Thursday, November 29, 2012

Motivation or Manipulation?



       In an article USA Today posted on its website on Thursday, writer Ann Oldenburg commented on the “bad day” actress Lindsay Lohan had this week. Oldenburg reported that Lohan had been charged with four different crimes in two states all in one day. The actress was arrested in New York for assault and then charged by the Santa Monica Police Department for giving false information to a police officer, resisting a police officer, and reckless driving in a case relating to a wreck she had last June. 



       The article was an unusual and amusing entertainment piece, but what was more interesting to me than the story was the way Oldenburg framed the account to make it appeal to the reader. Humorous headlines and plays on words drew me into clicking on the article. Then, graphic pictures of Lohan’s totaled Porsche decorate the page and encourage me to read the story that was periodically interrupted by links to other related articles and entertaining headlines. Finally, by the last paragraph was a picture of Lohan leaving the Los Angeles Women’s Center as a reiteration of the terrible condition this star is supposedly spiraling into. However, is it really that bad? Or, does Oldenburg’s plays on words, judgement statements like “bad,” and images make us as the audience just think it is a tragic situation? I do not know Oldenburg’s motivations, but I know that I was certainly engulfed by her article as I entertainingly read every word. That is the power of the media. It has the power to captivate us, real us in, and manipulate us into feeling and believing whatever it presents to us. We constantly fall victim to it’s influence through articles, commercials and ads, and even now, as you read this blog, and I manipulate you into believing that I’m manipulating you.

Saturday, November 17, 2012

Love the Way You Lie


Flashback Friday: My interview with Christina Aguilera



Christina Aguilera
Entertainment writer Sandra Sperounes flashed back in her article Friday to an interview with Christina Aguilera in 2000. In the article, Sperounes recounts questioning Aguilera about her “war of words” with rapper Eminem in which she called him out for his lyrics praising domestic violence against women. That was in 2000. The theme continued in 2010 when Eminem released a music video with singer Rihanna for their song, “Love the Way You Lie,” in which there were a number of scenes of domestic violence that were inspired by Eminem’s relationship with his ex-wife. Eminem is just another example of a “gangsta rapper” whose lyrical subject matter integrated itself into his personal life and resulted in not only the degradation of women in his music but the assault of women in his life. 
Eminem with backup dancer
Misogyny in “Gangsta rap” is not a product of the African-Americans singing it, but it is a characteristic of the genre itself as even white rappers such as Eminem portray similar ideas and actions. In our book, Race, Gender, and Stereotypes in the Media, Darren Rhym states, “[Rap] is the way we as blacks perceive ourselves, and the way we are perceived by the world.” However, I would add that it is not solely contained within the African-American community, but it expands into other races as well. As seen in the case with Eminem, domestic violence has been an image so present in rap that it is no longer a mere subject matter but a characteristic of the genre itself, and it integrates itself into the entertainers singing it, no matter their race. I would conclude that misogyny was not a theme brought into the music by a certain race, but it was brought in by a certain social background. Current rappers now believe that they too have to have this “hardcore” background and strive to fit into the genre of music by contributing to this theme and incorporating it into their own lives. As long as the public continues to advocate such practices by purchasing albums, attending concerts, and watching videos that portray misogynistic images and beliefs, then the traditional theme will continue as well, and women will continue to be disrespected and degraded by such music. However, if audiences finally step up and refuse to support artists and labels that promote “gangsta rap,” then the industry will not be able to sustain itself, and a redefining of rap will be required until women are finally respected in the music. 

