Lets Rewind

Image
Channel 7 news

Children in the media can be a bit of a touchy subject for some. I feel as though parents would be the most concerned. Stories about children in the media do not necessarily have to relate to the sexualisation of children, which creates the most concern, but can relate to children and body image or children and food. It is not just the media that should be more careful about what they say but the parents. I feel as though parents who watch the News or A Current Affair programs are brainwashed that everything is bad for their child. Looking at McKee’s (2005) themes of the public sphere you notice how most of these News programs instill fear into the public by the use of spectacles through their over exaggerated headlines such as those on 7 News. As these kids grow up their appearance is what they will be most worried about. If they are told that “that dress is too short and tight” or “these clothes don’t flatter this shape” girls in particular are going to grow up with serious body image issues. Our parents grew up in the 70’s and they were probably the most wild and free spirited generation yet they like to wrap their kids up in cotton wool. Something bad must’ve happened to them in their teens that they’re not telling us.

Children are very impressionable so everything they do or hear will impact them in someway. A positive impact in this day and age may be that children are taught via kids TV shows and at school is that a healthy diet and exercise are very important! Having been taught this from a young age allows kids to understand the negative and harsh impacts of junk food. I think people do not realise this good change because they still are in a moral panic (Cohen 1987) of television making our children fat and don’t look at the initiatives that are actually in place (Cancer Council 2013).

I have quite enjoyed writing my blog posts for the past few weeks. I loved researching the topic of semiotics and liked to see how every ones opinions and ideologies were varied. This last topic of “Children in the Media” I quite enjoyed too, especially our tutorial (Middlemost 2014) about the young model Thylane Blondeau. As I know lots about fashion and models I found that my opinion on her Paris Vogue story in 2011 differed to others as I was not as shocked by the case in which a young child was dressing as an adult. I enjoyed reading other peoples blogs and getting to see a glimpse into their minds and seeing how some differed from my own opinions. One topic I did find the most baffling though was the topic of “Who Runs The Media”. I think this is because there are just so many owners of news stations and newspapers and so many different owners within each company that it got a bit confusing. I didn’t find that topic to be as interesting as the rest because of that reason. I did try to gain a further understanding of the topic when I was studying so I wouldn’t be hindered on writing my blog post or future exams. As I wanted to get my blog posts written on time and not fall behind, I feel as though I didn’t really put as much of “me” into my posts as I could have for example I would’ve talked more about fashion and popular culture rather than just finding the first few news story i searched for. In saying that I was interested in every story I wrote about otherwise I wouldn’t have picked it. All in all I enjoyed writing my blog posts and have opened my mind to the different tricks of the media.

Sources:

McKee, A 2005, The Public Sphere: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 1-31

Cohen, S 1972, Folk Devils and Moral Panics, Routledge

Cancer Council VIC 2013, Obesity prevention initiatives, Cancer Council VIC, viewed on 11th April 2014, http://www.cancervic.org.au/preventing-cancer/weight/obesity-programs

Middlemost, R 2014, Children in the Media, Tutorial, UOW, 8th April 2014

Advertisements

Does Being Famous Allow You To Run Riot?

Image
CNN, Image from Getty Images

“A domain of our social life where such a thing as public opinion can be formed where citizens… deal with matters of general interest without being subject to coercion.. to express and publicise their views” (Habermas 1997 pg. 105)

One popular media text, well a song and the artist in this particular case, caused massive outrage in the public and not only nationally but worldwide. Odd Future are renowned for their misogynistic and homophobic lyrics. Their brutal “women bashing” lyrics disgust many journalists, feminist and basically everyone who doesn’t like their music creating a perfect topic to talk about in the public sphere. Personally I love Odd Future and have for a very long time, obviously not because of Tyler, The Creators derogatory lyrics, but he does rap about some major important downfalls and hard times in his life which I guess many of his fans can relate to. Also Odd Future are the funniest bunch of guys you will ever meet, they take the piss out of EVERYTHING. Their “don’t give a shit” attitude I think is how most teens act too. Although, most people wouldn’t know this other side to the rap group and only see the bad. 

Odd Future were pulled from New Zealand’s leg of Big Day Out after gay activist Calum Bennachie protested against their performance because of their homophobic lyrics (Triple J 2011). Just recently too, Odd Future were denied entry into New Zealand to support Eminem’s tour because they were “deemed a potential threat to public order and the public interest for several reasons…” said a statement from Immigration NZ (Walker 2014). Tyler, The Creator then went on a twitter spree about the NZ government. Another incident in Sydney occurred in June 2013 when a feminist activist tweeted to Tyler detailing she would be at a signing at Culture Kings to “protest against @fucktyler” (Stone 2013). Tyler retweeted the status and at his concert that night made a shout out to Stone saying “Fucking bitch, I wish she could hear me call her a bitch, too, fucking whore. Yeah, I got a sold-out show right now bitch. Hey this fucking song is dedicated to you, you fucking c***” (Battan 2013). This grabbed media attention and Julia Gillard’s at the time almost revoking their Visa’s (Battan 2013). 

