R1

INTRODUCTION TO MASS MEDIA WEEK ONE – LECTURE POST (SUMMER EDITION)

Again, let me welcome you to the class! Week One’s Lecture Post will guide you through this week’s readings and videos while providing you with some additional course material. It’s a substiute for a class lecture. I realize for many of you, this may be your first online class. Feel free to contact me to get assistance, I get back to emails pretty quickly. This week’s Lecture Post is lengthy, so you may choose to print out this document instead of reading a lot of text on a computer screen. While we’ve got a decent amount of theory to cover, if you can get through this week, I assure you that the content will probably get more interesting to you. Soon, we’ll focus more on what you probably expected to talk about when you signed up for a mass media course: influential TV shows, recording artists, and films. We’ll begin looking at specific television shows next week, and we’ll discuss, for example, “I Love Lucy” and “The Twilight Zone.” Week Two is probably a much better look at what this course is like in the average week. This week is instead more of a foundational week where we’ll cover a lot of basic concepts that we’ll be using all term. When you have friends over to your house, while you aren’t excited to show off the foundation of the house, the foundation is obviously really important to support everything else. Think of this foundational week in the same way. Since the study of popular culture is the basis for this entire course, before we get to anything else, let me tell you a brief history of the academic study of popular culture. The academic study of popular culture is relatively new. It became a phenomenon, essentially, in the 1970s. Before universities began studying popular culture, there was a branch of study called “American Studies” but it was fairly elitist in nature. The popular viewpoint among academics at that time was that movies, television, and popular music were mindless entertainment with no educational or artistic value. In other words, the thought was that if something was massively popular, it must be bad art with no important message, and therefore, it’s not worthy of any serious academic consideration. So, Elvis Presley = mass popularity = bad art. The “American Studies viewpoint” was that, for example serious literature and classical music could be studied. So, it was acceptable to study the work of poet Walt Whitman, but not the work of animator Walt Disney. It was acceptable to study Bach and Beethoven, but not the Beatles or Bob Dylan. Through the 1950’s and 1960’s, American Studies was primarily descriptive in nature, not analytical. Mass culture was condemned but no effort was made to understand it. Then, the Popular Culture Association of America was founded in 1969. At an American Studies convention in Toledo, Ohio, a scholar named Ray Browne convinced 200 people to form the PCA as an alternative to the elitist practices of American Studies. By 1971, you could major in popular culture at Bowling Green State University, the first university to have such a program. In the 1970s, lots of academics began studying popular culture and its influence on audiences. We will look at some of them soon. Obviously, now the study of popular culture is quite popular among colleges and universities, even though it is still sometimes looked down on by members of other fields. However, since you are enrolled in “Introduction to Mass Media” you are now a part of this academic study of popular culture. The argument for the study of popular culture is based on a few simple questions.

1. Do most people watch movies, listen to music, and/or watch television? If so, these things are at least a part of our culture, for better or for worse, and are worthy of consideration. There must be some need, no matter how small, that’s being fulfilled through these different media. Otherwise, people wouldn’t

choose to spend their time that way. Also, if something is very popular in a culture, it has at least the potential for a lot of widespread influence and a collectively shared experience.

2. Can people be persuaded and influenced by contemporary entertainment? If so, whether the creator intended to send a message or not, persuasion can often happen through these arts. And through distribution via mass media outlets, persuasion could be happening to many, many people, on a wide scale.

3. Does art (including art distributed through mass media) reveal anything about a nation’s culture? If so, we can learn something about our own values, beliefs, dreams, priorities, struggles, shortcomings, and goals through the study of popular culture. Since the beginning of time each culture has had its own art; it’s just that, for the past hundred years or so, much of ours is distributed through the mass media.

With that being said, READ Chapter 1 of Wilson and Wilson’s “Mass Media, Mass Culture” before returning to this lecture post. It will provide some of the terminology and basic concepts that we’ll be using this entire semester. Note that the file is a PDF file and you’ll need Adobe Acrobat Reader to open it. Also, please note that the concepts mentioned in it will DEFINITELY appear both on your mid-term and final exam. (Hint, hint.) Pay special attention to the terms Communication, Popular Culture, Elite Culture, Mass Culture, and Mass Communication. Also, make sure have a good understanding of the “EPS Cycle.” ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---------- ----- ----- ----- Finished? Okay. There’s no need for me to regurgitate and repeat the information you just read, but let me provide a little additional information for you. Wilson and Wilson’s definitions are a little broad, but I think they are still effective. For example, they define culture as “EVERYTHING that occurs in a society - ALL the customs and practices handed down from generation to generation.” That clearly covers a lot. It includes, but is not limited to, our knowledge, experiences, values, beliefs, and opinions. But think about our many sources of culture… our family, school, friends, and church. And, given the name of the course, another obvious source of culture is the mass media. As we focus on the mass media this term, let me acknowledge that there are a lot of things that shape our culture, and often despite the common tendency to point the finger at the media, there are thankfully, often more influential aspects of our culture. In the reading, Wilson and Wilson actually provide several definitions of communication, but I prefer the one on page seven. “The process by which individuals share information, ideas and attitudes.” I like this definition for several reasons. One, it’s much easier to understand and remember than the one that appears on page 12. Secondly, it states that communication is a process. We don’t think much about the process of communicating, because we do it all the time. However, to send you this lecture post for example right now, my communication is going through a process. I choose the words to write down to best communicate my message and I send that through a channel, in this case iLearn, to you with the hopes that you’ll fully understand my intended message. Then, if you want to, say, ask me a question about something I said, the communication process begins again as you send me feedback. Finally, the definition states that communication is a sharing of information and ideas. Communication is not one-way and because it’s a sharing process, a lot of meaningful content can be shared and passed along. Like the reading says traditionally culture was divided into two parts: “elite culture” and “folk culture.” Elite culture in, medieval times, was the culture of the royalty. Kings could enjoy fine literature and had access to