"Love the Way You Lie" by Eminem feat. Rihanna
music video


Sunday, November 11, 2012

No More 'Old White Guys'



ASSOCIATED PRESS ARCHIVES
George P. Bush has filed papers to run for office in Texas.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/11/11/4404230/gop-glad-to-have-another-bush.html#storylink=cpy
       According to an article in the Star-Telegram, the GOP is excited about Fort Worth Republican, George P. Bush, possibly running for Texas land commissioner. Why are Republicans so interested in this running? Is it his credentials? Is it his previous political experience? Is it even the renowned nature of his name? No, it is his hispanic heritage. This attention comes only days after Governor Mitt Romney lost in the Presidential election last week and received on 27 percent of the Hispanic vote. Such results were a shock to many. The people that nobody expected to turn out to vote did, and they did so in large numbers. Young people, African-Americans, and a large portion of Hispanics showed up to the polls on Tuesday, and they were the deciders of the election. The minorities were the choosers of the next President of the United States. 

       It has been amazing to see the response of the Republican party to the results of the recent 2012 Presidential election. With the surprising turn-out in the polls, the Republican party has had to shift its focus from the “old white guys” to readdressing issues such as immigration reform and promoting candidates of differing backgrounds such as Bush. However, this approach comes with a cost. Candidates could be chosen solely based on their heritage as opposed to their beliefs, moral stances, and qualifications for office. It could boost the Republican party in government positions, but it would ultimately hinder the overall national community. Is there a way to have both candidates that represent the whole of society through their differing social and racial backgrounds and are qualified for the offices they hold? I believe there is, but we must stop focusing on the color of their skin or the neighborhood they grew up in, and instead focus on the morals they keep and the credentials they hold. Once those are present, everything else will fall into place, and the person who will better this country the most will hopefully be in office. 

Monday, November 5, 2012

Innovation or Degradation

Microtargeting: How campaigns know you better than you know yourself


(A record number of political ads are blasting the swing state of Ohio. Martin Savidge reports from his hometown.) 

In the midst of the bombardment of political advertisements, such as the ones featured in the video link above, during the final days of the 2012 presidential race, CNN.com highlighted a new area in which voters are being targeted by these campaigns, the web. It’s called microtargeting. This recent technique utilizes browser histories for deeper insight into the preferences and personal interests of the people surfing the internet. These campaigns then use that information to predict how a person may vote and target them based on that prediction at the places they are most likely to visit online. Eitan Hersh, a political science professor who studies the impact of microtargeting at Yale University, explained it this way, “If a campaign knows that you're of this religion and this race and went to college, you're likely to have a different set of values ... the campaign is likely to reach out to you on those attributes." However, in the midst of the innovation of this targeting method, microtargeting has not been as well received by the public as was hoped. According to the article, 86% of Americans said they did not like political advertising tailored to their interests. Herst commented on the statistics concerning this political campaigning method saying, "The downside, of course, is that we might not like being stereotyped."

While it is more common to think of individuals being stereotyped by their race, gender, or physical abilities, it is more shocking to realize that people are now being targeted based on the types of websites they surf online. This phenomenon is not solely contained amongst political campaigns, but it is a method many other companies use as well. Google allows its marketers to target audiences based on demographical information. Facebook lets advertisers seek subsections of their users based on preferences indicated and pages liked. This practice of microtargeting is not just a seasonal use in the midst of the presidential campaign, but it is a method that will continue to grow more commonly practiced and accepted in the online world unless the public stand up against such policies. Over 80% of the Americans surveyed in CNN’s article said they dislike the idea of being targeted based on their interests, and it is time that this majority speaks out before microtargeting becomes a generally accepted practice. Microtargeting stereotypes people and targets individuals in an unfair manner based on generalized assumptions. The world has fought to eliminate stereotypes in many facets of society, and continues to battle those hurtful generalizations. Therefore, we should not, and cannot, allow another method of stereotyping to become accepted in our society. Microtargeting is not an innovation, it is a degradation. 

