The media has become a public staple over the past 50 years. The television sitcom (situation comedy) has become the way to enjoy a half an hour of television to laugh and watch the people acting on these sitcoms do the comedy that put them there in the first place. The way the shows are written are also different from the last 20 years. The idea of the whole duplicate and innovate has gone with the wind so-to-speak. All the sitcoms seem to copy each other and while in the process of doing that, writers seem to have written more and more racial storylines and although it has not been flat out racism, there is still a hint of the racism storylines that are on these shows. Whether its Archie Bunker, america's favorite bigot, to the television show friends having the absence of other races and ethnicites on its series televsion, the media and the people themselves really have created a sort of race riot on TV.
The way the TV sitcoms are created are simple. A team of writers comes up with a pilot episode and then it's picked up by a major studio and then its put on a distributor and then, it makes it to air in a matter of months and then, it picks up some awards and then it makes it until the show doesn't want to be on the air until it is in syndication. In the meantime, the ideas of racial stereotypes come in. The real boom of racial stereotypes as good televison came along in the mid to late 70's with the idea of "All In The Family". This show was supposed to showcase the average family in middle America with Archie and his wife and his grown up daughter who is married and is out of the house. Archie completely makes candid racial remarks about blacks and asians. He says in one episode that; "You can't tell the difference between a jap and a chink" and something along the lines of; "The world ain't ready for a black president causeit that happens, we'll have a female pope and that ain't gonna happen". This was supposedly funny by 1970's standards but by 2004 standards that is considered racist. The whole "Friends" fiasco where shows on NBC were recieving harsh reviews by critics saying that, there is an absence of different races and how there is no showacase of blacks or hispanics on the show. Soon , the show has two central female African American guest stars and lasted a while on the show. This idea leads to the next issue. who establishes what is racism and what creates this. The person who sees it as race, deems it racist. Race is a complete thing of perception to some. And that is what people see and comment on.
In conclusion racer is a thing of perception and that is how the world sees race as the color of your skin and what a persons heritage is and that what makes them, them. Race on television will come in together for a long time and that is to the decison of those who write the racist crap that will be on TV and to the discretion as to who will watch it.
If we look at the media as a group of people, with every channel as a different person, then the media is just an extremely biased group of people, just like every other group of humans on the face of the earth. They, like everyone else, have their own specific opinions. However, the media is more than just any group of people: it is a trusted group, one that society looks towards for answers to their problems (Just like the president or some celebrities). The opinions of the media have an extremely influential effect on the world because of the trust and belief that is placed in it (This is probably due to the fact that we really have no other choice: If you want to find out about Iraq or India, you can’t exactly just go over there and see what’s happening. You have to go to the media for news, even if you don’t trust it.).
The way that the media effects and perpetuates stereotypes is by imparting their own biases in the minds of their viewers. Stereotypes are not creations of the media, they are just human-created generalizations that have gotten out of control (not to say that stereotypes are not bad or powerful). Generalizing things is a part of human nature; everyone uses generalizations in order to comprehend and deal with being part of the world around them. The Media doesn’t create stereotypes, but it sucks them in and builds them up to a new degree of power before spitting them back into the minds of the public.
If I wanted to, I could tell as many people as I wanted to that all Jews are a corrupt, cold-blooded cult (I don’t think this, by the way). No matter how many people I tell, my opinions will not have a major effect on many, if any, people’s beliefs about Jews. But, when the President says to watch out for suspicious, middle-eastern looking characters, then immediately America’s masses will mistrust every Islamic person they see, and probably make their mistrust very clear. In the same way, Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion’ might not directly slander the Jews, but by portraying them in a negative way, Gibson will (hopefully unintentionally) influence millions of people’s opinions. The media, like the president, is believed about its opinions. Then it just becomes a matter of what the media wants to say.
On April 25th, there was an historic march on Washington. It was arguably the largest march on Washington ever to take place. According to CNN, "various police sources informally estimated the throng (of marchers) at between 500,000 and 800,000 strong", and the organizers of the march have estimated that closer to 1,000,000 people marched. So why when Ms. Reed showed me the New York Post today, why was I almost unable to find any record of this event ever taking place? I mean one would think that such a large convergence of people would cause even the closed minded New York Post to take it's head out of it's arse for long enough to write a page or two on what happened. Well, I finally found the article; it came in the form of a paragraph long opinion piece denouncing the march as a huge failure. Now, I understand that the US is a 'free country' and thus most people can pretty much say whatever they want to, but what I want to look at is why a news source would print an opinion saying that a march of about one million people is a failure. And how does the fact that certain stories are omitted contribute to steryotyping?
Firstly, let's examine who benefits from a story like this one. The answer is pretty clear: anti-chioce activists (who are by the way 70% men and thus will never be faced with an unwanted pregnacy). The current administration is also included in this group. Part of the problem is that many people only read, hear, or watch a select few news sources, thus a person who only reads the post and watches FOX news will never know how many people were actually at the march or what a great sucess it was. On the 'issues' page of Ralph Nader's website, (http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php) "The mass media in the United States is extremely concentrated, and the messages that they send are too broadly uniform. Six global corporations control more than half of all mass media in our country: newspapers, magazines, books, radio and television." With all the same people calling the shots on what is broadcast as news, iit's no wonder that certain stories just don't get coverage. Secondly, let's take a look at how having only a handful of news sources helps to enforce harmful steryotypes. If you were to watch the 10pm network news and flip through the chanels, you would see the same stories on each of them, broadcast in a very similar way. This is not just because only those news stories that are played happened that day, but becuase those stories are the only ones deemed good enough for TV. Ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a story about a black man on the news, what was the story about and what was the man's involvement in it? Is that protrayed in a positive or negative way? Unfortunately, he is probably a suspect in a case or the alledged perpetrator of some crime. What about all the black men who are doing great things for this city? The network news is not going to broadcast these stories becuase a black man succeding does not fit into the steryotype of what a black man in America should be and do. The media's intention is not to opens people's minds, but rather to maintain steryotypes in order to keep people in theor current place. The media can't broadcast anything that confronts people's steryotypes becuase if it does, people will feel offended and no longer watch the news.
