Bully and Skins
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSq2q45ohB8&feature=related]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lA86kQcE1I]
1. Compare and contrast the representation of teenagers in the two texts. (8 marks)
The representation of teenagers in Skins is quite different from that of the Bully trailer. The Skins opening represents teenagers as having a sensitive nature, easily hurt and upset where hormones and emotions take their toll during school. The shot of the two girls kissing abruptly cuts to another where the same girl is kissing a male instead. This also connotes that hormones are at their peak at a time where it is difficult to distinguish sexual preference. At the same time, it shows teenagers to still be immature and concentrating on the insignificant aspects of life – like the shot of Ollie pouring water out of his ears.
Bully seems to take a different side in terms of representation, showing teenagers to be violent, rude and involved in antisocial behaviour such as criminal damage. Similar to Skins, it shows an element of carelessness and immaturity – referring to the shot of the main protagonist slipping on some glass. However, the fact that the creators of the game have chosen to represent the main protagonist in this way shows that they are trying to create a sort-of “teenage gaze”, in order to allow users to play the game through the bully’s perspective. Some could argue that this promotes and encourages violent behaviour, showing teenagers that they should strive to take the easy way out in difficult situations.
2. Consider the view that the current representation of teenagers is simply another ‘moral panic’. (12 marks)
There has been a great controversy regarding the representation of teenagers in the media. Teenagers have been criticised constantly in the media since the 1960s, when teenage lifestyle began through popular music and youth culture. Some argue that the media seem to consider the actions of a minority in society as a stereotype with which to represent all teenagers in news articles and broadcasts. There has been more teenage crime in the last decade than ever in the history of UK, which has essentially caused audiences to become accustomed to stereotyping all teenagers as being dangerous, uneducated and unmannered. This sort of moral panic normally originates when newspaper institutions realise that certain stereotypes produce a higher readership and circulation than stories which are unusual. Therefore, it is common for certain newspapers and broadcast channels to reinforce these stereotypes for their own gain, knowing that audiences will be anxiously waiting for the next story that will follow this trend.
A recent example is that of the student protests in London, following the rise in University tuition fees ordered by the new British coalition government. These protests soon turned into riots, ultimately ending in destruction, violence and injuries. Most media coverage soon after these events failed to focus on the point that teenagers were making through the use of violence, but focused on stereotyping teenagers as being dangerous and a threat to society when joined in groups. Therefore, the media are creating moral panics for the profit of institutions. This Marxist view would argue that the institutions providing this news footage are like hypodermic needles, injecting the values and ideologies into audiences which would ultimately benefit the institution financially. Although User Generated Content has also become such a big form of contemporary news, the footage from people’s mobile phones and low-quality cameras showing police handling innocent and peaceful protesters violently, were not given as much attention as those that proved teenage crime was at its toll. These forms of Citizen Journalism have allowed the media to shape stories to fit the representations they are trying to disperse among the public. Therefore, even though it is simple and fast to create User Generated Content through the use of new and digital media, it is not as simple trying to convince institutions to portray the completely true story of the events shown in the footage.
Therefore, it could be said that the media are creating a moral panic in order to allow the public to stereotype certain people/groups of people for their own personal gain. It is a form of entertainment and also a form of profit that is easy to accomplish and carry out.
3. To what extent has new and digital media given younger audiences the opportunities to shape their own media representations? (12 marks)
User Generated Content has been one of the biggest advantages for audiences in terms of shaping their own media representations. Websites such as YouTube were invented in order to allow anybody to post videos containing their own views and opinions. Some argue that this brings out the Democratic values of the UK, allowing anybody to have their voices heard and accepted by majorities around the world. However, it is debatable whether YouTube’s censorship and regulation is in support of younger audiences shaping their own media representations. This is because, since its takeover by Google Inc. in 2006, certain content has been banned from being uploaded and shared due to its explicit nature. Therefore, it could be argued that the content being consumed by younger audiences on sites like YouTube is not the view of every uploading user, but simply the view that Google Inc. are trying to portray to its viewers, by banning other materials it thinks are too explicit or extreme.
Another E-Media platform that has contributed greatly to the younger generation and its stereotyping of certain places/people is Facebook. The social networking site allows any users over the age of 13 to interact and encourage their views and opinions on their own profiles. It has arguably been one of the most accepting social networking sites since the launch of the Internet, not undermining those who have extremist beliefs and judgments. Although the regulatory body of Facebook allows users to report anybody with racist or offensive remarks, users are able to simply block those who they do not wish to interact or communicate with. This leaves the younger generation with a new-found sense of power and freedom, where they are able to choose what kind of representations they are comfortable with, and accept these as being their own.
Monday, 25 April 2011
Task 2
In timed conditions (45 mins) answer the following essay question on New and Digital Media. You may need to research your case study in more detail to answer the questions successfully.
