Speaking of engagement…
14 years ago
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Earth Day 2020
I just realized I had this channel on my TV. I went to their website and found this interesting video.
-Brandon Adams
Norms Affect What's Really Reported, And What's Not
Climate change is one of the biggest environmental issues we have today, but one of the reasons the chances that the US will take action are slim is because of journalistic norms, as explained by this journal article about government policy. The norms have caused the scientific perspective on the climate change problem to be misrepresented. Scientists generally speak in a cautious, uncertain language that experts in their field would understand perfectly, but the public may have more difficulty with. Therefore, their language needs to be translated into the clear, certain discourse that is employed by journalists.
According to an article about journalistic norms and their functions, several specific journalistic norms are believed to cause misrepresentation of environmental problems like climate change. The first is personalization, “the tendency to downplay the big social, economic, or political picture in favor of the human trials, tragedies, and triumphs that sit at the surface of events” (Bennett, 2002, p. 45). The media tend to personalize the problems and focus on the individual tribulations instead of the greater context and process. This leads to the belief that the problems are centered around individuals and structural analyses of institutions and government are ignored.
Another journalistic norm that influences news output about environmental problems is dramatization, where “news dramas emphasize crisis over continuity, the present over the past or future, conflicts” and “downplay complex policy information, the workings of government institutions, and the bases of power behind the central characters” (Bennett, 2002, p. 46). Dramatized news tends to ignore comprehensive analysis about a problem, and rather focuses on the plots on the surface. It trivializes the news content, as well as blocking out news that does not have an immediate conflict or controversy.
The third journalistic norm is novelty. Journalists face a need to report “new” news, and repeatedly reporting on the same environmental problem may dedramatize it. Therefore, persistent and growing environmental problems may be unreported because there is nothing new to report. Journalists prefer to publish stories that are fresh and new over stories that have already been reported on. Consequently, they reject about continuous, chronic problems in favor of those about day-to-day crises.
These journalistic norms –personalization, dramatization, and novelty- cause mass media coverage of environmental problems like climate change to be deficient. We should keep in mind these journalistic norms at play when reading about environmental problems on the news.
By: Alice Leung
According to an article about journalistic norms and their functions, several specific journalistic norms are believed to cause misrepresentation of environmental problems like climate change. The first is personalization, “the tendency to downplay the big social, economic, or political picture in favor of the human trials, tragedies, and triumphs that sit at the surface of events” (Bennett, 2002, p. 45). The media tend to personalize the problems and focus on the individual tribulations instead of the greater context and process. This leads to the belief that the problems are centered around individuals and structural analyses of institutions and government are ignored.
Another journalistic norm that influences news output about environmental problems is dramatization, where “news dramas emphasize crisis over continuity, the present over the past or future, conflicts” and “downplay complex policy information, the workings of government institutions, and the bases of power behind the central characters” (Bennett, 2002, p. 46). Dramatized news tends to ignore comprehensive analysis about a problem, and rather focuses on the plots on the surface. It trivializes the news content, as well as blocking out news that does not have an immediate conflict or controversy.
The third journalistic norm is novelty. Journalists face a need to report “new” news, and repeatedly reporting on the same environmental problem may dedramatize it. Therefore, persistent and growing environmental problems may be unreported because there is nothing new to report. Journalists prefer to publish stories that are fresh and new over stories that have already been reported on. Consequently, they reject about continuous, chronic problems in favor of those about day-to-day crises.
These journalistic norms –personalization, dramatization, and novelty- cause mass media coverage of environmental problems like climate change to be deficient. We should keep in mind these journalistic norms at play when reading about environmental problems on the news.
By: Alice Leung
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
America's Next Top Trend is... Going Green!
Reality shows have rapidly grown in television within the past decade. From MTV’s Real World to The Hills, reality shows have become a significant part of television. Having become a reality show addict myself, I decided to investigate how reality shows generally portray environmentalism. I examined three shows: Survivor, America’s Next Top Model, and Keeping Up With the Kardashians. These were selected based on three sub-genres of reality televsion: the early reality shows, celebrity glorification, and scripted reality.
Survivor made its television debut in 2000. Countless media outlets, including ABC News have labeled the show to be one of the “Top Ten Reality Shows of the Decade.” The show unites a group of strangers who are forced to reside in extreme natural habitats. By its second episode, they had reeled in over 18 million viewers.
In general, environmentalists are generally pleased with the show’s premise. Although the show doesn’t report blatant “go green” ideas, the fact that the entire series is based off different, natural, and inhabited locations can leave viewers with an unconscious appreciation for the Earth. EarthTalk Magazine mentions a few disturbances, such as the affects on the spikes of tourism among those regions. However, these affects are considered minimal.
