MediaMagazine Articles

Election US-Style: an englishwoman’s view from the streets of new york

It’s all done and dusted, and by the time you read this, Obama will have taken over in the White House. The hype of the electoral process was well-covered in the British media, but what was it really like over there? Intrepid student, Emma Coker, on a 21st birthday trip to New York, was actually there on election day with her camera. This is her report.

I arrived in New York on the 30th of October, five days before the presidential election. It had been eight years since my first visit to the ‘Big Apple’ and I was yet to experience the city post-9/11. Perhaps it was arriving at night, driving south down Broadway in a yellow taxi, looking up in amazement as we passed Times Square, the city still so alive (or maybe ‘awake’ is a more appropriate term), that heightened my sense of anticipation of my stay. I was heading downtown to Tribeca on the Lower West side of Manhattan and within five minutes of my ride, I noticed the first evidence of the impact of the electoral race. In the window of an elegant 6th Avenue department store, two male mannequins attired in Armani suits each wore the mask of a potential president.

New Yorkers are of course world-renowned for their friendly, approachable demeanours as well as their seemingly genuine optimism. However, it was evident to me almost straight away that this positivism had amplified as the race to the White House reached the finishing strait. The people of New York were eager for, and expected, change. The city was consumed by election fever, and the Obama vs. McCain battle was completely unavoidable. New York is undoubtedly Blue through and through (rather confusingly, while blue for us means the Conservatives, in the US it stands for the Democrats). The face of Barack Obama was plastered or gratified on almost every street corner. Hundreds of New Yorkers wore pins on their lapels to confirm their partisanship, and I didn’t see a single one branded with the face of John McCain.

What surprised me the most, however, wasn’t how totally Obama-obsessed New York appeared to be, but the emphasis placed on the importance of voting, whichever way, and the sense of urgency do to so. Furthermore, it wasn’t just the public trying to spread the word to others, urging them to make the most of their most valuable civil liberty, but also franchises, including some of the world’s most well-known brands. Huge ‘VOTE’ signs were the centre-pieces of window displays in stores such as GAP, Urban Outfitters and American Apparel as well as several independent boutiques. Clever incentives were adopted to persuade people to make their vote count. GAP gave out free ‘Vote for _____’ T-shirts to anybody who made a purchase, whilst on election day itself, Starbucks gave away free lattes to anybody who could prove they’d already voted. The more creative types in SoHo and the meat-packing district used their artistic flair to illustrate the significance of voting, with eye-catching and witty posters and shop fronts. The Magnolia Bakery, made famous by an appearance in Sex and the City, was selling batches of cup cakes iced in red, white and blue, each with a mini stars and stripes flag. There was a queue around the block to get your hands on one. They tasted good.

Coverage of the electoral campaign was constant on American news channels, and while the general mood was positive and hopeful, there were reports of possible corruption in Virginia, a state with several marginal seats, and thus a heightened sense of urgency for everyone entitled to vote to do so. News of attempts by Republican support groups to sabotage Democratic voting emerged – and illustrated the darker side of such a critical election. It was suggested that several potentially Democratic neighbourhoods were targeted, and inhabitants were wrongly told that due to ‘unprecedented voter numbers’ Democrats had to vote on the 5th rather than the 4th of November – by which time the result of the election would have already been called. Specific groups, including recent immigrants and African Americans (seen as likely to support Barack Obama) were supposedly warned off voting with threats of arrest for trivial offences and deportation.

Five days later, as my trip neared its end, preparations were being made all over the city for the big day and the even bigger night that would follow. The Rockefeller Center, due to become ‘Election Plaza’, announcing the results from each state as they came in, already shrouded in tourists queuing for a skate on its famous ice rink, was crawling with news reporters awaiting the biggest story they’d surely cover in months and electricians making sure transmission went without a hitch.

To my utter frustration, I left New York City at 9pm on Election Day, just hours before Barack Obama was announced President. I can only imagine what it would have been like to experience such a momentous occasion in the flesh; instead I had to watch the reaction of New Yorkers on my television at home. As my bus headed to JFK airport, I caught my last glimpse of the big city, the Empire State Building lit up in the colours red, white and blue.

Emma Coker studied Media at A Level, and is now concluding a degree course at LSE.

This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 27, February 2009.

---------------

Election

In MediaMagazine 13 Jerome Monahan provided a comprehensive account of the media tactics employed in the 2005 General Election. Here he looks in more detail at the party Political Broadcasts and provides:

– a list of blogging MPs, with links
– links to other blogs connected to the election or politics more generally
– suggestions for further online reading.

Party Political Broadcasts – General Election 2005

The highlights include Anthony Minghella’s extraordinary film for the Labour party, depicting Blair and supposed arch-rival Chancellor Gordon Brown in a series of intimate discussions about the philosophical roots and governing principles attaching to their policies. Vaseline had definitely been applied to the lense to give it a warm glow, and the settings for the conversations in first the wood-panelled cabinet room and then in a bright canteen provided subliminal messages about tradition and forward thinking. The film was described as a ‘love scene’ by some journalists and there was a great deal of eye contact between the politicians going on, as a rather restless camera flicked between them. As you watch, look out for Blair’s vanishing striped tie – a classic continuity blunder! Among the subsequent broadcasts one that really stands out is that using Alan Sugar of The Apprentice fame. The screening was timed to coincide with the later stages of the reality show and scored on all sorts of levels, not least suggesting that labour was the natural choice of top businessmen.

The Tories broadcast a number of different films, but the first had clearly had the most money lavished on it. It featured a series of eleven vignettes involving representative individuals, echoing the ‘dog whistle’ concerns in the manifesto and on the posters. The rather dull content, with some of the contributors appearing distinctly lack lustre in their delivery, was counterbalanced by an extremely artful editing job that ensured no scene lasted more than a few seconds and every speaker was heralded by a close up on something that seemed to define them. In the background a rock-music track provided a counterweight to the traditional views being expressed. Among the richest in connotations were those scenes of a lady striding among the pebbles on a south coast beach – ready to defend our shores, a sentiment in keeping with the views she was expressing about immigration.