All you know is that you go to the movies on a Saturday night to with your friends, but what you don't realize are all of the sterotypes that the media consists of. While watching a T.V. show or reading a newspaper, it is usually likely to see that the writer or the producer is usually somewhat biased or prejedice agaisnt a certain sex, race, or ethnic backgrounds. Off the top of your head, every can think of numerous stereotypes that the media had led us to believe...
Race has always been highly debated in modern society. It is often sid that we have come so far to break down racial boundaries, but in fact, you can turn on your telelvision and see a black mad without a job, as a slave, or illeterate. This seems to me as taking a step backwards in society. Another common stereotype is that women are only on this world to look after their husbands, clean after them, and never work for themselves. These are unfair to women, and are perhaps why there are so many divorces in America, because husbands have been taught to think this of thier wives.
In conclusion, the media never seems to be fair to any group of people. African-Americans can not only be seen as slaves, women can not only be seen as workers, arabs cannot be seen as terrorists, and gays cannot only be seen as wrong and as imoral humans. Everyone should be looked at as equal, because the stererotypes ar what make people afraid and uncomfortable, not allowing to live to thier fullest potential
People are always the focus of any media creation, be it a magazine, movie, television program, etc. The manner in which these people are portrayed are left up to its creator(s) descretion. Over the years, it has become increasingly more apparent that individual genders, races, ethnicities and religious groups have conviently fallen into one particular character or subject in the media. These human qualities are perhaps the most stereotyped things around, and the media doesn't seem to want to let go of any of them. As a result, these stereotypes are constantly found in the speeches and thoughts of practically every living human on earth. Unfortunately, it seems as though these stereotypes are taken way too far in many circumstances.
To me at least, many people today feel compelled to live their lives according to their corresponding media stereotypes. People of color feel like they're somehow doing a disservice to themselves if they're somehow unconnected with the streets, as the media only shows this one specific racial group roaming the streets. On the other hand, caucasians cast themselves away as failures if they don't own a certain amount of jewelry or cannot afford to spend hundreds of dollars on the spot. The majority of this mindset can be cast back to the media's portrayal of caucasians as rich elitists who know nothing of immense strife or tragedy.
As harmless as these portrayals may be, they can also contribute a certain amount of discomfort within different racial groups. I've lost track of the number of cases in which I've seen African Americans get tagged with the title of "oreo" by other African Americans on the basis of excellent grades or manner of dress. Similarly, I've witnessed many an occasion when an average white kid gets hounded for wearing dirty hoodies and ripped up jeans, on the basis of not being "clean" enough. In addition, nobody believes that Jews aren't stingy, that Christians don't want to go to war at any given oppurtunity and that not all Muslims hijack planes. It seems as though being an individual is now somehow dangerous and out of place in today's society: persons of color have to act a certain way and caucasians have to act a certain way. Jews have to hate Muslims, and Christians have to just hate everybody and take over the world. It's pathetic...
As with any stereotype, there's always a bit of truth behind each of them. For example, it's pretty obvious that the majority of people in the business world are whiter than the clouds, and that the majority of the people that are "hanging out on the corner" have a little color on their skin. However, does this mean that ALL white people are rich businessmen and that ALL people of color are street roamers? NOT AT ALL. This is the problem with media stereotypes: they don't stereotype people as a whole, they stereotype very small, obvious traits. Why does the media do this? To keep things simple, to effectively brainwash us. The media doesn't have time to point out the racially-diverse end of the business world or the whiter end of the street crowd.
If the media portrayed people as people in all of our complex glory, then every program and magazine would seem boring, because there "wouldn't be" any specific qualities to point out and gloat about any one character or personality. The fact is that the complex ways in which we think, reason, speak and act are what make us so fabulous. This is what the media doesn't realize, and this is what the majority of people don't realize. Through the media, we are desensitized into thinking that we must follow its status-quo towards its pre-determined future, based solely on one or two traits that we may have. This is the last thing that we should be doing...
Throughout its history the media has shown to us what the "proper society" is like. We have been taught that our everyday T.V. families have nice cars and live in 2 story homes. The children have Soccer and Ballet Saturday mornings while the parents visit the local country Club with Bob and Martha. To add to this, we usually see the only minority in the show as the gardener or the not-so-normal comedic neighbor who stops be whenever he wants. But is this really how life is? I think not. Although everyone would like to have a job and a dream home, they don’t. We live in a world that is full of ups and downs, some positives and a lot of negatives.
Also we have the reality T.V. shows which make us feel ugly and unappreciated with their "I want a makeover" attitude. Magazines and new shows go by these trendy new ideas of entertainment, when really they're turning fun and joyous television into a self conscious mirror.
Basically, the modern ways to get rid of our everyday problems is in some ways routing us to our emotional problems, and taking us away from our everyday social problems. This new millennium has led us to believe that we no longer see racial prejudices and male superiority on television, but the truth is that these old stereotypes are transformed to be portrayed in new ways.
There are always going to be stereotypes portrayed in the media. Television tries in vain to capture parts of real life and create stories to enagage the viewer. Stereotypes are simply exaggerrated versions of real traits, but those traits get so overplayed that they lose most of their authenticity. A stereotype, by definition, is "A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image."(dictionary.com) The image is oversimplified and unwavering. People are complex, and there are so many different components that make us all up. Stereotypes promote the idea that there is only one way to define someone and that that definition is the only one acceptable for use of a larger group.
The media creates stereotypes about class differences often. The lower class individuals are either the helpless, oppressed, victimized, unheard population or they are the criminal lazy population. The upper class is either portrayed as pious, self-centered, and greedy or as troubled, secretive, and polite. The media also does something similar when it comes to sexuality. It promotes the idea that a person's identity must be rooted in thier sexual preferences. For example, if a t.v. show is about a gay male, everything that gay male says and does will be a direct result of his sexual orientation. The same goes for straight men. Most are characterized as tough, unbreakable, homophobic people. The stereotypes are so extreme and false. Not every straight man will be tough, not every gay man will have a high voice, not every wealthy person is obsessed with money, and not every poor preson is helpless. With such a large population, generalizations will only hold true in some cases. But, there will always be numerous exceptions to any stereotype. The media leaves that sidenote unsaid.
