Television is a major component of contemporary American life. There are more TV sets in American homes than telephones, and 62 million of these televisions are turned on seven hours a day on average [Mallowe, p11]. Many researchers and writers believe that television has a great influence over what and how people think -- that it can, in fact, shape their perceptions and beliefs about the world. Along with such a strong claim there frequently comes the idea that TV can potentially effect human behavior in an adverse manner. In order to overcome this problem appropriate measures must be taken to instruct people about the medium and the messages it delivers to the American society. The goal of such education is to disseminate throughout the community "media literacy".
There are several alleged problems with television and in the ways in which it influences the American people. One frequently suggested problem is that TV can give people unrealistic views (or perhaps their only views) of the world, while on other suggests that television can, in essence, ordain the things which people should believe are true. In "Is your TV programming you?" by Mike Mallowe, crime is presented as a topic which many people witness primarily through television. Schultze, an expert quoted in the piece, states, "[Television is] how millions of people get their idea of what crime is, what type of people commit crimes, and what the consequences of crime are. This happens almost interchangeably in both drama and news" [Mallowe, p12]. In a study by Dudley Barlow, a high school teacher, students were asked to write down their thoughts about words which he recited. He structured the exercise in such a way that every fifth word pertained to an Arab country or leader. In the student responses, he received answers like "unclean", "7-11", "camel jockey" and "sand". The class maintained that all these things were true ("[it is] just the way things are" [Barlow, p25]), but when asked to list Arabs or Arab-Americans whom they knew few could deliver valid answers. One girl said that she stood behind an Arab in line and that he had "smelled". Barlow replied, "'How did you know he was an Arab... because he smelled?' No answer" [Barlow, p25]. The alleged hegemony which television exercises over America inhibits people from forming personal beliefs based on their own experiences. As a result, many viewers remain passive and uncritical to what they view on television. They do not compare and contrast, but rather accept the "subtle, persuasive, multidimensional, and multilevel" [Mallowe, p6] messages thrown at them.
A further proposed problem by critics is related to the one above. Here, is argued that television has the great ability to influence viewers or even assign the values of them. Parental roles are taken over more and more by television as children continue to watch in excess of one thousand hours of television a year [Purgavie, p24]. "'Before parents even give them permission to cross the street,' says communications scholar Joshua Meyrowitz, 'TV takes our kids across the globe'" [Meyrowitz in Mallowe, p10]. Television has taken over the act of storytelling and "'those who tell the stories shape the values'" [Thorman in Mallowe, p11]. This can indeed be a problem if one takes into account the very format and logic of television programming, which proposes that everything is usually resolved in one sense or another by the end of the program. Children are constantly presented with situations in which problems are neatly dealt with, while those situations in real life may be totally different and conflicting. Other formatting styles of television, namely greed, instant gratification, and violence, potentially undermine attempts of parents to instill values of morals, justice, understanding and selflessness in children [Thorman in Mallowe, p10].
The evidence of the distortion of reality and the making of "good" television (through carefully selected images) is easily seen in advertisements for alcohol and tobacco, but is less readily observed in political issues. Critic Daniel C. Harding states, "'[Television] tends to treat politics as a contest rather than a discussion of social values'" [Harding in Mallowe, p10]. The Kennedy-Nixon debate provides an excellent example in which "television images seem to engage public attention more than the discussion of substantial matters" [Brookfield, p159]. The unkempt appearance of Nixon played a crucial role in establishing the belief of many viewers that he was the "loser" of the debate. On the other hand, many of those people who listened to the debate over the radio believed Nixon had, in fact, "won". The visual image (used here in the political realm, but evident in all aspects of television) is able to partially circumvent the viewers' ability to think and reason [Barlow, p24]. This power can be a problem since it is one of the techniques used by television to influence its viewers.
So what exactly is "media literacy"? The idea was started by Elizabeth Thorman, C.H.M., the executive director of the Center for Media and Values in Los Angeles. In essence it is an educational movement designed to make people better understand television media, especially though the "deconstruction" and analyzing of what exactly is being transmitted. Media literacy involves the investigation of aspects of television such as its programming, the news production, and advertisements. "It preaches that [people] must become discriminating users of information by analyzing the messages delivered by the media--especially TV--and by understanding the social and political forces that shape them [Purgavie, p24]. This leaves a vast amount of space for differing interpretations of how to implement media literacy in communities.
