Top
Note: Supplemental materials are not guaranteed with Rental or Used book purchases.
Purchase Benefits
Free Shipping On Orders Over $35!
Get Rewarded for Ordering Your Textbooks! Enroll Now
Customer Reviews Read Reviews
Write a Review
What is included with this book?
Professor of journalism and sociology Todd Gitlinaddresses how hegemony works in entertainment television. How, heasks, do the formal and familiar devices of entertainment work torelay and reproduce ideology? His answer is that ideology is embeddedin format, genre, setting and character types, slant, and solution.Professors of communication Horace Newcomb and Paul M. Hirsch counterthat television serves as a site of negotiation for cultural issues,images, and ideas. Viewer selection from among institutional choicesis a negotiation process as viewers select from a wide set ofapproaches to issues and ideas.
W. James Potter, a professor of communication, examinesexisting research in the area of children and television violence.Such research is extensive and covers a variety of theoretical andmethodological areas. He examines the nature of the impact oftelevision on children and concludes that strong evidence exists forharmful effects. Jib Fowles, a professor of communication, finds theresearch on children and television violence less convincing. Despitethe number of studies, he believes that the overall conclusions areunwarranted. Fowles finds that the influence is small, lab results areartificial, and fieldwork is inconclusive. In short, he findstelevision violence research flawed and unable to prove a linkagebetween violent images and harm to children.
Marketing professors Mary C. Martin and James W. Gentryaddress the literature dealing with advertising images and theformation of body identity for preadolescent and adolescent females.They report a study to explore how social comparison theory influencesyoung women. Washington Monthly editor Michelle Cottle takesthe perspective that females are not the only ones influenced by mediaimage. She cites polls and magazine advertising that indicate thatmales are exposed to images of idealized body type as well, and sheargues that these images also have an impact on the malepsyche.
Professor and author Donald Bogle offers a comprehensiveanalysis of African Americans on network series. He traces their roleon prime time from the negative stereotypes of the 1950s to thecurrent more subtle stereotypes of the 1990s. Bogle tackles the showsof the 1990s, particularly the popular and controversialMartin. Professor and author John McWhorter counters thatstereotypes are diminishing in America. In his review of Bogle's book,McWhorter asserts that Bogle has donned an ideological straitjacket,which blinds him to the strides that African Americans have made inprime time. He concludes that the continued search for stereotypesprevents us from seeing the very real changes that have taken place inthe media.
President of NBC News Michael Gartner argues thatidentifying accusers in rape cases will destroy many of society'swrongly held impressions and stereotypes about the crime of rape.Katha Pollitt, journalist and social critic, argues that the decisionto reveal victims' identities without their consent cannot bejustified.
Doctor Joseph R. DiFranza and his colleagues report anational study that examines the possibility of children being temptedto smoke because of the tobacco industry's use of images that appealto and are remembered by children. Because of the profound healthrisks, DiFranza et al. call for restrictions on tobacco ads. AttorneyGeorge J. Annas agrees that the tobacco industry has marketed productsto children, but he maintains that efforts to restrict advertising areinappropriate, perhaps even illegal. He argues that some of therestrictions that have been placed on tobacco advertisements violatethe First Amendment.
John E. Calfee, a former U.S. Trade Commission economist,takes the position that advertising is very useful to people and thatthe information that advertising imparts helps consumers make betterdecisions. He maintains that the benefits of advertising far outweighthe negative criticisms. Author Russ Baker focuses on the way in whichadvertisers seek to control magazine content and, thus, go beyondpersuasion and information into the realm of influencing the contentof other media.
Yale Law School professor J. M. Balkin argues that withoutmedia, openness and accountability are impossible in contemporarydemocracies. However, he also states that television tends to convertpolitical coverage into entertainment. Current focus on the "horserace" aspects of campaigns and personal scandal is detrimental tomedia's central mission of communicating information, holdingofficials accountable, and uncovering secrets. University of Londonlegal theory professor Roger Cotterrell suggests that Balkin'sargument implicitly assumes that there is a political reality or"truth", which he argues is illusory. He contends that transparency inmedia coverage should emphasize breach of trust as the justificationfor publicizing personal conduct and treat scandal as the publicrevelation of these breaches of trust.
Larry J. Sabato, professor of government, Mark Stencel,politics editor for Washingtonpost.com, and S. Robert Lichter,president of the Center for Media and Public Affairs, assert that theline dividing public life and private life is more blurred than ever.The authors state that this is creating an age of scandal. Theyconclude that this focus on politics-by-scandal results in disaffectedvoters, discouraged political candidates, and news devoid of analysisof policy issues and substantive debate. William G. Mayer, assistantprofessor of political science, defends negative campaigning as anecessity in political decision making. He argues that society mustprovide the public with the substantive information needed to makeinformed decisions at the polls and insists that this must occurduring political campaigns. Therefore negative campaigns are needed sothat citizens can make intelligent choices concerning theirleaders.
Journalist Bernard Goldberg looks at the common phrase,"the media elite have a liberal bias", and gives examples of the waycoverage becomes slanted, depending upon the reporter's or anchor'sperception of the subject's political stance. Journalist James Wolcottexamines the impact of Fox television network's conservative approach,as evidenced by the news programs that feature right-wing pundits andpro-Republican views. He contends that Fox's news and public affairscoverage attained the highest ratings when appealing to the "angrywhite male".