“Digital Media have, in many ways, changed how we consume media products” – who do you think benefits most? Audiences or Producers?
New and digital Media has had an enormous impact on, not only audiences, but also institutions that run traditional Media platforms such as broadcasting and print. Since the late 20th Century, digital Media has grown rapidly, almost three times as fast as the growth of traditional Media during the entire century.
The cross-platforming of many Media products has allowed audiences’ power and control to increase dramatically. Through the revelation of User Generated Content (UGC), it has widely become known that Media consumers have acquired just as much power and equality by the public as news readers. Websites such as BBC, that allow viewers to post home-made quality footage as news events, further emphasises this power. It illustrates today’s society as no longer being obsessed with trust and authority, but accepting of anything which could be viewed as evidence.
Traditional Media consumption methods such as television and radio have, since the Noughties, had a massive decline in revenue. Where traditional 50s patriarchal families would join together for the evening to watch the good old 6 o’clock news on BBC1, now families spend more time on their computers socialising much less with members of the household. Some argue that social networking sites such as Facebook contribute to this negative change and are dumbing-down society, eventually allowing themselves to be taken over by the Media (which Marxists call Ideological State Apparatus). The advantage for Mark Zuckerberg and producers of Facebook is that it illustrates a virtual world that is available for any person over the age of 13 to access and use freely. This means that those who are unaware of the dangers of antisocial behaviour, would find it extremely difficult to distinguish between the virtual world, and the real world.
Furthermore, this idea of audience power is illustrated through Citizen Journalism, where anybody is now able to record low-quality footage and have it treated with the same importance as that of professional quality. Some could argue that audiences are now trusting these things more than what they consume through traditional Media, e.g. Broadcasting. A recent example of an issue related to Citizen Journalism is the mobile phone recording of Ian Tomlinson’s assault during the G20 protests. This shows the public that Media institutions are almost deliberately not disclosing certain content in hope that the police officers in question would not be accused. Therefore this gives audiences power.
Another example of a rise in audience power and control is the introduction of Wikileaks, where the public were able to challenge and question the government – more so than before. This sort of power would have been almost impossible in the mid-20th Century, where the Media was one of the only methods of communication between elites and the public. This meant that it was so much easier to take advantage of the audience’s trust than it is now. A Marxist view on this issue would argue that institutions aim to take control of its viewers in order for the elite to remain powerful and destroy any equality. Even though this may not be the case in the US, it is clear that this sort of website allows for a more Democratic society and equalises the public.
Traditional Media consumption has, in a way, gone “downhill”, as the Media conglomerates now find it more important to merge platforms, in order to appeal to a larger demographic audience. Through the creation of Youtube, institutions are able to advertise channels/programmes to a younger target audience, depending on their profiles. This is another aspect of New and Digital media that has been in favour of producers. It is now possible to create automatic advertisements that only appear to certain users depending on the videos they watch, like and subscribe to. Youtube would be able to detect videos that have a similar theme like, for example, “Racing” and would proceed to publish recommended videos of Racing on the user’s profile next time they sign in. Therefore, it is beneficial for TV channels such as BBC and Channel 4 to create their own channels on Youtube. It allows them to advertise certain programmes to those viewers who show interest in similar themed videos.
Therefore, it is very clearly the audiences that benefit most from New and Digital Media and its technological advances. This is because this Pluralistic way of life has forced institutions to conform to the needs and requirements of its audiences, therefore leaving them with no choice but to accept technological advances and compete with organisations that are conforming faster. This makes is easier for audiences to consume products as the radical amount of new technology being produced as a result of institutions’ conformity, means audiences have a much larger variety to choose from.
“Digital Media have, in many ways, changed how we consume media products” – who do you think benefits most? Audiences or Producers?
New and digital Media has had an enormous impact on, not only audiences, but also institutions that run traditional Media platforms such as broadcasting and print. Since the late 20th Century, digital Media has grown rapidly, almost three times as fast as the growth of traditional Media during the entire century.
The cross-platforming of many Media products has allowed audiences’ power and control to increase dramatically. Through the revelation of User Generated Content (UGC), it has widely become known that Media consumers have acquired just as much power and equality by the public as news readers. Websites such as BBC, that allow viewers to post home-made quality footage as news events, further emphasises this power. It illustrates today’s society as no longer being obsessed with trust and authority, but accepting of anything which could be viewed as evidence.
Traditional Media consumption methods such as television and radio have, since the Noughties, had a massive decline in revenue. Where traditional 50s patriarchal families would join together for the evening to watch the good old 6 o’clock news on BBC1, now families spend more time on their computers socialising much less with members of the household. Some argue that social networking sites such as Facebook contribute to this negative change and are dumbing-down society, eventually allowing themselves to be taken over by the Media (which Marxists call Ideological State Apparatus). The advantage for Mark Zuckerberg and producers of Facebook is that it illustrates a virtual world that is available for any person over the age of 13 to access and use freely. This means that those who are unaware of the dangers of antisocial behaviour, would find it extremely difficult to distinguish between the virtual world, and the real world.
