Blog Post 7- Question 3- Tiffany Holts

3. Do you think people today use the mass media differently compared with how people used media 10 or 20 years ago?

I definitely believe the media was used differently 20 years ago compared to today. For example, newspapers were the main source of information since technology was not at the level it is today. The book discusses the importance of historical information when it comes to content analysis. It is important to know what was going on at the time that something was written/created. The media today breaks boundaries that were not as edgy in the past. The media is now about advertising and self-promotion, along with filling the desires of people needing entertainment. The invention of Netflix itself is a major milestone for the media. People are able to pick what they want to watch, when they want with no commercials. The TV shows in the nineties were more family based and less racy. The variety of genres that are available to everyone is remarkable and there is so much to analyze. There are also a variety of social media platforms that were not around 20 years ago such as Facebook. Facebook has become an instrumental platform used to promote and advertise people themselves and products/services. The desires and gratifications that are expected are different now as well due to the increase of technological advancements. 20 years ago, the instant ability to post how you're feeling or upload a new blog was not available. There were computers, but they did not function as efficiently as they do now. The media is continuously changing because of how many new inventions there are. I am curious to see how someone would answer this question 20 years from now.

Blog #7- Question 1

It is always interesting to me to learn new terms when delving into a new topic. These sociological concepts helped me better understand elements of sociological studies and the analysis we had to do as well. To set the stage for these definitions that can be applied when analyzing public arts, I'd like to make clear that sociology is the study of the development and elements of human societies. One type of societal power is a bureaucracy, in which a large society is being run by anonymous people following fixed guidelines that lead that society's largest corporations; this puts these individuals at the top of the hierarchy of authority for that specific society and leads to a less personable connection between leaders and followers. Within these societies, socialization occurs everywhere; this is when members of the specific society are taught the rules and values of their society. People can see through interacting with others and watching others interact what is appropriate and acceptable for themselves and what is not. A common way to place expectations around a society's members is to fit them into social roles; people are included in common social roles such as student, parent, nurse, etc... and must act accordingly to fit into the social norms of that role within that society. These roles also have statuses where someone is ranked within their role; for example a student can be a freshman in college or a final semester graduate student and a nurse could be a family medical practice nurse or an infant intensive care nurse in the ER. Gender can effect societal roles especially with media influencing the norms of a society. If a parent is female, a societal norm from the 50's and 60's was that mother would stay at home and take care of the kids and household. Each societal member has its own prestigiousness and rank within the field or lifestyle. Outside of these lifestyle roles, societies break their members up into different classes, or general groups, based on commonalities; most frequently they are broken up into socioeconomic classes, which rank people based on similarities in education, income, and careers which directly affect their lifestyles. These groups and their differences can cause stereotypes, or generalized signs commonly related to a specific type of person concerning a part of who or how they are; for example, a racial stereotype in America for Jewish people is that they like cheap deals in their purchases and are always willing to bargain down set prices. This tends to define social norms surrounding members of a society but if class structure and regulations in a society break down, the members do not have norms to align with and are left without much moral guidance within their society; this is called an anomie and is uncommon in most present societies. While a society is using these social norms and other tell-tale elements to rank and group its members, marginalization can occur, in which members of a society thats values and beliefs differ from that society's norms are placed in a secondary, lower ranked, status. This lack of acceptance for personal differences often leads to alienation of this secondary group, in which individuals feel detached from their society and the other members within it. This can also be caused by the impersonal bureaucracies that form to lead a society and members feeling like they do not belong or aren't closely a part of their society. If all parts of a society (including all members and their placements within their society) are contributing to the stability and well-being of their society as a whole, it is considered functional; the functionality of a society's parts plays a large role in the success of the society as a whole.  Postmodernism defines a society that embraces their personal differences to the full extent and does not try to categorize their members, instead emphasizing their personal relationships and understandings with themselves. It is a term that denies all religious, scientific, or philosophical truth for all people and instead focuses on each individual's interpretation of their own world around them. 2 major influences to societies are mass media and mass communication. Mass communication uses mass media to get the same message to large numbers of different types of people. This mass communication can relay the different aspects of a society and help individuals learn how to behave within them. There are a variety of elements of societies that define their future success or failure and with the knowledge of these aspects, we can all better understand sociology and the world around us.