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

The Stories of Those Without a Voice



       Images sometimes speak louder than words when it comes to the media. Earlier this week, CNN.com featured a slideshow of photographs and a short article on renowned photojournalist Steve McCurry in which writer Elizabeth I. Johnson commented on the inspiration behind McCurry’s iconic photos. His photos, featuring everything from conflicts to portraits, are based in McCurry’s curiosity of people from all across the world. McCurry relies heavily on translators and relationships in order to connect with these people from different cultures and varying customs. The article portrayed his commitment to traveling to places and working with the locals in order to show the true story of what is happening there. McCurry was quoted saying, “As they explore, photographers are responsible for witnessing events and informing the greater public and for telling the stories of those without a voice.” His hope for global change through an informed public motivates McCurry’s dedication to his work and his responsibility to telling the truth through his photography. 

Afghan girl, Peshawar, Pakistan (Steve McCurry/Magnum Photos)
       In a world with increasing access to new technologies and journalistic methods, photojournalism has been under heightened pressure and criticism in regards to the use of photoshop and the editing of photos. With these new technologies, photographers have more and more methods of manipulating photos and videos to present news events in a certain, and sometimes untruthful, light, which contributes to societal stereotypes or popular opinions. These systems have given photographers increased power in the media, but they also have much more responsibility to present the truth. Because writers can provide certain angles in their writing, the public relies heavily on photos to show them the events, in addition to their reading about them, so that they can form their own opinions. We, as the public, must be able to trust photographers to show world news and situations in a truthful light and not force certain opinions or stereotypes on the audience. Therefore, though this article, it was encouraging to see a renowned photojournalist committed to telling the truth and showing the whole scene through photography.

Click here for a slideshow of photographs by Steve McCurry.

Monday, October 22, 2012

The President of Black America? Or the President of the United States of America?



       The New York Times published an article last week on President Barack Obama’s difficulties as the first black president of the United States. In the article, Mr. Obama is ridiculed by both supporters and opposers of his campaign as both parties criticize either his favoritism toward the African-American population or his disregard of them. Many of the president’s policies have heavily benefited African-Americans, such as education grants to underperforming schools and the health care bill that will help millions of uninsured Americans. However, many blacks accuse Mr. Obama of not being aggressive enough on race and attentive to African-Americans. This was seen at a meeting with the president’s top campaign donors last year to discuss the administration’s achievements with women, Jews, gays and lesbians. However, there was no discussion of African Americans. President Obama’s reply to all of these accusations was simply, “I’m not the president of black America. I’m the president of the United States of America.”

Damon Winter/The New York Times
President Obama in Iowa last week. As the nation’s first black president, he has walked a careful line on the subject of race.

       This article was interesting, because it showed not only non-African-Americans’ stereotypes of the president as a black president, but fellow African-Americans’ stereotypes of Mr. Obama as a black president as well. Both sides stereotyped him as a proponent and benefactor of the African-American community. Therefore, when he began passing domestic policies, he was already wedged in by pre-held beliefs and expectations for his role as the first black president of the United States. It is disappointing to see that even with such progression as a black president, the American society has yet to let go of such debilitating stereotypes as race. These preconceived notions do not allow for progress and change. They only cripple growth even further, and this groundbreaking change with Mr. Obama as the first black president will forever be tainted by the stereotypes that boxed him in even throughout his presidency. This article simply proves that no one escapes the scrutiny and stereotyping of the public eye, not even the president.

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Kay Granger - "The Most Feminine Face"



MARY F. CALVERT
Kay Granger's face is called the most feminine in the House.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/10/13/4333692/if-theres-a-republican-look-she.html#storylink=cpy

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram featured a story Saturday titled “If there’s a Republican look, she has it.” According to this article by Maria Recio, Anna M. Tinsley and Scott Nishimura, U.S. female lawmakers with “stereotypical feminine facial features” are more likely to be Republican that Democrat. UCLA researchers scanned photos of various female politicians, compared them to “facial norms,” and then asked undergraduate students to guess the House members’ party affiliation. The study stated, the students’ “‘judgments were 98 percent more likely to be accurate for women with the highest rankings for femininity.’” In the Star-Telegram’s coverage of this UCLA study, the writers were sure to mention that Fort Worth’s own Kay Granger scored the highest on this femininity test. However, why was this local newspaper so enthralled with and proud of having the representative with the most feminine face? How can a group of researchers even determine what exactly is “feminine” and what is not? Furthermore, why is it important whether or not a politician has feminine facial features? It is important because the media makes it important through its coverage and support of studies such as this one.

