Changing The Paradigm: Why We Need Media Literacy

Media Literacy involves intelligently analyzing and evaluating media messages and assessing their worth. It is an act of questioning the media swamped world around us and critically thinking about the information provided to us. This type evaluation is very important to everyday life. It allows the public to make informed decisions while keeping them from being mislead by media messages.

Neil Postman goes through this issue over and over again in his best-selling novel “Amusing Ourselves to Death”. He talks about our overwhelming dependence on being entertained, the extreme importance of using more than one source of media for information, and the importance of being truly informed. Postman clearly believes in the art of media literacy education and, as you will see, it’s clear why.

News
Even the local news isn’t free of misinformation. Because of tight deadlines, reporters may not have time to fully sort through the whole story. It is sad to say but your local newspaper and TV news channel are businesses. They have to make money to survive. This force them to cover what will be the most watched which sometimes means the most entertaining rather than the most important. Your source of news is also constricted by its geographic location. The media outlet is most likely to focus more on stories that affect the area rather than national news. In order for a person to be fully informed they must have a balance of the two, thus forcing them to turn to other sources.

Risk continuum
The likelihood that a person will express a specific behavior due to a negative media message can be determined by using a risk continuum, a scale from 0 to 100 with 0 being the lowest and 100 the highest. Your set point in the scale is determined by a variety of factors from your home life to your media exposure habits. It is important to understand the movement of your “set point” to understand how at risk you or the people around you are to a negative effect from media exposure. These types of tools are essential to developing excellent media literacy skills. Awareness is the first step.

Media ownership
Another important factor of media literacy is being aware of media ownership. On a website from the Columbia Journalism Review one can pick a specific media company and see what other companies it owns. For example, we all know Walt Disney for its creative kid’s movies and theme parks, but did you know that Disney also owns ABC, ESPN, Touchtone Pictures and Miramax films? I certainly didn’t. We need to be careful when television shows promote a product or service because they could be promoting for company’s own good. If Johhny Depp were to appear on Jimmy Kimmel Live to promote the New Pirates of the Caribbean movie you could consider it a conflict of interest because Disney owns the hit movie and ABC where Jimmy Kimmel appears.

In a few short weeks I will graduate and will be thrown into the crazy world of Advertising and Public Relations. At this time, Media Literacy will be especially important. I need to beware of what my materials are conveying to my target audience. Now that I am aware of the tricks and traps I will be able to recognize and avoid these potential problems in years to come.

For more information on media literacy visit the Center for Media Literacy

For games to teach media literacy in the classroom click here

Am I at Risk?

Every day, whether we are aware of it or not, we are exposed to media messages. From watching movies, surfing the Internet, to even walking down the street, we are surrounded by a variety of messages. But have you ever stopped and wondered over time what kind of influence these messages have over our daily lives? (Probably not, at least I never have)

I’ve heard people say time and time again that school shootings are the direct result of playing too many violent video games, but I’ve leaned that’s not actually entirely true. There are many factors that influence outward behavior. Everyone has what you can call a set point in the “risk continuum”. It’s a point on a scale from 0 (being at low risk) and 100 (highly at risk for a specific behavior).

There are essentially seven different factors, as a result of long-term conditioning, that determine where your set point is placed on the scale. Most of these factors are derived from your environment and lifestyle. This includes your cognitive abilities, sociological factors, and your exposure to the media. If you were immature, had a rough home life, and was living in media bubble only exposing yourself to a particular negative message over a long period of time you would probably have a high risk point.

Your risk set point for a negative effect is not stationary. There are six factors that affect the movement of a person’s personal set point. These include the severity of the content you are exposing yourself to, your state of mind and how much of yourself you see in a particular character demonstrating the negative traits.

After thinking about this I was forced to assess my own media exposure habits. I am fortunate enough to have grown up in a positive environment that encouraged the development of my strong morals. But, on the other hand, when it comes to my media exposure habits I admit I love scary movies. Does that mean I’m going to blow up the school? NO! But my set point for being at risk of violent or aggressive behavior is higher than if I weren’t to watch them.

Although I’m a sucker for scary movies, I feel my risk of negative behavior is relatively low. I never identify with any of the aggressive characters I am watching. My tight family bond and ability to realize fact from fiction enables me to stay at a low risk level.