the finest artists and musicians. This elite culture, sometimes called high culture, is commonly considered to include the fine arts. In contrast, the average person, or the peasant, couldn’t access those things; he/she probably couldn’t even read. But did the peasants have their own culture and their own entertainment? Of course. They enjoyed oral storytelling, dancing, and drinking games. This folk culture was the popular culture of the day because it was enjoyed by the majority. Today, we use the word popular culture instead of folk culture to describe the “culture of everyone in a society.” The interesting thing about this divide is that everyone participated in popular culture, but only the powerful, educated, aristocratic and wealthy would enjoy the elite culture. Think of it this way… Any king could leave their castle and enjoy the peasant’s culture, but the peasants couldn’t scale the castle wall. Not everyone can understand, access, or afford the elite culture. Does this divide exist today? I would say yes. Many would probably still think of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” or the opera as elite culture because those things are considered to be fine art and are most often enjoyed by either the well educated or wealthy. For example, there’s a certain level of understanding you have to have to fully understand and appreciate the opera, Emily Dickenson, Shakespeare, or ballet. Sure, in 2014, thanks to the Internet especially, we have easier access to elite culture, but it’s not the same as popular culture. In contrast, popular culture would include things that are popular in our culture, yet things that are often taken for granted as throwaway entertainment like “The Simpsons,” “Star Wars.” Again, “the culture of everyone in a society.” However, I would argue, like so many others before me that these examples contain powerful messages and influence a lot of people. Yet to say that either of them are a part of elite culture would be ridiculous. Here’s a fun example of the influence of popular culture. “D’oh!” is a word Homer has been saying on “The Simpsons” since 1989. It was a funny expression created for the show for Homer to use when he got frustrated. Obviously, fans of the show started saying it. It caught on over the years. People that didn’t watch the show started saying it. It was added to the prestigious “New Oxford Dictionary of English” in 1998, cementing its place in culture as a new, commonly used word. Some would argue that within popular culture, there is also what’s called low culture. Low culture in entertainment, while often very popular with audiences, is most often criticized for having no artistic or educational value. Think “Jerry Springer” or “The Hills.” Today in America, “Popular Culture” and “Mass Culture” are nearly synonymous terms. We use them interchangeably. That’s because so much of our popular culture is shared through the media. Remember that mass culture is defined as “things in our popular culture that are mass produced and/or shared through the mass media.” Now, before I give you some additional examples of the EPS cycle, which was discussed in the reading, take a look at the “Culture as a Skyscraper” reading from “Media and Culture.” It’s a PDF file. If you need more information about the concepts of elite culture, popular culture, or low culture, you can also read the few pages of their explanations there. However, everyone should look at Page 3, which presents these categories of culture as a spectrum. It presents an example of culture not as a social process but as a set of products sorted into high, low, or middle positions on a cultural skyscraper. It should provide clear, modern examples of high culture, popular culture, and (within popular culture) low culture. ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---------- ----- ----- ----- Got it? Good. Did you see examples that you disagreed with? People usually argue with some of them, which is okay. Hopefully you see as the skyscraper climbs how the content and its primary audience changes. Let me tell you a little bit about the EPS Cycle.

It was proposed by John Merrill and Ralph Lowenstein in 1971. It was created to describe how different types of mass media and technologies get adopted. They argued there were three stages. The elite stage, the popular stage and the specialized stage. Take a moment and think about your favorite television channel, the channel you watch most. We’ll come back to that in just a moment. ELITE STAGE The stage of the early adopters. Typically, these people are educated and wealthy. POPULAR STAGE This is the stage that has participation by a majority of citizens. Often barriers, especially the barrier of cost, are removed which allow more people access. SPECIALIZED STAGE At this stage media is divided into specialized segments and interests. Let’s consider the EPS Cycle and Television. The first time television was displayed in public in a major way was the 1939 World’s Fair. In fact, you could buy a television there. However, a television cost in today’s money (adjusted for inflation) about $2,000 for the cheapest model. The television was black and white and the screen was about the size of a CD case. Imagine paying $2,000 for a small television today. And could you afford to buy one? Probably not. But a few people in the 1940s bought a television, despite a lack of regular quality programming. Yet, it was accepted by the elite. TV moved from Elite to Popular in the 1950s and 1960s. Why? Cost went down. Families could save up to buy one television. It was still expensive but growing in popularity. By 1955, almost everyone knew someone that owned a television and the majority of people wanted one despite the high price tag. If you’ve seen “Back to the Future” (which you should, it’s great) you may remember the scene set in 1955 when Marty McFly claims he has two television sets and his grandmother claims “He’s just joking. No one has two television sets!” By 1952, there were about 15 million sets in use in America, 10 million of which tuned in to “I Love Lucy” each week. TV is now in the Specialized stage, and has been for some time. In the 1950s, you were lucky to have about four or five channels. The channels were ABC, CBS, NBC, and maybe an independent local channel or two. These channels featured sports, news, comedy, drama, and lots of other types of programming. They tried to have a little something for everyone. However, think back to what you said when I asked about your favorite TV channel. Chances are it was not ABC, CBS, NBC, or FOX. It was probably a specialized channel like Food Network, ESPN, E!, or Comedy Central. We live in an age of specialized networks. If you only want to watch sports, we have several channels for that. If you only want golf coverage, there’s a channel for that. If you only want to watch sci-fi programs, there’s a channel for that. The media is now divided into specialized groups for more niche audiences. Consider the iPod and the EPS Cycle. If you bought an iPod in 2001, you paid over $400 for it. It was then in the elite stage, only purchased by the early adopters, primarily the wealthy, who had enough money to buy this new-fangled thing called an MP3 player. Now, I would argue that MP3 players are in the popular stage, because a growing majority of the people have them or at least can afford them. For example, you can get an iPod Shuffle now for less than 50 bucks! The barriers of price and accessibility are removed and the elite stage is gone. Finally, consider the DVD player as an example. I remember getting my first DVD player for Christmas when I was in college, back in 2001. It was, by then, I would say in the early days of the popular stage. However,