In the media, female politicians and women in general are often depicted only in terms of their looks as opposed to their actual political contributions. This trend held true in the early 80’s when the first female Vice President nominee, Geraldine Ferraro, was introduced by a news anchor as a “size 6.” Then again in 2008, Sarah Palin was featured more in the news for wearing a pair of red patent leather peep-toe pumps to the Vice Presidential debate than she was for the ideas she portrayed during the discussion. Still today, as seen in the article by the Star-Telegram, women are continually depicted in the media based on their appearance. It is a vicious cycle in which the media only features politicians in terms of their womanly traits, making that the most important aspect in the mind of the public. Therefore, the result is more public focus on these politicians’ physical features as opposed to their political ideals, as seen in the UCLA research study. When a prominent university then continues this interest through a news-worthy research study, the media features once again solely the “feminine” side of women, and the cycle continues. If the public continues to fuel this stereotype by engaging in and contributing to the interest in mere physicality as opposed to morality, then the media will never cease to sexualize women. If we as the audience wish for better and demand better by refusing to support media that stereotypes women, then we may hope to see some change in the future. Until then, however, we will be caught in this cycle of stereotypes and misrepresentations and a world where our government representatives are judged more by the femininity of their facial features than the merit of their political ideals.


Thursday, October 4, 2012

The "Not-So-Sexy" Truth




STAR-TELEGRAM/RODGER MALLISON
Tamika Smikle and Christina Hernandez register to vote with help from Claire Forshey on Tuesday at the TCC Trinity River Campus.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/10/03/4306748/first-time-voters-concerned-about.html#storylink=cpy


       The Fort Worth Star Telegram posted an article on their website Wednesday in which the writer, Diane Smith, commented on the apparent main issues of concerns to college students that will play a factor in this upcoming presidential election. The two main topics Smith focused on were centered around student debt and job availability after graduation. She portrayed other key issues present in this presidential debate, like the economy and healthcare, as “not-so-sexy topics” for “first-time voters” or college students. Smith also reported political experts’ prediction of a significant drop in the number of youth voters and attributed this decrease to the absence of the “cool factor” of Barack Obama’s 2008 “hope and change” campaign. By using such diction as “not-so-sexy” and the “cool factor,” and by focusing almost solely on the issues of student debt and jobs after graduation, Smith tries to appeal to college students but does so in a completely stereotypical and overly generalized manner that actually distances her from this younger generation.

Just as women and minorities are often underrepresented and stereotyped in the media, young people are frequently portrayed in articles concerning either employment or crime. In this particular article in the Star Telegram, the youth is once again present in association with job availability and is actually alienated from more “grown-up” concerns such as health care and the economy. This stereotype, however, completely generalizes college students and neglects many of the concerns that they too may have in the 2012 election. While some students may be focused on the issue of student loans, many university students are not on loan at all and would, therefore, not be as interested in that subject. Also, while jobs after graduation is a concern of a lot of college students face, others may be equality worried about other factors beyond graduation such as health care. Therefore, it is impossible to pin-point the main concerns of “first-time” voters because there are various issue that attain to a wide-range of students beyond the mere two mentioned in Smith’s article. We as college students actually make-up a large portion of the consumers of media content. If the media continues to misrepresent us and place college students into a collectively similar small group, they will begin to alienate their greatest asset and largest audience and gradually ruin themselves until they finally begin to acknowledge us as their most important consumer necessary for the media’s success as an industry. 

