Reflecting on BCM110

Source: http://diningforwomen.org/

As 6 weeks of blogging for BCM110 (Introduction to Communication and Media Studies) has come to an end, it’s time to do some reflection time. To put it simply, BCM110 was my favourite, by far the subject I enjoyed the most. The lectures were so interesting and fun, it was enjoyable to delve more into the world of media and learn more about what happens behind the scenes. Everything I knew about the media was not what it really was.

During the BCM110 course, we explored ‘Media Mythbusting’ – these lectures really caught my attention. Out of all these lectures, I believe I learnt the most from Week 3 and 4. Week 3 was the consideration of representation and the possibilities of ‘semiotics’ – the signifier and the signified, the connotations and denotations. I think that week was one of the most interesting as we were allowed deconstruct and analyse advertisements, looking past what the image or video simply shows and focusing on what the image intends for us to see and what meaning it evokes in our minds. In my blog post for Week 3, I studied Dove’s ‘Real Beauty’ sketches videos. Before researching, I had no idea that it had received such criticism. It seemed like a ‘feel-good’ video and from what I saw in comments and social media, it generated a good response. However, through that week’s blog post, I’d learnt that there’s always more than what meets the eye – we just have to look a little closer and dig a little deeper to form our own meaning and interpretation. In my opinion, Week 4 was one of the hardest to grasp yet most important lessons I have learnt in BCM110 – media ownership. Until then, I had not realised the entire extent of the media’s control and its limitations on what we see and hear in the news, whether it is printed, televised or digitised. It’s even worse that due to the concentration of media ownership, which sees all information highly controlled and uniform in content whereas it should be less regulated and more diverse in opinion. This is a major concern for Australia, as according to McAllister, we have one of the highest concentrations of media ownership in the world (Pusey and McCutcheon, 2011).

Throughout my weekly blogging for BCM110, I’ve learnt a lot that my knowledge of the media concepts were not very accurate. Attending the lectures, researching for my own blog posts and reading the blog posts of my fellow BCM students have all taught me and helped shaped my understanding and perceptions of the role of the media in our society and lives.

Reference List
1. Pusey, Michael and McCutcheon, Marion 2011, ‘From the Media Moguls to the Money Men? Media Concentration in Australia’, Media International Australia, No 140, pp. 22-31, viewed 14th April 2014

Are you keeping up with the Kardashians?

Source: https://ca.celebrity.yahoo.com/

On 14th October 2007, Channel E! debuted their latest smash-hit reality television show ‘Keeping Up with the Kardashians’ which followed the personal and professional lives of the famous Kardashian and Jenner family. Back then, no one really knew who they were but what little was known, it was not positive. So how exactly did they manage to snag their own reality television show? The family’s notoriety came from one of the daughters, Kim Kardashian. Kim was best friends with hotel heiress and socialite Paris Hilton but made headlines when her sex tape with R&B singer, Ray J, was released to the public. Though this was negative publicity for the family, momager Kris Jenner decided to make the most of the situation as she believed she “had to make some lemonade out of these lemons fast. Real fast…” and that her “job was trying to take my kids’ 15 minutes and turn it into 30.”

Now 7 years, 9 seasons and 3 spin-offs (with 2 more set to air) later, with many appearances in tabloid  magazines, it’s safe to say that everyone knows who the Kardashian’s and Jenner’s are and all about their lives. The reality show is a excellent example of the mediated public sphere and its concerns in the 21st Century. The public sphere is defined as —

“A domain of our social life where such a thing as public opinion can be formed [where] citizens… deal with matters of general interest without being subject to coercion… [to] express and publicize our views.” (Habermas, J 1997)

Keeping Up with the Kardashians rose to fame in the public sphere as it not only explores the families’ personal and professional lives but also fame, sex, drama and materialism. The reality show exemplifies that the mediated public sphere and its concerns are accurate — it has become too trivialised, too commercialised, too spectacular (instead of rational), too fragmented and too apathetic about important public issues. It shows the little concern that we have for the political and social issues our world is facing, that we are so consumed by the spectacle of celebrity and fame that we only absorb what grabs our attention, what we want and like to hear such as gossip. Although viewers do not learn or gain much from watching Keeping Up with the Kardashians, it is up to the viewer’s discretion as to how they react and what they take away from the show because underneath all the layers of ‘show’, it does also portray a close-knit family bond.

Fun fact — President Obama bans his kids from watching Keeping Up with the Kardashians!