when they were first introduced in the mid-90s, you had to pay hundreds of dollars for a DVD player. Some people paid over $500 for one then. They were in the elite stage, until about 2000, when “Titanic” became the first DVD to sell a million copies, proving that people began to start adopting the DVD player instead of the VCR. What would you say about the Blu-Ray player or the iPad? What about the smartphone? What stage of the EPS Cycle are they in? It’s worth thinking about. ----------------------------- Next, let’s examine some early developments in the history of mass media. We must begin with a poor German printer who went on to be named by a panel of scholars as the most influential person of the past millennium. I’m talking about Johannes Gutenberg and his invention, the printing press. The printing press allowed efficient copying of words for the first time in history. Entire books have been writing about the invention’s importance, but I’ll be brief. For Western Culture, mass communication begins around 1455 when Gutenberg invents movable type and makes printing possible. The Internet, TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, books… they all start with Gutenberg. He completely changed our world by starting mass communication. Prior to Gutenberg’s printing press, if you wanted to pass along facts, ideas, opinions, or stories… you had two choices. You could tell someone, in hopes they would pass it along by word of mouth. If you’ve played the “telephone game” as a kid, you know this can be a difficult task. Therefore, only really important histories, like those found now in the Bible were important enough to be passed on with accuracy. Or you could write it down by hand. And then write it down by hand again, and give that copy to someone. And then write it down by hand again, and give that copy to someone. Then write it down by hand again, and give that copy to someone… It was a long process, so only the most important books and ideas got passed down from generation to generation. Only the most important writings were hand-written and survived. The Bible, being God’s Word, was one of the only books that was copied again and again and again by hand. I suggest you take a moment to appreciate how long this would take. If you were to write out Genesis 1:1… “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” How long would it take you to write it out by hand in your best legible handwriting? Probably about 30 seconds or so. But, there are over 31,000 verses in the Bible. So, if you were a monk living in 1400 A.D., prior to the printing press, copying the entire Bible by hand at rate of two verses per minute in your best handwriting, it would take you over 250 hours of writing (with no breaks) to copy one Bible. Then, to make another copy, you would start again. We certainly take for granted that we can Xerox almost anything instantly on our home printer with little to no effort. However, with Gutenberg, any idea, fact, or story could be easily copied and distributed, for better or for worse. --------------------------------------- To give you a break from reading what I’m writing here, READ “The Beginnings of Mass Communication” by Wilson and Wilson. It will tell you more about Gutenberg, the printing press, and the first mass movement made possible by the printing press, the Protestant Reformation. Then, WATCH the A&E Spotlight on Gutenberg. It features several noted individuals discussing the impact Gutenberg has had on society. The video runs about eight minutes. ----------------------------------------------

Interesting, isn’t it? At least I think it is. One thing that I would like to echo about the documentary is the fact that through the printing press, people suddenly had access to reading material. And when people had access to reading material for the first time, they wanted to learn how to read for the first time. It makes sense. If I never owned a hand-copied book, because I wasn’t rich enough to buy one, reading wouldn’t be important. Suddenly, if I could have my own copy of a book, I would want to read it. So, mass communication lead to literacy, which in turn, encouraged people to think differently about the world around them. Power was truly given to the people. It no longer just belonged to the elite. For example, it led Martin Luther to challenge the teaching of the Catholic Church and meanwhile, encourage people to read and interpret the Bible for themselves. ------- --------- Let me share with you a few more key dates in media history. 1833 - New York Sun becomes the first US metropolitan newspaper. It was sold for a penny; the first newspaper aimed at general public instead of the wealthy and elite. It was affordable to the average working man, and it even criticized the powerful and elite. 1895 – Lumiere Brothers debut Cinematographe in Paris. This device allowed moving pictures to be projected on a screen for the first time. Suddenly, a room of people could share a movie at the same time. The technology actually hasn’t changed all that much at your local movie theatre today in 2013. Prior to the Cinematographe, moving pictures were viewed one-person-at-a-time through an eyeglass of shorts, attached to a big device called the Kinetoscope.