It seems like no matter what kind of stereotype is being created or maintained, that it is always an extreme one. For example, when it comes to gender strereotypes, there are either girls that are full-on tomboys and play lots of sports and hang out with guys, etc. or there are the princess type girls that only care about clothes and dates and hair. There are never any in-betweens. Isn't it possible for a female to like football and shopping? In real life the answer would be yes, so why aren't more of these images sent across the television every week?
The media provides richer contexts for understanding the numerous social realities in America. We look at social groupings in America in isolation and in combination of various differences. We are interested in how class, race and gender biases become reflected in our society by media. Socially and materially constructed phenomena, reproduced daily through various discussions in the streets, the media, home, the government, the courts, and other cultural bodies.
On TV news it’s still the black race doing most of the criminal job. On movies they are the street punks. Interracial relationships are presented very differently. And we view it differently. Black feminist media criticism, allowing us to reexamine the nature of feminist cultural criticism. It’s intersectional because it centers a black female subject. And because it uses Black feminism as its dominant interpretive framework.
A stereotypical female figure we see in most of the movies. Women are still the weaker part of gender. They are always in danger and crying. A strong male figure the “heroes” would come and save the day. Yeah, we also see some strong female figure but they present it and make it seem non realistic mostly fictional; Charlie’s Angels, Kill Bill e.g.
When is the last time that you noticed a very strong statement about a stereotypes shown in the media? Some of you may say, the last time you turned on your TV. Others may think you don’t recognize many stereotypes from the media. The reason behind this is that the media has a very strong influence on what we see of the world and how we view things. Most people won’t notice that they are being affected by the media’s stereotypical persuade, until it is too late.
Take for example the music being played all over the radio. How many gender and sexuality slurs do you hear in almost every song? In songs it describes people getting raped, murdered, abused, having sex, a lot of this is talked about in so many songs that the artists are performing today. Also notice the sexuality in the dancing done in music video and performed in concert. None of this is appropriate for the young children that are watching it. As an example: the half time show with Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake, enough said.
Relating this back to the stereotypes found in the media, that show promoted the idea that women should best be seen for their sexuality and bodies. It was degrading and offensives to women. However those are the kinds of images that America see everyday. TV now consists of reality shows that exploit women. Demoralizing them to dumb beauties.
Of course the stereotypes in the media have greatly changed over the years. Not too long ago, the movies and TV shows would cast a black man as the bad guy. And there were even other times when a black person was not casted in a film at all. Today, society is doing its best not to let that happen. You see biracial families in commercials and people of many different ethnicities as the main character. Although there are still many stereotypes in the media, the people who they are aimed at have changed. And no matter what happens, it is very hard to create stereotypes for certain people. Everyone has a different view for all the people around them and everyone has their own opinions, whether they are good or bad.
The media at time can be very negitve towards the viewers. Although there been for many years streotype, racial jokes, gender dissing and sexist comments on t.v. to this day they still appear. With alot of protesting against people being racist and media then influinsing people to be racist is not helping our society. The media, in ways you don't not relize show alot of racist things. For example on the News although there is alot that goes around the world they will show alot of black people getting arested or a black person being shown getting in trouble for a crime. Things like that start an uprising among the people all because of the media.
the media somtime get outline when it comes to there joking. The shows that come on t.v. like sit-coms tend to have alot of gender jokes. Many shows tend to joke on gay people when many of them (gays) havent done anything to them. I am not gay but feel bad when i here people joking on gays and ofending them. Now there been a big issue with people gender. People gender in the media has been the sources for comdey and is not pleaseing many people but is a joke to many.
The media is a bussiness, when there bussiness there money. Since the media is a bussiness they do what they need to do to make money. If the media see that viewers find the racial joking funny and joking on people gender is funny they will contiune with the joking till people dont find it amussing. The media will stop with whatever they are doing it all depnds on the viewers who watch it.
The media is a way of life. Many people live by the media. The media tells us what is popular, what isn't, and what the "cool" people in this world are doing.
The media keeps us up to date with the world. It is an expression through some sort of physical medium, as oppose to speaking. Newspapers, television, the internet, radio are all types of media. Just like people, these medias have opinions. The difference is that many people are buying into these opinions. Somebody could sit at home all day and never go out and would still know what is going on. They could just buy into what the media is telling them to like. As people, we need the media and we rely on it. Still, we can't get to obsest with it. People need to be their own person and have their own opinions. The media can be very manipulative and nagging.
Among multiple purposes of the New Media, one is ,of course, the creation and maintenance of stereotypes among humans. It is interesting to note how efficient New Media is in achieving its goal. New Media tends to preserve certain situation in the best way that suits it, for the sake of appearances. It is apparent that New Media and fashion go hand in hand. Together, they are pretty powerful. As far as stereotypes are concerned, there are few common and recognizable types of stereotypes, such as racial, social, sexual, national etc.
The word stereotype functions as a metaphor to state a certain set of beliefs and ideas, as well as qualities, that are usually illogical, and difficult to change. Stereotype is like a rule that has specific characteristics. Stereotypical ideology is difficult to change because it is imbedded deeply into people's minds, and could be passed from generation to generation. The role of the New Media is to preserve or change those beliefs, and since it is so widely spread, it is quite successful. The New Media plays a major role in subscribing people to a certain category. This is somehow useful in giving a quick judgment about the people. However, there can be negative stereotypes that are unjustifiably given to a particular people. As a result, prejudice, racism, sexism, and nationalism could be born. In order for that not to happen, the New Media tries to make humans somehow equal--creating one big stereotype. This is done through news, newspapers, TV shows, music etc.
