Game Over

In class we watched a documentary called Game Over: Gender, Race and Violence in Video Games (2000). The popularity of video games has grown exponentially since the introduction of the first video game. In 2000, 90% of households with kids had rented or bought videogames (Jhally, 2000). That’s a lot of video games! As I mentioned in a previous post, 8% of media messages are getting processed by the conscious brain, and the other 92% is getting processed by the subconscious, and this includes playing video games. And according to Game Over, “all media-manufactured images blur together with reality”, which makes it more difficult to differentiate between reality & fiction (Jhally, 2000). So if so many families are playing video games, along with the consumption of other media images, isn’t it important for us to look at the messages being put forth through them? Sure is!

Video games produce a heightened sense of realism. Sports games will use live motion capture of the real athlete to create the character. The graphics of video games have also become more realistic, with 3D worlds and life-like imagery. We interact with games psychologically and physically, essentially allowing ourselves to be absorbed into the game. Essentially, video game companies want us to believe that we are a part of the game, which keeps us wanting to come back for more. If we feel like we are a part of the game, the blur between reality and fantasy begins as soon as we start playing, even without needing the time to process the messages.

Video games often times reflect what is going on culturally, so we can see a lot of gender inequalities happening in video games. Since the games are primarily made by men and for men, we see men’s ideology in games. For example, we see the hyper-masculine, strong, and aggressive male characters as were mentioned in my blog about masculinity. Women are typically depicted as damsels in distress who need to be rescued, or if they are the heroine in the story, they are very sexualized with disproportionate body types. Sexualized women are often put on game covers or in advertisements, even if there aren’t any female characters in the game. These sexual images are meant to attract male audiences to the video game.

Race is also plays a big role in video games. When Game Over was produced, 8 out of 10 of the most popular video games had white characters (Jhally, 2000). Native Americans are portrayed with feathers, a bow & arrow, and tribal clothing and markings. They are also often seen as savages. Black people are often depicted as living in inner city environments who commit acts of violence and crime. In the game” King Pin”, the player is a white person while everyone else is black. The goal is to become the “king pin” or the gang leader. The message here is that it is the goal of a white person, particularly a white male, to dominate the races, and anyone who is not white is either savage, dangerous, or from some exotic location.
One other common theme in video games is violence. In many video games, the more violent your character is, the higher your rewards are. Watching violence and playing violent video games makes people believe that the world is violent and it becomes normalized, that it is normal for someone to kill another person. There is no punishment or consequences for violence, yet if you commit violence in the real world, you will be punished for it (either legally or emotionally). The military actually started using shooting games to train soldiers before going into action. In Game Over, they made some pretty clear distinctions between military training and video games, and how those effects can come into play in everyday life (Jhally, 2000). For starters, the military started simulating war scenarios after World War II. They found that soldiers did not fire their gun as easily as they should have, even though they were in danger, because they had not been conditioned to shoot. After introducing target practices and even using video game simulations, the number increased to 95% likelihood of a person firing during combat. This goes to show that violence is a conditioned response. In military training, soldiers are disciplined to carry their weapons without ever firing it so that they understand not to shoot unless they are ordered to do so. They also get reprimanded for shooting the wrong person during simulations. In video games, there is nothing telling you to stop shooting, and you could shoot the wrong person and nothing happens to your scores (though sometimes if you don’t have a “friendly fire” setting turned on, you could accidentally kill a teammate, which could lead you to losing the game). Video games also make shooting people pleasurable and exciting (Jhally, 2000).

Media and video games encourage violence as an appropriate response to conflict. While many people would argue that video games themselves lead to violence in people, it is the messages within them that are the true culprits. Some questions to think about: If we know that violence in media can lead to more aggressive tendencies, why do we continue to let them into our homes? How can we let people enjoy video games, but also teach them the true meaning behind them? How can we open people up to the idea that violence is not a normal/helpful act?

For more information on the controversy over violent video games, please visit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_controversy
http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2003/10/anderson.aspx

For more information on video games in the military, visit:
http://www.livescience.com/10022-military-video-games.html

Source: Jhally, S. (Director). (2000). Game Over: Gender, Race, & Violence in Video Games [Documentary]. USA: Media Education Foundation.