ßCinematographe

ß Kinetoscope In 1895, if you paid a nickel to go see some movies projected with a Cinematographe, you went to what was called a nickelodeon. [Yes, this is where the kid’s channel got its name from.] These films weren’t like our modern films today. They didn’t have sound. They weren’t in color. They certainly weren’t in 3D. In fact, these early Lumiere films were short movies, less than a minute long. Sure, you got to see a collection of them at the theater, but you weren’t going to see a two-hour feature. These are most odd to our contemporary eyes because they also didn’t try to tell a story. Instead, they were candid films of everyday life. No one was acting out a screenwriter’s plot. Instead someone would film people leaving the market and turn it into a 30 second film. Another film might simply show people climbing down a ladder or someone feeding ducks. What you have to keep in mind is that these audiences were fairly new to still photographs. Therefore, the sheer illusion of movement projected on a screen was exciting. That’s why they’re still called move-ies or with the correct spelling, movies. At the time, when approximately each second 24 still photos were played quickly in sequence to create a movie, it was very exciting stuff. To give you an idea of these shorts, I’ve posted a video file that collects a few of them. Keep in mind, that unless there was someone improvising on a piano in the movie theater to accompany what was on the screen, which was VERY rare at the time, these films were also seen without any sound. WATCH the Lumiere Shorts Video. ---- -------------- After watching them, someone usually says in class, “People paid to watch that?” And yes, they loved it. You have to realize that, in that era, still photography was a relatively new thing and a big deal. Moving pictures, or movies, were an even bigger, more exciting spectacle for folks in the early 1900s. I know you were probably waiting for something more to happen in each short, but no. They didn’t really tell any stories or use the narrative form. Thankfully, people began to realize that people had been telling stories and watching plays for hundreds of years. People would probably enjoy films that had a story with a beginning, middle and end, much more than they would these simple “slice of life” films.

The first American to create such a film was Edwin S. Porter. The movie, released in 1903 was “The Great Train Robbery.” “The Great Train Robbery” is the first American film to tell a complete story. It’s a western that featured a plot, good guys, bad guys, a chase scene, gunfights, dancing, death scenes, and even the first ever special effect in a film. At the time, this film was leaps and bounds better than the Lumiere shorts in terms of its entertainment value. In fact, when comparing the two, it’s still leaps and bounds better today. Note that this film is also violent. Sure, it’s not graphic in any way, but there are those that claim we should go back to the good ol’ days, when American movies didn’t have any violence. Yet, this is the first American movie and it’s filled with gunfights, death, and punch-outs. This film didn’t have sound, that wouldn’t come along until 1927’s “The Jazz Singer,” but it did make use of some common filmmaking techniques. Porter, as the director, was smart enough to realize he could shoot his actors from different angles and in different locations and then edit them together to tell a more exciting story, a technique used in almost every movie since then. He also made use of the first special effect in American film history during a fight that takes place on top of a train, and he provides us with a close-up shot at the end of the film, literally. So now, WATCH Edwin S. Porter’s “The Great Train Robbery.” It runs about 10 minutes in length. ----- ---- It’s worth noting how excited and into this film people got in the early 1900s when they watched in the movie theatre. Keep in mind this was new and realistic technology for that time. Also, this was still a time in our nation’s history when a lot of guys were still “packing heat,” with pistols at their sides. So, historians tell us that when the character draws his gun at the end and fires, people in theaters across America instinctively fired back! That’s funny! And sure, it ruined a few projection screens perhaps, but it speaks to how powerful this movie was to audiences. It’s been said by many a film author that every movie made since then has been trying to, in at least a small way, remake “The Great Train Robbery.”

Before we get to even more new material, let’s talk about what you probably don’t want to talk about… your first paper. Your goal for this first paper is to choose one individual that is involved in shaping our popular culture and then write an objective, five-page biography about that person. READ “Requirements for Paper #1.” Read it twice. For this paper, you can write about your favorite musician, actor, director, athlete, author, model, dancer, artist, journalist, etc. There are a few exceptions though. Your chosen person must be a real person; you cannot write a biography of a fictional character. So, you can write a history of George Lucas but not of Luke Skywalker. Also, I’ve had several experiences (along with Dr. Keith Semmel and Mr. John Varley and others who have taught this class) that have led me to decide that you cannot write your paper about Michael Jordan. He was an amazing athlete and a huge influence on our culture, but there are too many old versions of that paper floating around to okay him as a topic for your first paper. A few IMPORTANT things about page length: I’m pretty harsh, if you haven’t heard, when it comes to page length. This is a college course, which comes with some challenges. In the summer, you are required to write at least five full pages. That doesn’t mean you can write four and a half pages and argue that “there’s something on the fifth page so it counts as a page.” Make sure each page is filled, including that last one. Also, though it’s never been a problem in the past, make sure that you don’t go over eight full pages. Also, you’ll have to have BOTH a works cited page and a title page. These two pages do NOT count toward the five pages minimum. Make sure that you’re using one-inch margins, double-line-spacing and Times New Roman 12 point font. I know all of the tricks to make a paper seem longer, because I used to try all those tricks. Also, avoid using long block quotes to fill space. Try to limit any quotes you use to one or two sentences each. If I determine that your paper has an excessive number of errors in formatting, grammar, and/or spelling, I will return your paper to you ungraded. Similarly, if your paper does not approximately meet the minimum page requirements it will be returned to you ungraded. If so, your paper will be dropped a full letter grade. You will have 24 hours to correct these errors and turn the paper in. If the revised version still contains a significant number of errors, this process will begin again. Please don’t make me drop your paper a letter grade and then ask for a rewrite from you. Do it right the first time. And again, I know five pages may sound like a lot. Some of you may have never completed a paper that long. Don’t worry, you can do it! Just make sure to start early and give yourself plenty of time. If you need help and live on campus or within driving distance I recommend going to the ARC. They can help get you started and answer any questions. Make sure that your paper is objective. In other words, I DON’T want you to discuss your own opinions about the chosen person. For example, “Johnny Depp is an amazing actor that I’ve loved for years” or “I saw John Mayer play live once and I was wowed,” aren’t things that belong in your objective paper. Instead, present a fact-based biography of their life and career. Usually, people just organize the paper chronologically. Because this is an objective biography, make sure that you cite at least three sources in your paper. These can all be online sources, but make sure that the site in credible. You CANNOT use Wikipedia as a source. I will be checking your papers against Wikipedia entries, so be warned. Also, unheard of sites with no credibility like blogs probably don’t have any authoritative information in the same way that an actor’s official website might, so choose your sources carefully. List these sources in your works cited page in either MLA or APA style. If you’re not familiar with those, don’t panic. I’m more interested in knowing where the info came from than I am in your citation style being 100% correct. Using http://citationmachine.net/ might help you. If you’re citing a website, in the works cited page, please include more than the URL; more than www.websitename.com. Tell me the author, if there is one, the name of the website, the copyright date if you can find it, and the date you visited the site to gather the information.