Therefore, the New Media is overwhelming. It has its advantages and disadvantages. It is very difficult for one in this modern era to escape its grasp. Whatever that will be the most profitable for the society, there would be no problem to be advertised or popularized. And people respond to that--just go by the flow--it is cool, and inevitable.
These are just three examples of how the media effects stereotypes and causes stereotypes. I think it's sad how much our society follows these images and how much people rely on the media for their own self image, instead of just being who they are.
As far as media and the happenings in this country concern, I am not so informed and concerned about the daily problems. However, I do know some basic information in what is currently happening, and, of course, the media is the one that provides all necessary and unnecessary information to me. Media is everywhere. It is in politics, science, economy, marketing, law etc. It is an integral part of human lives that is difficult to imagine what would happen if the media would suddenly disappear.
As mentioned, media informs people about numerous and various occurrences. Some of these occurrences include the newly proposed marriage laws, sex problems, teenagers and puberty, as well as rape. Of course, the function of the media is to distribute the information as wide, and fast as possible to billions of people. It is up to them to make up their own damn mind whether to accept the information as true or not to accept it. However, in this modern age, media's importance is so great, and the efficiency of it to persuade people in absolutely surrendering to it is remarkable. Each day the media is becoming exceedingly efficient at it. There are not so many choices that people have. Humans know, what they need to know, and the media gives them that "knowledge." If one wants to be independent, has time, and wants to exclude him from the crowd, he/she may want to find the 'truth' for himself. They need to read widely, think wisely, and came to their own conclusion. However, billions of people do not have time to bother in finding out what is really going on, and do not care to know. Media gives them automatic information. That is all that is relevant. Billions of people are just living out their lives...oblivious. All in all, ignorance is bliss. Humans are inspired to living luxuriously. They have their spouses, and children, and imagine being on a yacht having champagne, eating bonbons---an American dream. At the end, ask yourself: What is the Truth?
As mentioned, media informs people about numerous and various occurrences. Some of these occurrences include the newly proposed marriage laws, sex problems, teenagers and puberty, as well as rape. Of course, the function of the media is to distribute the information as wide, and fast as possible to billions of people. It is up to them to make up their own damn mind whether to accept the information as true or not to accept it. However, in this modern age, media's importance is so great, and the efficiency of it to persuade people in absolutely surrendering to it is remarkable. Each day the media is becoming exceedingly efficient at it. There are not so many choices that people have. Humans know, what they need to know, and the media gives them that "knowledge." If one wants to be independent, has time, and wants to exclude him from the crowd, he/she may want to find the 'truth' for himself. They need to read widely, think wisely, and came to their own conclusion. However, billions of people do not have time to bother in finding out what is really going on, and do not care to know. Media gives them automatic information. That is all that is relevant. Billions of people are just living out their lives...oblivious. All in all, ignorance is bliss. Humans are inspired to living luxuriously. They have their spouses, and children, and imagine being on a yacht having champagne, eating bonbons---an American dream. At the end, ask yourself: What is the Truth?
Everyday, millions of words are written that represent the day's news stories. These stories are often times published and the world learns of their ocurances. The stories are put through a filter that decides what we get to see and hear about and what we are kept oblivious to. The filter is so strong at times in other countries that it is known as censorship.
Although, this might sound like some type of a conspiracy theory, the truth is, that what news stories get publicity and which do not is very political. A lot of people's lives and money go into the publication of different news stories over others. For example, the way that the entire, story of kidnapping developed and blew-up as a mainstream news stpory. The story of a young-rich-white girl from Utah that was abducted, exploded and reached mainstream news in a big way. At the same time, hundreds of young minoritoes are abducted by family members or kidnapped every year, and their stories get little to no attention from the media.
A similar story, came from the summer's great attention on shark attacks. The stories documented every single slight encounter humns had with sharks in America and turned it into a story of dire consequences and great attention. The images and headlines that adorned the covers of the New York Post and Daily News, heralded this the summer of the shark and that it was no longer safe to go in any waters! When the trusth of the matter, was that shark attack statistics had not risen, at all, that summer. The entire story, was just a well marketed and interesting liefds, to tell the people.
The reason things like this are capable of occuring is becasue of the attention and interest catching ways of the media. The large type fonts on the cover of inexpensive and unsophistacated sources often atttract and speak to the lowest common denominator of interests and care about selling their stories not reporting their facts.
Ever since the 2000 elections, the White House has been surrounded by controversy. From John Ashcroft's nude statue incident, to Condoleezza Rice's 9/11 committee testimony, the media has reported to us what happened and why. But, does the media really tell us all about the Bush administration? Do we really know what happens behind closed doors in our country? The answer to these key questions are simple: the government controls everything that they want us to know. From ABC to MSNBC, Bush and his "control panel" of men and women determine whether or not we are told the truth, the extended truth, or just a plain old lie.
It is a known fact that people in other countries know more about what is going on with the war, and everything else that has to do with the U.S., than we do here. This blinding of the truth is how President Bush is covered up by the media. Instead of reporting what's really important, such as the failing "war against terrorism," we here all the details about the Jason Williams case, Michael Jackson, and gay marriages. By telling us of this, the media has allied the administration and protected it from harsh criticism. If we were to hear all that has happened in Iraq and abroad, then even die hard supporters of president Bush would begin to challenge his decision making and credibility as the President of the United States (a.k.a. the leader of the most influential country in the world).
To add to this protecting of the media, things could turn around against president Bush. This could still happen since the real campaigning for the 2004 election begins to kick off. The media could turn into an enemy of Bush in heartbeat by just having "World News Tonight" report how dangerous the streets of Iraq really are. Just one report on how american soldiers are likely to die every week at a large rate could make everyone's patriotic smile and ignorance disappear, and make reality common knowledge.
What is the Media? What is it doing to us, the people? I’m always hearing that the media has a big influences on the people’s view of the world we live in. But in my opinion, I don’t pay attention to what the media is telling me. What I’m told by the media, I feel like it goes in one ear and out the other. The problem with believing that I don’t listen to the media’s influence over my views is that maybe I’m wrong. Who’s to say that the media does have a big influence on my views and I don’t even realize it.
