1.
I believe that Neil Postman not only brings up several accurate points, but he even falls short in scope with his message that we as a society are constantly bombarded by different ideals. It is easily discernible that businesses, organizations, and political figures are attempting to reach is in varied fashion. However, one must take into account the fact that we receive bullshit from a commercial agenda on a daily basis while also receiving bullshit from a personal agenda. In today's era of social media and connectivity, we must ready ourselves to sift through the infinite amount of data readily available at our fingertips.
The speech states that "all human communications have deeply embedded and profound hidden agendas"(Postman, 1969). If I were to look on facebook in this current moment, I would see videos posted with people carrying the message of the ALS charity "ice-bucket challenge" movement. I would likely see my brother arguing with someone over a political agenda. Ads would like the page specifically tailored to me based on my browsing and download history. These examples are only the most obvious and easily recognizable of the agendas that would be accessed in less than 30 seconds of web browsing. It is easier than ever for businesses and people alike to access the average individual. I would argue that a large portion of that access is for bullshit purposes.
2. One could argue that the advancement of information access and media availability has both aided and countered his argument. The ability for individuals to create messages with the capacity to reach millions means that, at times, it can be harder for the truth to be concealed, and that the average citizen has a greater voice than ever before in denouncing discrimination or ills of society. This same power, however, has given individuals the ability to push personal agendas that run county to that which could be considered accurate and proper. This creates a situation of much ambiguity that can hide truth and weaken the voice of an individual with a message of importance.
I will use sports figures as an example in their portrayal with the media. There have been multiple accusations of sexual assault or rape involving star athletes in recent years. While millions of people immediately have the ability to access the information involving the situation, the shear number of news sources can blend the fact until it is difficult to determine what the truth really is. There are also a number of individuals that, due to personal bias, background, or beliefs, will defend one side over the other, even in the face of contrary evidence. How many blogs have I read calling women whores that were involved in similar situations? At the same time, how many athletes are immediately assumed guilty simply because they belong to a cohort that is believe to have been responsible for similar transgressions in the past, be it gender, skin color, or career? The ability to broadcast one's voice to the world is a double-edged sword, allowing some individuals to further the quest for truth, while others to continue pushing a false, discriminatory, or biased agenda.
3.
The video took thoughts and notions that I had developed on my own, and made them more cohesive in a "this is our reality" fashion. I work as an admissions counselor for Fairmont State, essentially recruiting students to attend Fairmont State University. One of the additional tasks I have been given is the title of "diversity recruiter," and in my work to reach and connect with students, my realizations of what we look for when seeking connections and information.
Kellner and Share state that we should be "analysing media culture as products of social production and struggle and teaching students to be critical of media representations and discourses..." (Toward Critical Media Literacy, 372). As I travel to different states and high schools to speak with students, I am constantly bombarding college-age students with recruiting material and presentations promoting why Fairmont State is a great school. When I attend college fairs, I am joined by anywhere from 25 to 300 additional institutions each doing the same thing. How exactly does a student determine which institution is best for them in the face of this onslaught? Too often I see students drawn to a school not because it is a good fit, but because an attractive display, enthusiastic recruiter, or compelling spiel drew the attention of a student. Teaching critical media literacy would better allow these students to critically examine these institutions and their messages, rather than being drawn in by the superficial. As stated in "Toward Critical Media Literacy," we need to [empower] students to be independently critical" (Kellner and Share, 381).
As Neil Postman might say, individuals must be able to see a bullshit or misleading message for what it really is, no matter how enthusiastic or colorful the delivery is. The understanding that media is created for a purpose must be established in order for one to begin to dissect media for the "how and "why." The presentation by Cameron Russell follows a similar lineage as she attests to the fact that the person she is and the person she is portrayed to be are separate: one is a person, one is a fabrication.
In the video, Russell advises the listener on the "fabrications" that they see. What you see is not necessarily reality, but rather it is intended to guide the viewer to think or feel a certain way. Is this not true in the everyday of the world we live in? People dress in a certain fashion in order for others to think of them as sexy, rebellious, or professional. Commercials strive to make people feel that a product or service is required. Politicians attempt to deliver a message that makes them appear superior to their opposition. As stated by Kellner and Share, "There is expanding recognition that media representations help construct our images and understanding of the world..." ("Toward Critical Media Literacy, 370). Media literacy allows us to view these messages as they are intended. Critical media literacy allows us dive deeper into the message, questioning the reason for its creation, construction, and delivery.
Kellner & Share, Russell, and Postman all deliver different messages on the need to critically evaluate media, however the overall message remains clear: in modern society, we must be aware of what media is attempting to deliver to us, and we must have the capacity to be individually critical of what the purpose of such media is. Critical media literacy and the lack thereof has resounding effects on ethical, political, commercial, and individual levels. Be is combating social ills in sexism and racism, political misrepresentation in the media, or compelling advertisements in commercial media, critical media literacy creates a capacity to challenge social and media construction.
Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2005). Toward Critical Media Literacy: Core concepts, debates, organizations, and policy. Discouse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 3(3), 369-386.
Postman, Neil. (1969, November). Bullshit and the Art of Crap-Detection. Speech Presented at the National Convention for the Teachers of English. Washington, DC.
Russell, C. (2013). Looks aren't everything. [Web]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM4Xe6Dlp0Y
Evidence Chart: Toward Critical Media Literacy
I think your relation to the job and looking through the bullshit is so true. I have in the past helped with 2 college fairs and have seen exactly what you are talking about. How do student choose what is best and see past all the flashy lights? I think this form of media couldn't actually be attributed to some schools retention rates. As you stated we need to empower the students to think critically.
ReplyDeleteCorey, I agree Postman did fall short, but can you image what that speech would sound like if he was giving it for the first time in 2009 instead of 1969 (he lived til 2003 age 72) or even 1999 Y2K looming on the horizon. I read his books "The End of Education" and "Teaching as a Subversive Activity" some time ago and really wish I had found this speech to read, which would have offered more insight into his writing. In a day and age where many are tried in the court of public opinion and found guilty openly shows how the media has profound;y changed our world. This is a good and thought provoking post, thanks!
ReplyDeleteCorey, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post! You wove together the main arguments of all three sources expertly and connected them to your personal experiences as a college recruiter! You demonstrate a strong understanding of the power of contemporary media outlets like Facebook and the need for critical media literacy! I'm really look forward to reading more of your insightful postings!
ReplyDeleteCorey, I enjoyed reading your post and I agree with your comments, especially with me being a coach. I have been in a situation where a former player of mine was accused of an incident and the media blow it out of context which resulted in him having a negative reputation because of the "BS" that the media portrayed about him. Numerous sources had different takes on the story which made it difficult to find the real truth.
ReplyDeleteWe are in agreement when it comes to our responses, especially in terms of commercial agenda. We do ourselves an injustice when we forget what .com stands for, commercial, and that even though we may not be directly handing money over to a website, money is being exchanged by someone for you having been on that site.
ReplyDeleteWe’re also in agreement that technology has enabled the advancement of that agenda while making it supposedly easier to detect. Taking that a little further, I’d like to add that I believe because technology makes it easier to detect the bullshit, corporations continually go to great lengths to be deceptive and offer much more subliminal messages.
H.G. Wells once stated, “Advertising is legalized lying.” How far advertising has come was driven home to me yesterday while I was viewing an exhibit on WWI and WWII. I’ve always been drawn toward the advertisements and propaganda of that era, mainly because they were extraordinarily guilt driven and at times coercive. However, they were overt. Today, much of the messages are hidden which makes learning critical media literacy even more important.