One solution to the problem of media illiteracy is reducing the time people spend watching television or simply "turning it off". In this way, the person would be less effected by the messages television transmits. It would also give him or her more time to consider aspects of life other than television and become more involved in first-hand experiences. This solution is invalid though. It robs all "intelligent viewers, and children most of all, of valuable lessons in how to make choices about what's worth watching and what's not" [Mallowe, p13]. In particular, children should be taught how to interpret media encounters appropriately at an early age. This solution also neglects the fact that television can be a great learning tool and source of information about the world. For example, programs such as "Ghost Writer," "Sesame Street," and "Reading Rainbow" encourage children to take an active role in education and provide value-oriented instruction in the home.
In "Steal this TV: How media literacy can change the world" solutions based on other factors are given. Television is viewed as reproducing the dominant culture. The massive, extremely complex system of business interests in television have a great influence in the programming of TV due to the corporate pursuit of commercial success. At the same time the role of television as a public forum is more and more forgotten and put in the background [Adams and Goldbard, p68]. Accordingly, the main purpose of media literacy is to form (or transform) children and adults into responsible, questioning members of the viewing audiences rather than passive dupes or indiscriminate users (or non-users) of information.
"Complete media literacy means mastery of the electronic media: knowledge of how films, tapes, and records are produced, with enough hands-on experience at the lower end of the technological scale to make taking part in more complex media productions an option later on; knowledge of the social, economic, and political characteristics of the media as they're developed; and knowledge of the debates over the media's effects--psychological, physiological, and social--as they've been perceived by diverse interests and competing schools of thought" [Adams and Goldbard, p69].
This is the definition of media literacy they give and use as a basis for the solutions they propose. Every school should be equipped with closed circuit audio and video systems and studio facilities as well as other necessary tools to give children sufficient hands-on experience. There should also be appropriate curriculum designed to teach the non-technical aspects of television: "how media are organized, how they've developed, and what policy measures have been considered and enacted to guide and regulate [a] public trust" [Adams and Goldbard, p71]. For the establishment of adult media literacy, media resources should be made available in the community such as in cultural centers. In this way, people could come together, gain hands-on experience and "learn by doing." In addition, higher-end professional media would be obligated to share a portion of air time with citizenry programs which are to be "without appropriation by the dream machine, without compulsory translation through the omniscient, omnipresent official voice" [Adams and Goldbard, p73]. In other words, community programs should be allowed on without any of television's techniques of subtle bias persuasion.
Adams' and Goldbard's proposal focuses on having people become thoroughly involved in school- and the community-related television activities in order to better understand television, its messages and production techniques. The detailed overview of television which people would gain closely resembles "a full scale indoctrination in the art and science of television" [Mallowe, p6]. This solution to combat media illiteracy is seemingly a great idea, for it would, indeed, make people media literate, but it suffers from a certain impracticality. It is not viable in many communities because support for it, in terms of public demand and money, is very low. Republican cutbacks (ex: Ronald Reagan's cut of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) which put community groups around the country out of business [Adams and Goldbard, p72]) have not helped an already fund-deficient area. The first step at implementing this solution, which could possibly create a public demand, would have to include raising media literacy as a broad social topic which can be "examined, debated, and refined" [Adams and Goldbard, p69]. Still, in considering contemporary society, this solution would to be difficult to enact in many communities. Besides monetary interests in the schools, there is also the problem of how to fit media courses into the curriculum without upsetting those people opposed to media literacy or unwilling to oust other disciplines in favor of it. I also believe the interest in community media groups would be very scarce, making this aspect unreasonable as well. Both of these problems, again, have to do with a lack of public demand.