Blog Post #1 - Ted Bangs

The above advertisement is a P.E.T.A. support campaign ad, and the subject matter of the ad is quite obviously what makes this particular ad controversial. To a certain degree, a large portion of commercial advertisement hinges its popularity or success probability on the bet that “sex sells”. In this specific case, it was not so much that sex sells as much as it was that sex in this case catches the eyes of the viewers and draws attention to the ad campaign. With the tagline above the image “all animals have the same parts” the reader is somewhat taken back because we as human beings (although technically we are also animals) don’t like to consider ourselves as part of the animal kingdom. We as a species almost believe that we are above that to a certain degree, but this advertisement juxtaposes that comment alongside the body of Pamela Anderson in order to make a point. Their point is to demonstrate that animals are, from a practical and functional point of view, just the same as us. We all have a common denominator in our mortality and that is made especially obvious by the way in which Pamela Anderson’s body is painted. It is painted and sectioned off as if it were a butcher’s guide to extracting meat from a cow.  It is very jarring at first glance, but this image could also be taken in a different way. It could be taken as a type of satire that models and their bodies are objectified in advertisement today, not just by commercial entities but also non-profit organizations like P.E.T.A. that use the models as conduits for their advertisements.

Blog Post 6

From what I have seen from the documentary, "Miss Representation"it shows how women are depicted in media in a very unfulfilling manner. It also goes deeper into what women would like to happen in order for them to be represented better than they have been throughout the years. However, it usually becomes the opposite whenever someone comes along and does what women have been wanting for them. Like for example when the author of Twilight wrote a novel that help empower women and it represented them very well, it didn't do well in sales at all and instead Twilight got a lot more sales after finishing that novel. Which is very perplexing to think that what women want for better representation is discarded or ignored for something that goes against what they want. For me, what i say about this documentary is that it helps identify the many issues women have with their representation in media. Also due to the fact that while yes women still aren't being represented well in any form of media, but it definitely is better now then it has been in the past. Like nowadays we have more movies focusing on females as the main protagonist or have strong female characters in general. For example, in movies like Frozen, Hunger Games, and a television show like Once Upon a Time the female characters are given very strong characterization in their given mediums and helps represent women well. It also helps give women a role model to look up to depending on the age group the show or movie tries to depict it to. Also another thing to shortly go into is that the documentary does go into is that women aren't being treated well either because of how media abuses them of stuff like products or the news. In this case, yes it is true and honestly as a whole for this documentary, keep spreading the message of misrepresentation in the media. its gotten better over the years, but it is clear women are still misrepresented in other areas.

Blog post 3

What i noticed ever since i took this class was how I viewed commercials and other forms of media differently compared to before i took the class. Like i seen that a commercial from apple is used for as a product for a higher class than say, the low to middle class area since the higher class people can afford it. As for the opposite like a Subway commercial where most classes can afford it while the lower class can struggle if they are not careful with their cash. Same can be applied to movies and tv shows, were I've seen how they separate between elitists and non-elitist or something simple like competitive individualism.

Its also helped me see through the Marxist lens that in television or movies to look at the writing structure more than i have been in the past and find those little details from the characters, motivations, etc. in order to identify the ideas in a easier manner. Like for example, watching some of my favorite shows back when i was a kid or even favorite shows of today I look at how the characters emote and what their motivations are help me understand them more than i did before. I would also look at how each episode is written to see how the writer would create the world for those characters and how the show would wrap itself up in the end. Even though it can help me analyze shows and movies a lot better than i did before, I don't believe it helps my writing since I feel the need to still write it in a simple manner and not in a complicated and over analytical matter. Even though that still won't detract from the real lesson learned on analyzing things i love in a better light.

Blog Post 7: Uses and Gratifications

2. What is meant by uses and gratifications? Which uses and gratifications do you think are the most important for people nowadays?

