Uses and Gratifications Theory

Blulmer & Katz
- Diversion: escape from everyday problems and routine
I don't think this applies to me much because watching a soap would be part of my routine anyway and you can't escape everyday problems just by watching Eastenders or Neighbours because they have problems as well. So either way, the problems and routine do not escape me by watching soaps.

- Personal relationships: using the media for emotional and other interaction, e.g. substituting soap operas for family life
Sometimes, the family issues that arise in soaps aren't very common on my family. For example, soaps often raise issues of things like illness, pregnancy, debt and family break ups. These kind of things don't really happen in my family so i don't substitute soap operas for family life.

- Personal Identity- Constructing their own identity from characters in media texts, and learning behaviour and values
Sometimes in films i indentify with a character in it but i wouldn't construct my own identity to be just like theirs because their identity is acted, so it's not real. For example, I seem to indetify with a character in chick flicks but i don't necessarily want to the b like them as i know that the real world doesn't exist of people in chick flicks- because their representation is very stereotypical.

- Surveillance: information gathering, e.g. educational programmes, weather reports, financial news, holiday bargains
I watch weather reports and financial news sometimes so keep up-to-date with what's happening in the world and nationally. An exampleof this is to keep up to date with the War in Iraq, football highlights and recently the whole case of the Russian spy. Therefore, Surveillance is probably the only reason of why i might consume a media text from Blulmer and Katz' list.

Denis McQuail
Information:
- Finding out about relevant events and conditions- I probably use the internet more to find out about relevant events and conditions rather than the TV. Through TV, i am aware of some events but they are not really that relevant to me. I use the radio to find out about relevant events as well.
- seeking advice- I don't personally use the TV for seeking advice but it build up my general knowledge.
- satisfying curiosity and general interest.- Through watching the News, my curioisties about certain news piece would be satisfied. This is what motivates me to watch the News. For example, i was especially interested in the Fairpack scandal.

Learning
- self- education- TV does educate me but i would watch something to be enteratined rather than to learn. Even though soaps and hospital series like Holby City, I self-learn everyday and specific things.
- confidence through gaining knowledge- I'm not motivated to watch a certain programme to gain confidence through gaining knowledge. I un-knowingly gain knowledge so it doesn't really make me more confident, just have more general knowledge. Quiz shows do this quite obviously but soaps and drama can teach you everyday things.

Personal Identity.
- finding reinforcement for personal values- I don't think this applies to my media consumption because i don't think i need reinforcement for personal values- i would have my family/friends for that.
- finding models of behvaiour- This doesn't apply to my media consumption either because it doesn't really make sense to find a model of behaviour on TV- u would ened a more realistic and approachable model to seek advice etc.
- identifying with 'celebrities'- I don' identify with celebrities but maybe the members of some of the females from indie bands just because of their "indie" look or "glamorous punk".
- gaining insight into oneself.- i dont consume media for this reason because the Tv can't exactly give you an insight into who you are, only the person themselves can.

Integration and social interaction
- gaining insight into circumstances of others- Through issues that media texts raise such as illnesses, i do gain an insight into circumstances of others who i know of that may have the same illness, for example.
- identifying with others- a sense of belonging- I dont think this applies ot my media consumption because the Tv is not a real world thing, even though soap and films sometime smale them out to be. Even in reality shows not everything that happens is put on camera so i can't feel a sense of belonging through comsuming media texts.
- finding a basis for conversation and social interaction- This applies to my media consumption because i often use programmes such as Eastenders or Big Brother as a basis of a conversation.
- having a substitute for real-life companionship- I don't think you can substitute real-life companionship for media texts. This is because you can't see someone on TV and call them your friend...because you may think you know them but they don't know you.
- having to carry out social roles- I dont think this applies to me.
- enabling one to connect with family, friends and society- this doesn't apply to my media consumption because i think it's impossible to connect with family, friends and society through consuming media texts. On the other hand, i guess yu connect with family, friends and society by watching the same programmes/films and having the same opinion.

Entertainment
- escaping, or being diverted, from problems- I don't use media texts to escape, or to be diverted, from problems. Songs are more of a likely thing to use instead.
- relaxing- I watch Tv to relax because all i usually do is watch the TV and sit on the sofa so by relaxing on the sofa, i am consuming the media.
- getting intrinsic cultural or aesthetic enjoyment- Some programmes like "life isn't all ha ha hee hee" i watched because of my intrinsic culture and the trailers attracted me mainly for that reason.
- filling time- I mostly watch TV to fill time. If i'm bored or waiting for someone/thing i'd watch TV or put on the radio.
- emotional release- Only some films caused me to have emotional release but i didn't watch the film especially to get emotional release, it was an unintended reaction.
- sexual arousal.