Author Michael A. Banks explains that as more people turnto libraries for Internet access, libraries and communities have beenforced to come to grips with the conflict between freedom of speechand objectional material on the World Wide Web and in Usenetnewsgroups. He adds that software filters are tools that helplibrarians keep inappropriate materials out of the library. TheAmerican Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) concludes that mandatoryblocking software in libraries is both inappropriate andunconstitutional. Blocking censors valuable speech and giveslibrarians, educators, and parents a false sense of security whenproviding minors with Internet access, argues the ACLU.
Senators Paul Simon, Sam Brownback, and Joseph Liebermanspeak up on why cleaning up television is important to the nation.They detail the frustrating experiences that caused them to supportlegislation to clean up television. Marjorie Heins, founding directorof the American Civil Liberties Union's Arts Censorship Project, posesthree questions about television ratings: First, what is the ratingssystem meant to accomplish? Second, who will rate programming, andhow? Third, what are the likely political and artistic effects of theratings scheme? The V-chip and television ratings will do nothing, sheargues, to solve the problems of American youth andsociety.
Since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has undergone severalrevisions of its mission. Professor Robert W. McChesney and authorJohn Nichols discuss the "media reform movement" and outline thepurpose of several interest groups to deal with the FCC's changes. Inparticular, they critique the current role of the FCC withCommissioner Michael Powell with regard to whether or not the FCC canstill claim to operate in the "public interest". Author Brendan I.Koerner sees any changes under Powell's FCC leadership as more of thesame pandering to industry ties that characterized past commissions.While he feels that the direction of the FCC has been driven for sometime by the promise of digital technology, he speculates thattechnology is now leading regulation. In this case, the power of theFCC can be seen to encourage mergers that will ultimately result ingreater involvement and control by multimediacorporations.
Ben H. Bagdikian, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist,argues that the public must be aware of the control that internationalconglomerates have over the media. He contends that despite hopes thatnew technologies would control giant corporations, these corporationshave wrested control of the production and distribution of most of themedia content in the world. Conglomerate domination remains, concludesBagdikian. Professor Michael Curtin questions whether or notconcentration of media ownership leads to a conservative, homogenousflow of popular imagery. For example, television contexts around theworld are increasingly featuring female characters who resistconventional gender roles. This happens because media firms benefitfrom transnational circulation of multiple and alternativerepresentations of feminine desire.
Chuck Clark, government editor of the CharlotteObserver, defends the use of civic journalism by theObserver in covering election campaigns in North Carolina. Hedescribes the publication's goal: to provide the readers of thenewspaper with enough relevant information to make decisionsconcerning the elections. William E. Jackson, Jr., professor and U.S.House candidate in 1996, criticizes the use of civic journalism. Hecharges that coverage was narrowly focused on only a few issues,evolving issues were ignored, and important other races were notcovered. According to Jackson, political coverage and the people ofNorth Carolina suffered because of this experiment in civicjournalism.
Media critic Ken Auletta discusses how the events ofSeptember 11, 2001, refocused news journalism toward foreign news andan explanation of world events. He discusses the industry's decisionsabout news, and the motivation of journalists who want to cover issuesin greater depth. Michael Parks, director of the School of Journalismat the University of Southern California, warns that as the terroristevents recede in our memories, print and broadcast journalists willreturn to the same tactics they used prior to September 11th. Theseinclude less of an interest in foreign news, primarily because of thefinancial costs borne by the media industries.
Journalist Simson Garfinkel discusses how today'stechnology has the potential to destroy our privacy. He makes the casethat the government and individuals could take steps to protectthemselves against privacy abuse, particularly by returning to thegroundwork set by the government in the 1970s and by educating peopleon how to avoid privacy traps. Forbes reporter Adam L.Penenberg discusses his own experiences with an Internet detectiveagency, and he explains how easy it is for companies to getunauthorized access to personal information. He specifically describeshow much, and where, personal information is kept and the lack ofsafeguards in our current system.
Author Matt Goldberg discusses the way in which theestimated 150 million people around the world are changing theirsocial interaction habits and expectations, thanks to the ability touse instant messaging (IM). By focusing on this one particularapplication of technology, he offers specific behavioral changes andattitudes observed in some of the IM users and then speculates as towhat the eventual outcome will be as more people use IM for a broaderrange of purposes. Professor Peter F. Drucker, a noted expert ontechnological change, outlines a history of social organization inrelation to technology in order to put the "information revolution"into perspective. He compares the changes in our present and futurelives to the introduction of the Industrial Revolution and reminds usthat while social change often takes much longer than the termrevolution suggests, the real impact of social change isoften accompanied by more subtle shifts in ourinstitutions.
The New copy of this book will include any supplemental materials advertised. Please check the title of the book to determine if it should include any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
The Used, Rental and eBook copies of this book are not guaranteed to include any supplemental materials. Typically, only the book itself is included. This is true even if the title states it includes any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
Need Help? Copyright © 1999-2024