Furthermore, this idea of audience power is illustrated through Citizen Journalism, where anybody is now able to record low-quality footage and have it treated with the same importance as that of professional quality. Some could argue that audiences are now trusting these things more than what they consume through traditional Media, e.g. Broadcasting. A recent example of an issue related to Citizen Journalism is the mobile phone recording of Ian Tomlinson’s assault during the G20 protests. This shows the public that Media institutions are almost deliberately not disclosing certain content in hope that the police officers in question would not be accused. Therefore this gives audiences power.
Another example of a rise in audience power and control is the introduction of Wikileaks, where the public were able to challenge and question the government – more so than before. This sort of power would have been almost impossible in the mid-20th Century, where the Media was one of the only methods of communication between elites and the public. This meant that it was so much easier to take advantage of the audience’s trust than it is now. A Marxist view on this issue would argue that institutions aim to take control of its viewers in order for the elite to remain powerful and destroy any equality. Even though this may not be the case in the US, it is clear that this sort of website allows for a more Democratic society and equalises the public.
Traditional Media consumption has, in a way, gone “downhill”, as the Media conglomerates now find it more important to merge platforms, in order to appeal to a larger demographic audience. Through the creation of Youtube, institutions are able to advertise channels/programmes to a younger target audience, depending on their profiles. This is another aspect of New and Digital media that has been in favour of producers. It is now possible to create automatic advertisements that only appear to certain users depending on the videos they watch, like and subscribe to. Youtube would be able to detect videos that have a similar theme like, for example, “Racing” and would proceed to publish recommended videos of Racing on the user’s profile next time they sign in. Therefore, it is beneficial for TV channels such as BBC and Channel 4 to create their own channels on Youtube. It allows them to advertise certain programmes to those viewers who show interest in similar themed videos.
Therefore, it is very clearly the audiences that benefit most from New and Digital Media and its technological advances. This is because this Pluralistic way of life has forced institutions to conform to the needs and requirements of its audiences, therefore leaving them with no choice but to accept technological advances and compete with organisations that are conforming faster. This makes is easier for audiences to consume products as the radical amount of new technology being produced as a result of institutions’ conformity, means audiences have a much larger variety to choose from.
Task 3
In timed conditions (45 mins) answer the following essay question on Representation. You may need to research your case study in more detail to answer the questions successfully.
It has been said that media representations often reflect the social and political concerns of the age in which they are created. Discuss.
Media representation has been the most controversial topic since the invention of television. It is hard to distinguish whether the Media is the voice of the public, or whether the public respond to issues raised in the Media.
Celebrity culture is a representation that steers between positive and negative depending on the social and political issues of the age in which they were created. There are some issues raised about celebrities being represented as better than “regular” people in society, purely because of their status of fame. Some argue that those who are famous seem to be more powerful than those who are not, because of the money they earn, their expensive dress-sense and style, and the sheer amount of fans they possess. This brings media institutions to draw the public’s attention to their private lives, in hope that they will be able to destroy these “fairytale” representations. A Marxist would argue that institutions are doing this in order to control what audiences view, and insert certain Ideologies into them, through the use of Ideological State Apparatus. Therefore, a Marxist view would agree with the above statement.
Furthermore, other figures of “power” such as Royalty also steer in terms of representation. 50 years aso, the Royal Family were seen as the ideal family, to which everyone would have aspired to, leaving their own beliefs behind. Even through the immense Media outburst of Princess Diana and Prince Charles’ “fairytale wedding” illustrated these positive representations. However, after they used the Media to bring out their opinions about their marriage and its failure, the positive representation of Royalty was destroyed. It became clear that the royal family were like any other family and shared problems that are experienced in any modern-day relationships. Therefore, audiences were persuaded to take on a negative view on any monarch who tried to portray their relationship as being happy/perfect.
Television shows such as “Have I Got News for You” would take advantage of this change of representation, allowing the public to believe that authority figures should not be represented any differently from those who have no status. It could be argued that the representation of politicians had never been favoured by the Media. Even though there seemed to have been glimpses of positive representations such as Obama becoming the first black US president, audiences have become accustomed to finding flaws in peoples’ personality and their work, in order to conform to the stereotypes illustrated in the Media.