Reference List
1. Dimelow, G 2011, Keeping Up With The Kardashians: TV’s Face Of Evil, Sabotage Times, 27 June, viewed 7th April <http://sabotagetimes.com/reportage/keeping-up-with-the-kardashians-tvs-face-of-evil/#_>
2. McKee, A 2005, Introduction to the Public Sphere: An Introduction, Public Sphere: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press 2005, pp. 1-31, viewed 7th April

Media Ownership – Why does it matter who ‘controls’ the media?

According to McAllister, Australia has one of the highest concentrations of media ownership in the world (Pusey and McCutcheon, 2011). A concentration of media ownership is a process whereby progressively fewer individuals or organisations control increasing shares of the mass media. This creates a media oligopoly as large-scale media companies eliminate their business competition (smaller-scaled or local companies) through mergers and acquisitions because they lack resources and finances. Thus, these companies gain more power within the market, dominating the mass media industry.

But why does it matter? A concentration of a media ownership not only affects the mass media industry but content provision, packaging and distribution and results in a ‘standardised production and marketing process in which the messages communicated are constrained and directed in both quantity and quality to meet the economic imperatives of that process’ as stated by Melody (Meier, 2000). However, this limits the number of available media sources, making mass media (newspapers, television, magazines and the internet) highly controlled and remarkably uniform in content and world-view.

As citizens of the world, we should have the right to access the most diverse opinions and the accurate, truthful information. We rely on the media to provide us with facts and interpretations of the world. The information we receive allows us to understand the world and influence our social and political decisions. With the concentration of media ownership, this information is heavily regulated and biased which decreases its investigative nature. Diversity is encouraged and enforced because it minimises the risk that the information we receive is adversely influenced by the interests of media organisations which provides it. If the media becomes overly concentrated, this can allow abuses of power, lack of diversity of opinion, conflicting interests and suppression of journalistic freedom. The consequences of this is a poorly informed public and thus, it is important for media to be less concentrated and regulated and more freed with additional diversity and avenues as everyone has the right to know the truth.

Reference List

1. Hart, E 2008, ‘Media Ownership’ in Media and Journalism, Bainbridge, J., Goc, N. and Tynan, L. (eds.) Oxford University Press: Melbourne, pp. 400-408, viewed 29 March 2014 <http://lib.oup.com.au/he/media_journalism/bainbridge2e/bainbridge1e_case06.pdf>
2. Meier, W. A. 2000, ‘Media Ownership – Does It Matter?’, Meir cites Bagdikian, viewed 29th March 2014 <http://lirne.net/resources/netknowledge/meier.pdf>
3. Pusey, Michael and McCutcheon, Marion 2011, ‘From the Media Moguls to the Money Men? Media Concentration in Australia’, Media International Australia, No 140, pp. 22-31, viewed 29 March 2014
4. The Australian Collaboration 2013, ‘Democracy in Australia – Media concentration and media laws’, viewed 29 March 2014 <http://www.australiancollaboration.com.au/pdf/Democracy/Media-laws.pdf>

Dove’s ‘Real Beauty’ Sketches – Inspiring or Controversial?

In April 2013, Dove released their ‘Real Beauty Sketches’ video on Youtube as a part of their new campaign, Real Beauty. The video (there is another one that is 6 minutes long) went viral and in its first 10 days, it garnered up to 29.4 million views and more than 660,000 Facebook shares. The video portrays a social experiment where women having their features drawn by a forensic artist, based on descriptions of their appearances given to him. By the end of the video, each woman has two sketches created from two perspectives — one that she helped the artist create, and another that someone else helped create. When the sketches are hung up and compared, all the women are shocked – the differences between the two sketches are vast. Most importantly, however, the sketch that the other person helped create seems more attractive and accurate than the sketch that the women themselves created.

The message of the video is that women are their worst critics and “You are more beautiful than you think”. Dove takes a soft approach to examine the current beauty standards, utilising exceptional cinematography, accompanied by a sentimental tone and background music, as it claims that only 4% of women around the world consider themselves beautiful. It also makes us question our standards of what is beautiful and how it affects us all (Vartan, S 2013). However, despite Dove’s empowering message, the video has received criticisms amongst critics and audiences. Criticisms include the focus of a small subset of women, the lack of minority representation and how it blames women, rather than society, for critiquing the smallest physical imperfections. However, its biggest criticism is that many believe Dove is preaching what it is opposes — that beauty is paramount. Ann Friedman (2013) at New York Magazine wrote, “These ads still uphold the notion that, when it comes to evaluating ourselves and other women, beauty is paramount. The goal shouldn’t be to get women to focus on how we are all gorgeous in our own way. It should be to get women to do for ourselves what we wish the broader culture would do: judge each other based on intelligence and wit and ethical sensibility, not just our faces and bodies.” Dove was also been slammed for their hypocrisy as the video aims to instill healthy body images, although owned by the company Unilever, which makes business out of marginalising women in Axe campaigns.