What about commercial on TV? They are all companies selling their products to the people watching TV. I could be wrong but I have heard that one way the producers of a certain show know that people are watching it is by the response to the products that are advertise during the commercials. Which might not be true, but doesn’t it make sense? “Don’t get Mad, Get Glad.” A catchy phase that makes me believe that Glad garbage bags are the best. Normally I would then go out and buy Glad, but how I’m I to know that it’s the best product of garbage bags? Just because it’s a nice commercial, doesn’t make it the best out there. That is the media’s influence on the people. Yeah, it’s not as important as who’s going to be the next president but it’s still a way that the media influences our views.
In every TV commercial about the presidential election, there will always be one candidate saying that he is the best choice for the people, that he will help make a difference for us. But who are we to believe. It seems that they are all saying the same thing, “Vote for Me. I will help you the most.” But there is always something wrong with every candidate, something that balances out just how perfect they are. But you are the one who has to decide in the end what you believe to be true and what you think the media is fabricating.
But where else can you get information about each candidate for president? Maybe you can do your own research to help you decide who is best but it is in the media where you see what the people are really like. The media is what tells you what Bush does and how he has decided to fight back against terrorists, but it’s up to you to take in what the media is saying, and decide for yourself what you believe. Just hopefully the media won’t shape your own views for you.
The media for the past fifty years has become the most important tool in society. Television, Radio and other form s of the media have become the way to communicate in the world. As of the past thirty years, the media has become a tool of communication and manipulation of the public and the society its apart of. Media has a small power on people even if people who don't follow trends and don't fall into the trap that the tv's and the radios provide, it has a small hold including the obession with celebrities and the obession with the idea of peopl in turmoil like trials and things like that.
This idea that the media has become a tool for public relations and such came at time when movie and music stars became these larger than life figures. When the stars become these figures, people become infatuaed with them. Soon, they begin to stalk them and the media starts this frenzy with them but documenting t their life and stalking them as well. This idea the media perpetuates is rthe idea that you must love them not for their work, but their pretty little million dollar faces and their mediocre acting. The times when acting was just acting is gone and that the idea of the "Minute celebrity" is in.
The idea that the media has toward the idea of making decisions. The media creates this propaganda and the media creates the answer for you and all the decisons in the world. Depending on how much they paid for the commerical, they tell you how to vote. You wanna know what to wear, dress like your favorite celebity, they do that for you by picking up magazines. Feeling bad about your self image, look at the magazines to see pictures of "perfection"
The media has a huge impact on our major decisions and opinions. Though we may not realize it, we are constantly being persuaded and influenced by what we see on programs and the news in specific. Who knows who would be in power if it weren’t for the media exposing both their flaws and perfections? I will focus on the news and its affect on our psyches. The news takes advantage of people who may be ignorant on an issue and exposes them to lies. I will explain this further. Since these people do no know any better, they simply absorb all of the deceitfulness that is pitched to them.
The portrayal that the media displays for our world’s condition varies from broadcast to broadcast. On one occasion they might focus on a killing spree or the war in Iraq. However, the next day they will mention a murder and then put all of their attention on basket making or a new diet pill that “really works”. I prefer that the news discuss the serious and important issues in the world. If we want entertainment or crafts, we will turn to another channel. Many early morning news shows forget their purposes. They are concerned about ratings so they try to make it more positive. However, the grim truth of it is that most of the important news is negative. Also they should be aware about dismissing serious crimes. The order that they broadcast the news is important. This gives people a mixed message about the state of our world. Its almost saying we’re all going to die, but you can be skinny when it happens.
The media also influences our political decisions. They love to expose scandals and publicize them. This can be a benefit because this makes us more cautious about whom we decide to put into power. However, opinions can get in the way of facts. There is a difference between stating negative facts and slander. Gullible people will listen to the slander and may base their decisions on lies, which could affect the future of our country. The media also arouses questions that never would have been asked. This isn’t always bad thing, but it is when questioning a person’s morale. If a good person continues to be questioned, they become untrustworthy and rumors begin to spread very quickly. This could ruin a person’s reputation. This is another example of he media’s weight and how it could change our views and make us more cynical than necessary.
Media plays a big role in our world. media is what keep people alert of what going on and what happening. without media there would been alot viewers like my self clueless of what goes on in our world. Media influence us to buy things as in cloths, food and electronics and also even reminds us to vote. Presidents use media as a key source for them to push people vote for them.
With many people now in our world possesing a telivison and spending hours waching it threw media they gain knowlege and also allow viewrs to be up to date with what going on. Society is highly influnces by the media from kids to adults. kids because of media tend to want toys that are shown on comericals and adults are convince to buy things because of comericals.
The news allow people to see what problems and what occuring in your area and in the world. News is almost every New Yoker depends on. New Yorkers depend on the next day weather, what is going on with the stocks, what going on with the trains and what are some of the problems in the world. There are many viewers to the world and what the media show and say many viewers follow and also listen. News and what the media says influences viewers heavly on what they think and what they should belive and not belive.
Good films can be of many genres: comedy, romance, action, fantasy, etc. But, all great films have the same universal methods of attracting millions of viewers. From what I have seen, good movies are able to have the viewer hooked from the opening scene. Whether it's starting off with an action filled scene, like “Saving Private Ryan”, or starting off slowly like “Training Day, directors manipulate the camera angles and actions of their actors. This is done in order to keep the person watching not wanting to get up for a bathroom break or to get that bucket of popcorn that they crave. Directors and producers who want this for their film must be able to create a way to make their opening scene attractive enough to make the entire movie memorable.
The media plays a HUGE part in past and this upcoming election. Most of the country gets to know the candidates through the media; through television, newspaper, magazine, and the internet. Bush could be a completely different person than what he poses to be on the media. He could have a media personality and a normal one. He likes to portray himself as this "man from the ranch." Most people don't know that he really didn't grow up on a ranch. He grew up a rich boy going to private school.