Race in television

Ethnic groups have lacked in original television content that truly reflects their culture. In Color Adjustment, Marlon Riggs takes us through 40 years of race through television. When African Americans first appeared in television, they were portrayed as minstrel characters—stupid and good for nothing but a laugh (as demonstrated in “Amos and Andy”). Over the years, more characters were introduced, but shows were primarily made up of white families—the husband went to work, the wife was the homemaker, and they had their perfect little picket fence lifestyle. Occasionally, shows with white characters would have a black character as a special guest. “The Nat King Cole Show” was the first show that featured a black person. He was loved for his sophistication, elegance, and class, and he appealed to many people, not just the black population. On his show, he had white guests and everyone got along. However, in reality, there were images on the news of blacks being beaten and arrested; it was the first time black people were seen as real people. There were shows like “Julia”, “I Spy”, and “The Cosby Show” which attempted to show alternate views of black people and black families, but they often played it safe and showed them reaching the ideals set by the white, patriarchal society that we live in. “Frank’s Place” was the first show to truly show different views of black people, but it was cancelled for being “too real”. Producers were only making television that was appealing to the white masses, while incorporating a biased view of black culture so that white people wouldn’t feel uncomfortable or offended. They didn’t care if it was offensive to black people.
Black people are often portrayed as the slave/maid, native, clown/minstrel, athlete, or hypersexual and violent. Most ethnic groups are stereotyped into working class people who live in the ghetto, and they are often mostly portrayed as thugs. (Color Adjustment)

“Whether any of us likes it or not, this medium is the most powerful communication device in the world”—Steve Bochco, TV producer/writer (Color Adjustment)

“I don’t think the producers and writers took into consideration the social effects of stereotypes.”—Hal Kanter, TV producer/writer (Color Adjustment)

These quotes speak leaps and bounds about the importance of understanding media messages and for producers to realize that their messages can have a great effect on how people view the world around them. Stereotyping may make for good entertainment, but it’s not a responsible choice. This often leads to misconceptions about who people are based on their race or ethnicity, and often times perpetuates hate on both sides.

If there is one thing that we can do to help even out the playing field so that white people aren’t the “supreme beings”, what would it be?

Source: Color Adjustment. Dir. Marlon Riggs. Perf. Vivian Kleiman. California NewsReel, 1992. Film.

Men and the "Tough Guise"

When you think of a man and what it means to be masculine, what do you think of? Do you think of the skinny, nerdy guy or do you think of the big, strong, muscular guy? Most Americans will probably say the latter. It has become a part of our culture that a man needs to be strong, aggressive, protective, little to no emotion, and be extremely muscular in stature. In the documentary Tough Guise: Violence, Media & The Crisis of Masculinity, Jackson Katz demonstrated the shift in size of male action figures in the 1960s/1970s to the size of men in the 1980s/1990s. In the 1960s/1970s, male action figures were smaller all around—proportions, muscular size, and guns were all smaller. In the 1980s/1990s, we had action figures with bigger guns, bigger, more “ripped” muscles, and they were taller. To give a comparison, he showed that a G.I. Joe action figure in the 1980s/1990s would have had a 26” bicep in reality, while Mark Maguire, the epitome of masculinity at the time, only had 20” biceps. This becomes a problem because any male who does not fit into the “big and strong” category gets bullied, told that they are weak and that they are not of much worth. Men are also told that they need to ‘man up’ or ‘grow a pair’ if they are showing signs of weakness—pain/injured, scared, sad/upset, and the only thing that is acceptable to show is anger. If all that men are allowed to do is feel anger, it manifests in violence—towards other men, towards women (especially sexually), and towards every living thing. This idea that any sign of femininity (emotional, liking arts instead of sports, liking cooking or any other “homemaker” duties) is bad and that anything masculine (violent, strong, unemotional) is good is what Katz calls the “tough guise”.

A real life example of the “tough guise” is evident in a TED talk by Tony Porter. He talks about how men are socialized to devalue women, to not show any emotion when something bad happens, and that violence is OK. He makes a call to men that if they want their daughters to have a better future, they need to do something about it and start teaching their sons a different moral code, as well as start thinking about how they treat women.
You can view this TED Talk here: http://www.ted.com/talks/tony_porter_a_call_to_men.html

I am interested in knowing, what are some ways that we can help young men in our society learn to value and appreciate women more, to make it acceptable for men to show emotion, and to show them that they don’t all have to be tough? How do we get society as a whole to value the nerds/geeks/artists who typically are not seen in favorable light? How do we get to show men that they can be whoever they want and it doesn’t have to be in a negative, violent manner?