The Lib Dems by contrast could not afford the kind of production values their rivals could manage, so their first broadcast was a rather down-market affair with Charles Kennedy superimposed on a computer graphic of Britain from which orange cones of light emerged to herald brief sequences celebrating the party’s record in such places as Newcastle, where they run the council. Far more effective was the party’s second film – a version of the ‘the boy who cried wolf’ cautionary tale voiced by Sandy Toksvig and ridiculing both Blair and ‘Howie’ for believing tales of bad things hiding in the woods.

However, in the end, first prize in the audacious broadcast stakes deserves to go to UKIP. Their film was a hilarious tribute to B-feature sci-fi featuring screaming crowds and a fabulously tacky European Union many-tentacled monster clambering over the Bank of England and the Palace of Westminster. The film was in the great tradition of nineteenth-century political cartoons by the likes of James Gillray or Thomas Rowlandson.
The last word on this score has to go to Channel 4 news who hired maverick ad-makers Lee and Dan to come up with a set of hilarious spoof broadcasts. At the time of writing this they remained online at http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=67

Blogging– General Election 2005

Blogging MPS
• Tom Watson http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/
• Boris Johnson http://www.boris-johnson.com/
• Shaun Woodward http://www.shaunwoodward.com/
• Sandra Gidley http://romseyredhead.blogspot.com/
• Austin Mitchell http://www.austinmitchell.org/
• Iain Dale http://www.iaindale.blogspot.com/
• Ian Lyon http://www.ianlyon.org.uk/
• Kevin Davis http://kevindavis.blogspot.com/
• Antonia Bance http://www.antoniabance.org.uk/blog/
• Anthony Little http://antonylittle.blogspot.com/
• Judith Blake http://www.labour.org.uk/home
• Keith Taylor http://www.keithforwestminster.com/h/f/KEITH/blog//2//
• Mark Young http://dyffrynt.blogspot.com/
• Jamie Bolden http://www.jamiebolden.com/
• Chris Whiteside http://www.chris4copeland.blogspot.com/
• John Hemming http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/
• Robert Buckland http://www.swindonforbuckland.com/

Election and political blogging

• Richard Allan http://www.richardallan.org.uk/
• Clive Soley http://clivesoleymp.typepad.com/clive_soley_mp/
• BBC Election blog http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/blog/default.stm
• Guardian Election blog http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/election2005/
• Times Election blog http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,20809,00.html
• New Statesman Election blog http://www.newstatesman.com/generalelection
• Bill Thompson’s blog http://www.andfinally.com/
• Slugger O’Toole http://www.sluggerotoole.com/
• Voxpolitics http://www.voxpolitics.com/index.shtml
• The Homeless Guy http://www.thehomelessguy.blogspot.com/
• Downing Street Says http://www.downingstreetsays.com/
• They work for you http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
• Election blogs, Keele University http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/ge05/electionblogs.htm
• Leon’s Election blog http://election-05.blogspot.com/
• Robin’s eDemocracy http://www.perfect.co.uk/

Blogs in the USA

www.blogpulse.com/papers/2005/AdamicG
Further online reading
Dog Whistle Issues
http://economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3789210
Sandy Walkington appointment
http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/press/050105a.htm
Main Political sites
British National Party: http://www.bnp.org.uk/
Conservatives: http://www.conservatives.com/
The Green Party: http://www.greenparty.org.uk/
lanceBlogWWW.pdf
The Labour Party: http://www.labour.org.uk/home
The Liberal Democrats: http://www.libdems.org.uk/
Plaid Cymru: http://www.plaidcymru.org/
Scottish National Party: http://www.snp.org/
UKIP: http://www.ukip.org/
Respect: http://www.respectcoalition.org/
Sinn Fein: http://sinnfein.ie/
Ulster Unionists: http://www.uup.org
Democratic Unionist Party: http://www.dup.org.uk/

---------

Brand/Ross/Sachsgate: what every media student needs to know

When Brand and Ross left those infamous answerphone messages for Andrew Sachs, they little realised they were unleashing a scandal of national proportions – or that they might become enshrined as A Level case studies. Senior examiner Steph Hendry outlines the debates raised by the affair, the ways different media platforms addressed it, and the important issues it should raise for your media course.

For a recent issue of MediaMagazine I used the poster for the film Forgetting Sarah Marshall to demonstrate approaches to analysis. One of the points I raised was about the use of the image of Russell Brand in the marketing of the film. At that point Brand’s star was in the ascendency and he had begun to raise his profile both here and across the Atlantic. His ‘bad boy’ persona was an integral part of the way the film was promoted to British audiences. If, however, a week is a long time in politics then a few months is a lifetime in the entertainment industry. In October 2008 ‘Bad Boy Brand’ responded to public pressure and resigned from the BBC after being involved in a ‘phone prank’ broadcast on BBC Radio 2.

The scandal concerned answerphone messages left for the actor Andrew Sachs and the fact that Brand and Jonathan Ross had broadcast comments that some saw as abusive, inappropriate and vulgar. This story was high on the news agenda for the best part of a week in October. The event, the reporting of the event and the responses to both provide interesting insight into modern media culture for students. It is an ideal case study which shows how various media platforms act together to provide the momentum for a story to dominate the news agenda of all news outlets and to mobilise audiences. The broadcast itself generated very little public concern but the reporting of it created such interest that thousands who originally knew nothing about the prank felt compelled to complain (or defend the broadcasters) in the wake of the news media’s response to this radio show.

Institutional contexts

Radio

The offending broadcast was originally aired on BBC Radio 2 on Saturday Oct 18th during the The Russell Brand Show. Radio is a media platform which is often overlooked by students but it is still a very popular medium which mixes broadcasting of various types from music to current affairs and documentary to comedy. Radio is one of the most easily accessed of broadcasting platforms with radios themselves being cheap to buy. Radio is also broadcast on digital television, mobile phones and online either as live broadcasts or via recorded shows which are available as streamed audio or podcasts for downloading and listening to on MP3 players. The rise in the popularity of portable music players and downloadable material has made radio an exceptionally flexible format which allows audiences to control when and where they listen to radio shows.

On the day of the broadcast itself, it is interesting to note that there were only two complaints and that these were made about the use of bad language in the segment, not the content of the call itself. This could indicate a number of things: the radio audience for the show found the content of the programme within their expectations of the show; the radio audience did not feel the joke merited concern; proportionally, the audience for radio programmes such as this is relatively small (it is estimated that the radio show had around 400,000 listeners). Whatever the reasons, the initial broadcast did not generate much in the way of a public outcry. This only occurred when the issue was taken up by the national newspapers.