Most people aren't up front first row watching Bush and listening to what he says. We learn about him from the media. The media is made up of people and their ideas. So in fact, we are just listening to other people's interpetations. Now, everybody has opinions and preferences, so who is to say they can't put a tilt on what they put out.
The War in Iraq is a huge factor for Bush's fait as future President. The media could show him up with the war and make him look bad. They could criticize the war and why we're there, while linking it back to Bush. On the other hand, they could glorify the war and talk about our national security. They could say that the fight on terrorism is over or lessened and this is all due to Bush's actions. The people could either agree or disagree with both, yet if he media is siding with one opinion, the public will follow. We are too dependent on the media.
Bush has a plan on how he will win the election. He is going to attempt to put it out in a cetrain way, get out exactly what he wants, but it will have to be through the media. You never know, the media could change what he's saying, put it out in a way that Bush hadn't intended, or attack his points, for example, the casual ranch man he is posing to be.
what make a good film is a good story and video camera view that are very appealing. A film which could have a bad story but has camrera view that are very nice to the viewers. A good film is a good pice of art, to be as creative and open minded as you can. To have a film that is very creative can eaisly make a good film. A film that have diffrent angles through out tit can make a smiple shot to become a very beatiful frame. A good film if for the directoer o have a good story and have shots that can be an eye opner for viewers.
a
Now I'm not supporting President Bush, but people are really rough on him. I have no idea what goes on inside the white house, but niether does the majority of America, Last night, the President gave a press confernce to answer questions which the media has, the questions asked of him he kinda dodged, but the ones he did answer I understood the reasoning. However my pops, the most stubborn person in the world, wouldn't listen.
President Bush, was asked how does he feel about the remarks that we didn't take action against Afganistan soon enough, and took action on Iraq too soon. The President responeded, when we attacked Iraq the world was on a different place then it was pre 9/11, America was in a war stance when we attacked Iraq to remove Sadam. We didn't attack Afganistan because the world wasn't prepared for war, but when the US was attacked that all changed, the World came to look at terrorism as a new threat for the world. I thought that that statement was pretty acurate in my mind. And the truth of the matter is that President Clinton, had been bombing Afganistan in search of Osama pre 9/11.
If President Bush wins the election, he has to clear his name and his staffs of the blame for 9/11. Bush also will need to bring a new name to America, perhaps a no war stance. The handover in Iraq, however its spun will also greatly effect the election
Basically, a good film has to have many aspects to it. First off, the movie has to start off right. It needs to catch my attention and lure me in. A good film should have good shots, memorable shots. I want to get a sense of the environment and mood. Next, the actors and actresses need to be good, honestly. I want to love the way they act and be able to sympathize with them. If something is happening in the movie and the actor is acting a way I really don't think someone would act in the situation, I begin to watch the movie focusing on the bad parts and how I would change it. Punch lines and scenes need to be included. The director needs to get into my mind and bring out my interest. In movies I like, I enjoy being surprised or lead on the wrong way. Directors that play with the viewer's mind and emotions are the real good ones, for examples, Quentin Tarrantino. He goes back and forth with the story, letting you know exactly what he wants so that the ending is very powerful and good.
When I surf the internet and especially when I watch TV, I mostly see advertisements and sensationalized news stories. This has caused me to ask some questions like: Who uses the media and what do they use it for? What is effective media usage? What am I getting out of the media; what does it do for me? And lastly: How can I use the media?
Let me answer the questions consecutively the best that I can.
The media is primarily used by corporations/companies trying to sell their products. In one hour of television that I watched I counted over twenty minutes of commercials (about 40-45 commercials). This is not counting product placement within the shows that I watched. So it became pretty clear to me that company advertisers also use the media very effectively because when they advertise on TV, they are selling to a captive audience. If a person is watching a certain show, that person will continue to watch through the commercial break so she/he will not miss part of the show either by channel surfing or by taking her/his attention away from the TV. Whether we realize it or not, the images that we see on TV affect us and our perceptions of the world. I would encourage you reading this right now to take a look at a short film called Channeling by clicking on this link
In this movie, the particular individual's perceptions of everythig that he sees in the real world are so affected by the images that he sees on TV that he cannot even function in the 'real world'.
What I get out of the media is a little different. I don’t usually buy what I see on TV. I see the media as a tool to get ideas out to a large range and number of people. Sadly, I think that the advertisers are way ahead of the activists I terms of media use, but there is no reason why the activists and thinkers can’t catch up. I use the media, particularly the internet, in order to spread ideas and information. The internet is a very useful activist tool. It allows for the organization of large demoinstrations, coordination of events across contries and sharing of information. This is the direction in which I would like media ussage to go. Hopefully the people will take back the media for their own uses, but until then, the people have to be that much more aware of the effects of the images they see. At this point in time, in this country at least, media permeates almost every part of our existance. On the whole, it's hard to avoid. This is the reason that anyone who is sick of being told how to think and act and what to buy by the media has a responsability to take the media back. I think that it's particularly important to remember that the media is neither good nor bad; it's simply a tool. Like many other tools (spatulas, tables, shoes) the media can be uased for either good or bad purposes. (Disclaimer: This statement should not in any way be misunderstood to support the 'guns don't kill people, people kill people argument'. There are many tools that can be used only for good or only for bad.)It really depends on the intentions of the person/group using the media. If the person/group does not take into account the possible consequences of her/his/its media use, then the media usage can have deliterious results. This can be seen in advertisements that rely on steryotypes to sell their products.
Well, what can we do about this cooption of communication? how do we take back the media for our own uses?
I'd like to think that I have some good answers, but I'd love to hear some more so leave me some comments.
Here are three ways in which the media can be taken back; 1.support public media, like PBS, NPR and Indymedia. This is media that already belongs to you; keep it that way. 2. Avoid buying products with logos all over them (unless you are making a conscious decision to advertise for a certain company/organization for free). 3. Put your own media out there; make a website (almost everyone at Beacon has a website from ninth grade, update it), start a zine (or write for The Otherground or Beacon Ink) post on discussion forums on Beacon and sites other than Beacon, or raise some money and get your movie on public access TV (Conor did it, why can't you?).