To watch an interview with Tarrant County College student, Nathaniel Peoples, click here 

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

"Islamophobia"


ASSOCIATED PRESS / RICARDO B. BRAZZIELL
University of Texas students evacuate campus after the university received a bomb threat Friday morning

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/09/14/4258657/uts-austin-campus-being-evacuated.html#storylink=cpy
       
       The University of Texas at Austin’s campus was evacuated Friday due to a bomb threat. A man with a “Middle Eastern” accent called the main university phone saying he belonged to al-Qaida and claimed bombs placed throughout campus would go off in 90 minutes. Administrators waited more than an hour, however, before evacuating the grounds and telling students to get as far away from the school as possible. In the midst of violent protests outside U.S. embassies in the Middle East, nervous tension stirred among students. The UT president was quoted saying, “The global situation would be part of what we look at when we evaluate any threat.” In the coverage following the initial breaking story of the incident at UT, many students were quoted connecting the unrest in the middle east to the threat posed on the college’s campus. Why, however, did so many of them so quickly to make such negative associations? Why is the media so unalarmed by and unconscious of these assumptions?

       Ever since the 9/11 attacks of 2001, citizens or visitors of Middle Eastern descent in the United States have been viewed through a lens of heightened caution and skepticism. Discrimination against peoples of Muslim faith and racism against Middle Easterner peoples has been a growing issue, and it is greatly contributed to the media’s representation of the religion and nationality in the news. TV news is one of the most important sources of public knowledge about world events as approximately 80 percent of the population relies on it as their main source of news. Therefore, when Middle Eastern peoples are only present in the media in times of crisis, as seen in the recent coverage the bomb threat in Austin, it is natural for the public to associate such images with “Islam terrorism.” The terms “Muslim” and “terrorist” have become synonymous as Arabs are overwhelming underrepresented in the media aside from issue such as terrorist threats or the war in Iraq. If the media continues to present Islam as fundamentalism, extremism, and radicalism posing a threat to western security, then racial discrimination in the United States will never improve. On the other hand, if one day, we can replace “Islamophobia” with interculturalism and a lack of acceptance of differences with an educated understanding of one another’s beliefs then peace between countries, cultures, and religions may be within reach. Until then, however, in this era of communication, war will continue and end with media war.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Who has the power?

“Box office report: 'The Possession' leads the worst weekend in over a decade” by Grady Smith

The Possessions - Official Trailer

       CNN featured a story from EW yesterday on this weekends depressing box office sales. According to Grady Smith’s article, Box office report: 'The Possession' leads the worst weekend in over a decade,” this weekend marked the lowest movie ticket sales in years as the top 12 films grossed a cumulative $51.9 million. It was the worst top 12 total since 2008. The last time overall ticket sales were so low was two weekends after the 9/11 attacks in September of 2001. Therefore, it is evident to see that numerous aspects contribute to the receptivity of the public to the media. Whether it is political, social, or economic issues, when the people are not responding to the media in a positive way, it becomes concerning news. This is just one example of how important money and success is to individual facets of the media and to the mass media as a whole. 

      Therefore, this article raises the question, “What makes media successful?” According to the EW article, movies are deemed successful based on box office sales. Newspaper success is based on whether or not they sell copies each day. Online publications and magazines rely on subscriptions from readers in order to sustain their companies. So, who goes to those movies to make the box office sales go up or down? Who buys the newspapers and reads them on a daily basis? Who subscribes to various websites or magazines? It’s the people. As much power and influence the media has over the general public, it is still the people who have the ultimate decision of whether or not to respond to those media sources. The mass media is an outlet and voice for the people. It seeks to express the general public’s opinions, beliefs, and concerns. As much power as the media has, however, it gets that power from the people. If we as individuals and groups decide to stop reading newspapers and magazines, and if we stop going to movies or listening to music, the entire system would collapse. The media would lose all power, all influence, and would eventually cease to exist at all. Therefore, this article helped remind me that I do have power despite the grandness of the media. I am not just a victim of it or a mind for it to manipulate. Rather, I am its controller, and we as a people get to choose how we respond to it, how we question it, and how much power we choose to give it. 