Newspapers

The first sign of ‘outrage’ came in an article published by The Mail on Sunday. The British press often positions itself as a guardian of public morality and decency and this was the tone taken by The Mail in its shocked reporting of the issue. No room was left for debate as the newspaper condemned the broadcast absolutely, describing Brand and Ross’s phone call as a ‘criminal offence’ (Oct 25th) and raising the institutional issue of BBC funding as an important factor given the fact that Jonathan Ross was working under a contract worth £18m over three years. This money comes from funds the BBC receives from the license fee paid by the general public.

The types of responses the different newspapers made to the event provide a lot of clues about the specific news agenda held by the titles. The Mail often criticises the BBC in terms of the way it spends money and the public service that it provides. The Mail broke the story and continued to give it a high profile over the course of the week. The Sun ran the story on the Monday on page 3 suggesting perhaps that it saw the event as little more than titillating entertainment. Their attitude changed and it took a more moralistic slant as the public response became clear but they also ran photographs of Sachs’ granddaughter, Georgina Baillie, which had been used in an attempt to launch her glamour model career some years previously.

Several papers, including The Mirror, The Express and The Guardian did not see the story as newsworthy enough on the Monday to include it at all – their coverage began on the Tuesday. The Star jumped on the bandwagon on the Wednesday by running pictures of Sachs’ granddaughter in her fetish stage gear. Max Clifford (a notorious PR agent) was employed by Baillie as the story broke and played a major part in ensuring her perspective was communicated through the tabloid press. The newspapers employed narrative techniques as villains (Brand, Ross, the BBC) were quickly identified and victims (Sachs and Baillie) were quickly defended. Each day saw a further conflict being brought to the story which allowed the papers to capitalise on the public interest being generated. Brand’s resignation, Gordon Brown’s statement, Baillie’s comments and the BBC’s responses all allowed the story to run for several days as each event added more discussion points. However, the main reason the story continued to run was due to the life it generated for itself outside the newspapers with audiences becoming involved in the debate, largely via the internet.

The Internet

The reason for the extended and expanded responses from all newspapers can be explained when looking at the role of the internet in the growth of the story. The initial story in The Mail on Sunday and its follow-up in The Mail on the Monday generated over 200, mainly negative, comments. This may not sound like a lot but, compared to the average number of responses received for a breaking news story, this indicated that the public’s feelings ran high and there was a large scale condemnation of both the broadcaster’s judgement and in the BBC’s decision to allow the pre-recorded segment to be aired.

The offending broadcast was the most accessed video ever on YouTube shortly after the story broke. One version of the clip on YouTube has been accessed by over 1.25 million people and the easy access to the ‘evidence’ gave people a chance to listen and evaluate the broadcast for themselves. In addition, online editions of newspapers now provide a useful way for the papers themselves to gauge audience feelings as stories on the internet provide a facility for readers to add their own comments.

Add to all this the sheer volume of outlets for reporting and commenting on the story provided by the internet and this story echoed across the media in news and gossip web pages, in blogs and in chat forums. Facebook currently has an area for people who are opposed to the suspensions with 43,000 members. Everyone who has felt the need has had an opportunity to contribute to the debate.

Wider issues and debates

• The events have put the BBC under the spotlight yet again. Questions have been asked about the accountability of individuals within the BBC when mistakes or bad judgements are made. Some commentators have criticised the fact that ‘success’ is always gauged by viewing figures and so the BBC is seen to be attempting to produce populist programming at the expense of broadcasts which seek to inform and educate. The enormous fees paid to presenters such as Ross has also been widely criticised and his subsequent suspension without pay has been widely reported as a victory as it saves the corporation over £1m.

• Wider questions have also been raised regarding the moral climate of a nation where the content of the broadcast is defined by some as ‘comedy’. This has been described as part of a wider culture of cruelty in popular entertainment.

• Debates have begun on whether we are witnessing evidence of a cultural generation gap. Sachs has been described as a ‘national treasure’ but this can only be of any relevance to people who can remember his performance in the 1970s sitcom Fawlty Towers. Although Ross is nearly 50 years old, he still presents himself as part of youth culture and Brand is a comedian who appeals directly to a youth audience. Has this been at the heart of the ‘scandal’? Is this a clash of adult and youth values touching on attitudes to public discussions of sexual behaviour and ideas surrounding showing respect for older generations? Is gender a part of this? Is the outcry based on a perception of Brand’s ‘ungentlemanly’ behaviour in talking crudely about his sexual encounter?

• Conversely, concerns have also been raised about the condemnation by newspapers and a minority of the population and the BBC’s response to this, seeing it as a form of censorship. There are worries that this may make broadcasters less willing to take creative risks and act to limit new ideas in the future.

• The affair also raises questions about the power of the audience (and British newspapers). As no programming could ever please all audience members, it begs the question as to who should be the ones to decide what can and cannot be broadcast. Who should have the final say: newspapers, a vocal minority or programme producers?

• The story taps into an idea of ‘people power’ and democracy created by the interactive potential of the internet. Have we been witness to an example of e-technology taking power away from the institutions and giving it to audience members?

For Media students investigating institutions, audiences, e-media, representations and ideologies, the events of one week in October 2008 provide ample material for further research and discussion which flags up key issues and debates within contemporary media. It’s a shame Ross himself was not a Media student as apparently he hadn’t given these issues much thought. He is quoted as saying:

you don’t realise that what you’re doing here [in the studio] has a reality outside. Cited in Harris, the Guardian, 28/10/08

This radio show, accessed by a relatively small number of the British public, has certainly shown that the reality outside the studio can sometimes be enormously wide-reaching.

Sachsgate – a timeline of events

• Sunday Oct 26th 2008: The initial Mail on Sunday report is published. There are two complaints generated by the broadcast itself.

• Monday 27th: The BBC apologises to Andrew Sachs. Complaints top 1,500.

• Tuesday 28th: The Mail runs a front page call for the sacking of Brand and Ross and included a YouTube video-link on the website. The Star prints images of granddaughter in fetish stage gear. All newspapers now report on the story; Gordon Brown and David Cameron both make statements condemning the broadcast. Complaints reach 10,500. Ofcom opens an investigation.

