MDIA1001 Presentation

Sports Journalism

“Debating Identity” by Simon During

Here it is; the final blog. It has been quite a journey, filled with the highs and lows you could only expect out of an Arts1090 course. During’s reading, however, was a little different to past weeks in that he did not focus on the media but rather the cultural side of “Media, Culture and Everyday Life”. In particular he focuses on the concept of identity and identity politics within cultural studies.

 At its core the reading delves into the highly complex yet integral role of identity within our lives. For During “identities are not given in terms of what individuals are as a whole, but in terms of more or less arbitrarily selected features that they possess”. That is one can be identified as a man, an Australian, a father, etc. Therefore individuality is characterized by “the degree of intensity with which they (individuals) connect to particular identities.” He writes that identities are often “culturally inflected” and are key to structuring society and power roles. What I interpreted from this argument, and what During discusses somewhat, is that with this prevalence of social identity in charactering a person, individual and unique personas and characteristics are often lost or not socially recognized. “What lacks identity cannot form a social persona,” he writes. Thus at the heart of culture is not individualism but shared associations and connections of identity.

While these concepts of identity are at the core of the article, During’s main argument focuses on the prevalence of identity politics as the basis of adversarial political systems across the globe. Simple put politics is engaged on behalf organizations of people based on particular identities. “Even traditional left/right wing politics was loosely organized around class identities”. The advantage of this structure was to unify people behind a common identity/cause to strive for change. For example the civil rights and feminist movements. However, During highlights that in recent time cultural studies have identified conceptual and political difficulties that plague identity politics. These problems related to the ideas of isolation and inflexibility. Therefore to address these problems cultural studies tried to “rethink identity in such a way that the concept lost its rigidity.” This included exploring the idea of hybridity where individuals do not have “a single identity but many”.

                                                                                                                                    

It was at the back end of this reading throughout the discussion of hybridity that I became a little confused and disillusioned with the reading. But what I see as During’s most important ideas is that identity is inescapable and identity politics is a vital facet of cultural studies. Most importantly, however, he identified that it is through identity that “culture is joined to society and politics”.

 

End communication

A Telling Symbiosis in the Discourse of Hatred- Multimodal News Texts about the ‘Children Overboard’ Affair by Mary Macken-Horaik

At its heart Maken-Horaik’s (I’m going to call her MH from now on, two names in one last name is just not efficient) paper examines the power of linguistics and grammar within visual and verbal media texts to orientate readers to a particular line of thinking. In particular it “tackles some analytical challenges of multimodal texts as they contribute to production of racial anxiety about asylum seekers”. By focussing on the infamous ‘Children Overboard’ affair of 2001 it highlights how stories perpetuated deeply negative views of asylum seekers in the wake of false allegations that these ‘boat people’ threw their children overboard to gain access to Australia. Such image creation was achieved through subtle use of linguistics and syntax, co-operating with a visual photograph. Her utilisation of a prevalent Daily Telegraph article justifies her arguments clearly displaying to readers the line of thinking they were pushed into (subconsciously or not) by certain elements of discourse.

 

The only possible weakness in MH’s analysis is that she only examines one particular article on the affair. While she defines it as an “exemplary news text”, it was published in a tabloid publication prone to simplification and/or sensationalism. This aside, however, an examination of a broader range of news texts would have added veracity to her argument.

Disregarding this one flaw, the analysis of Telegraph article, which publishes a photograph that supposedly proves the allegations of the government, is very in-depth. She firstly pin points how within the text of the article, prominent politicians such as PM John Howard are specifically addressed, their name and title. The asylum seekers, however, are generalised as ‘boat people’, ‘asylum seekers’.  The effect of this generalisation is that these “social actors” “are symbolically removed from the reader’s world of immediate experience”. Thus readers are aligned to the liberal politicians specifically addressed in the article. What follows is an identification how the asylum seekers on the boat are categorised by non-temporal of physical attributes that removes them further from the reader’s sympathy. Similar effect is created in the “roles” they are allocated within the article.