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Women Athletes...Players or Playboys?



       It is often complained that female athletes are frequently depicted by the media in a rather unfair and unequal manner to their counter male athletes. One journalists at bodybuilding.com argued that “women athletes tend to be poorly portrayed, both textually and pictorially, by the media” and “seem to be chosen more for their looks and ‘womanly traits’ as opposed to their sporting prowess.” Another columnist at womensenews.org wrote, “Photos of successful male athletes overwhelmingly show them in serious, action poses, while powerhouse women are often trivialized, romanticized, and sexualized.” While this point of view may be proven by various articles and profiles of women athletes throughout the media, it was recently disproven by CNN’s article, “Paralympics 2012: The inspiring women fighting for gold” by Lauren Said-Moorhouse. Throughout the article, Said-Moorhouse refers to the women athletes by using words such as “extraordinary,” “distinguished,” and “impressive sporting all-rounders.” Instead of presenting them in sensual or non-threatening poses, Said-Moorhouse pictures the women in her article in their uniforms in the midsts of competition or victory. She never demoralizes the women, but she rather contradicts most media depictions by praising them as strong athletic competitors.  
In her article, Said-Moorhouse broke the mold of traditional media depictions and presented the female Paralympic winners as competitors, athletes, and strong role-models rather than sexualizing, feminizing, or romanticizing them just because they are women.  This article proved to me the importance of stepping outside of social norms. It also depicted the profusion of viewpoints outside of those of the traditional media by helping me realize that there is no way to generalize the media. There is such an abundance of differing opinions, writing styles, and points of view circulating throughout the media that it is impossible to pinpoint one opinion and believe it as a universal truth. Exploring the media requires discernment, flexibility, and diligence in order to decipher what is fact and what is opinion. However, no matter what we read or what pictures we see, in the end it is our responsibility as human beings to form our own opinions and decide for ourselves who has the final say in our lives. So, will it be the media or will it be you?

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Everyone has an agenda...

Named from left to right: Jim Lehrer, Bob Schieffer, Candy Crowley, Martha Raddatz


Criticism Greets List of Debate Moderators


Everyone has an agenda

The New York Times commented last week on the stream of criticism and complaint surrounding the announcement of the four moderators of the 2012 presidential debates. With the slew of contrasting comments and quotes, this article may not have determined if this fall’s moderators were “good” or “bad” choices, but it did effectively prove that everyone has an opinion; everyone has an agenda. The commission strategically chose each the four moderators: Jim Lehrer, Bob Schieffer, Candy Crowley, and Martha Raddatz. Lehrer’s involvement in eleven previous presidential debates and Schieffer’s years of professional experience made them leading choices for this year’s moderators. “A desire for diversity” elevated Crowley and Raddatz to top contenders and led commission members to choose Crowley as the first female presidential debate moderator in 20 years. However, as commission member Mike McCurry said, “We cannot make everybody happy.”  Not only did the commission have an agenda while making its decisions, but those critiquing the selection have their own agenda as well. Univision, The National Association of Black Journalists, the presidential campaign teams, and even individuals such as Rush Limbaugh and Gwen Ifill all have their own organizational, political, or professional gain in mind when complaining about the various choices.

Whether praising or critiquing the commission’s decision, everyone has an agenda, and the media is the means to impose that agenda on the public. Why is there so much complaint and criticism surrounding the decision? It is because certain news stations, organizations, or people groups feel they will miss out on an opportunity to make their opinions known. They will be unrepresented in a prime-time, highly viewed media event and feel their causes will be set back as a result of that exclusion. They will miss out on an opportunity to prey on the public opinion. The well-being and success of the presidential debate is not the goal to be attained. It is the attention of the viewers. It is we. To know that we, as the public, are the ultimate prey of these individuals, organizations, and the media as a whole makes one stop and question the true focus of every question, answer, or advertisement present during the debate. It makes one question the true agenda behind it all.