• Wednesday 29th: Brand and Ross are suspended by the BBC. Brand resigns his position from the BBC and releases a video apology. Complaints reach 18,000.

• Thursday 30th: Lesley Douglas, Radio 2’s Controller and Head of Popular Music, resigns. Ross told he is suspended for three months without pay.

• November 5th: Channel 5 broadcast a TV documentary on the affair which features an interview with Georgina Baillie. Complaints reach 37,500.

• November 7th: Radio 2’s Head of Specialist Music and Compliance resigns.

• November 8th: The BBC broadcast a second apology to Andrew Sachs on Radio 2. Complaints have reached 42,000.

• December 18th: The BBC demands that Ross tones down his swearing and smutty language when he returns to work.

• December 29th: Daily Mail reveals that Ross is currently joking about the situation online in his blog. It also suggests his most recent book Why do I say these things? is a flop at only 685 in the Amazon book sales charts.

• January 23rd: Ross returns to work with the line ‘Where were we?’. He apologises for his previous behaviour. Brand continues to refer to the incident in stand-up and other gigs.

Steph Hendry is a Lecturer in Media Studies at Runshaw College, Lancashire. She is a Senior Examiner, freelance writer and trainer.

This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 27, February 2009.

Reality and Realism

Benefits to institutions

 Divide between institution and audience is eroded.
 Power to make and break news.

Benefits to audience

 No longer passive receivers of news.
 Have become ‘users’ and users become publishers.
 Now create their own content.
 Divide between institution and audience is eroded.
 Safer – evidence of everything.

Examples

 1991 – video cameras become more common and more people afford them.
 Rodney King incident [1991] – 4 LA Police Officers charged of assault and excessive force for tasering and beating Rodney King.
 Asian Tsunami [2004] – turning point for UGC, created by Accidental Journalists (on-the-spot witness accounts – after couple of days, social networking sites had worldwide witness accounts on forums to help families get in touch.
 London bombings [2005] – citizen journalists influenced mainstream agenda. Footage from mobile phones. First-hand view was more uncompromising. Now everyone can see similar unmediated footage on the news.

UGC

 Message boards
 Citizen journalists
 Grassroots journalists
 Accidental journalists
 Chat rooms
 Q&A
 Polls
 Have your says
 Blogs with enabled commenting
 Bebo
 MySpace
 YouTube
 Facebook
 Wikipedia news
 Google news
-------------------------

What is meant by the term ‘citizen journalist’?

The term ‘Citizen Journalist’ means members of the public (‘ordinary people’) capture an event which is consider being important. They become producers when they upload the texts on sites such as YouTube. They are also referred to as accidental journalists' or 'grassroots journalists.

What was one of the first examples of news being generated by ‘ordinary people’?

The first ever text that was generated by an ‘ordinary person’ was the Rodney King incident which was captured by George Holliday. This was when he captured the event of Rodney King and the four police officers. As the officers surrounded him, tasered him and beat him with clubs. The event was filmed by George from his apartment window; Later the home-video footage made prime-time news and became an international media sensation, and a focus for complaints about police racism towards African-Americans.

List some of the formats for participation that are now offered by news organisations.

• Message boards
• Chat rooms
• Q&A, polls
• Have your says
• And blogs with comments enabled.

What is one of the main differences between professionally shot footage and that taken first-hand (UGC)?

The difference between professional shot footage and UGC footage is that the User Generated Content is hard-hitting and emotive. Therefore news is now considered to be old fashioned if it lacks the low quality grainy style of footage that is proved by citizen journalists.

What is a gatekeeper?

A gatekeeper is the organisation which decides the types of text that is/is not news and whether it will broadcast the content provided by the Citizen journalists is called a gatekeeper as they in other words filter the content for publication.

How has the role of a gatekeeper changed?

A gatekeepers job role has changed as it’s has become more important because before it had very little access to self-representation before such as youth groups, low income groups, and various minority groups may but now it has gained its own voice through the use of citizen journalism.

What is one of the primary concerns held by journalists over the rise of UGC?

The main concern held by journalists over the rise of UGC is that they are no longer needed in event as ‘ordinary people’ have become their own journalists and product better content. Therefore journalists fear that they will no longer have jobs in the future and leaving large organisation out of jobs as smaller core staff will manage and process UGC from citizen journalists, this is called 'crowd sourcing.'

Alternative Representations in Hip Hop

Christina Aguilera - Can't Hold Us Down



This music video is very contraversial in the way that women are represented in the Hip Hop genre.

Christina Aguilera has often been critisiced of her revealing dress sense, before she changed her look completely for the music video "Beautiful". In this text, her image is that of someone stereotypically nicknamed "white trash". She is shown in shorts, wearing all pink, which suggests there is still supposed to be an element of innocence in her character in this music video.

Even the title gives indications of a rebellious and revolutionary-style music video. "Can't Hold Us Down" tells the viewers, even before they view the text, that this is something to repell those who create pressure; in this case, men. The text also features mainly black males, who are stereotypically seen as the most dominant, dangerous and violent men who create the most problems. Even though Christina Aguilera is white and middle-classed, she chose to dress like an ethnic minority figure to express her view that it is not important what race they are, but that they are fighting together against equality.

Clearly this text shows an alternative representation of women in the Hip Hop genre, compared to stereotypical ones we often see in rap songs, featuring women hardly dressed, dancing around dominant males and phallic symbols. This text contains connotations that are more deeply rooted around feminism and post-feminism rather than morality. The lyrics "when a female fires back, suddenly big-talker don't know how to act" shapes the meaning of the music video to the viewer. The singer questions this idea of feminism that is supposed to have created equality in everyday life, yet considerable differences still exist within the two genres that don't allow equality to prevail.

Mainly in the Hip Hop genre, the dominant representation of men are that they seem quite relaxed and don't have to move much to be pleasured by his women. Usually using phallic symbols to express his power and control over these women, dominant males would show off their power with the most expensive cars, clothing and jewellery. Whereas in this music video, we see the alternative representation of men:

Here is a screenshot of the scene where the males are breakdancing. This whole idea of dancing to show themselves off almost seems a desperation to re-gain power. The text reflects the rise in female power against males who, according to this music video, really and truly don't have any power but refuse to admit so. Therefore, it supports the idea that we are still living in a patriarchal society, even though male mysogyny has decreased.