In the years to come I would like to cut down my exposure to violent movies and continue on the path to media literacy. The only way we can prevent the possible negative effects of the media is to take a proactive stance. That way we can determine how close we, and the people around us, are to manifesting a negative behavior such as aggressiveness or violence. Click here for more information.

The Cultural Craze Known as American Idol

I hate to admit it but one of my favorite guilty pleasures is to watch American Idol every week. Apparently, according to the Neilson ratings, I am not the only one. During the week of March 24 American Idol had over 25 million viewers. American Idol first began in 2002 and has been gaining viewers ever since. It originated from the British reality show Pop Idol which first aired in 2001. Jeff Zucker, the chief executive of NBC Universal said “[He] thinks Idol is the most impactful show in the history of television”.

Other shows in the same timeslot cannot even compare to the American Idol phenomenon. A March 27^th article from Zap2it.com showed that American Idol is continuing to rule in the ratings with minimal resistance from other networks. In the Wednesday night 9pm time slot American idol ran against a rerun of “Criminal Minds” from CBS and a rerun of the CW’s “Girlicious”. It seems the networks know that American Idol will win every week so they don’t even try anymore. They rearrange their schedules lessen their losses. Competing networks are even calling the show “The Death Star”

Ratings statistics and calculations can sometimes be difficult to interpret. In simple terms the rating percentage is dividing the number of people watching the specific program divided by the total number of people watching TV in a single minute. For the week of March 28^th American Idol was rated 15.1% which is significantly more than CBS’s criminal minds which was airing at the same time. Share, on the other hand, by definition is the percent of households (or persons) using television who are tuned to a specific program, station or network in a specific area at a specific time. During this week American Idol scored a 24 when criminal minds only scored a 7. American Idol rises above the competition in both the ratings percentage and share.

American Idol has consistently dominated the ratings and created such a reputation for itself, that I believe the show can be moved to anytime slot any night and still stay high in the ratings. There are very few television programs that have as much success. The only show that I feel can compete with American Idol would be ABC’s “Dancing with the Stars”. The week of March 24^th “Dancing with the Stars” came in third with slightly over 20 million viewers, 5 million less than American Idol. Overall, American Idol is a cultural phenomenon that has took American by storm and, as proven by the ratings, has no signs of stopping.

Are We Amusing Ourselves... to Death?

Neil Postman’s unique novel “Amusing Ourselves to Death” is a thoughtful yet entertaining evaluation of today’s media saturated culture. Although written in 1985, the book comments on many issues of media literacy still relevant today.

On his first page Postman states, “We must look to the city of Las Vegas, Nevada, as a metaphor of our national character and aspirations”. This idea although extreme lends a focus for the entire novel: entertainment. Entertainment today has blended itself into everything from the magazines we read to the daily news.

Postman believes we have been conditioned at an early age to depend on media as a learning device. The introduction of Sesame Street encouraged children to learn by being entertained. Although we typically think of children’s programming aiding in education, Postman reveals that it’s only undermining what teachers are trying to do. When parents set their kids in front of the television the children discover to rely on the media to learn and in time may develop into passive learners.

Even though Postman’s example is somewhat outdated we can see evidence of this same process through television shows like Dora the Explorer and products such as leapfrog . Children are encouraged and trained to rely on TV and computers for their learning needs.

This reliance continues into adulthood with the advent of television news shows. Postman talks endlessly about the perils of television newscasts saying, “Television is altering the meaning of being informed by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation.” He feels that news is packaged as entertainment so much that it looses it sense of fact. This illustrates ones inability (laziness) to use a variety of outlets for information. You can’t rely on one specific source whether it be TV, or otherwise. You must be a well-rounded reader to get all the information you need to become a competent viewer. The entertainment value of television doesn’t override the sense of fact. It’s the viewer’s job to develop media literacy skills to discern the fact from fiction.

Overall, we will never be able to slip away from the effects of the media. I feel that people choose to watch TV as an outlet to forget the worries of everyday life. Some people choose to watch for the sole purpose of being entertained and will continue no matter how much we try to change it. Sorry Postman :)

Are You Truly Informed??

The newspaper industry is slowly going through a transformation. Cyberjournalism is new form of news writing and is emerging in cities throughout the country. The average citizen is put in the driver’s seat as they become the reporters and write the stories they feel are important.

