls/women in particular, although this does impact
boys/masculinity and queer identities, as well - are taught
to judge other women based on cultural attitudes about body
shape (slim thick, etc.), hair, skin, etc., this will eventually lead
to an internal judgment when looking in the mirror. So if the
posts and comments on Instagram promote a narrow standard of
beauty, this could have an impact/effect on users.
Early theories on media influence/effect grew from a concern
over media's role in democratic life; journalists and scholars -
including Ferdinand Toennis, Charles Horton Colley, and even
Karl Marx -questioned the ways that media may influence how
the public would come to support particular candidates, vote for
president, etc. They believed that, as societies continued
to urbanize due to industrialization, as well as spread out due to
the growth of suburbia, media were developing a growing
significance in the lives of those who were
increasingly reliant on newspapers, and later, radio and
television, for information.
It is important to remember that many of these theories
had methodological issues, meaning that the questions were too
narrow, or they were conducted in too experimental of a setting
(subject were removed from a more "natural" setting and were
uncomfortable and/or may have told the researchers what they

wanted to hear). For example, as Croteau & Hoynes (2019)
point out that Herbert Blumer's social-psychological studies on
influence, " ... was problematic, especially in how it asked
leading questions about the influence of movies" (p. 303). This
is not to say that all of the early, direct theories were
problematic - indeed, they were very influential on creating a
foundation for effects research - but like any research tradition,
methodology and theory have improved over time.
Your book outlines a few of the more popular theories:
The Hypodermic Model: Direct and powerful influence (Orson
Welles’s, WOTW, 1939): PBS War of the Worlds
Mass Society Theory: Mass media as “homogenizing” the
public; less personal ties post-WWII (suburbs), but united
through mass media
The Minimal Effects Model: “Two-step flow of influence”: (1)
Media transmitted information to opinion leaders; (2) Leaders
influence those with personal contact
Agenda Setting: Media tell us not WHAT to think, but what to
think ABOUT
Priming: Mass media attention to particular issues; “prime”
audiences to be more sensitive (economics, candidates)
Cultivation Theory: Continued, lengthly and ritualistic viewing
that leads to homogenized public and “mainstreaming." Mean
World Syndrome: Heavy television viewers internalize many of
the distorted views of the social and political world presented
by television (i.e., crime and violence)
Additionally, your Croteau & Hoynes (2019) outline theories of
"framing" and the "spiral of silence," which are extremely
relevant to contemporary coverage of politics (along with
agenda-setting):
Framing: How coverage is constructed; how the media organizes
and presenting information influences how people are likely to
understand the story (second-level agenda setting); frames make
an event “intelligible” - easy to decode in a particular way.
Spiral of Silence: Media’s role in the squeezing out of minority
views and overstating the degree of political consensus

(narrows public discussion).
Example: “Trump’s election may have animated some who had
been previously silent because they had not seen their views
included in the mainstream media” (p. 310).
Before you move on to the next section, I'd like you to do an
activity that will help deepen your understanding of agenda-
setting and framing. Select a news item/story that has been
deemed extremely "newsworthy" today. For example, today (I'm
writing this on May 20th), I'd be interested in the evacuation of
thousands of Michigan residents due to flooding or any updated
news related to COVID-19. So, choose a story that interests you
and then select three newspapers (digital/online editions; visit
their website); next, you will see how those newspapers are
covering this story.
Agenda-setting: Where is the story located in the publication or
website? Is it on the front/landing page? Do you have to click
through many links to find it? How is the location of the story
telling you how important it is.
Framing: What does the headline reveal about the framing of
this story? Is there a photo as well, as how does that convey
meaning? Are there any politically-charged terms being used?
What sources are present (and absent?) and in what order?
Most importantly, how is the coverage different in each
newspaper? How might this be linked to ownership, circulation,
funding, and audience?
9.2 Effects, Mediatization & Politics
In a democratic nation such as the United States, we are charged
with participating in our government through electing
representatives. Because we have this electoral power, it is
important that we maintain an awareness of candidates and
issues.So where do we receive this information? Where do we
learn about candidates? How do we figure out which policies a
presidential candidate supports? It comes as no surprise to you,
then, that media hold much political power in this way; we
come to support our representatives through their mediations. In
other words, the way candidates and issues are portrayed in

news media become the way we understand them; we rely on
political communication and thus, it becomes essential that we
understand media's impact on politics.And with the Presidential
election coming up this year (!!!), we're already experiencing a
sharp increase in political messaging; in particular, a partisan
divide in the response to COVID-19.
(Links to an external site.)
Your textbook (2019) explores political culture using/through
the concept of mediatization,which is defined as " ... a social
change process in which media have become
increasingly influential in and deeply integrated into different
spheres of society" (Strömbäck and Esser 2014, p. 244, as
quoted in Croteau & Hoynes, 2019, p. 314). Mediatization, as a
framework, draws on earlier media effects theories (including
agenda setting, framing, medium theory), but also "transcends"
them (as quoted by Schulz, 2004 in Croteau & Hoynes, 2019, p.
314) by rethinking the social world and how media have had a
direct impact. Like globalization, mediatization is a process and
" ... evolves over time and manifests itself differently in
different social and cultural contexts" (p. 314. And while the
framework/theory of mediatization is helpful for some - and for
us to consider - it has also been critiqued as similar
to technological determinism and its emphasis on the role of
media versus its inclusion of human agency (p. 315).
Some examples of mediatization include: health care (WebMD);
criminal justice system (“risk assessment” tools and
algorithms); online shopping; live streaming musical events and
religious ceremonies (“virtualization of social institutions”).
Scholar Winfried Schulz (2004) outlines the changes in
interactionand communication brought
by mediatization into four categories(p. 315):
1. Media extend the ability of humans to communicate across
space and time.
2. Media replace some forms of face-to-face interaction, as with
online banking.
3. Media infiltrate and coexist with everyday communication, as