Relating to McKee’s 5 critiques I do believe that the band is fragmented but don’t all artist have a target audience? And also their performances and attitudes do rely on spectacle but that is just the individuals personalities and I believe is not deliberate to cause attention. 

Sources:

Habermas, J 1989, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 

Triple J 2011, Big Day Out issue statement on Odd Future shows, Triple J, viewed on 4th April 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/musicnews/s3356711.htm

Walker, B 2014, New Zealand refuses entry to rap group Odd Future, CNN, viewed on 4th April 2014, http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/13/world/asia/new-zealand-odd-future-ban/

Battan, C 2013, Tyler, the Creator Reported to Australian Police After Stage Tirade Against Feminist Group, Pitchfork, viewed on 4th April 2014, http://pitchfork.com/news/51072-tyler-the-creator-reported-to-australian-police-after-stage-tirade-against-feminist-group/ 

Stone, T 2013, ‘protest against @fucktyler’, @littleredfox17, Twitter, 5th June 2013, viewed on 4th April 2014, http://musicfeeds.com.au/news/watch-tyler-the-creator-verbally-abuses-woman-at-sydney-show/

 

We Don’t Have To Be Media Robots

As soon as I wake up I check Instagram like it’s my Daily Telegraph, then I check out what nonsense is on Facebook, then I proceed to Twitter then Tumblr if I have time. Mind you, at this point I’m still in bed. Then when I am eating breakfast I can guarantee you I am watching either the Today Show on the Nine Network or Family Guy on Foxtel. On my way to Uni I am also chopping and changing between Triple J, Nova and Today FM. I guess you could say I’m run by the media, Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, Kerry Packer, Mark Zuckerberg, The ABC, Austereo and the Nine Entertainment Company to be exact (Goncalves 2013). Woah, thats quite a lot.

I may be run by the media, in fact the majority of the world is run by media but that doesn’t mean we have to believe what we are “fed”. A few months ago Tony Abott appeared on 2GB with Ray Hadley claiming that the public believe the ABC is biased and un-Australian (Alexander 2014). This interview then led to a front page story in The Daily Telegraph causing controversy amongst some. The story sounded as though they were trying to justify Abotts statement about the ABC and attempted to make an apology (Blair & Auerbach 2014). As we know, “The Tele” a.k.a Mr Murdoch has been a supporter of the Liberals for some time showing bias in their headlines towards Liberal e.g. leading up to the election, headlines were in Abotts favour. Little to the audiences knowledge, just recently a poll had been taken on Australia’s most trusted media and detailed that it was in fact ABC that was the most trusted. News Corp contributes to Newspoll so Abott shouldn’t worry about this poll being biased.

essential-trust-in-media
Newspoll study via Essential Research 2013 (Alexander 2014)

 

I think this one example of media bias explains that no matter who controls the media, you have to broaden your sources of information. If we were only given one side of a story from all media corporations, Australia would be a very one sided country. I think that it’s great to have multiple media companies all with different opinions as they give the public a variety of information for them to make up our own minds. The first step though is broadening our media horizons.

 

Sources:

Goncalves, R 2013, Factbox: Who Owns What in the Australian Media, SBS, viewed on 27th March 2014, http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2012/06/22/factbox-who-owns-what-australian-media

Blair & Auerbach, T & T 2014, THE ABC OF TREACHERY, The Daily Telegraph, 30 January, p.1

Alexander, C 2014, Get Fact: Is Tony Abott right about the ABC?, Crikey, viewed on 27th March 2014, http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/01/30/get-fact-is-tony-abbott-right-about-the-abc/

 

Do You See What I See?

I had fun researching some controversial images and found it shocking what some people would even allow to be published. Personally, I have no issue with controversial ads as I understand that it’s a way to sell  products. If an ad is banned for it being too inappropriate then that was probably the company’s goal in the first place, receiving more interest  just like this Lynx ad.

One ad I did find particularly caught my eye. It was a Brazilian WWF campaign. Upon researching this ad I came across another 9/11 ad. (Copyranter 2012) Although not as controversial as WWF I felt as though it explained and clearly conveyed they ideas of denotation and connotation.