However, in a way, the text is trying to change the views of the viewer by showing them that it is the representation of men that creates the patriarchal society, and not the men themselves. The scene where Lil Kim enters the scene in her tight revealing outfit, is where it becomes clear what the main focus of the clip is:

Even though she is dressed in the stereotypically subordinate female image, her words explain, using examples, the inequality that still exists today. Yet she makes it clear that it is not the men's actions that lead to this being the case, but the way they are still represented as angels/heroes. "When a guy have 3 girls, then he's the man. He can either give her some head of sex her off, but if the girl do the same then she's a whore" - the text connotes that the only reason equality still exists today is because men are still given this freedom of being able to sexually please many women and be promiscuous without consequence, but women are seen to be "whores" if they do the same, because of this never-ending mysogynistic view towards women in society.

"But the table's about to turn" and "You can't hold me down, i got to keep on moving" - give indications of feminist behaviour on the rapper's part. These lyrics signify that we have not yet reached total feminism and that the viewers should bear in mind that women's power is still rising today. In a way, Christina Aguilera tries to promote women's power and allow women to become more rebellious and violent towards men in society, because of the idea of feminism being so revolutionary.

Even the lyrics "you must talk so big to make up for smaller things":

The singer's hand gestures as she says this line are very sexual. Yet she is using this phallic symbol as a way to express the meaning behind what she is saying. She is trying to say that males try to be dominant by pretending they have big penises, but talk in a mysogynistic manner to women in order to make up for a size that they haven't achieved.

Therefore, alternative representations do exist of females and males in the Hip Hop genre. However, to be an alternative representation, the stereotypical roles must be switched from the males being dominant to subordinate, and from the females being subordinate to dominant. Although this is an unusual change, it seems normal for the general public as we are used to the rise in female power over the years. But to go as far as suggesting that society naturally subordinates men would be incorrect. The text signifies the hatred some women have for mysogynistic men in particular, therefore creating an alternate mysogyny coming from the female point-of-view. This has slowly began to shape society, that instead of equality, we are slowly beginnning to accept the fact that males should be subordinated and females dominant.

Post-Feminism and Popular Culture

The link to Angela McRobbie's paper on Post-Feminism and Popular Culture:

http://weblearn.ox.ac.uk/site/human/women/students/biblio/historiog/McRobbie%20-%20postfeminism.pdf

Bridget Jones' Diary



"My argument is that post-feminism positively draws on and invokes feminism as that which can be taken into account, to suggest that equality is achieved..."

"This is a movement detectable across popular culture, a site where “power … is remade at various junctures within everyday life"

"the shrill championing of young women as a “metaphor for social change” on the pages of the right wing press in the UK, in particular the Daily Mail."

Wonderbra - Eva Herzigova



"The Wonderbra advert showing the model Eva Herzigova looking down admiringly at her substantial cleavage enhanced by the lacy pyrotechnics of the Wonderbra, was through the mid-1990s positioned in major high street locations in the UK on full size billboards."

"The composition of the image had such a textbook “sexist ad” dimension that one could be forgiven for supposing some familiarity with both cultural studies and with feministcritiques of advertising (Judith Williamson 1987)."

"It was, in a sense, taking feminism into account by showing it to be a thing of the past, by provocatively “enacting sexism” while at the same time playing with those debates in film theory about women as the object of the gaze (Laura Mulvey 1975) and even with female desire (Rosalind Coward 1984;Teresa de Lauretis 1988)."

Claudia Schiffer Car Ad



"This advert appears to suggest that yes, this is a self-consciously “sexist ad,” feminist critiques of it are deliberately evoked."

"Feminism is “taken into account,” but only to be shown to be no longer necessary. Why? Because there is no exploitation here, there is nothing remotely naıve about this striptease. She seems to be doing it out of choice, and for her own enjoyment; the advert works on the basis of its audience knowing Claudia to be one of the world’s most famous and highly paid supermodels."

"Once again, the shadow of disapproval is introduced (the striptease as site of female exploitation), only instantly to be dismissed as belonging to the past, to a time when feminists used to object to such imagery. "

Playboy magazine criticism

Here is an article from Journal of the History of Sexuality (May 1, 2008), which criticises Playboy's treatment of post-feminist women as being mysogynistic and disrespectful.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-179195168.html

"If we turn attention to some of the participatory dynamics in leisure and everyday
life which see young women endorse (or else refuse to condemn) the ironic normalisation of pornography, where they indicate their approval of and desire to be pin up girls for the centrefolds of the soft porn “lad mags"

"we are witness to a hyper-culture of commercial sexuality, one aspect of which is the repudiation of a feminism invoked only to be summarily dismissed (see also Rosalind Gill 2003)"

Chick Lit



"scenarios and dilemmas facing the young women characters in the narratives of contemporary popular culture (especially so-called chick lit)."

"Individuals must now choose the kind of life they want to live. Girls must have a lifeplan. They must become more reflexive in regard to every aspect of their lives, from making the right choice in marriage, to taking responsibility for their own working lives,and not being dependent on a job for life or on the stable and reliable operations of a large-scale bureaucracy which in the past would have allocated its employees specific,and possibly unchanging, roles."

The Four "Clarifying Concepts"

1. Post-feminism as backlash to feminism:

The new stage of equality between men and women, moving on from the old gender war.

2. Post-feminism as a colloquialism:

The idea that, although the movement has been contraversial, it is seen in society by the publicity of its new era.

3. The ambiguity of the prefix “post”:

Feminism has ended and we have ultimately reached equality.

4. A more positive look at post-feminism:

Looking at feminism as no longer a difficult era that we must overcome, but now as a completed era that we must be proud of.

Media Conference - 21/10/2010

Why do people talk such rubbish about Media Studies?