Source: Jhally, S. (Director). (1999). Tough Guise: Violence, Media & the Crisis in Masculinity [Documentary]. USA: Media Education Foundation.

Killing Us Softly...with their messages

In Jean Kilbourne’s Killing Us Softly IV, Kilbourne shows a string of advertisements dating back to the late 1960s up to present day to demonstrate the types of messages that are being made about women and their roles in society. By stringing them together instead of just looking at them individually, it becomes easier to pick up on the subliminal messages. In her documentary, Kilbourne states that “Only 8% of an ad’s message is received by the conscious mind. The rest is worked

and reworked deep within the recesses of the brain.” This figure was surprising and shocking to me, because it goes to show that ads and television can affect us long after we’ve stopped viewing it. One big concern with this is that women and girls will continue to process messages that are meant to cut them down.

From watching Killing Us Softly IV and doing an in-class activity where we brought in a variety of ads depicting women, I have come to many conclusions. Women are depicted as flawless and beautiful, with thin physiques, large breasts, and ample butts.

(Here is a sample of how models have changed throughout history: http://www.diet-blog.com/07/female_body_shape_in_the_20th_century.php)

Despite growing numbers in obesity, models are still skinnier than ever. A need to being thin leads to eating disorders, cosmetic surgery, and other unhealthy ways of body alterations. It is estimated that 80% of American women are dissatisfied with their appearance (http://bit.ly/lqoYCR), 7 million American women have an eating disorder (http://bit.ly/C2Dk) and 91% of all cosmetic procedures are performed on women (Killing Us Softly IV). How are these statistics OK? Just to fit an ideal that doesn’t actually exist? Did you know that advertisers will actually take bits and pieces of a woman to create a whole new person? Do you know how much photoshopping is actually done on an image? Check out this site: http://bit.ly/rwWG4w

Women also must retain a youthful and innocent look, while still amplifying sex appeal. Women are objects for men to play with, they are given no emotions, they are submissive, and all they want is sex. One ad campaign that I found that fits this description is a 2011 Gucci accessories campaign.

http://www.whatahandbag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Gucci-Fall-2011-Campaign1.jpg

In the magazine, there are two pages, but unfortunately the second page is not available online. You can see other images related to this campaign here: http://capturefashion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Gucci-Fall-Winter-2011-Ad-Campaign.jpg

When I first saw this ad, I instantly thought of a strip club. The lighting, the body parts on the screen, and the very sexual poses of the models are all very reminiscent of a strip club. The body parts being shown and the men lusting after the women in the images (in the first image, the guy is actually staring at another woman across the room) are examples of the objectification and dismemberment of women that Kilbourne talks about in the documentary. It also poses the question—are they selling sex and a night club lifestyle, or are they selling a handbag?

Ads are also often violent towards women. In Killing Us Softly IV, Kilbourne shows the following Dolce & Gabbana ad:

http://kbeche1.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/dolce-gabbana-ad-sexist.jpg

There are 4 men looming over one girl, who is in a very provocative pose and it is essentially showing a gang rape scenario. She seems to be passive and not entirely opposed to them coming at her, which also proves the ideal that women are supposed to be passive towards men and welcome any sexual advancement that comes to them.

In another ad for Unforgivable Woman, a perfume by Sean Combs, Sean Combs is assaulting a woman by pushing her up against a wall. The name of the perfume implies that she has done something bad and that it is unforgivable, so her punishment is an unwanted sexual advancement. http://www.mimifroufrou.com/scentedsalamander/i/Unforgivable_Woman.jpg

These aggressive advertisements send the message to men that they can be as aggressive with their partners as they want without any consequences, and it sends the wrong message about intimacy. Domestic violence is often times due to men thinking they are able to dominate the woman and the woman talks back.

If there are so many damaging effects on women’s self-esteem and self-worth, and men have become more violent towards women because of advertising, why do we still let these images continue? Why do we let ourselves be defined by someone else’s unrealistic standard of beauty? And what can we do to move forward to progress towards healthier body images and self-esteem? Here’s one suggestion: http://huff.to/peTjnH

If anyone reading this has suggestions of other ways we can take action, please let me know.

Source: Jhally, S. (Director). (2010). Killing Us Softly IV [Documentary]. USA: Media Education Foundation.