In their article, Adams and Goldbard present two theories with which I disagree. Their view on the power of business interests over television is not entirely true, and the idea of people being passive dupes to television's influence is false. In my view, Stephen Brookfield's argument in "Media Power and the Development of Media Literacy: An Adult Educational Interpretation" is more compelling. Brookfield argues that the media, especially TV, are not "monolithic transmitters of a dominant ideology uncritically assimilated by an audience of passive dupes" [Brookfield, p154]. It is true that commercial interests have a tremendous influence over media, but to accept Adams' and Goldbard's view would be to neglect opposition within the media and would be to consider "media producers and workers... robotic automatons working at the behest of ruling elites" [Brookfield, p154]. While television does in the main reflect dominant capitalist ideology, there are occurrences of internal resistance which are "neither purely palliative nor wholly uncritical of prevailing structures and ideologies" [Brookfield, p155]. Examples are in such programs as "Saturday Night Live," "The Rush Limbaugh Show," "Monty Python's Flying Circus," etc.
Moreover, television viewers are not simply passive to television's images; rather, they are "'active and immersed in cultural situations where media influence joins other structures and forces in the whirling array of relationships which make up their 'living''" [Kennedy in Brookfield, p153]. In other words, television does not have an almighty power over its viewers; it cannot establish automatic acceptance of its messages, since there is a "'nexus of mediating conditions in which members of the audience decode messages, assigning meaning to them out of a crucible of their own experiences [distinct from those of other viewers]'" [White in Brookfield, p153]. Television sends out messages, but it cannot fully control how people "read" those messages, because TV viewers are differently shaped by a myriad of forces unique to them. This is not to say, in fact, that people are inherently media literate, or that television images have no effect on its viewers. It is quite the opposite -- TV can and usually does have a tremendous effect on its viewers, but these viewers are not merely "couch potatoes" unconsciencely absorbing and assimilating everything they see. TV messages are interpreted with a fair amount of thought and personalization, mixed together with the basic intended message sent over the airways. Media literacy programs should, therefore, teach people to closely (or critically) view programs in order to see how exactly they (the people, but on an individual basis) are interpreting TV's messages. In addition, media programs should instruct viewers how to identify the "subtle, persuasive, multidimensional, and multilevel" techniques to persuade the audience. People could then eliminate these factors, and refine (but not necessarily alter) their views and interpretations. Ideally, this will have the effect of downplaying messages from television which are biased and intended to persuade everyone of one particular belief. At the same time, it would enhance an unbias, discriminating and rational view of the world which is based on the downplay, personal experiences and increased critical thinking.
Adams' and Goldbard's solution is very broad in the sense that the entire community is involved in trying to understand television and its tremendous influence over the helpless, uncritical mass watching it. This overestimation of television's power and the underestimation of the viewers is the reason their solution contains the proposed need for the involvement of the entire community. I find this approach overzealous and impractical. A far more feasible approach, appropriate for the current American society, involves the use of a family- or individual-oriented approach.
There are several techniques one can use to promote greater media literacy within him- or herself, or his or her family. Several methods include decoding exercises.
"[In decoding programs, viewers] are critically analyzing the meanings enshrined in images and narrative with the intent of assessing how such meanings are culturally constructed. To do this, learners must realize that alternative interpretative frameworks exist and that using a different framework can cause the same images and narratives to convey a very different meaning" [Brookfield, p162].Thus, decoding is the exact opposite of television's use of encoding, which is "the process of producing images and narratives that deliberately emphasis certain meanings" [Brookfield, p162]. One approach to decoding is analyzing the role of television presenters such as news anchors, interviewers, etc., in order to "assess how they function as mediators of information and as framers of debate and discussion" [Brookfield, p163]. In the case of the interview, as pointed out by Hood in Brookfield's article, the man or woman being interviewed may attempt to directly address the audience through the camera. At this point, the director may cut away from that person sending the implied message that "the interviewer, as mediator, is in command of the encounter, and that he or she has the authority to veto expressions of opinions that are considered too upsetting, outrageous, or radical for viewers to hear" [Brookfield, p163]. Media literate individuals are able to identify and decode this encoding when it happens.