According to our text book, “Media Analysis Techniques,” by Arthur Asa Berger, the uses-and-gratifications theory is a “sociological theory states that audiences use the mass media for certain purposes and gain certain gratification from the use of those media” (Berger 224). The focus is on how people use, benefit, and gain from the media rather than how the media affects the audience. This theory is further discussed in detail on page 119 of the book and goes into details of different ways the users gain gratification.

For example, people watch a comedy TV show to be amused. The user uses the media to “find things to laugh about, to be put in a happy spirit, and is the source of pleasure” (Berger 119).

Another example would be to gain more information about the world. By using the media, the user gains knowledge, new information, and values. I have a good example of this; recently I watched a documentary on Netflix which informs their audience of the problem in plastic waste that is improperly disposed of. The plastic waste would go into the ocean and then wash up on shore. The document gave stats on the effects of this improper disposal. It really made me conscious of throwing away plastic, how much plastic I use, and now whenever I see small plastic waste on the ground I tend to pick it up to throw away. By using this media, I have been gratified with information and new values.

I believe that with the media growing more and more each year, people nowadays are using the media to gratify themselves in many ways. It’s difficult to choose one out of the twenty-four from the book. I will say that this year I have noticed how users are using the media to promote themselves. What do I mean by this? I am talking about how people use social media to promote and advertise their skills, professions, and bodies. In particular, I am talking about Instagram posts. My original thought of Instagram was that people post up pictures of their life, activities, friends, pets and whatnot. But after actually getting my first iPhone and my first account on Instagram I have learned that a large majority of people use Instagram to promote themselves. From large corporate companies like Target and Nike to small businesses like a calligraphy artist, and even models – they are using social media to be gratified with fame and fortune.

Looking at media through a use-and-gratification theory is interesting because I have read many articles about how the media is affecting us. It is true that the media makes a big impact on how our lifestyles are but we still use it for our benefits. The media gains from the users and the users gain from the media.

Blog Post 7: If He Says She’s a Girl, She’s a Girl

"How should one define gender? Is gender natural, or is it socially constructed, and if it is socially constructed, does that mean gender is anything someone wants it to be?"

Gender should be defined by its definition, graciously offered by google: “Gender: The state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).” Basically, gender is the social conceptualization of what it means to be either male or female, and while it is often assigned at birth, it isn’t tied to physical sex characteristics and can change and evolve with time. Gender should be, on a personal basis, defined by the individual. Having a vagina doesn’t make someone a girl, anymore than owning an oven makes them a five star chef, and gender, then, should be defined on an individual basis. 

Sex, on the other hand, is physical, it can be changed through surgical intervention, but for the most part it is static. Sex is used medically to sort patients into risk categories for things like prostate cancer or ovarian cysts, but for everything else, there is gender. Gender is a natural byproduct of labor division and socialization, so to say it is purely natural or purely construct is a bit misleading given it’s an intersection of both. That said, our strict American definitions of male and female are indeed constructs, as in, what defines a woman in our culture does not hold true universally, so really gender is less of a concept and more of a nebulous cloud of penises and vaginas roving the countryside.

Gender can, then, only really be determined by a society, though it can be selected on an individual basis, but here’s the thing, why can’t it just be anything someone wants it to be? I mean, academically sure there’s all sorts of posturing and theory, but in reality, you can be whatever you want and literally no one can stop you. Even if you can’t get your license changed, or use the bathroom you feel comfortable in, there’s no one in the world that can stop you from being a man or a woman or neither or both, and sterilizing gender into a semantic debate about socialization and biology doesn’t invalidate that you have a penis and are a girl. Does it really matter what the scholars say about gender to the individual identifying theirs? I mean, does our definition of gender really matter on a personal level and or stop someone from being whatever they choose to be? No, not at all, so of course gender is anything someone wants it to be, because people don’t tend to read dissertations when making choices about their personal lives. Gender can be anything to a person, maybe not to academia, but what’s a few stuffed shirts to feeling comfortable in your own skin. Be a girl, be a boy, be a dolphin, why not? Just be yourself, a definition can’t stop you.