Delving too deep into MH’s analysis would throw me into a description. What is intriguing about her analysis is how she examines not simply the written text but also the image within the article (of a navy sailor rescuing a mother and child in the water). What she reveals is that within the multi-modal text “the photograph and the story are mutually interdependent if we are to interpret the text as a whole.” And through her analysis we learn to interpret this text as highly manipulated by linguistic choices and syntax. The effect was is to create racial hatred of the refugees following the ‘children overboard’ affair. Unfortunately as MH writes “its effects are still being felt in current discourses and practices such as mandatory detention of refugees.”

“Lessons in grammar: how ideology shapes the reporting of war” by Annabelle Lukin

by Tom Bracken

 

Annabelle Lukin’s article presents an interesting and thoroughly examined insight into the manner in which linguistics and grammar are utilised to impact the presentation and perception of a text and its content. Her utilisation of different examples of a major story from the War in Iraq, written by various authors, cleverly helps justify her argument. Yet she also asks readers to apply her critical way of thinking to all texts they encounter.

 In summation Lukin’s article argues the idea that “unprecedented amounts of access to information” on the events of the Iraq War has provided the population the opportunity to “explore many events from a range of perspectives”. However, the incredible amount of media coverage allocated to the conflict raises certain challenges in regards to how to “manage and evaluate the virtual bombardment of reports from news media. This idea leads her to comment on the development of a new type of language developed for reporting on the war. This included new words phrases leading to a new “discourse of the war”.

In establishing this idea the core argument of the article is revealed; the impact of language is inescapable with the language selected by differing authors sub-consciously selected by pre-determined attitudes and conceptions. This is even more prevalent within the often volatile reporting of war in which differing political ideals can dictate the presentation of stories. Thus the main aim of Lukin within the article is, in her own words, “to demonstrate how a functional approach to grammar and linguistic concepts can help students….of media reports adopt a more critical orientation to language.”

Without delving into excessive detail, Lukin utilises differing reports on an infamous incident during the Iraq War to examine how subtle variations in grammar and language devices can totally transform the tone and impact of a story. She insightfully highlights how a well known left-wing journalist (usually opposed to the war) highlights the horrendous nature of the tragedy that has occurred, while other reports subtly minimise such affects.

In conclusion, the power of Lukin’s example is to convincingly highlight to readers “how deeply unconscious the choices are which can orient readers in quite different ways to the events of war”. Choice is at the heart of any use of language and it is our unconscious choices that can dictate our construction of events. This is highly linked to the ideas of signs and semiotics raised by Louise Ravelli in our recent lecture. While facts may not be in dispute the language choices made by authors must always be critically analysed.

“Research Questions for the Evolving Communication Landscape” by Leslie Haddon

By Tom Bracken

As the title suggests, this reading by Leslie Haddon emphasises the variety of questions concerning researchers and analyst studying the continuously changing communication landscape applicable to contemporary society. In effect she does not attempt to put forward a developed and contended argument or angle in relation to this landscape. This does not mean, however, that this text lacks integrity, rather it forces readers to extract the core concepts whilst considering the questions posed.

At its core the reading deals with the “repertoire of practices”, that is in an age when people everyday are asked to choose from a whole range of communication technologies, we must now begin “conceptualizing communication practices as an ensemble, a repertoire”. Thus she suggests that within Western society our use of communication technology is so constant and varied that social, economic and physical practices will play a great role in our communication ‘collection and selection’. It is these factors that Haddon explores and develops in four main sections, also exploring the role of previous experiences in our repertoire of practices and how they may evolve in the future.

The first major point made by Haddon is that in our technological age it is important that “when encountering new elements to the communications repertoire, we need to ask what may count as communication related practices”. This classification is vital to ensure boundaries when studying the impact of such repertoires on society. Thus Haddon focuses on mainly dominant technologies such as the phone and email in her discussion. Once past this initial introduction I sought to decipher exactly what argument or concept was at the core of the reading.  For me I feel Haddon is attempting to highlight that with the proliferation of communication technologies and the great range of economic and social factors and restraints our communication practices will always be unsettled and variable. In her own words she seeks to highlight “some general guidelines for understanding the take-up of new communications options, for understanding why they are used in the way they are and our degree of commitment to them.”