Another decoding exercise has viewers inspect the filming of interviews with people involved in a conflict and the settings for such interviews [Brookfield, p164]. Brookfield uses an example of the Glasgow Group research of strikes to illustrate this point. [Glasgow Group in Brookfield, p163]. In news coverage of a strike (or any conflict), viewers may notice that interviews with managers often take place in pleasant offices and tend to have a non-threatening, serene atmosphere. At the same time, interviews with the stikers may have noisy environments in picket lines or factories. This will give the impression of the managers as being rational and strikers as antisocial troublemakers. In this type of encoding, the directors main purpose may be to make "good" TV -- TV that is interesting and highly rated. This impression puts the issue of the reason for the strike in the background. Media literate individuals would identify this strategy and, being less influenced, search for the content of the programming. In such content analyze [Glasgow Group in Brookfield, p167] they may also find and decode narratives aimed to persuade the viewers. The following is an example. Presented with the phrase "workers again rejected the pleas of management", media literate viewers would notice "a number of hidden and implicit assumptions: that workers are persistently unreasonable (the use of "again"); that workers are strident (the use of "reject"): and that management is quietly reasonable (the use of "pleas") in the face of the workers' mindless resistance" [Brookfield, p167].
As illustrated in my description of the Kennedy-Nixon debate and alluded to at in my mention of strike coverage, there is an enormous impact of visual stimuli over the narrative. An additional decoding technique urges viewers to examine narrative and images as separate components of the entire content [Brookfield, p164]. Brookfield maintains that "doing this will help learners realize how powerful an effect can be created by linking apparently neutral and objective reporting of events to highly provocative visual images" [Brookfield, p167]. There is also a point to be made in expressing the difficulty of acquiring the ability to separate the two forms. Mark Miller, of Johns Hopkins University, is quoted in Barlow's piece as applying the notion of 'doublethink' from 1984 to the power of the visual image. "[Doublethink] means with one part of your mind you can see that it's a crock, and you don't fall for it..., but with the other part of that same mind you adhere blindly to it" [Miller in Barlow, p167]. This technique of establishing media literacy should not be abandoned, though, since Miller's statement is not entirely true -- it is possible to unravel the power of many images given a certain skill level and the amount of practice of the media literate individual. The process is, in any case, able to provide valuable insight to any learner on how to interpret the complete programming content.
Autobiographical analysis is an approach based on the viewer's personal experiences and how these relate to his or her encounters with television [Brookfield, p167]. This technique will establish if there is an apparent dissonance between his or her real life experiences and the reality expressed on television. If a contradiction is evident, then there is grounds for the viewer to be wary of its messages and assume that the program may contain distortions of reality. An example of discord for many people is expressed when viewing "The Waltons" and "Married with Children". Both of these shows can be criticized by many for their unrealistic portrayal of family life.
Thus far the approaches have mainly been intended for adult and teenager media literacy education. Children are equally affected by television and need instruction in order to become media literate. The Center for Media and Values in Los Angeles proposes several family-oriented techniques for doing this [Mallowe, p8]. These are designed to put emphasis on parents to appropriately structure the family viewing hours. Taking time for the family to watch TV together is a method that should stimulate discussion on behavior, values, and ethics. The parents should not specifically lecture in this instances, although the kids should be able to hear them thinking out loud. Parents should "talk back to programs on television. "Point out sexism, racism, ageism, violence, or discrimination of any kind that's depicted on TV. [Parents] should also point out useful role models" [Mallowe, p8]. In addition, TV viewing should be expanded into other fields of life. Books and magazines can be found about subjects presented on television. The Center even suggests to take a trip to the zoo if the children enjoy television shows based on animals. Structured learning activities during viewing time can promote media literacy in children as well. For instance, an atlas can be used to teach kids where places mentioned on TV are. These approaches give children a certain amount of power over the influence that television has on shaping their worldviews. Their early age provides an opportune time to begin to instill in them these necessary techniques which will no doubt become an important factor in the way they interpret television as an adult.
Managing the thousands of media messages that come into our lives each day [Mallowe, p8] can be a difficult task. By encouraging a critical skepticism of television and its messages, media literacy can be the key in helping individuals become more efficient viewers . In essence, media literacy is the ability to decode television. A media literate individual has the ability to "take television programs apart in order to see how images were selected, how certain viewpoints were emphasized and others excluded" [Brookfield, p162]. It does not give people the ability to somehow search and identify the "true" answer or "best" solution for every topic. I doubt any exist. Media literacy does give people the ability to view a number of programs on a topic, determine which areas of each were slighted, and with this knowledge form as close as possible to an unbias opinion. The process of establishing a media literacy within America should be handled using a individual- or family-oriented approach. In consideting contemporary American society, this type of procedure is much more practical than school- or community-oriented techniques.