Hegemony and Gender, Race, and Class

        In my previous post, I briefly mentioned ideology and that having a select group of people deciding what gets produced is not good for society as a whole. I wanted to discuss ideology a little further and how it gets integrated into popular culture. First, ideology is a set of beliefs and values a person, group of people, or society holds in how the world works or should work. In many instances, ideology oppresses particular groups of people, yet those being oppressed will go along with the dominant ideology. Hegemony is the explanation for why this happens. The dominant systems of oppression are perceived as normal, natural, inevitable, unchangeable, the way things are, and how things always will be. Hegemony naturalizes ideology & renders it common sense. So how does this happen?

        There are things called Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) that help create and reinforce hegemony, such as Education, family, religion, the legal system, political parties, culture, and communication (particularly the media). They work collectively in reproducing our submission to ideologies by deeming them natural, normal and neutral. However, neutrality is just a myth in many of these cases. In education, there is a cultural bias in standardized tests—they believe that every child should be able to perform the same if they have had the same education, regardless of personal circumstances. The legal system deems that only certain acts are criminalized and able to be convicted. For example, crack cocaine has a harsher punishment than powder cocaine does. There isn’t a good explanation for why there is a disparity, though many believe that crack cocaine is more popular among ethnic groups, particularly African Americans, while powder cocaine is more popular among white people. This is just one disparity among other in the legal system. The media is an ISA because it only shows and represents certain ideologies. Someone gets to decide which story (or part of a story) is most important to tell without giving an alternative to the same story, or a different story that may be coinciding at the same time. Our political parties are also ISAs; currently, our country is dominated by Republicans and Democrats. While we have other parties, they are not given equal airtime, so we often are stuck with the same types of candidates and are forced to choose one of them even if we don’t like either of them because we are not given information about the other candidates.

        While it is important to know how oppression happens, it’s even more important to note who is oppressed and how it is manifesting in society. The main groups that we look at in society are gender, race, and class. When hegemony is in play, this leads to sexism, racism, and classism. In America, the hegemonic views are representative of a patriarchal, “white supremacist” and capitalistic society. If you are not a white male who is making a lot of money, you are often times oppressed and do not get as big of a say as you should. Even though we have women who are working and making money for their families and ethnic groups have become more prominent in leadership roles, we still see in our media and daily interactions that they are not taken as seriously as a white, successful male is. Throughout the course of my blog, we will be taking a look at each of these types of oppressions, as well as some forms of media that they take place in a little more closely. Having an understanding of the oppression that happens on a daily basis will help you to open your mind to new ideas and realize that “natural” isn’t really that natural at all, and that anything can change.

A cultural studies approach to media study

        Over the past century, the media have become more and more engrained in our daily lives, providing ample opportunities for their messages to help formulate our views of the world (i.e. a sense of what is good/bad, positive/negative, moral/immoral) and we create our identities from learning what it means to belong in certain social groups (i.e. gender, race, class, etc.). Knowing that media have a great deal of influence on how we view ourselves and others, it is important to take a closer look at what messages are being distributed in the media. Are they showing a wide variety of images to reflect our multicultural world, or are they showing more narrow views generated by like-minded groups? Are they showing images that are positive and have the well-being of the consumers in mind, or are they showing ones that could potentially harm someone’s well-being, self-image, and their views of other groups? A cultural studies approach attempts to answer these questions by looking critically at three different areas of the media: political economy, textual analysis, and audience reception.

        Political economy is the production and distribution of media products. This area looks at what is being produced, who is producing it, and why they are producing it. It is important to note that most, if not all, media producers are out to make some sort of profit. They will produce whatever sells and cancel anything that doesn't have high enough ratings. In recent years, reality TV has become more and more popular. At one point, someone decided that showing real life experiences on television would be interesting and could show a different perspective of everyday life vs. scripted “reality” as seen on typical television shows. People took to them because they enjoyed being able to escape from their own lives and get to experience someone else’s for the length of a television program. In the case of game shows or talent contests such as “American Idol”, people loved the idea that anyone could become famous almost instantly and viewers also took to the fact that they could participate in the show with their votes. However, the more popular that these shows became, the more extreme the content became to break through the noise. We now have shows like “Jersey Shore”, “Teen Mom”, “Toddlers & Tiaras”, and “the Real Housewives” franchise, which are all about one-upping each other—how extreme and terrible can we make these situations in order to draw in a crowd. It’s like traffic slowing when driving past a crash site—it’s so terrible, yet you can’t look away. The more profit the companies bring in, the more they will keep producing shows similar to the ones listed above.

