When I first began my graduate studies I had an intense distrust of scholars who focus on the effects of media. This distrust extended to those who take a critical approach to rhetoric and media. My mindset through the years has completely changed. I don’t want to make this a long diatribe about postmodernism or Marxism or the failings of positivism in humanistic research. With that in mind I will be brief. I just want to pose a few questions for the reader.
There are many in the media, including my former self, who like to claim that the media have little or no negative effects on the public. That notion also includes semantics. It is now in vogue to attack “political correctness”. It is a comforting notion for media practitioners and public figures that all you contribute to society is good. Unfortunately, this mindset is faulty and gives some free reign to recklessly guide the public consciousness.
One main problem with the idea that media have limited negative effects is highlighted by the key revenue stream for media (at least U.S. based media). Media are supported largely by advertising. Advertising’s (speaking from my personal advertising work) goal is to influence and persuade the public. The point is to alter the audience’s perception of a product, good, service, person, etc. Media sales executives make pitches everyday to clients about the immense impact of advertising. There is an entire industry of advertising agencies that are supported by this notion. If media practitioners recognize that media has the power to guide the masses to perpetuate our capitalistic ideals, then doesn’t it make sense that the same media have the power to damage and oppress?
I leave you with that question to ponder. I invite your feedback.
Related posts:
The business model dominates and all too often money is the key that unlocks the content gate guarded by the corporate media gatekeepers. Advertising, public relations, and marketing are built upon theories of persuasion. Reality may be what happens, but perception of reality is what the individual perceives as “truth.”
So, it’s a bit like media speak the words “trippingly off the tongue” and then utter their “truth/action” in stage asides. The public face looks out upon the public and the voice loudly declaims that media do not have long term or short term effects of viewers/listeners/readers (because if it were not so, the media would bear ethical and moral responsibility for content). Within seconds, the private face turns toward the camera, cupping the hand beside the mouth so as to keep the “conversation” from the public, and whispers “but we know we must make money – so let’s worry about good content later.”
In this case, actions do speak louder than words.
Hi all, I am new and searching forward to connecting with you!
New here and excited about understanding far more
Looks like a fantastic place, hope to make some new pals along the way!
Looks like an awesome location, hope to make some new pals along the way!
Hi all, I am new and looking forward to connecting with you!
New here and excited about studying extra