This brings about the issue of ethnic minorities being represented negatively. It is known that racism is still a huge issue that is being tackled in this country. Therefore, it is not surprising that black or Asian people are represented as being more dangerous and less accepting of the British culture. News footage that talks about crime and terrorism seems to feature names/images of Muslim extremist groups. This, in a way, brainwashes audiences to believe that it is the religion that requires these actions to be committed and don’t concentrate on the individuals themselves. As this is something that has become somewhat of a moral panic in Britain recently, especially after this Post-911 society as we near the London Olympics, it needs to be made clear that those who are ethnic minorities have a far lower chance of acquiring “power” or “authority”. Therefore, the representations of ethnic minorities in the media agrees with the statement that those in power are favoured in terms of positive representations in the Media, and those who are considered second/third class citizens would always be represented negatively.
Furthermore, the representation of politicians in the media seemed to have taken a huge negative toll in the recent years. The panic arising from this change in the British government from Labour to a Coalition between Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties has taken over the way politicians are represented. The media specifically targeted Gordon Brown for his weaknesses in controlling his temper in private. This was seen when controversy hit his public image after he was caught on microphone calling a regular woman “bigoted”. Another example of a negative representation is when a YouTube user created a creative music video featuring shots from the three main politicians’ debated and transforming them into a “rap battle”. This, in a way, allowed viewers to understand the issues going on in Parliament without having to listen to pointless excuses by politicians, who are psychologically experienced in manipulating audiences’ thoughts.
To conclude, it is clear that the Media does not favour those in power at the expense of those without, as it is often observed that those in power receive far more criticism by the media because of audiences’ demands to understand their private lives.
It has been said that media representations often reflect the social and political concerns of the age in which they are created. Discuss.
Media representation has been the most controversial topic since the invention of television. It is hard to distinguish whether the Media is the voice of the public, or whether the public respond to issues raised in the Media.
Celebrity culture is a representation that steers between positive and negative depending on the social and political issues of the age in which they were created. There are some issues raised about celebrities being represented as better than “regular” people in society, purely because of their status of fame. Some argue that those who are famous seem to be more powerful than those who are not, because of the money they earn, their expensive dress-sense and style, and the sheer amount of fans they possess. This brings media institutions to draw the public’s attention to their private lives, in hope that they will be able to destroy these “fairytale” representations. A Marxist would argue that institutions are doing this in order to control what audiences view, and insert certain Ideologies into them, through the use of Ideological State Apparatus. Therefore, a Marxist view would agree with the above statement.
Furthermore, other figures of “power” such as Royalty also steer in terms of representation. 50 years aso, the Royal Family were seen as the ideal family, to which everyone would have aspired to, leaving their own beliefs behind. Even through the immense Media outburst of Princess Diana and Prince Charles’ “fairytale wedding” illustrated these positive representations. However, after they used the Media to bring out their opinions about their marriage and its failure, the positive representation of Royalty was destroyed. It became clear that the royal family were like any other family and shared problems that are experienced in any modern-day relationships. Therefore, audiences were persuaded to take on a negative view on any monarch who tried to portray their relationship as being happy/perfect.
Television shows such as “Have I Got News for You” would take advantage of this change of representation, allowing the public to believe that authority figures should not be represented any differently from those who have no status. It could be argued that the representation of politicians had never been favoured by the Media. Even though there seemed to have been glimpses of positive representations such as Obama becoming the first black US president, audiences have become accustomed to finding flaws in peoples’ personality and their work, in order to conform to the stereotypes illustrated in the Media.
This brings about the issue of ethnic minorities being represented negatively. It is known that racism is still a huge issue that is being tackled in this country. Therefore, it is not surprising that black or Asian people are represented as being more dangerous and less accepting of the British culture. News footage that talks about crime and terrorism seems to feature names/images of Muslim extremist groups. This, in a way, brainwashes audiences to believe that it is the religion that requires these actions to be committed and don’t concentrate on the individuals themselves. As this is something that has become somewhat of a moral panic in Britain recently, especially after this Post-911 society as we near the London Olympics, it needs to be made clear that those who are ethnic minorities have a far lower chance of acquiring “power” or “authority”. Therefore, the representations of ethnic minorities in the media agrees with the statement that those in power are favoured in terms of positive representations in the Media, and those who are considered second/third class citizens would always be represented negatively.
Furthermore, the representation of politicians in the media seemed to have taken a huge negative toll in the recent years. The panic arising from this change in the British government from Labour to a Coalition between Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties has taken over the way politicians are represented. The media specifically targeted Gordon Brown for his weaknesses in controlling his temper in private. This was seen when controversy hit his public image after he was caught on microphone calling a regular woman “bigoted”. Another example of a negative representation is when a YouTube user created a creative music video featuring shots from the three main politicians’ debated and transforming them into a “rap battle”. This, in a way, allowed viewers to understand the issues going on in Parliament without having to listen to pointless excuses by politicians, who are psychologically experienced in manipulating audiences’ thoughts.
To conclude, it is clear that the Media does not favour those in power at the expense of those without, as it is often observed that those in power receive far more criticism by the media because of audiences’ demands to understand their private lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)