Effects Theory

The Frankfurt School
- Argued that the rise of the 'culture industry' resulted in society conforming to the standard within society.
- Under capitalism, culture is processed through the mass media as something which is bought and sold.
- The passive mass audience are manipulated by society.
- We watch Tv programmes, not because we want to but because we have been conditioned to watch them because someone has commodified it as something which is good to watch.

The hypodermic needle model
- based on the idea of mass media having the power to inject the passive audiences with ideologies.
For e.g. Triumph of the Will- Where a repressive regime controlled the media (through the likes of Goebbels) because of the belief that the strict regulation of the media will help in controlling their populations and in Hitler's case, become and stay a dictator.
- The audience accept the version of events given in the media.

Violence in the Media
- Suggests that the audience is passive again and the amount of explicitly sexual, too violent or in other ways offensive Tv ouput should be cencored as the audience may act in the same way.
- However, today's audience's are media literate and can de-code media texts without being injected in this way.

Cultivation Theory
- suggests that a repeated exposure of a single text will make the audience less sensitive- they become 'desensitised'.
- Over time, soical attitudes change a lot causing audiences to think that films created in the past do not have much of an scary etc effect as they would have had when the film was first released.

Two- step flow
- Assumes a more active audience who discuss the text with a respected person then we will be passive enough to accept their reviews of the text.

Whether i agree or disagree with the Effects Theory:
I agree with the Cultivation theory because with films which have been banned like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre being for some yearsbut when i watched a few years ago, i didn't find it that scary. Also, this is the same with adverts. Audiences used to be injected with ideologies but that doesn't happen a lot anymore. The Frankfurt School, Violence in the media and two step flow all depend on the individual and whether they are easily manipulated or are media-literate.

Representation of women in the L'oreal Advert:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Lju1F3DY8&mode=related&search

(embedding was disabled by request)

This advert uses the celebrity endorcement of Popular Asian actress Aishwarya Rai. She is represented as a middle-class, respectable and smart woman. When she puts on the mascara and walks out of the lift men and women are in awe of how amazing she looks. She is under the male gaze, which is expected anyway, but she is not dressed provocatively. Women are also in awe which may result in them being jealous or wanting to look like her because she has this quality of to-be-looked-at-ness. Also, she is enjoying the attention as she confidently looks at the people in the room.

The representation of women in the 1988 Irn Bru advert




This advert takes "irn bru" very literally. A woman, who is "sweaty" uses the Irn Bru to tease the man and then she literally blows him away. This suggests that women take advantage of their good looks but know when to stop and so are in control. The man may be after the woman or the Irn Bru she is holding. There is then a woman walking past objectified for her looks and is shown very obviously by the men looing at her as she goes past. Another woman is ealier shown next to a car with water(?) spraying on her so her hair is wet and then she poses..this is quite provocative and so conforms to Mulvey's theory to create a fetishistic mode, which presents responses to male castration. Although the advert seems to be targeting both males and females, the women are objectified causing males to be persuaded to buy the drinks. The female audience may want to buy the drink to look and feel like the women in the advert- to be provocative but have the power to push men away.

Although this was shown 18 years ago it is still quite similar to the McDonalds advert in the way that it conforms to the Male gaze but women to have control and are not passive.

Representation of women in the Mc Donalds advert 2006



This advert compared how easy it is to win a prize in the new McDonald's promotional scheme by comparing it to how hard it would be for the man dancing to get the blonde woman. She says "shove of will ya" showing how shes in control and although its used to make fun out of the man dancing wierdly on the dancefloor, it shows how in todays society, women may be fetishised but they still have control. The woman here is very active and so opposes Mulvey's theory of the male gaze. Also, she is not dressed premiscuously so she is not a object of scopophillia.

Google chief vows to protect users' privacy

Bobbie Johnson,
Wednesday November 8, 2006
http://media.guardian.co.uk/newmedia/story/0,,1942173,00.html

This article is about google's chief executive, Eric Schmidt going against the decision made by the Bush Administration to obtain all the user's searches etc. He that he went to court for it and under The Partiots Act, he does not need to share the privacy of the users who have used Google as a search engine.

This opinion of Scmidt has only come aboout when President Bush faced very bad results at the mid-term elections making it very hard for him to make any laws etc.

Schmidt still believes that Google will come under pressure in the future to share the users' private information of searches.

My opinion:

I think that Schmidt is right for holding the private information back and only in extreme circumstances should it be used. However, the fact that Schmidt has only aired his views when the Bush Administration is under threat shows how he might only have done it because there is little that they can do now. Also, some people have never known that Google records everything you search and other people may use more than 1 computer so its information s not strictly accurate.

Have you got news for us?

http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,1940127,00.html

This article is based on how channel Five and The Sun are going to allow the public to send stories to them through their website and then, if they use them on the news they would get paid £100. The stories could be anything from video clips and pictures taken on a mobile phone to important stories that you've heard about. This will all start next week.