Also, you must cite the sources within the text of your paper. It’s as simple as saying “According to Allmovies.com author Forrest Siegel…” or you can put the in-text citation in parentheses at the end of a sentence like (Siegel, 2009). If you have questions about in-text citations, just let me know. Finally, please don’t cheat. Every semester I’ve taught this course, I’ve caught someone plagiarizing one of the three papers and the penalty for cheating is failing the entire course. It’s not worth the consequences; please don’t try it. ****** For now, start thinking about the following assignment. I must pre-approve your paper topic.

Email me (at [email protected] ) with the name of the individual you plan to write your biography paper about by 11:55 p.m. on Sunday. Keep in mind that your chosen individual must be involved in shaping our popular culture.

----------------------- We pick it up this week by getting into some basic media theory that will be the framework that we’ll use all semester to shape our understanding of the study of popular culture. We turn next to talk about a couple of guys named Charles Redding and Edward Steele. In the 1970’s, the study of popular culture took off, and during that time the pop culture scholars, Redding and Steele, identified a set of archetypical American values. They published their findings in Western Speech in 1977, claiming that there were eighteen primary strategies used in American persuasion. In other words, they found that in our culture there were eighteen common themes and values that showed up again and again in American popular culture. This list included things like “Rejection of Authority,” “The Value of Family,” “Patriotism,” and “Effort and Optimism.” Next, take a look at this list by reading Redding and Steele’s Values. Print a copy out for your records, because this list will be VERY important for passing your second and third paper. In fact, in part of your second paper, for example, you’ll choose a television episode and identify which of these 18 values appear in this episode. My hope is that you’ll notice that even though this list was created decades ago, these values are used again and again today. ----- ---- Now, let’s talk more about those Redding and Steele values… I will often call these Redding and Steele’s rhetorical strategies. Why do we call them rhetorical strategies? The term “rhetoric” refers to meaningful, often-persuasive communication and I call them strategies because these values are effective persuasive ideas that entertainment creators can strategically use in their content. This list of Redding and Steele’s strategies will be important in your second and third papers. You’ll be asked to choose a TV show, for example in your second paper, and then you’ll have spend the majority of that paper identifying and analyzing which of Redding and Steele’s 18 strategies can be found in the episode you selected. You’ll also have the opportunity to create some of your own values and strategies, but that’ll be a discussion for a later week.