I hope that what I've written here helps contribute to the people taking back the media as well as more conscious media consumption.
I am sitting in an apartment in New York City. What’s going around me? I am no traveler and Its not possible to go around the world, lets make it even smaller, around the country. What is happening, while I am sitting on my cozy apartment? How is our leader doing in that big House, which is white. We cannot possibly get these answers by running around. This huge work is on Media’s shoulder. I get all the information about our government and everything inside our home through media. This huge way of communication has created a great bond. We trust media. We believe what they tell us.
Now this trust becomes a big factor during the time of election. All those sneaky, picky, serious, valor information about the candidates. Recently I saw on news, they were reporting about John Kerry’s health situation. Will he be able to run this country with his current health situation? A plus point for Bush. I love those funny campaign where they showed kid is yawning and falling asleep during Bush’s speech. Beside the fun factor Presidential Campaign has many more levels than the War on Terrorism. Haven't we forgotten about gun control, education, civil rights, THE ECONOMY, and pretty much every other political issue that we think of. Bush is busy explaining what he did, why he did as he was doing on his every other controversial decision. One thing might make people to re elect Bush. The ongoing war crisis in Iraq. People might think he have to come again to finish up the mess that he created. And he says we are wining against terrorism. Are we? I don’t think so. Innocent people are dying everyday. Come on be practical, what about the crimes going on inside the country. Why cant woman or any one walk safely at night? We are more afraid of the inside terrorism rather than terrorism from outside. Bush’s role on the September 11th crisis might come handy for him, in fact he is using that as his campaign. All of our concerns are coming through the media.
There is really no way to tell if Bush's sex program is properly working without interviewing millions of teenagers and finding out their thoughts on the matter. So I don’t think we know that yet. But we will soon.
Obviously the media affects politics, because the media affects people’s opinions, especially what they think about the world around them. Just as a biased person will only tell you things that are biased, the media only tells you what it chooses to. However, the problem isn’t that the media is biased, because really everything in the world is biased. For that matter, human nature is to have opinions and be biased. And in the same way, everything in the world affects people’s opinions: every movie you see, book you read, news show you watch, painting you contemplate, or sport you play affects how you think and what you think. So, therefore, the problem is not that the media manipulates us, because everything manipulates us somehow, but that it manipulates us in a negative, destructive way. And by manipulating society, the media manipulates the people who create the politics, thereby manipulating politics themselves.
The Media affects politics by manipulating society to become impulse driven, materialistic, apathetic strangers who only care about the things that benefit them (mainly themselves, their possessions, and the people that they like). If you’re different from the rest of society, then you are a stranger, and as a stranger you are a threat, a threat who shouldn’t be listened to, trusted, or respected. Now, this affects politics because our elected officials are elected by people who want impulsive, irresponsible, greedy and vengeful leaders (hence, our current administration).
U.S. Foreign Policy (and internal policy, for that matter) is a direct result of a society manipulated by the media. The U.S. looks out for the U.S., at the expense of the rest of the world (admittedly, many other countries have similar goals). And, because, for whatever reason, the media has manipulated society to be impulsive and vengeful, the majority of Americans support the way our country acts, without casting a critical (or even comprehending) eye towards it. For example, the Americans who were killed in Falluja a couple weeks ago: this was an atrocious event, but most headlines did not grieve for those who had died. Instead, they declared (in all capitals, of course) ‘MURDERERS!’ The newspaper headlines, however, did not say “Oh Sh*t! How did America f*ck up Iraq so badly that Iraqis are massacring innocent citizens?”
It isn’t bad that the media affects politics, what’s bad is that the result is a self-destructive, ignorant government (as well as a self destructive, ignorant society). To end this long ramble, I want to quote the Boondocks, a comic strip (which, admittedly, is also biased and manipulative). In the strip, the main character, Huey, is sitting and watching T.V. after September 11th. “Isn’t it interesting how all the different news channels have cool titles and logos for their coverage?...Let’s see: Channel 2 is ‘America’s vengeance,’ Channel 12 is ‘America at War,’ and Channel 33 is ‘America Strikes Back,’” he says. “How about ‘America stops and thinks about why some people hate us?’” I think that this epitomizes the problem with American society- a society which has been created by the media that manipulates it.
The media is something that every knows plenty about, but what can it tell us about politics and the important issues in the United States today. George Bush is in office today, but sometimes even today, people want to know how he got to be where he is. On television, all you see are commericals attacking John Kerry or praising Bush's policy. You can note that there are never any commercials about how Bush's Iraqi policies are ever detailed on TV.
By now, it seems to be clear that Bush's attempts to find weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. But all of the major newsstations don't really address Bush's failures. But he is the president, so why would anyone want to not be patriotic? This also might effect this upcoming election in November. If the public, especaily the millions of young adults, do not know the truths about Bush's ideas, they might not make the right presidential choice in November '04.
One example of Bush's failures, possibly effecting voters desicions (as brought up by Ms. Reed) is that Bush has supposedly been enforcing anti-rape/womans rights. But in fact, there are still rape cases in America, but nothing is ever done about it. In schools, it can be argued that there is still sexual pressuse in schools. But nobody really cares or says anything becasue they don't know that Bush's campaign is failing. But it's never seen on TV.
Patriotism is probably a driving force for all of this. With the war in Iraq, why would anyone want to go against the ruler of our "great" state. Some may argue that without expresing Bush's failures, the media is lying to everyone who will be voting. I think that the media should show these sides of the story becasue it will help everyone make an informed desicion in November.
Few things on this earth possess as much power as the media in the lives of everyday people. We are consumed by the media everywhere we exist, from billboards on every corner that we walk to the numerous televisions that seem to turn up in just about every establishment that one can find. With this never-ending occupation of our minds, the media has the distinct privelage of being albe to shape how we view things in our lives, whether it be politics, popular culture or otherwise. In an age where people crave information, the media has become as necessary as our shoes, and it seems like we wear its effects everywhere that we go. The unfortunate thing is that the media tends to gloss over many an important issue and in the end deprives the common person of vital information.