I feel while never presenting a clear argument or point of view (I don’t feel this was her intention), Haddon successfully asks audiences to consider the unsettled nature of our communication practices, our ‘repertoire’, and how such practices are dictated by social factors. It exemplifies how our growing use and dependence on communication technologies is causing it to transcend into the everyday aspects of society.

Manuel Castells’ “Informationalism, networks and the network society: a theoretical blueprint”

Castells’ reading on undeniable significance of networks in human life and their structure and role within contemporary society is highly fascinating, dealing with a broad range of ideas. For him networks, simply put, “constitute the fundamental pattern of life”. She describes networks as “a set of interconnected nodes” with each node assigned its own role, gaining importance by absorbing “more relevant information.” The supreme strengths of networks he points out is in their flexibility, scalability and survivability. With not centre, networks can operate in “a wide range of configurations” yet remain adaptable. By presenting this elaborate description of networks and their function, Castells seeks to lay the foundation for the remainder of the reading and its core concept: that we today live in “network society” whose “social structure is made of networks powered by microelectronics-based information and communication technologies.”

In establishing the concept of a network society, Castells affirms that it is the development in communication technologies that has allowed network society “to deploy itself fully, transcending the historical limits of networks as forms of social organisation and interaction. In broadening this concept he also engages in the idea of the space of flows that characterize the network society. The space of flows refers to the technological possibility of practising simultaneity without contiguity; basically interacting instantly and beyond physical confines. This is vital to not only the efficiency of dominant networks within society but also the achievement of globalisation and the connecting of the world.

While the above concepts were at the overall core of the reading, it was Castells discussion and argument on culture in a network society that I found most fascinating.  He argues that “all societies are cultural constructs”. Therefore within a global network society there should be an identifiable culture. While national cultures form the basis for resistance against globalisation, Castells’ question becomes what is the culture of a global network society? After further elaboration he puts it beautifully. “The culture of the global network society is a culture of protocols of communication enabling communication between different cultures on the basis, not necessarily of shared values, but of sharing the value of communication.” Castells envisions a global network society as the emergence of interacting cultures “unified in a common belief in the value of sharing.” While this argument may appear idealistic, it is infused with logic. I agree wholeheartedly with Castells vision and am refreshed by his argument. In the face of growing criticism of globalisation and technology as destroying culture Castells presents an affirming argument that derives its creation from the concept of networks as the cornerstone of human interaction.

“New Media Worlds? Challenges for Convergence” by Virginia Nightingale

by Tom Bracken

Nightingale’s reading examines the concept of convergence and it its highly prevalent impact on both present day media and digital technology. Convergence according to Nightingale “describes the technological, industrial, cultural and social changes in the ways media circulates within out culture.”  The dominant theme within the reading is Nightingale’s belief that traditional media is being forced to change dramatically to survive in the face of “digitization” and the popularity of digital media.

The core concept of the article that binds Nightingale’s other arguments is the idea that, despite previous belief, digitization and convergence has not resulted “in a mono-media world”. Instead what has evolved is a “dramatic explosion and diversification of media platforms, devices and activities”. Digitization has led to a media convergence process and the creation of increasingly complex mediascapes.

In highlighting this core concept Nightingale then puts forward the argument that this diversification of media has created a high level of uncertainty about the future of traditional media and thus must respond through a convergence of these traditional and new media platforms. Seemingly Nightingale seems concerned with the seemingly unlimited reach that digital technology (mainly the internet) provides for organizations. This is especially prevalent in regards to information providers. Hence this is a key issue for traditional media forms vested in the presentation of information. The effects of this disruptive process are described by Nightingale by referencing Evan and Wurster’s theory of deconstruction and disintermediation. It highlights the ability of new players, through digital media to reformulate and break down traditional business/media structures. Nightingale closely examines how digital media such as Youtube and Myspace is reducing and restructuring the audiences of the television industry. Furthermore the internet’s great potential to advertise is removing reducing its major form of revenue. Hence the television industry is facing the need for total transformation to limit its gradual slide into redundancy.