In the meantime, let me BRIEFLY reword a few of their strategies and give you an example of each one from our popular culture. Also, keep in mind that the original Redding and Steele definitions are much better than my own, but sometimes rephrasing something helps in understanding it, which is why I had you work on a related assignment. However, you may want to revisit the Redding and Steele reading as I revisit this content. Puritan and Pioneer Morality: Americans, by and large, desire Christian values and morality. The ideal American chooses to do the right thing. This is what Scripture calls “being above reproach.” We see this a lot in older television shows, especially from the 1950s and early 1960s. Many people (particularly older people) will tell you that their favorite show is “The Andy Griffith Show.” If you ask them why, the answer is usually because the show has “good, old fashioned values.” That’s puritan and pioneer morality. Value of the Individual: Every person matters. Each person is unique and important. One great example of this is the movie “Forrest Gump.” The character of Forrest could easily be looked down on by society, but in his life he does a lot of good and accomplishes many amazing things, with the support of his friends and family. Achievement and Success: If you have a good job and wealth, you are successful. Look no further than “The Apprentice” which features people battling it out, so to speak, to become the apprentice of billionaire Donald Trump. Change and Progress: Change is important; things are getting better all the time. Perhaps Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A Changin’” says it all. Ethical Equality: Regardless of wealth, race, gender, etc., we are all equal. A great example of this is one of my favorite shows growing up, “The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.” You know the theme song. Where did Will grow up? “West Philadelphia, born and raised” – right? At the beginning of the show, if you’ve seen the first season, Will is made fun of because he doesn’t fit in with his rich family because of his background and hometown. Yet, through the course of the show, Will is treated more and more as a total equal in respect to his very wealthy uncle, aunt, and cousins that live in Bel Air. Equality of Opportunity: Even though we’re not all “dealt the same hand” in life, we all have the opportunity for things to get better. Regardless of how difficult things may be, you can still pursue the American dream. Again, let’s think about theme songs. Remember “The Jeffersons” theme song? The Jefferson’s are… movin’ on UP. That’s the idea behind this strategy… that through hard work you can have a better life. I think this also explains the popularity of competition-based reality shows like “American Idol” or “Survivor,” where a “nobody from nowhere” can become rich and famous if they do well on the TV show. Effort and Optimism: If you work hard enough, it will pay off; you will succeed. No pain, no gain. We see this in ANY “Rocky” movie as he trains for any upcoming fight. We see this in lots of sports movies actually, whether that be “Rudy,” “the Karate Kid,” or “Remember the Titans.” As I mentioned in one of my examples for an assignment, we also see this through the hard work of Elle Wood’s character in “Legally Blonde,” so this is not a sports-only value. Efficiency, Practicality and Pragmatism: Americans believe in getting things done quickly. Often we need to act fact, do our best, and ask questions later. We see this in “24” when Jack Bauer has to make a lot of difficult decisions quickly, fighting bad guys and getting important information in order to save the president, or the nation, in less than 24 hours. Some would also argue that MacGyver is the ultimate example of this strategy because of his ability to solve any problem, no matter how crazy, with the items he has in his pocket. Who else can instantly make a bomb with a piece of chewing gum, a can of soda, and a paperclip? Rejection of Authority: Americans have a tendency to rebel against restraints and rules. We see this all the time in our culture in teen movies, in rap music, in punk music, in folky protest music. Any time someone draws a

line, we have a tendency to cross it. We’ll discuss a film about a rebellious teenager called “Rebel Without a Cause” where James Dean’s character breaks the law, argues with his parents, and gets into all kind of trouble. Science and Secular Rationality: Science and technology can improve our life. This value was seen recently in “Avatar” where a handicapped soldier through science and technology, was able to experience life in a new body on a new world. Sociality: If you get along with everyone, things will go well. Again, I see “The Andy Griffith Show” as having this value because everyone in the town of Mayberry looks out for each other. Material Comfort: More = better. If you have more things, you’ll be happier. We see this in really EVERY American television commercial. Commercials essentially say “If you buy this product, your life will be better.” Also, if you’ve ever seen “Cribs” on MTV or more recently on CMT, you’ve seen this. The strategy is what makes “Cribs” so popular… the idea that “If I just had a swimming pool shaped like my face or if the walls of my house were literally painted in gold… then I would be happy.” Quantification: Bigger is better. More, more, more. This is very much similar to Material Comfort. If you’ve ever seen “Deal or No Deal” you understand this strategy. We have an insatiable appetite for more. Often like on “Deal or No Deal” or “Let’s Make a Deal,” people risk what they have just because they COULD get MORE. External Conformity: Americans desire to fit in with a group. No one wants to not fit in. We see this a lot any time there are teenagers on screen, whether that be in “The Breakfast Club” or “Saved by the Bell.” Humor: Humor is really useful to help put everyone on the same level, included our superiors, and it helps us tolerate difficult situations. Please note that the value of humor isn’t just being funny to get a laugh, it’s being funny to deal with problems. Not everything that is funny is using Redding and Steele’s value of humor. We see this on shows like “M*A*S*H” and more recently “Scrubs,” where when surrounded by illness and death, the characters use humor to deal with the situation. Generosity and Considerateness: Americans like to give back and help those in need. We see this with giving campaigns like American Idol’s “Idol Gives Back” which encourages viewers to donate money that could be used to help those in need nationwide and around the world. Later this term, we’ll talk about the “We Are the World” singles that did the same thing. Patriotism: People are, typically, proud to be Americans. The fact that Lee Greenwood is still touring our country singing, “God Bless the USA” which contains the line “I’m proud to be an American…” proves this strategy is still popular today. The Value of the Family: The family is the center of our values and in a way, the center of our life. It’s very important. We see this in family-centered, positive shows like “The Cosby Show” but also on more controversial shows centered around families like “The Simpsons.” If you’re familiar with Steve Urkel, and I hope you are, you’ve seen the show “Family Matters.” That show was a part of a trend in the 1990s to bring the family back as the center of television comedies. Think about it, if you never have, the show was called family matters. In other words, even from the title, we get that family is important. -------------------------------------------- Now that we’ve talked about those 18 strategies again, let’s turn to a guy named Walter Fisher. Walter Fisher is a famous communication scholar, if there is such a thing, who proposed that in all persuasion there are just four master strategies. He promoted these ideas in an article called “A Motive View of Communication” that appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Speech in 1970.

