Friday, January 20, 2006
Module 1: Media Literacy Debates
QUESTION:
From the media literacy approaches readings, what approach or combination of approaches do you most value? Why?
I deeply value the approach which says that to learn true media literacy, one should at least attempt some hands-on work . There is a certain appreciation for anything that comes from actually touching or creating. Active participation in my classes tend to create the most retention in students. I can lecture day after day about how video should be shot or how a newspaper article should be written or how an advertisement is persuading someone on purpose. What I can’t do is make the students retain that information without putting it to practice. I am biased on this: I teach journalism courses, including newspaper and Television Production. I also was a professional writer for several years. I learned best “on-the-job.” I believe most students in my classroom do as well.
QUESTION:
Which do you find problematic and why?
Aside from finding an author who often used words like “autonomous”, “pluralism” and “pedagogy”, yet didn’t proofread her own writing before publishing it (very problematic), I found two different debates problematic. They were: “Should Media Literacy Have A More Explicit Political And/Or Ideological Agenda?” and “
Should Media Literacy Education Aim To Protect Children And Young People From Negative Media Influences?” The discussion about media literacy being based on any idea of a political or ideological basis is absurd. If we have a political agenda (which many teachers whom I have seen dabble in this area clearly have), our message is biased and not exactly educational. Media are many things. Putting anything in media studies into a nice, neat box is not getting at the real crux of the subject. Teachers who teach media studies with a pre-formed bias or set political ideology/agenda often appear so subjective the messages tend to get lost.
The issues of protecting children and others from the “dangers” of “negative” media influences as a means of reason for teaching media studies is simply silly. Media are not positive, nor negative. Media exists and as with all industries or products are not cut and dried in any right or wrong discussion. True media practice is ripe with conundrums and dilemmas and vagueness compared to a theoretical approach. Therefore, singling something out as a negative influence or as something that we need to protect people from is biased and missing half of the truth of the curriculum.
QUESTION:
What approach(es) do (es) the films that you viewed at http://www.mediathatmattersfest.org/mtm05/ take?
I viewed all four films (several times), but I’d really like to comment on my favorite one: Video 3 which is the privacy video featuring a man ordering a pizza for delivery. I’ve seen this P.S.A. several times in the past and deeply enjoy its irony and satire. I believe the approach taken in this production deals with promoting a political/ideological idea. The idea here is to have the audience think about their freedoms in this country and the relation to the Patriot Act. The ad clearly is satirical and paints the picture of a future with personal information in an open marketplace. We are supposed to watch this and think: I don’t want that to happen. I don’t want the Pizza Parlor to know how many condoms I bought at Walgreen’s (it’s in the ad; take a look!). Therefore, I need to be more liberal and down that Patriot Act. I certainly think this ad should be out there and being political. Persuasion for political gain is one of the functions of mass communications. I believe that is why we would have a class of teenagers watch this PSA – perhaps to attain said political gain (downing the Patriot Act). It also could be used to dissect as a class to see how ads can be humorous, but underneath may have strong persuasive purposes.
From the media literacy approaches readings, what approach or combination of approaches do you most value? Why?
I deeply value the approach which says that to learn true media literacy, one should at least attempt some hands-on work . There is a certain appreciation for anything that comes from actually touching or creating. Active participation in my classes tend to create the most retention in students. I can lecture day after day about how video should be shot or how a newspaper article should be written or how an advertisement is persuading someone on purpose. What I can’t do is make the students retain that information without putting it to practice. I am biased on this: I teach journalism courses, including newspaper and Television Production. I also was a professional writer for several years. I learned best “on-the-job.” I believe most students in my classroom do as well.
QUESTION:
Which do you find problematic and why?
Aside from finding an author who often used words like “autonomous”, “pluralism” and “pedagogy”, yet didn’t proofread her own writing before publishing it (very problematic), I found two different debates problematic. They were: “Should Media Literacy Have A More Explicit Political And/Or Ideological Agenda?” and “
Should Media Literacy Education Aim To Protect Children And Young People From Negative Media Influences?” The discussion about media literacy being based on any idea of a political or ideological basis is absurd. If we have a political agenda (which many teachers whom I have seen dabble in this area clearly have), our message is biased and not exactly educational. Media are many things. Putting anything in media studies into a nice, neat box is not getting at the real crux of the subject. Teachers who teach media studies with a pre-formed bias or set political ideology/agenda often appear so subjective the messages tend to get lost.
The issues of protecting children and others from the “dangers” of “negative” media influences as a means of reason for teaching media studies is simply silly. Media are not positive, nor negative. Media exists and as with all industries or products are not cut and dried in any right or wrong discussion. True media practice is ripe with conundrums and dilemmas and vagueness compared to a theoretical approach. Therefore, singling something out as a negative influence or as something that we need to protect people from is biased and missing half of the truth of the curriculum.
QUESTION:
What approach(es) do (es) the films that you viewed at http://www.mediathatmattersfest.org/mtm05/ take?
I viewed all four films (several times), but I’d really like to comment on my favorite one: Video 3 which is the privacy video featuring a man ordering a pizza for delivery. I’ve seen this P.S.A. several times in the past and deeply enjoy its irony and satire. I believe the approach taken in this production deals with promoting a political/ideological idea. The idea here is to have the audience think about their freedoms in this country and the relation to the Patriot Act. The ad clearly is satirical and paints the picture of a future with personal information in an open marketplace. We are supposed to watch this and think: I don’t want that to happen. I don’t want the Pizza Parlor to know how many condoms I bought at Walgreen’s (it’s in the ad; take a look!). Therefore, I need to be more liberal and down that Patriot Act. I certainly think this ad should be out there and being political. Persuasion for political gain is one of the functions of mass communications. I believe that is why we would have a class of teenagers watch this PSA – perhaps to attain said political gain (downing the Patriot Act). It also could be used to dissect as a class to see how ads can be humorous, but underneath may have strong persuasive purposes.