When Supermodel Tyra Banks launched the reality show America’s Next Top Model, the show became an immediate sensation. The ninth season in particular emphasized a “go green” theme. Tyra starts the season off by revealing the models’ method of transportation: a 100% biodiesel bus decorated with plants and seats made out of recycled tires. Many photoshoots also had environmental themes. The contestants were asked to pose rock-climbing in couture outits, model as a flower, and fashion outfits made of recycled materials. In addition to photoshoots, the model house consisted of nature-themed decorations and the individual commentaries of models had nature backdrops.
I use the phrase “celebrity glorification” to express people’s fascination and admiration with celebrities. Having a powerful celebrity consistently promoting “go green” ideas can leave viewers to think of pro-environmentalism ideas as being “cool.” Although Tyra Banks thinks collectively of the public's interest when accentuating the importance of preserving nature, how credible of a source is she? Why should I, a college student, trust the words of a former Victoria’s Secret model?
The same question comes into play when watching Keeping Up With the Kardashians. A show that follows the daily lives of the Kardashian family, the show is an example of a “scripted reality.” How can a 20-minute show accurately reflect a week of events filmed? In the third season, one of the sisters, Khloe, is approached by PETA to participate in the “I’d rather go naked” campaigns. Despite Khloe’s personal body image insecurities, she decides to partake in the campaign after seeing videos of animals being treated cruelly.
Sure, I believe that we don’t let silly celebrities interfere with our thinking. But with millions and millions of viewership, there has got to be some unconscious consequences for being exposed to reality shows. I am generally a believer in preserving nature, but how much of an influence did reality shows come into play? These messages are on television, which is easily accessible. Can this lack of the messenger’s credibility be dangerous? This time, don’t let Survivor’s tribal council or Tyra dictate. You be the judge.
-Lydia Kye
Survivor made its television debut in 2000. Countless media outlets, including ABC News have labeled the show to be one of the “Top Ten Reality Shows of the Decade.” The show unites a group of strangers who are forced to reside in extreme natural habitats. By its second episode, they had reeled in over 18 million viewers. In general, environmentalists are generally pleased with the show’s premise. Although the show doesn’t report blatant “go green” ideas, the fact that the entire series is based off different, natural, and inhabited locations can leave viewers with an unconscious appreciation for the Earth. EarthTalk Magazine mentions a few disturbances, such as the affects on the spikes of tourism among those regions. However, these affects are considered minimal.
When Supermodel Tyra Banks launched the reality show America’s Next Top Model, the show became an immediate sensation. The ninth season in particular emphasized a “go green” theme. Tyra starts the season off by revealing the models’ method of transportation: a 100% biodiesel bus decorated with plants and seats made out of recycled tires. Many photoshoots also had environmental themes. The contestants were asked to pose rock-climbing in couture outits, model as a flower, and fashion outfits made of recycled materials. In addition to photoshoots, the model house consisted of nature-themed decorations and the individual commentaries of models had nature backdrops. I use the phrase “celebrity glorification” to express people’s fascination and admiration with celebrities. Having a powerful celebrity consistently promoting “go green” ideas can leave viewers to think of pro-environmentalism ideas as being “cool.” Although Tyra Banks thinks collectively of the public's interest when accentuating the importance of preserving nature, how credible of a source is she? Why should I, a college student, trust the words of a former Victoria’s Secret model?
The same question comes into play when watching Keeping Up With the Kardashians. A show that follows the daily lives of the Kardashian family, the show is an example of a “scripted reality.” How can a 20-minute show accurately reflect a week of events filmed? In the third season, one of the sisters, Khloe, is approached by PETA to participate in the “I’d rather go naked” campaigns. Despite Khloe’s personal body image insecurities, she decides to partake in the campaign after seeing videos of animals being treated cruelly. Sure, I believe that we don’t let silly celebrities interfere with our thinking. But with millions and millions of viewership, there has got to be some unconscious consequences for being exposed to reality shows. I am generally a believer in preserving nature, but how much of an influence did reality shows come into play? These messages are on television, which is easily accessible. Can this lack of the messenger’s credibility be dangerous? This time, don’t let Survivor’s tribal council or Tyra dictate. You be the judge.
-Lydia Kye
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
H&M's Organic Clothing Line for Spring 2010
I'm personally obsessed with fashion. I ventured into H&M the other day after my haircut at the University Village when I noticed the very first rack of clothes located right in front of the entrance: their Spring 2010 collection is comprised of pieces created from organic fabrics!
Here is the link to the clothing line. Enjoy!
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Arthur
Here's a goofy little post.
I grew up idolizing this show... and I just remembered how one episode in particular could somewhat relate to this class.
During a lecture, we discussed how elementary education had a notable effect on our current views regarding the environment. The latter bit of the scene is of Francine's dad teaching her class about the wonders of recycling.
Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