Let be briefly explain each one. Affirmation happens when something gives birth to a new image or idea. This happens when a new product is launched or a new idea is proposed in popular culture. On the show “Mary Tyler Moore” Americans, for the first time, saw a positive look at a single, independent career woman. Because it was a new value/idea being promoted in our popular culture, it is affirmation. Now, let’s look at an advertising example. WATCH “Affirmation: “1984 Apple Macintosh’s Commercial.” This was the commercial that launched Apple to mainstream America and introduced the idea of your home computer. Now, what the commercial is trying to say is up for debate, but this was certainly a new image for a new product that people hadn’t heard of. The commercial is an example of affirmation because the commercial gave birth to the idea of a Mac being an exciting product that challenged the norm. So, when something is shared for the first time in popular culture, that’s affirmation. You’ve got that by now. But what if a value like “ethical equality” shows up again in another movie or song, years or even days after it first appeared in our culture? Is it affirmation again? No. Affirmation can only really happen once with each idea. It’s reaffirmation. Reaffirmation revitalizes and renews an image. It updates an existing idea or image. For example, “Star Wars” was innovative in 1977 because of the special effects, but the story was really reaffirmation. “Star Wars” is reaffirmation because it’s basically a western movie, set in outer space, with blasters and spaceships taking the place of pistols and horses.

ß Han Solo If you look at a picture of Han Solo, he even looks like he’s a cowboy more than he looks like he could be flying a spaceship. That’s reaffirmation, a new spin on an old idea. Reaffirmation also happens a lot because sequels and remakes are easily reaffirmation. This is the master strategy used by most of our popular culture today, both in terms of plot choices and themes. Let’s look at another advertising example, this time with Pepsi. Pepsi in the 1980s realized they needed to put a new spin on their existing image. Pepsi had been around for decades, but they wanted to revitalize their image. So, they teamed with Michael Jackson, at the height of his popularity from the album Thriller, to create a campaign to paint Pepsi as “the choice of a new generation.” This was reaffirmation because they were using the strategy of reaffirmation to revitalize their image by marketing Pepsi as hip, exciting, and for the younger crowd. WATCH “Michael Jackson Pepsi Generation.” Another strategy of Fisher’s is subversion. Subversion undermines or attacks another’s image. This is when communication is used to destroy, make fun of, or attack another person, image, or idea. We see this all the time in politics with the political mudslinging and negative ad campaigns. Let’s take a look at subversion at its finest, which also means subversion at its worst. WATCH “Harold Ford Jr. Not Right for Tennessee Ad.” Wow. That’s subversion. You may need to watch that again to see how much subversion goes on. Those “interviews” in the ad were basically a small series of attacks used to hopefully get you to not vote for a certain candidate. Notice we learn NOTHING about Bob Corker from that ad, but we do get to hear lots of negative things about his opponent Harold Ford Jr. That is subversion, when the communication isn’t promoting an idea

or image, it’s just destroying someone else’s. “Don’t vote for the other guy; he’s an idiot. Needless to say, people were upset at the content which was certainly political mudslinging. Another example… If a paper towel ad tells you nothing about their product, but points out the problems with their competitor Bounty, that’s subversion too. Finally, the fourth and final strategy Fisher mentioned was Purification. Purification happens in communication when someone attempts to heal an image. I’ll go ahead and tell you that purification rarely happens in television shows, movies, or music. But it does happen in advertising… especially when there’s an accident or when a product needs recalled. This happened in the 1980s with the “Tylenol scare.” In September of 1982, a "Tylenol scare" began when seven individuals died in Chicago, after ingesting Extra Strength Tylenol that had been deliberately contaminated with cyanide. The Tylenol company didn’t make a manufacturing mistake; they didn’t accidentally include the cyanide, but someone had inserted it into pills after the product left Tylenol’s warehouses and entered stores. Now how many of you would go buy Tylenol after finding out that people were dying from taking a normal dose? Exactly. Within a week, the company pulled 31 million bottles of tablets back from retailers, making it one of the first major recalls in American history. The market share plummeted, because as you can guess, no one bought Tylenol. But did Tylenol stop production? Obviously not. The company ran a series of ads to purify their image. These new commercials promoted Tylenol’s new tamper-resistant packaging which included much-improved safety-sealed containers. The ads also featured doctors claiming that they still use Tylenol and still trust Tylenol more than any other brand. The ads worked and Tylenol once again became American’s pain reliever of choice because of the company’s purification efforts. BP is attempting to use the master strategy of purification right now in order to heal their damaged image after the oil spill in the Gulf. You make have seen their “We’ll make this right” campaign. Take a look at one of their efforts. WATCH “BP ‘Making it Right: Beaches’ Ad” So, that’s BP’s attempt at Purification. Is it having a major healing effect on the American public? I would say not yet, but it is at least a good example of purification. Okay, so now we’ve talked about Redding and Steele’s American values and Fisher’s master strategies. How would we connect the two?? Well, it’s actually kind of simple. Every time a value, like one of Redding and Steele’s, appears in popular culture, it’s affirmation, reaffirmation, subversion, or purification of that value. That’s why he called them overarching strategies. So, if the value of family shows up on television for the first time in an early 1950s show like “Father Knows Best,” the overall strategy is affirmation of the value of family. If the value of family shows up again on television in an updated way like the classic 1980s series, “The Cosby Show,” the overall strategy would be reaffirmation of the value of family. If a television show like “South Park” harshly makes fun of the value of family, the overall strategy would be subversion of the value of family. Hopefully, you get the idea. Now, READ and DOWNLOAD the “Master Strategies by Walter Fisher” which is just a handout that briefly recaps what I’ve already told you about. You’ll want to have it handy in the coming weeks. I’ve got one more theory to throw out to you, an important one, which comes to us from anther media scholar, named George Gerbner. Since the existence of mass media, people have been interested in and concerned about its impact. Could the media influence people? How much? Are our televisions brainwashing us? George Gerbner, and his associates at the University of Pennsylvania, advanced what was called cultivation theory. This theory states that media shapes how people view the world. This theory helps explain how a person’s perceptions of the world are shaped and sometimes distorted by media. Gerbner also believed

television in particular was influential in cultivating a certain viewpoint because he thought it was our most persuasive medium. Basically, he thought that logically, if you watch a lot of TV, you’ll be influenced by what you see. Let’s repeat one of Gerber’s survey experiments that he used to test cultivation theory. Write down your answers to the following questions. Don’t Google the answers, or you’ll be wasting your time.