Homer Simpson - Article - "Angry parents accuse school of 'dumbing down' English by showing The Simpsons in class" (says the Daily Mail)

"Tories to tackle Media Studies Menace" (says the Independent)

Michael Gove (Education Minister) says - "entry rates for Media A-Level in 10 years have increased by 160%

Barnaby Leman (from The Guardian) - "'Worthless' qualifications give false hope to state pupils says Harrow Head"

Google article - "Media studies is shit"

Martin Baker - "Dons despair as students spurn Science in favour of 'Media Studies'"

Matthew Arnold (Headteacher of Rugby) - wrote a book about working class threats

Frank and Queenie Leavis - book - "Literature against pop culture"

Cause by the Media - Saving innocent kids from violence, tobacco, alcohol, sex and obesity

Tony Benn - "Only Democracy gives us that right"

Jon Kingsbury - "We're talking about a converged interactive Media industry. There's an increasing interplay between gaming, online, TV and films - it's all coming together"

Converged Media is more interactive...

Stuff to read

- David Gauntless
- Sonia Livingstone
- David Buckingham
- Annette Hill
- Michael Wesch
- Dan Gillmor
- Henry Jenkins
- Graeme Turner

Perfecting your production work

- Research and planning
- Blogging and evidence
- Ideas and feedback
- Logistics, equipment and production

Research

- Really look at examples
- Keep evidence of all your research
- Research every angle
- Conventions, audiences and institutions

Planning

- Things will go wrong
- Record all your planning in visuals
- Show the process of your 'journey'

Blogging

- Always use a blog (it allows you to link to examples)

Evidence

- Storyboards
- Animatics
- Recce photos

Ideas

- Keep the ideas simple
- Have a workable concept with realistic plans
- Try the '25 word pitch' or the 'lift pitch'

Feedback

- At all stages, get feedback from peers, teachers and others

Logistics

- People, places, props, costumes
- Get it done early - you may need to do it all again
- Rehearse and prepare
- Share contact details for all involved

Equipment

- Practice on it
- Prepare it

Production

- Always shoot extra for coverage
- Organise your material before editting
- Start with the big picture

Useful websites

www.artofthetitle.com - helps you create a nice flashy title
www.petesmediablog.blogspot.com - lecturer's media blog (very helpful apparently)

Bianca's Essay...keywords

What are the different representations of women in adverts and how are they signified?





The representation of women can be positive: challenging the roles and expectations of women or negative: reinforcing a patriarchal society. This essay questions how and why these representations are constructed in an advert for Gucci Guilty Perfume and Stella Artois beer.

Firstly the Gucci advert is in widescreen which connotes a dramatic cinematic experience to engage its audience. More attention is gained by the female character first seen in the text and her protagonist is signified through this. The protagonist has female dominance which is signified through the use of colour- everything is in black and white while her hair is gold/blonde. This colour connotes gold, power and divinity signifying her importance in the text.

The use of intertextuality in this text will appeal to a particular audience. The film references a great deal to the neo film noir Sin City, with the use of colour and the female dominant femme fatale character. Sin City appeals to a male audience due to the action genre, this trailer could also appeal to the same audience due to the intertextuality. In terms of the Uses and Gratifications theory, a female audience might realise and accept the protagonist in the text is a form of escapism and also a male gaze, by theorist Mulvey, and therefore might aspire, from Young and Rubicam's 4Cs, to be the object of male gaze too.

Though the protagonist is an object of male gaze, it could be suggested that she sexually objectifies herself to tease the audience. The protagonist puts her leg into the frame of the shot. As she puts into the frame, it signifies self objectification, allowing the audience to fetishise her body. Another shot, a high angle, of their sexual activities signifies CCTV and spying which is voyeuristic. The fact she is on top signifies her control of the situation for both the male character and the audience.

Not only does the protagonist exert her feminity through self objectification she also presents herself as an anarchic character signified by adopting male stereotypes. The advert begins with a long shot of an unknown character speeding down the motorway, which stereotypically would be expected to be a male character. However, the audience's expectations are challenged when a medium shot of the driver shows to be a female.

In contrast, women are negatively represented in the Stella Artois text. The most obvious editing technique used in the advert is the split screen: one side shows the female getting dressed and the other side is of the beer getting "prepared". This use of split screen signifies that neither the beer nor the woman know they have been placed side by side. This puts the audience in position of control as they can voyeur the woman, in a socially acceptable way. Audiences may identify this control as patriarchy, and also identify with the unknown male character whose presence is felt within the text. This text then reinforces the idea of a patriarchal society and that women are subordinated by men.

Not only does the female share the screen with the beer, but the screen is split equally between the two "objects" which connotes the woman is equally objectified to the status of beer. It is suggested the audience is male due to the female and beer subject. Though the advert is targeted at men, it also negatively stereotypes men as people who have little respect for women which however is a dominant representation.

A range of close up shots of the female are used to fetishise her body. There is a close up shot of the female's leg slowly and elegantly rising from the bath tub. On one hand this could signify femininity and her control over it which is the oppositional reading. However, the more dominant reading is that her legs are an important part of the female body and connotes a male audience who can voyeur her body.

The text near the beginning of the trailer says "the preparation" which is an enigma code as the audience question "what event is the preparation for?". It is signified through the shots that the woman and beer preparation is for the male through the use of action codes. Action codes of both the preparation of the woman and the glass of beer are the same.

Women are represented as people who prioritise their looks and appearance, and this ad reinforces this ideology. Action codes including close ups of her: brushing her hair, doing her make up and putting on heels strongly represent women as image conscious. It could be said that the advert reinforces this representation, which is always seen in the media. Funnily enough, it could also be said that the media itself is the cause of this representation as this ideal, perfect woman is always represented in the media, and women feel they have to aspire to it.

In conclusion, both texts females are the protagonists and are sexually objectified for male audiences to fetishise and vouyer their bodies. However, while Gucci’s advert’s protagonist controls her sexuality through self objectification, the Stella Artois’ protagonist is objectified by an unknown but present male character.

In the Gucci’s ad, there are many examples in the text that signify the protagonist’s female dominance, but it is arguable whether this could be seen as a positive representation. The dominant reading is that the protagonist exerts her female dominance over the male challenging the historical patriarchal society and even subordinating males as easily manipulated and easily tempted by women and sex and this would favour feminism. However the oppositional reading which would favour the ideologies of the Stella Artois advert, might be that females can control their sexuality, but it is still for the male gaze and male dominant society.