Here is the WWF ad:

image.jpg
Brazilian WWF advertisement 2009

Here is the ad I chose:

enhanced-buzz-wide-8950-1347374351-14
Colombian newspaper, El País, 2008 advertisement

Both images are controversial as this event is something no one wants to relive or remember. But this ad in particular makes  you want to look. The sight of a plane flying into a building at a low landscape angle (at any angle really) is terrifying but in a sense too interesting to turn away. When I first viewed the image I found something to be a bit odd, then I read the small text at the bottom of the image. It says “You think you’re informed? Maybe not. If you read El País, you would have the information and a deep analysis of the world’s scene, and you would have noticed that the first attack on the World Trade Centre, was on the North Tower, that the impact wasn’t in the middle floors but the upper ones…Remember, there is something worse than not being informed and that is believing you are”. Of course, this image is a total misrepresentation of the event, for some though, they may not have realised. The signifier is what you see, the event of 9/11, most people would recognise that. The signified is what the image makes you think of. For me it is the major news stories and documentaries that followed the event, the poor families involved and the idiots that hijacked the plane. It also makes me think, like the small text says, that the first tower was hit higher up. The signified is determined by your ideological opinion and your knowledge so everyone’s opinion is different. For someone who doesn’t know the ins and outs of this event would just see an eye catching ad for El País. But for someone who does know this story they would truly get the whole idea and point of the ad. Personally I think this image is very clever in the way that it catches your attention for the purpose of this ad. Although, this ad may not be terribly like if it were on a large billboard in NYC.

Resources:

Copyranter 2012, The Five worst 9/11 Exploitation Ads, BuzzFeed, viewed on 20th March 2014, http://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/the-five-worst-911-exploitation-ads

Monkey See Monkey Do

http://www.hcplive.com/articles/Violent-Videogames-Desensitize-Brain-to-Violence-Increase-Aggressiveness-
http://www.hcplive.com/articles/Violent-Videogames-Desensitize-Brain-to-Violence-Increase-Aggressiveness-

 

So, apparently young children are influenced by the media to do violent things? At first I would’ve partly agreed with this statement, I mean the media affects everything we do, buy and consume, therefore making me wonder “maybe we behave like the media shows us to”. Having grown up in a time of technology, I had always been sat in front of the TV so I wasn’t nuisance to my parents. All of  that TV watching must have had some behavioural affects on me. Obviously I wasn’t walking around pretending I was a Power Puff Girl (actually I probably was) but maybe I learnt to be a brat by watching Angelica on The Rugrats, monkey see monkey do, a like to Alfred Bandura and his Bobo Doll experiment (Turnbull 2014).  After taking a look at Gauntlett’s “Ten Things Wrong with the ‘Effects Model'”(1998) it actually got me thinking. Maybe the issue isn’t with the media but to do with the genetics and psychological capability of a person. I found researching teenage offenders vs. ‘ordinary’ teens to be particularly interesting considering that the offenders hardly had watched any TV as they had hardly any exposure to technology in the first place (Gauntlette 1998).  It’s like saying that because the shooters of the Columbine massacre were supposedly influenced by Marilyn Manson (Bowling For Columbine 2002) therefore every violent act caused by children/teens is because of media influences. I think that is totally bogus to be honest.

Then we have issues, once again, said to be caused by social media, a new and even more brutal and psychological way of violence. We are all aware of the late Charlotte Dawson’s passing due to being cyber bullied via Twitter. This new extension of social media makes it ever more easy to contact people 24/7. It allows ordinary people to contact celebrities and gives them access to say whatever they please no matter how brutal. Many people a blame Twitter for her suicide but as the majority of her close friends had reported she had battled with serious mental issues for a very long time (Harris and Banshan 2014). She had them before she was abused and bullied on Twitter. So yes, Twitter was only just one contributing factor to her death but I believe it is not be blamed as much as it has been. I believe the way someone acts is very dependent on the persons upbringing (not television but parental nurture), their genetics and their life experiences not always the by the media.

Sources:

Gauntlett, D 1998, ‘Ten Things Wrong with the ‘Effects Model”, Approaches to Audiences- A Reader, viewed on 15th March 2014, http://www.theory.org.uk/effects.htm

Bowling For Columbine 2002, film, Momentum, America, directed by Michael Moore

Turnbull, S 2014, Week 2 Lecture

Harris, A and Bashan Y 2014, Charlotte Dawson found dead at her Sydney home, police say her death is not suspicious, The Daily Telegraph, viewed on 15th March 2014, http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/sydney-confidential/charlotte-dawson-found-dead-at-her-sydney-home-police-say-her-death-is-not-suspicious/story-fni0cvc9-1226834547331

WELCOME

Hi I’m Madeline, (now you get the blog name, Madeline Oh Madeline).

I have finished at Engadine High School last year and am now excited to start my journey through University. I am doing a Bachelor of Communication and Media studies majoring in marketing and advertising and I also currently intern at a modelling agency in Surry Hills so life is a bit full on.  I love everything and anything about fashion, knowing almost every model that ever walked the runway for FW and I love music, just don’t ask me my favourite genre because I  will not be able to tell you, unless you count Beyonce as a genre.  Do I really need to tell you more about my life?

After finding the HSC difficult  I’m very determined to get stuck into the Uni life and study and find at least some balance in my life. Im dedicating this blog to my semester in the BCM110 and BCM112 courses. From this blog I will detail to all my readers and fellow classmates the difficulties that they and I are sure to come across over this course and interesting topics to discuss that I have learnt in my lectures and tutorials.

Such Uni, Much Blog