I reviewed an online journalism effort in San Diego and was quite surprised by what I found. The site “Voice of San Diego.org” is a non-profit online newspaper focused on issues affecting the San Diego region. Their unique mission statement is:

“to consistently deliver ground-breaking investigative journalism for the San Diego region. To increase civic participation by giving citizens the knowledge and in-depth analysis necessary to become advocates for good government and social progress.”

The site is simply dedicated to informing. No entertainment here. The online newspaper prides itself on the fact that its sole focus is to deliver local news and issues. They present the neighborhood news from an independent prospective.

As the mission statement implies, The newspaper has an overwhelming local feel to it. It is simply the news relevant to the citizens of San Diego. I live in Erie, PA so the articles and issues discussed are somewhat irrelevant to me but could be very important to others. This type of reporting is good in a sense that local citizens can become more actively involved in their community events. They will know, not just some, but ALL of the issues affecting their area and will be able to make educated and informed decision. This seems like the perfect idea in theory. But if one was to rely solely on the Voice of San Diego for their news they would be missing out on vital section of information; world news. Like any form of media, readers must not rely solely on one source for news.

Another unique aspect of the site that it is professionally staffed yet still a non-profit organization. It’s the only organization of its kind in the whole state of California. They operate from the financial support of individuals, foundations and business.

Because the online newspaper is non-profit, the idea of commercialism plays less of a role in the depiction of events. The paper can publish whatever they want, not just what will make them money. They don’t have as many constraints and can focus on bringing the reader stories that are most likely to impact their daily lives.

Sometimes in journalism the structure of the organizational structure of the paper can determine what stories they cover or the bias with which they write. The Voice of San Diego is run by a board of 6 directors and has a staff of 8 writers, editors and producers. Interestingly enough each member of the board has a unique background. No two have the same. Each member brings a different outlook to the paper. This allows for a balance between the stories that will be covered. If the board of directors were all tied to the same company the paper would most likely have a skewed focus.

In conclusion, the only way to be sure that you are getting fully informed is to rely on more than one source. No matter how unbiased and informative one paper or television news cast may seem, you’re still missing vital information in some way. One media source can’t do it all. A mix of all types and varieties is the only sure way to stay truly informed.

Survivor: Fans vs Favorites

I think the idea of the show is an interesting concept. Having the dedicated fans compete with their favorite competitors is definite way to boost ratings. Getting the viewers involved is a great way to increase the average viewer’s relationship with the program.

But I feel Alexis’s quote is incorrect. The fans only “think” they know their competitor’s strengths and weaknesses. During the actual filming there are hours and hours of footage that is shot and condensed into a one-hour show. No one knows what is really happening in the other 23 hours of the day. As Dr. Corso said in class, most of the players sleep for hours on end because there’s nothing else to do.

Overall, the fans only know they game in which they are shown. They have no way of actually knowing what goes on there. This proves that the “favorites” are actually the ones with the advantage.

This is where the line blurs between scripted programs and reality television. The recorded footage is skillfully edited to create a storyline and “characters”. Which makes me wonder "is this really reality? "

"Since when has news become entertainment ..."

In class we were exposed to an episode of the 1980’s science fiction series Max Headroom. Though futuristic and somewhat implausible, the show comments on many aspects of media literacy relevant today.

In the particular episode we watched entitled “war”, we were introduced to a society overwhelmed by media influence. One of network news channels, BreakThruTV, stages a terrorist attack in order to increase the number of viewers during the global ratings sweeps.

The concepts that first came to mind were the four traps that result from automaticity, Since we are bombarded by so many media messages everyday our minds program themselves to automatically filter out those deemed unimportant. As discussed in our class lecture, this state of mind has four traps that make discerning important messages difficult.

Since society has developed such a strong sense of trust with television news channels, we have “a false sense of feeling informed and in control” which eventually leads to “faulty beliefs. Since we have no way of actually knowing the truth, we whole-heartedly believe what we see. As illustrated in the episode, playing on these information traps is a dangerous way to get viewers to believe anything you want them to.

Another important issue resulting from this episode is media ethics. This just goes to show that networks will do anything for ratings. A question of ethics can be asked of most of the reality shows that appear on television today. The line between what is ethical and what will make money continues to be unclear. As Edison Carter asks, “Since when has news become entertainment?”