TV Ad Analysis

This clip shows a positive representation of women. We see this in the way the man is struggling to parallel-park his car. Naturally, in today's patriarchal society, we expect there to be some stereotypical insult against women's parking skills, judging by how they have been criticised in the past. However, this advertisement takes a turn against this patriarchal mentality and shows the viewer that women can not only park safely, but can park better than men. It expresses the views of modern Feminists that women can do everything as well as men, if not better. The Mise-en-scene is derived from a comic scene created in the 1990s, where a woman was mocked for her driving skills after impossibly crashing into a gate and flipping her car upside-down.

The woman that gets out of the car wears high heels, which is the first glimpse we get of her. This build up creates a powerful atmosphere illustrating her as an authoritative figure as she walks towards the man's car in slow motion. The effect is used to create tension as the audience watches in suspense for who this mystery woman is. She is dressed in formal office-type clothing, which connotes that she is not the sterotypical woman who is known to have reckless driving skills, but is this powerful Feminist, looking down at the man in the car through the window. This advertisement sends a clear message to anti-Feminist males, that women do not have to show their flesh and skin to be considered powerful, or even beautiful.

It almost seems deliberate that she is shown to be blonde, judging by the stereotypical connotations of blonde women being less academincally able "bimbos". THis also cancels out the traditional subordinate view of blonde women driving cars, almost converting the male gaze into a female one. Furthermore, the female character in the commercial could be showing signs of Androgyny, as she is portraying herself as almost a masculine woman. However, some could argue that she has qualities of a traditional Femme Fatale; even though she is not dressed provocatively, she possessed the shiny blonde hair and power over the man. There is also a slight sense of Voyeurism depicted in the scene which would tend to attract male audiences. It uses ISA to bring across this message of passion and fetishization as we watch her heel hit the floor and the camera pan up her legs to show her waist

This commercial shows a negative representation of women and is of complete contrast to the previous one. First of all, it begins with a group of friends playing a prank on one of their mates, who leaves the car to urinate. The fact that the driver is male displays the stereotypical view of how cars should be handled.

However, the main sexist remark shown in this clip is at the end, where the car drives over the cliff and the viewer is informed that the ad is to promote an insurance company. The target audience would probabl be sexist males, who have a patriarchal, even in today's society. This is because they are most likely the only group of viewers who would find the commercial funny rather than indulting. It is surprising that, not only is the advertisement completely sexist, but the company itself is based around the view that insurance should exist purely for women's use. This centres on the previous clip, which opposed the view of the stereotypical woman driver and her lack of driving skills.

Therefore, this commercial shows women as subordinate by insulting the intelligence of women drivers. Some may argue that this commercial is more misogynistic rather than patriarchal, seeing as it displays an unnecessary dislike towards women and their driving skills. Furthermore, it uses ideological state apparatus to, in a way, “brainwash” the naive and feminist male audience that this is the way they should be thinking. Therefore, it could be argued that the creators try to manipulate audiences to fit the needs of their target audience.

Gender & Advertising (Research)

This commercial highlights the stereotypical representation of women that was visible in the 1970s. It shows a standard 70s housewife singing almost happily that her day of labour is over and she shall now relax using the perfume. The quote "I've been sweet and I've been good, I've had a whole full day of motherhood" refer to the behaviour associated with a housewife, and how she must serve to meet the pleasures of her family. She is then observed singing "But I'm gonna have an Aviance night" and moving in a sexual manner as she takes off her gloves and lets loose her hair. This brings out the Angel-Whore theory, where stereotypically, women are seen to be angels during the day, but whores in the bedroom. The commercial continues with the woman unbuttoning her shirt and her husband walking into the room, gazing at her in a sexual way, obviously connoting that he is sexually aroused by her perfume. Furthermore, this brings out a negative represenation of women as it reflects the kind of patriarchal society that once existed, and some argue still exists today.



This 1960s advertisement is quite controversial. It shows an elderly lady, possibly in her mid-70s sitting at a restaurant by herself. She is posisbly a well-spoekn dame, who is being served by men from left and right. Excited about the pickle she picks up from the serving tray, she breaks out in violence as she gives it a taste, clearly dislking its texture. She engages in violent activity which includes throwing items, tipping her table over, throwing and beating waiters etc. This shows a completely different side of women of the 60s, considering her old age she is still able to fight off over 4 waiters at the same time and manage to tip over tables and chairs. Therefore, this commercial eliminates the inferior representation of women and replaces it with a socially superior one. Not only is she shown as being the dominant, but the one that is feared, as seen by the hand shaking and hesitating to pass her the jar at the end of the commercial. Some could argue that this is a positive representation of women, as women are hereby seen as dominant, confident, powerful and able to defend themselves, whereas in many other commercials, they are seen as th inferior ones with no power.

Thus others could argue that this shows a negative representation of women, seeing as her persona is quite violent and aggressive. This could provide men with more sexist criticisms to use in future advertisement.



This is an advertisement showing a positive representation of men. The man walks right into his girlfriend's home, who automatically leaps on him with sexual arousement at the after shave that he is wearing. The idea of "Hai Karate" being the name of the after shave, as well as the name of a popular martial art, gave this commercial its kick. However, the use of the martial art comparison in the commercial seems to present the man as vain and macho. The connotations of the ad are that this product will allow all women to leap on you as the woman did in the text.

Gender & Advertising

1. What sort of images of women and men dominated advertising pre-1970s? Why was this the case?

Women were rarely shown in paid work. When they were it would usually be a stereotypical role e.g. the smiling secretary of hairdresser. Housewife images were still very common even after the 1950s. In the 1970s, of all ads featuring women, three-quarters were for kitchen and bathroom products. Women's ads were mainly concerned about beauty, cleanliness, family and pleasing others. Whereas men were only more concerned about achievement and having fun.

The reason for this may be that the third wave of Feminism didn't take its toll until mid 1980s/1990s. This meant that women's power was still restricted pre-1970s, allowing the men to remain socially superior. It is clear that the pre-1970s era was a much bigger patriarchal society than today. Therefore, the media industry was never targetted for sexist/misogynistic attacks on women, because of this male-dominant social norm that had been around for many years.

2. How did the advertising of the 1970’s continue to perpetuate the stereotype of women, despite depicting women in a greater range of roles?

Even though women's roles had increased in advertising, there was this element of, almost mockery, in doing so. The roles women were given were mainly family-orientated and concerned about "non-important" aspects of life. Therefore, although the range of roles were increased, they were not necessarily less stereotypical.