In answer to this problem Nightingale looks too Fortunati (2005) in arguing television is and must undergo a process of convergence.  Fortunati describes convergence as a process whereby the Internet is mediating itself and traditional media are internetising. This both unifies media as a digital form yet promotes a continuation of diversification. Examples of the television industry adhering to this process of convergence are seen in the online enhancements of many programs and the digital interactivity of programs such as ‘Big Brother’. Such action is imperative for the television and other traditional media to flourish once more.

Nightingale concludes in examining the issues of content and audience raised by digitization and the convergence of media. Her overall argument remains though that digitization is forcing a convergence of media platforms not into a monolithic whole but a diverse space of interlocking and overlapping media. I find this a highly valid argument in the face of the explosion of digital media, mainly the net, as the central media within people’s lives. Traditional media must react to ensure its continuing place in people’s everyday lives, and convergence appears the most likely way.

“The Doubling of Place- Electronic media, time-space arrangements and social relationships” by Shaun Moores

By Tom Bracken

After a few highly dense, difficult and in one case plain pretentious reading I was encouraged and fascinated by the Shaun Moores book. I was encouraged to find a reading that developed a sustained theory on the nature of society’s media use that I could understand fully and relate to. This in turn led to my fascination in the ideas presented by Moores himself.

In a quick summation Moores extends on the concept originated by Paddy Scannell (1996) that media serve to create a “doubling of place”. That is that events occur in a double reality; the place of the event itself and that in it is watched and heard. Thus broadcasting “mediates between these two sites” (Scannell). Moores seeks to extend this theory and argue that Scannell’s concept of altered possibilities of being “might also be applied more generally in the analysis of those electronic media, such as internet and telephone.” (Moores)

Moore’s central theme is that through our use of electronic media place is “pluralised not marginalised” (Moores). He believes that media coverage and use creates the possibility of multiplying the interconnections between places and people, which has great connotations on society, our social relationships and our perceptions of ourselves.

  I think the reason I was able to fully engage and believe the ideas put forward by Moores is that rather than indulging in the writings of complex theorists to seemingly justify a slight variation on their ideas he used relevant and easy to understand examples of how electronic media ‘doubles place’. Firstly he examines how television telecasts of events, such as Princess Di’s funeral, can create an experience of actually being there. He also looks at how internet chartrooms not only create multiple places but allow people to act in multiple roles. He concludes with an examination of mobile phones as taking people into another reality in which privacy is assumed, even if the conversation is taking place in a public arena (i.e. a train).

In each example Moore’s reference to other writers is insightful and interesting. His ideas on not only doubling of place but also how electronic media has allowed people to adopt new personas and the new set of etiquette that is associated with certain media is relatable to us a contemporary users of these technologies.

The final question that Moore’s left me with was in relation to his example of the girl on her mobile on the train expecting a level of privacy from the other travellers. In speaking to her boyfriend is she being transported into a central reality in which her boyfriend joins her at? Or when her boyfriend speaks is she being transferred into his reality only for it to reverse when she speaks. I have no clue but would be interested to see what Moores might think.

References

Scannell, P. “Daliness” In Radio, Television and Modern Life. Blackwell, London, 1996, 144-178

Morres, S. “The Doubling of Place- Electronic media, time-space arrangements and social relationships.” In Couldry, N. and McCarthey, A., Eds. MediaSpace: Place, Scale and Culture in a Media Age. London: routledge, 2004, 21-37.  

To Mike Michael: the remote control isn’t that significant to humanity

By Tom Bracken

As an 18 year old first year Media and Communications student, I am (quite obviously) not an academic, I have no published work and there are no photos of me sitting at a desk looking intelligent. Therefore I feel reluctant and a little guilty to criticise a reading I don’t feel is much good or successfully makes a relevant point.  

In the case Mike Michael’s “Disciplined and Disciplining co(a)gents: The Remote Control and the Couch Potato” I have no choice but to make an exception.