Despite the criticisms it’s received, the video has been viewed as an effective tool in helping women and their struggle with body image insecurities and served as a catalyst for discussion about women, beauty, body image, and self-esteem, even if some of it has come as a result of its marketing campaign’s failings (Schifani, A 2013).

What do you guys think of the video? Please comment below if you wish!

Reference List
1. Friedman, A 2013, ‘Beauty Above All Else: The Problem With Dove’s New Viral Ad’, New York Magazine, 18 April, viewed 24 March 2014 <http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/04/beauty-above-all-else-doves-viral-ad-problem.html>
2.Postrel, V 2013 ‘Dove’s Fake New ‘Real Beauty’ Ads’, Huffington Post, 27 April, viewed 24 March 2014 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/27/doves-fake-new-real-beaut_n_3165479.html>
3.Schifani, A 2013, ‘Dove’s “Real Beauty” Sketches Provoke Real Controversy’, Feminspire, viewed 24 March 2014 <http://feminspire.com/doves-real-beauty-sketches-provoke-real-controversy/>
4. Stampler, L 2013, ‘Why People Hate Dove’s “Real Beauty” Video’, Business Insider, 23 April, viewed 24 March 2014 <http://www.businessinsider.com.au/why-people-hate-doves-real-beauty-ad-2013-4>
5.Vartan, S 2013, “Dove’s real beauty sketches leads to controversy”, mother nature network, 21 April, viewed 24 March 2014 <http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/blogs/doves-real-beauty-sketches-video-leads-to-controversy>

Internet and technology addiction

Source: http://muzzling.deviantart.com/

The internet and technology has revolutionised how people connect and interact with each other. However, along with the internet and technology revolution has come emerging social and psychological issues such as anti-social behaviour and addiction. These issues can be seen through the integration of the internet on our everyday lives. What once was only accessible through the traditional media platforms such as television, radio and newspapers has grown to become even more accessible in the palms of our hands and at the tips of our fingers, all from our smart phones. The rapid advancement in internet and technologies has created convenience for us, thus integrating itself throughout our everyday lives. Firstly, instead of talking with someone in real life, we are able to make phone calls. Now, we are able to send instant messages or text messages. But what is missing in this scenario? A lack of social interaction. Should we be concerned about this and is the internet and technology to be blamed?

Many (especially parents) fear that the overuse of technology and ‘internet addiction’ will be detrimental to social relationships and jobs, encouraging anti-social behaviour. Research has likened its symptoms to those experienced by drug consumers. It is most prominent in Asia as China has been one of the first countries to label ‘internet addiction’ as a clinical disorder and have set up military-like detox rehabilitation centres to combat compulsive online behaviour. However, recent research has shown that there are other factors that contribute to this addiction. In the case of gaming, Dr Daniel Johnson (2013) believes “In some cases when people have problems in other areas of their life they are turning to video games in a dysfunctional way. But I think in that case, the real cause is the problems that exist in the rest of their lives and video games are more a symptom.” Professor Jane Burns (2013) further agrees, “It is highly likely that if you’re experiencing depression or if you are experiencing challenges within the family that the place you might turn to is the internet”. Dr Johnson (2013) also explores the association between gaming and stress reduction and improved mood – “Video games create important feelings of competence and autonomy. In some cases resilience and also relatedness. There is a lot of support for the idea that when we play with others we connect in a really meaningful way.”

This reveals that the internet and technology are not to be entirely blame for its emerging social and psychological issues. There are other factors that contribute to its impact on people and although the internet and technology does allow people to be anti-social or addicted, it does not force to them to be so. However, this does not mean that I don’t think it is a problem. There are definitely people who use the internet and technology in an obsessive manner and it is all about finding balance between the virtual and real world.

References
1. Barrett, R 2014 ‘Parents concerned over problem gaming and internet addiction’, ABC, 8 March, viewed March 14 2014 <http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-08/teens-addicted-to-gaming/5306534>
2. John, O 2014, ‘Study: Internet Addicts Suffer Withdrawal Symptoms Like Drug Users’, Times, 19 February, viewed March 14 2014 <http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/19/study-internet-addicts-suffer-withdrawal-symptoms-like-drug-users/>