with checking your cell phone while talking with a friend or
“talking around” a television program while watching with
others.
4. “Media logic” encourages people to adjust their attitudes and
behaviors; connects media production to media effects.
So how might mediatization factor into the development of
our current political climate? Drawing on the notion of media
logic,Croteau & Hoynes (2019) highlight that, increasingly,
the ecosystem of US-based politics works to meet the needs of
media consumption and the performativity of
democracy. Candidates are thought of as "political actors" and
debates and press conferences are thought of as "stages"; this
transformation, as media scholars argue, is the result of the
increased presence (mediatization) of media
production/consumption in democratic life.
Now that political figures are mediated through television,
social media, documentary, radio, magazines, etc., campaigns
are built around media considerations. The importance of
appearance, the branding and imaging of an individual
candidate, and overall political messaging of a campaign
becomes paramount to their success, especially as political
parties have become less influential during a campaign season
(see p. 320-321).
Further, the use of Twitter and Facebook have become
absolutely essential in political races. How is this an example of
mediatization?
Now, there are a few things to reflect on before I/we move
further. First, your awareness and level of political "knowledge"
is contingent on a few things: how much reporting is done on
these issues, how much you read the news, the questions
journalists are asking, and what is "newsworthy." Think about it
this way, our accessto this important information (remember, we
need it in order to vote in a democratic culture) is contingent
upon media coverage. This is why political mediacoverage is
essential in an American culture where we are not in a position
to meet the candidates ourselves (but sometimes you can,

depending on your job, etc.).
Although politicians can utilize media to maintain a curated
image, media coverage can also negatively impact one's
image (warranted or not) due to constant exposure in light of a
scandal. Some examples include: The Bill Clinton/Monica
Lewinsky sex scandal(1998), the Anthony Weiner sexting
scandal (2011), also known as "Weinergate," and the Chris
Christie Fort Lee lane closure scandal (2013), also known
as "Bridgegate," and more recently, the release of Hillary
Clinton's emails before the 2016 election. In all of these cases -
and there are many more - news media presented audiences
with immediate coverage, including press conferences,
interviews, panel interviews, videos, etc., that worked to shift
their political image. In this way, politicians both use media
to connect with their constituents, but can also
be brought down by media coverage,often (but not always)
resulting in resignation (as in the case with Weiner).
9.3. Social Media Logics & Deepfakes
As social media platforms continue to extend their reach as
sites ofinteractive communication, community-building, and
knowledge-sharing, concerns over influence (effect) are
questioned various social stakeholders, including politicians,
students, parents, etc. Croteau & Hoynes use the work of Van
Dijk and Peoll (2013) to explore "social media logic," or, " ...
the strategies, mechanisms, and economies that are the
foundation for social media platforms: programmability,
popularity, connectivity, and datafication" and argue that the
issue of influence can be traced back to one (or more) of these
features (p. 328).
Programmability: Codes and algorithms that can steers users in
a particular direction;
Popularity: Likes, followers and retweets a technological
elements that will steer users in a particular direction;
Connectivity: Linking and connecting people and advertisers to
each other in order to steer users in a particular direction.
Based on these "logics," Croteau & Hoynes (2019) point out

that social media platforms are not "neutral," and they (the
authors) highlight resulting issues related to surveillance,
advertising, algorithms, and racist content (see p. 330).
Another concerning issue, especially during an election season,
is the "deepfake," which is the use of AI (artificial
intelligence), algorithms, and video/audio footage to paste a
person's face onto another video. To date, this practice is
often predatory/problematicand has been used a variety of
practices including revenge porn and political coverage. Check
out this recent deepfake that altered a video of House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi to make it seem that she was drunk (the link has a
short video and text):
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/politics/doctored-video-
pelosi/index.html (Links to an external site.)
Please read the following piece on deepfakes from The
Guardian,and as you're reading consider how issues
of mediatization, social media logic, media effects, and
socialization contribute to this issue:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-
interactive/2019/jun/22/the-rise-of-the-deepfake-and-the-threat-
to-democracy (Links to an external site.)
IMPORTANT: In order to deepen your knowledge of a
contemporary media organization, you will analyze the SAME
COMPANY for both your Mini-Essay A and Mini-Essay B, so
please select a company that you're interested in exploring. I've
narrowed down your options to the following list. Note that
some of these companies are "parent companies" or
"conglomerates" while others are independent studios or
subsidiaries within a parent company/conglomerate.
HBO
The Walt Disney Company
Comcast
ESPN
Capitol Records
The Washington Post

Vogue Magazine
Marvel
Buzzfeed
The New York Times
Fox News
VICE
Electronic Arts
National Geographic
A24 (Apartment 24)
Cosmopolitan
The Wall Street Journal
WarnerMedia
The Denver Post

Chapter One MediaSociety in a Digital WorldNote Read the summ.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Chapter One MediaSociety in a Digital WorldNote Read the summ.docx

Similar to Chapter One MediaSociety in a Digital WorldNote Read the summ.docx (20)

More from tiffanyd4

More from tiffanyd4 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter One MediaSociety in a Digital WorldNote Read the summ.docx