The advertising selection at the Super Bowl earlier this year perfectly portrays this new phenomenon. An anti-Bush organization, "moveon.org," held a contest to come up with a convincing advertisment that accurately displayed a fault in the Bush administration's handling of the nation. The winning advertisment displayed several children working in everyday jobs ranging from garbagemen to clerks at a supermarket. At the advertisment's conclusion, the following text appears: "Who is going to pay for Bush's $3 trillion deficit?" Naturally, CBS chose not to carry the advertisment, even if "moveon.org" had raised adequate funds (well into the multi-millions) to pay for the 30 second timeslot. CNN instead chose to air the advertisment twice during the Super Bowl, but couldn't have roused nearly as much exposure to the organization's message as a national network could have.
Why was this advertisment not shown? It seems like the media is afraid to display any sort of opposition or second opinions anymore. In an age where we preach "unity" and "togetherness," it seems like any form of angst shown towards our national government is somehow taboo. The government and the media both want us to keep our mouths shut and live our lives in quiet ignorance. This new reality is really unfortunate and pathetic, as we are living in a time where the free-flow of ideas is paramount in our ever-changing world. What's wrong with a little oppostion, a little questioning? Does it really hurt that much? Obviously CBS and the entire media think so. They selectively inform us of the issues that really matter. Through this course of action, the media is therefore communicating to me that recognition of our enormous national debt is far less important than the hours and hours of male enhancement advertisments (which dominated the airwaves at the Super Bowl). As much as we hear of the economy rebounding and increases in jobs, the media seems to conviently forget about the national budget deficit and the amount of budget cuts that all states are facing. Again, how convient....
To conclude, it seems like as curious as we are about the world and events that impact us everyday, we are still able to selectively tune out certain truths and realities. The media is a perfect example of this: it projects the good, fluffy and ultimately harmless stuff to us all, and then simaltaneously deprives us of critical, abrasive and "dangerous" material in the spirit of "keeping everybody happy." The spreading of information has always been upheld as an objective institution, and yet the largest information hub in the world is perhaps the most subjective that exists. It seems like the media is scared of disagreeing with the majority or the ruling power of the nation. Risk is almost like a terrorist threat to the media: they have to defeat it at all costs. I live in hope that mass-media as a whole can finally defeat its own quiet ignorance and really show us every aspect of the truth, rather than one incredibly one-sided, glossed over and ultimately pointless piece of trash. People are smarter than the status-quo, and the media must realize this.
I truly am a conspiracy theorist because I don't trust the media. When there are "reality T.V. shows"and people are "talking to the camera" I believe they are reading their lines. I believe that Elian Gonzales and his entire family were told what to say and what to do. I am also one of the few people who do believe that Bush has had Saddam Hussein and also has Osama Bin Ladin and they are just going to "find" him about a week before the final elections.
But either way. Lets just for a moment sit back and believe that he is a good and fair outstanding citizen, the whole "Florida ballots"incident didn't really happen and he could speak proper English. Oh and of course lets not forget that going into Iraq was completely justifiable and catching Hussein was the only move left to make America that much more "Democratic." Would he still have any true place as our president? Because honestly I don't think so. Half of hour country is being blind sighted WE ARE IN A MUILTIBILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT BECAUSE OF HIM. Doesn't anyone see that? Does catching one man because of unjustifiable reasons shield him from the responsibility of keeping our economic status at a balance? Because I definitely thought that was on the agenda of PRESIDENT.
I don't understand how half of the voters in America are letting him propaganda their ears, eyes and opinions out of the picture and making them only use their hands to vote for him. They are like cyborgs to his manipulation. If there was someway to bang out of peoples minds that catching and killing people just because they are bad doesn't mean good president we (by we I mean not the people voting for bush) we would all be doing it. Until then these blogs are all we can do until EVERYONE IS A COOL CONSPIRACY THEORIST LIKE ME!!
I think a "good movie" is one that doesn't feel like a movie at all.It is the truth, it is real life on tape.The perfect combination of actors,directors,and especially editors will allow a viewer to forget they're watching rehearsed , pre-written sequences, but rather feel they can emotionally relate to the characters and storyline.Take something away from it , long after the movie ends.This applies to any genre, from comedy to crime-drama.Ive seen movies I have not remembered the next day, or remembered them for the wrong reasons.Sometimes actors that were not trustworthy in thier roles,sometimes bad editing, sometimes even bad hair.A good movie should feel comfortable,human,be smooth to watch...
By instilling endless fear in the hearts of the American people, the government genuinely prefers us on the edge of our seats at all times. In retrospect ,this has been a very planned out and vital governmental policy. The lack of communication in this “democracy” only adds to the constant state of terror no matter what the REAL news stories seem to be. Statistics are routinely inflated, crimes often exaggerated and suspects made out to be the psuedo-black man not far from home. Because of this fear, citizens are less likely to question government motives in things like Racial Profiling, Funding and most importantly ,War. If that man working in your local deli is a danger to you (and of course President Bush wouldn’t lie to you) then there should be no problem with a war that has been compared to the inquisition. As long as the mission is completed it good taste, and does not interfere with wholesome Middle-American life, then all is well ,from sea to shining sea. Fear has turned out to be a very lucrative and reliable policy for The White House. Making issues and people worse than they are in reality is a sure-fire way to get people to obey. It can be depended on in good,as well as war times. Media just so happens to be the best portal for this. There is no faster way to send a taupe terror alert than that local news channel we all tune to see the latest murder or rape. I don't want to hate the messenger , but I feel I've had enough. From an approaching two inch snow storm that is shown like a coming apocalypse, ready to wipe out everything in it’s way, to a swarm of killer sharks coming to attack swimmers on the Long Island shoreline, I truly wait for the day newscasters will allow our American people to just...relax.