3. Can Gaye Tuchman’s quote regarding under-representation and the ‘symbolic annihilation of women’ still be applied in 21st Century advertising? If so, how?

Tuchman refers to American television in his quote, therefore it is important to consider this question in relation to solely American television. It could be argued that the 21st Century is continuing to follow in the footsteps of the 20th's patriarchal society. Sexist comedy has increasingly become more and more popular, and tends to be the humour of most men who grew up in the society where misogyny was at its peak. However, as with racism, sexist comedy could be described as being acceptible, purely for satirical use.

Because the 21st Century is an era of post-Feminism, it has become popular for advertisers to use ISA (Ideological State Apparatus) to invisibly naturalise these crticisms. Therefore, audiences are able to receive these messages covertly through media texts by means of brainwashing (hypodermic needle).

4. Do you agree that adverts, such as those for the 1990’s Boots No. 7, ‘It’s not make-up. It’s ammunition.’ campaign, are post-feminist (thereby representing women as better than men?). Explain your answer.

?

5. Is the representation of women by the media accountable for the results of a survey in which ‘women were up to ten times more likely than men to be unhappy with their body image’?

Yes, I believe the media is accountable. This is because the only reason women are uncomfortable and unhappy with their body image is because certain guidelines have been set by the media industry on how a woman should look/dress/walk/talk etc. Therefore, women have become increasingly self-conscious and worried that their body image will be less appealing to men than those advertised on television.

6. Is the contemporary representation of men in advertising perhaps also a negative one where they too are treated as sex objects?

It could be argued that, contemporarily, sexism is no longer an issue. The issue that would have risen from this sort of advertising would have been whether, with women having fought for many years for equality and the right to be treated as anything but sex objects, whether men should now have to do the same... the answer is no, as there is no longer a sexism issue because of the fact that they both almost cancel each other out negatively. Even though two wrong issues wouldn't make a right one, there is a sense of relaxation from both sexes on whether men are shown as being overly sexual in today's media landscape.

Media Guardian 100

1. What is the Guardian 100 and who are the panellists that create it?

Media Guardian 100 is an annual guide to the most powerful people in television, radio, newspapers, magazines, digital media, media business, advertising, marketing and PR.

2. How many women are in the top 100?

There are 16 women in the top 100

3. What companies do these women work for and in what roles?

Controller for BBC1
Chief Executive for News International
Chairman and Chief Executive of Shine Group
Director of BBC News
Chief Executive of Pearson
Controller of film and drama on Channel 4
Chairman and Chief Executive of Random House
Corporate Marketing Director and Head of Marketing of Procter & Gamble UK and Ireland
Director of Vision of BBC
Chairman and Chief Executive of AMV Group
Chairman and Chief Executive of Channel Five

4. What percentage of the 100 are women?

16%

5. How would you assess the balance of power in this list and why do you think it is this way?

There is an almost obvious correlation between the number of men vs women in the Top 100. Living in a patriarchal society, we may not realise that this is a case of inequality. Yet the women who are in the 100 have clearly conformed to their positions and have been sucked into this male gaze, unaware that they are being treated unfairly. The list shows that we still live in a male dominated environment where women continue to be prone to subordination.

Femme Fatales

Gilda from Gilda (1947)

One very popular Femme Fatale character of the 20th Century was the film Gilda (1947). Gilda is played by Rita Hayworth who is known, not only as one of her era's top stars, but also as a great sex symbol. She was a top glamour girl in the 1940s and later became a pin-up girl for military servicemen and a beauty icon for women.

Gilda resembled classic Femme Fatale characteristics. Most memorably, in the first scene of the film, where she is introduced to the audience by her husband as she is getting dressed. Here is the scene found on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA2AsJ_GneI&feature=related

It is quite obvious, even from the moment we see Gilda fling her hair back, that she is a very confident character. Gilda is introduced to her husband's friend (Johnny) and then proceeds to light a cigarette, which reflects her masculinity. Stereotypically, smoking indicates a sense of ruggedness, roughness and is primarily associated with the male sex. Therefore, when a female character is observed smoking in a film, she is automatically classed by the viewer as a controlling persona. Even though Gilda is of a film noir genre, it is obvious by the mise-en-scene that the room is dim-lit and colourful, creating a romantic atmosphere which allows this Femme Fatale to act out her manipulative motives. It is also clear by the way she moves and speaks to Johnny, that she is extremely flirtatious, which does not seem to be, in any way, strange to her husband. Even though her husband is constantly trying to gain control by subordinating her, her facial expression seems to indicate that she is not happy, and soon regains her control by making as little eye-contact with her husband as possible.

Rose Loomis from Niagara (1953)

One of the most famous Femme Fatales in history would have to be Marilyn Monroe, whose charm and sex appeal created great controversy in the 1950s. She is known for her dominating role in the dramatic thriller and film noir "Niagara", as a manipulative and unfaithful wife.

Her character, Rose Loomis, resembles a stereotypical Femme Fatale. In the plot, she has an affair with another man and plans to have her current husband murdered by her lover. However, in a bizzare twist, her lover ends up murdered and thrown into the Niagara Falls. In the following scene, her husband takes control after she triggers his jealousy with a song containing sexual connotations:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X5X0JNiPPw

The first words spoken in the scene are from her cabin neighbour saying "get out the firehose". This already connotes that she is seen, by the male sex, as being hot, sexy and 'on fire'. The fact that the man later compares her dress sense to that of his wife, also shows that he is most probably sexually aroused by her figure. The scarf around Rose's arms gives an indication of elegance and delicacy, conforming with her bright pink dress, which represents passion. Her movements are observed as slow and careful and her eye-contact seems to indicate arousement. Her voice and speech is soft and quiet, which is also observed by her singing. One of Marilyn Monroe's most popular qualities was her flawless singing voice, often associated with her 1962 Happy Birthday performance for President JF Kennedy. Furthermore, her golden hooped earings could also be stereotypically associated with whore-like qualities. As her husband begins breaking the record, one shot shows her smiling, connoting total control over her husband's emotional welfare. It is clear by the sly look on her face that she is aware that she can manipulate his anger and frustration at any time. Again, similar to Gilda, she makes as little eye-contact with her husband as possible, showing that she is his superior.