The main idea of this was taken from Myspace but especially YouTube, however, the Channel Five senior pgrammer has pointed out that it will help to make a relationship and commitment between the audience and Channel 5. The authenticity of the flim clips is benefical for the news team and some sent in to the BBC are even better than their film crew's.

The Sun's big innovation is MySun which is an addition to the website and glorifies the news which users can comment on, which leads on to my opinion...

My Opinion:
I think this is a good idea in some ways because Channel 5 news would probably get most of their footage from the BBC so it will help them to improve. Also, its good that they have the audience's view in mind and sometimes, people in the right place at the right time so why not send in a video clip for £100. On the other hand, i think that this is maybe more because they want to up their standards in the competition of channels and news rather than "creat a ense of loyalty". Because this is a commercial channel, i can't help thinking that the only reason they are doing this is to increase their ratings.

Also, the Sun have implied that they are putting the stories in their newspaper and website purely because it is what they think the public will enjoy, not because they want to inform them of nuetral news. Therefore, this proves that The sun is a very biased newspaper and is purely for profit gains.

Another aspect which may go wrong is the public will be sending anything to the website that is not particularly useful just because they went the money. Money shouldn;t be an incentive to send a story, the person's devotion and interest to the story should be.

Pluralism

Summary:

A basic definition of pluralism:
- opposite belief to marxism
- society is a system of competing groups and interests
- The elite, who control the media, allows a lot of flexibility in the production of choices.
- The audience can manipulate the media- they are able to "conform, accommodate or reject"

The role of the audience:
- audience= vital to media producers- who must spend a lot of R+D to make sure their products will appeal to the audience.
- Audience is active

The Media as a fourth estate:
- 1st three estates (government, legal system and the Church) each have power in our society.
- Each of these systems hold the other in place as democracy is maintained.
- Role of media is the 4th estate- to keep the public informed of what is happening in the other 3.

Limitations of pluralism:
- It assumes the audience is active and an economic basis for production..these can sometime be in conflict.

Why I am/am not a Pluralist:
I believe the way that pluralists think about how the economy is treated and the governing of the country. Democracy is a more forward way of thinking and the audience demanding products that they can manipulate in their own way is sometimes accurate. I think it depends on the knowledge on the audience as to whether or not they are able to make their own judgement of what they read/hear/see or whether the representations are hegemonic to them. However, there is clearly some class divide in society today and the media does not always fulfill the role of the fourth estate. Sometimes the media are one-sided (such as in tabloids) and do not have enough information to remain neutral like the BBC. By being more focused on entertainment and profits, the media fails to inform the public of the 3 estates neutrally. Therefore, I believe that in some ways i am a pluralist but in others i am more marxist.

Marxism

Summary:

Marxist Ideologies:
He argued against capitalism; that profits are generated by exploiting workers. He believed that Capitalist society is divided into 2 social classes:
1) The working cass/proletariat
2) The bourgeousie/establishment/ruling elite - who employ the proleteriat

Marxism and the Media:
- All media texts maintains the social divides.
- The media promote the ideologies of marxism through entertaining the workers

Althusser:
- ideoglogical state apparatuses that maintain the bourgeois ideologies and interpellate an audience:
1) Religion
2) education
3) family
4) Legal and political system
5) Political system
6) Cultural and communications systems

Gramsci:
- hegemony: through the media, the ruling classes promote their ideologies and values on the working class therefore forcing them to think it is common sense.

Eisenstein (1920's Soviet film maker) and montage:
- Used Marxism as a justification for his film making- Hollywood and conventional narrative structure and media language imposes the capitalist ideolgies on the audience.
- His solution: to show through montages that there is not a protagnist thus no one that the audience can emotionally engage with.

Williams: - contemporary marxist
- Believed in "low culture" instead of "mass culture"
- Popular culture seen as second class today whereas high culture events (ie theatre) are given a much higher status.

Why I am/not a Marxist:
I think some aspects of Marxism are true such as the fact that the ruling elite do empose these ideologies on the working class through the media. A key example of this is Rupert Murdoch who, through the Sun, Sky etc, force these right wing ideologies on the audiences and then believe that this is common sense. Even though this means that the working class are thought to be manipulated easily by the proletariat, hegemony does occur in todays society and the audience are not aware of it. However, there are other aspects of Marxism i don't agree with such as the fact that capitalism is only aiming to making profits by exploiting workers. The economy needs a little bit of capitalism to grow therefore, supply and demand in an economy should always exist. In a comminist state (which Marxim believes in) there is no supply and demand and people heavely on the government to be distributed wealth equally. Therefore, i believe in Marxism in some ways but don't think it is accurate in others.