I'm taking COMM 100 this semester, a course on the issues of mass communication. As I was sitting through lecture this morning, I began thinking of the ways media tries to grab our attention. Over the past hundreds of years, mass media has done more than transfer information: it's discovered ways to pull all of us into its modes of thought and reactions. Advertisements yank at us in subtle ways the few of us are always conscious of.
Let's step back to Greek culture. When someone wanted to talk to the gods, they went to an oracle, who would often do drugs and report back her visions. These people would be the only ones who could talk to the gods; they held information that only they could truly convey.
Fast forward to the 'Dark' Ages, and even Ancient Rome. Literacy is at a low, and the only way people can experience religion is through the veil of what priests tell them. The Gutenberg printing press changed that, although churches' interpretations of biblical passages are still highly regarded today.
And MTV was once (and still is) marketed as the vehicle for social and cultural definition among America's youth. I remember their shows and commercials in the 90's about people defining themselves through how they dress and act. (And a lot of my contemporaries seem to take a lot from the portrayal of American life in "reality" TV shows, also a product of MTV). Even Nickelodeon did this.
And then the portrayal of life in alcohol and cigarette ads. I'll be honest: if I see an ad with someone relaxing on a sofa, sipping a gin and tonic, I'm going to buy a gin and tonic that week. That represents a peaceful, contemplative lifestyle to me, all thanks to the media. We were shown old advertisements for toothpaste (which is still marketed as 'your only way to prevent tooth decay'), and it's amusing how many things are marketed using fear or even inconveniences (OMG!). But what takes the cake for me is the news.
Thinking back over the last four years, I'll estimate that 97% of the Daily Collegian issues I saw had a story related to football front and center, above the fold. The newspapers are 70% sports, and the news we're provided with isn't always relevant or meaningful. This defines our modern college culture, or at least for Penn State: sports, sports, sports, a commedian visited, Spanier said something, sports, sports and some random band from Detroit. I remain unsure whether the newspaper displays or defines the culture, or if it's simply a vicious cycle.
Even in the 'professional' newspapers, though, this is of extreme concern. All the coverage Obama got makes me curious how much thought people actually gave to his issues (not to mention Ron Paul's media blackout), and the sudden disappearence of WMD's from newspaper articles a few years ago, and how little coverage Bush's last days have been getting in lieu of an incoming president. This is important stuff, and we're being pushed away from it.
And that's my question: media has given us so much in the way of interaction and information, and yet it still has the power to transform our mindset and thought structure. Can we truly trust the media we surround ourselves with?
I'm not suggesting that recent conspiracy theories (fluorine, 9/11, Paul McCartney) are true, but perhaps they do have something to them. And it creates even more fear: if we're not told what's actually going on when it's going on, and we're presented with a view of it through a broken kaleidiscope instead, what are we really gaining from modern mass media? Is it really any different than feudal peasant life?
My answer is yes and no. Big Mass Media (CNN, Fox, MTV, basic cable, etc.) is probably poisoning us to some degree, but the emergence of the internet, especially in its current form, leaves a lot to be uncovered.
For your viewing pleasure, I've provided a performance of Oingo Boingo's "Wake Up (It's 1984)."
Let's step back to Greek culture. When someone wanted to talk to the gods, they went to an oracle, who would often do drugs and report back her visions. These people would be the only ones who could talk to the gods; they held information that only they could truly convey.
Fast forward to the 'Dark' Ages, and even Ancient Rome. Literacy is at a low, and the only way people can experience religion is through the veil of what priests tell them. The Gutenberg printing press changed that, although churches' interpretations of biblical passages are still highly regarded today.
And MTV was once (and still is) marketed as the vehicle for social and cultural definition among America's youth. I remember their shows and commercials in the 90's about people defining themselves through how they dress and act. (And a lot of my contemporaries seem to take a lot from the portrayal of American life in "reality" TV shows, also a product of MTV). Even Nickelodeon did this.
And then the portrayal of life in alcohol and cigarette ads. I'll be honest: if I see an ad with someone relaxing on a sofa, sipping a gin and tonic, I'm going to buy a gin and tonic that week. That represents a peaceful, contemplative lifestyle to me, all thanks to the media. We were shown old advertisements for toothpaste (which is still marketed as 'your only way to prevent tooth decay'), and it's amusing how many things are marketed using fear or even inconveniences (OMG!). But what takes the cake for me is the news.
Thinking back over the last four years, I'll estimate that 97% of the Daily Collegian issues I saw had a story related to football front and center, above the fold. The newspapers are 70% sports, and the news we're provided with isn't always relevant or meaningful. This defines our modern college culture, or at least for Penn State: sports, sports, sports, a commedian visited, Spanier said something, sports, sports and some random band from Detroit. I remain unsure whether the newspaper displays or defines the culture, or if it's simply a vicious cycle.
Even in the 'professional' newspapers, though, this is of extreme concern. All the coverage Obama got makes me curious how much thought people actually gave to his issues (not to mention Ron Paul's media blackout), and the sudden disappearence of WMD's from newspaper articles a few years ago, and how little coverage Bush's last days have been getting in lieu of an incoming president. This is important stuff, and we're being pushed away from it.
And that's my question: media has given us so much in the way of interaction and information, and yet it still has the power to transform our mindset and thought structure. Can we truly trust the media we surround ourselves with?
I'm not suggesting that recent conspiracy theories (fluorine, 9/11, Paul McCartney) are true, but perhaps they do have something to them. And it creates even more fear: if we're not told what's actually going on when it's going on, and we're presented with a view of it through a broken kaleidiscope instead, what are we really gaining from modern mass media? Is it really any different than feudal peasant life?
My answer is yes and no. Big Mass Media (CNN, Fox, MTV, basic cable, etc.) is probably poisoning us to some degree, but the emergence of the internet, especially in its current form, leaves a lot to be uncovered.
For your viewing pleasure, I've provided a performance of Oingo Boingo's "Wake Up (It's 1984)."
Leave a comment