          In addition to what is being produced, there are currently 10 major media conglomerates who produce the media we consume every day. These are Time Warner, Disney, Bertelsmann, News Corp, Viacom, Comcast, NBC/Universal, Pearson, Fuji TV Network, and ITV. These companies own multiple channels and means of distributing media texts, and each are owned by a limited amount of people. Having only a few people and companies owning and distributing media, we are limited to stories of whatever ideology those producers have. We also won’t see much diversity because if what they are doing now is selling, they will keep producing the same things without taking much risk to show new ideas.

(For more information about political economy and media conglomerates, please see:
Anup Shah, Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership, Global Issues, Updated: January 02, 2009)

        The next part of cultural studies is textual analysis. Textual analysis is how the text (ex. a television show) is structured and breaking down the content of its message. Genres of video games, television shows, music, or movies can tell us about the structure of the text. It can also lend some context to what the piece is about, what are commonalities that are unique to that genre, what are typical values embedded in that genre, etc. We can also look at the narrative: who are the characters, what is happening in the story, what is the overall goal of the story, etc. We can take a look at an ad and see the types of symbols that are being used to represent the ideology behind the ad. Overall, it is about looking deeper at what is being said piece by piece in a text in order to construct an overall understanding of the messages being presented.

        The third piece of cultural studies is audience reception. Audience reception is the reading and interpretation of media texts and, overall, how consumers respond to those texts. Like I said in political economy, people tell the media producers what they like by what they buy, watch, play, or listen to regularly. It also includes how people reevaluate their identities, their beliefs, and their behaviors based on what they see in the media. For example, I have grown up believing that being skinny with big boobs and long hair was the only way guys would think I am attractive. I loathed myself because I was constantly being told by media and those around me that I wasn’t pretty enough because I didn’t look like a model. In other instances, I bought things or had my parents buy me things because the coolest thing had been on TV and all of my friends now had one, but I didn’t. In other words, whatever a media message makes a person feel, and thus their consumption habits change because of it, is at the heart of what audience reception is.

        If we take media messages at face value and say, “Oh, it’s just for entertainment” or “It just makes for good marketing”, we risk continually consuming ideas that are harmful to us. By thinking about messages critically, we can begin to understand that media companies typically do not care about ‘the greater good’ and will just produce stuff that they think will sell, regardless of any truth behind the message. By looking at media texts from political economy (who produces media texts, what is produced, and why), textual analysis (what are the messages in the text) and audience reception (how do consumers respond to media messages), we can educate ourselves on the media and be better prepared to move towards a healthier, multicultural, and multiperspectival media and society.

Welcome

Welcome to Adventures in Medialand, a blog dedicated to the analysis and critique of gender/sexual orientation, race, and class in the media through a Communication perspective. The media have become more and more integrated into our society, and it has become more important than ever to take a critical look at the messages being shown to our society and the impacts they have on people. I will be looking at these messages, breaking them down, and discussing the implications of various forms of messages, particularly relating to the construction of gender, race, and class identities.

I chose an "Alice in Wonderland" theme for a couple of reasons. First, I love the variations of the Alice in Wonderland stories. The fact that the story has been remade many times goes to show that there is more than one side to any story and there are always new ways to portray messages. This becomes ever important in our exploration of media messages. There is always more than one way to portray specific people and scenarios, and some will reflect reality more than others. We run into problems in the media because creators often times have very narrow depictions of people and society. This leaves consumers to believe that what they see in the movies, on TV, in ads, etc. is how things really are or should be in reality when it often times isn't the case. We will explore this more throughout the blog.

Second, I more specifically chose a Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland theme because Alice is very symbolic of a Communication student, or of anyone trying to break boundaries between social groups. While the hegemonic ideology (or the dominant values of a culture that has become so integrated with society that it seems "natural) is saying to believe and act in a certain way (i.e. Alice's family and friends), Alice discovers a new world and is eager to explore it and show everyone that things don't have to be a certain way (i.e. Communication students discovering alternative messages for the media). I often times feel like Alice, where I am constantly told who to be, what to think, what to do and I am searching for ways to break out of that small box society has created for me. The best way to break out of these boxes is to educate ourselves on what is going on in the world, especially in the media, develop new understandings of the world around us, and educate others on these issues--which is what I intend to do with this blog.

As you read my blog please feel free to post your comments on any of the topics I discuss. I look forward to taking this adventure with you!