Stupid author names aside, simply put, if Mike Michael had intended for this chapter to be satirical I would have enjoyed it immensely. This is not the case, however, but I still laughed a lot

On one level Michael is analysing the increasing emphasis and reliance civilisation places on technology. He discusses how technological develop has allowed people to distribute bodily functions to different media and inventions. This itself is an interesting and valid topic. It’s when Michael starts to speak of human’s as hybrids, half man half remote-control, that I became disillusioned. From there he examines the proverbial “couch potato” as both a plague on society but also something to be celebrated. Ridiculousness reaches its peak when he begins his analysis of the apparently endless significance of the television remote control for humanity. In summary this reading is a hilarious example of pretentious over-analysis of a nothing topic with pointless conclusions.

I could rant on for 3000 words, therefore I’ve decided to highlight a couple of key areas of the reading as proof of the ludicrousness of this article. Firstly, I am going to quote the moment when I first realised I was in trouble:

“What does this interaction with the remote control presuppose about my body and others? How is this mundane technological artefact implicated in the heterogeneous ordering that comprises ‘television watching’ and how are we to understand its routine disappearance?…can we think of the absenting of the remote control as a form of heterogeneous disciplining  of the couch potato? “

The language is dense, and what is he suggesting?? That when the remote control goes missing under the cushion some unknown power is punishing us for watching too many episodes of “Neighbours”?

My favourite part of the reading comes when Michael describes the remote as a grave symbol of gender inequality. He argues that the fact that the man of the house was traditionally in control of the remote was symbolic of his gender role. He quotes Morley “the remote control is a highly visible symbol of condensed power relations’”. I highly doubt that greater control of the remote control was at the forefront of the Women’s Movement. I can picture the protest signs standing high at a 1970s rally now”

“Equal pay

Equal Opportunity

Equal Remote Time”

Now I am willing to accept this observation on gender roles, has merit. But then for some unknown reason Michael goes on to suggest that not only do men suppress women through their remote control control (?), their inclination to channel surf links them with the postmodern movement. “…fractured, fragmented images structure (post) modern consciousness.” Me, personally, I just don’t like ads. Such an observation is parallel to pulling at straws. It gives no new insight into the postmodern movement or the role of media related technology in our lives.

So to quickly conclude, I have not read the entirety of Mike Michael’s book, so maybe I’m therefore missing the overall point. From this reading alone, however, I see nothing but an ostentatious attempt to analyse a concept and an entity that does not need it. Hence the end results are conclusions that are trivial, pointless and in my opinion, just plain silly.

That is just my opinion. I hope I haven’t offended anyone. If anyone feels I have completely missed the point of the reading; fill me in so I can stop ranting.

End communication.

References

All quotes taken from: Michael, Mike “Disciplined and Disciplining co(a)gents: The Remote Control and the Couch Potato”. In Reconnecting Culture; Technology and Nature: From Society to Heterogeneity. London Routledge, 2000., 96-116

 

MDIA 1002 Introductions

By Tom Bracken

This is now my third blog ever and first “MDIA1002 Tutorial Post” as we say in the industry. What follows is my concise and brutally honest assessment of myself as a media user/writer/time manager/(if this gets posted where it needs to be) simultaneous categoriser and tagger.

I read the newspaper consistently every day. The sport section, however, is the first and main point of call. I will (and often force myself) read through the front section so I know what’s going down outside of the NRL. I may read half an article and move on if it isn’t too enthralling. I like the letters and envisage myself as one day becoming a 72 year old public transport patron who continuously writes conservative letters to the Herald complaining about long hair/young people (only 3 will ever be published). I am more of an FM radio man but thanks to Mum I listen to 702 Radio National in the morning and if I’m driving I may occasionally catch PM. For me watching televised news is more of a coincidental occurrence. I don’t watch it religiously but if I sit down to watch TV and it is on I will watch everything except the weather.

When writing I tend to use an online thesaurus (helps complete any HSC English essay) and dictionaries come into the equation when I have no clue what something means and I feel it is important that I do. And finally, as for dead-lines I tend not to miss them.

So that’s all I’ve got to say on the matter

End communication