- How many hours of television do you watch in the average week? - FILL in the BLANK: - Americans make up __________ percent of the world’s population. - What percentage of Americans, do you think, are involved in law enforcement? - What percentage of Americans, do you think, are victims of violent crime in an average year?

AFTER you’ve finished, go to the next page…

Ready for the correct answers? Americans make up about 5% of the world’s population. About 1% of Americans are involved in law enforcement. And less than 1% of Americans are victims of violent crime in an average year.

Were you close? If not, take a look at the number of hours of television you claim to watch each week. Gerbner would argue that the more hours of television you watch a week, the more likely your answers could be distorted from reality. He found again and again, that people who watched lots of television and didn’t get a lot of social interaction tended to have the answers to questions about the “real world” that were way off base and far from the correct answers. If you watch a lot of TV, he would label you a “heavy viewer.” Light TV viewers tended to get the percentages closer to the factual information. Why would that be? Because media can be persuasive. Think about each of those questions briefly. Why would heavy TV viewers get the population question very wrong? Because who do we mostly see on American television? Americans. So, TV might distort the fact that most people in the world are not American citizens. Similarly, heavy viewers are usually surprised that only 1% of Americans are involved in law enforcement. Gerbner would argue that this is because there are so many police dramas on television: different versions of “ “Bones,” “Law and Order,” “NCIS,” “Cops,” and newer, now cancelled shows like “The Good Guys,” and “Rookie Blue.” With so many cop shows, it’s no wonder heavy TV viewers think more people are involved in law enforcement. In contrast, teachers are estimated to make up about 2% of the population, but except for “Glee,” we don’t see a lot of teachers on television. Similarly, think about the number of violent crimes that happen on television. Some estimates say that over 70% of programs on TV between 8-11 p.m. contain acts of violence. It makes sense, if cultivation theory is true, that survey takers often incorrectly estimate that the real answer is more than 1% because the “reality” seen on TV paints a much different and much more violent picture. Gerbner suggested that heavy TV viewers, because of the worldview “cultivation” they are getting through TV shows, tend to think of the world as being much more violent, less trustworthy, and less safe. He called this tendency the mean world syndrome. Sure there are other factors that affected the outcomes like level of education and social interaction, but overall the amount of TV viewed will determine how correct or incorrect the average person’s answer is to those questions. Television, it seems, does sometimes cultivate a worldview for some people. Interesting isn’t it? Now READ “Stephen Littlejohn on Cultivation Theory.” The PDF file is from Littlejohn’s textbook on communication theory. It’s only a couple of pages and will supplement what I’ve told you about Gerbner’s cultivation theory, and it will give you a break from reading some of my writing. Finally, the last thing you need to do this week is to WATCH the “Seeds of the Sixties” video. The documentary aired on PBS in 1991 as a part of David Hoffman’s “Making Sense of the Sixties.” It runs about 40 minutes. This is the longest video that you’ll have to watch this entire term. It will provide the context for the TV shows we’ll begin focusing on next week. Chances are, you’re not familiar with what it was like to live in the suburbs of 1950s America. This video will discuss the Baby Boom, the gender roles, the expectations of teenagers and children, civil rights, the Cold War with USSR (and the fear that a nuclear holocaust could happen at any minute), the perceived benefits of the suburbs, and most importantly “The Rules.” You’ll be able to better understand and appreciate the older films, TV shows, and music we watch after this documentary. Also, let me state that this, in my opinion, is not the most unbiased look at the 1950s. Its goal is to provide a contrast from the 1950s and the 1960s, and they tend to interview a significant number of people from the “hippie generation.” One lady’s qualification underneath her name, funny enough, is “former hippie.” And so, it tends to sometimes paint things like Sunday School and patriotism in a negative light. But, as a whole it’s a great precursor to help you understand shows like “I Love Lucy,” “Gunsmoke” and “The

Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet,” which we will look at next week, among others. Make sure you know each of “the Rules” for your mid-term exam and for a future discussion question. Therefore, you’ll probably want to write them down. After you’ve watched the video, go back to the “Week Overview” to make sure you’ve completed everything for the week. As a reminder, pay special attention to the deadlines because late work isn’t going to be accepted. Next week, we’ve got some more theory to tackle, and then we’ll get to “the good stuff.” That includes the famous and very funny “I Love Lucy” clip of Lucy working at the candy factory, some groundbreaking innovations from “The Twilight Zone,” clips of “The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour,” which was kicked off the air because it was so controversial in the 1960s, and none other than Bill Cosby will show up for the first time in our class lectures. It’ll be worth your while. Be sure to complete all the readings, videos, activities, and assignments. Please post questions in the “Questions and Answers” discussion forum or you can email them to me at [email protected]. Let me know if there’s anything I can do to help! I really appreciate you and I hope you’re having a great week.

- Jeremiah