How many chances do you get to make a first impression? What does it take to refine and change that impression? Did you get to decide what your cannon of beauty looks like? How have you come to know and believe all the things you hold to be true? All these questions have answers that are rooted in experiences... some are your own and some are instilled in us by others. What are the risks in learning to think and ask critical questions about these experiences. I hesitated to start off so philosophical, but after learning and reading a few things like Epistemology, The Critique of Pure Reason, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and many others led me to the thought about what it really means to think critically about the motive of what others are creating. The Kellner and Share article offered some insight and guidelines for better understanding the constructs of media and the motives behind their construction. The article also serves as call to action to educators to not only develop and hone their own understandings or the types of media literacies, but also the need for teaching students how to think critically about all forms of media.
The video of the Tedx Talk given by Cameron Russell talks about the power of the social constructs. She shares her story of becoming a professional model as the lucky winner of the genetic lottery. She had to (in her mind) transform herself on stage in order to make her "talk" more credible because as long as she looked the part of a professional model people would be unable to listen to words and take her serious. She also (without knowing) also made very strong references to Dweck's "Mindset" when she was speaking about self-esteem and insecurity. The idea that -"what she was" - is a construct of others designed to solicit a certain predetermined response sounded like she had being tricked into soliciting others with the fake facade she had become. A sense that innocence had been stolen and replaced with a master seductress (scantly clad and exuding sexuality) all in the desire to sell an image or a product. If educators do not arm students with the tools to understand the power of media then we all risk the loss of "freedom of thought."
Neil Postman's Speech, serves as candid and straightforward reminder that students need tools, real tools, to navigate the complexities of communication. I truly believe the better an educator prepares students to learn how to learn and ultimately to learn how to think then the world is a much better place. The need to teach students these strategies is even greater in this new "information age." A good case in point is a "wiki" like wikipedia, which may contain factual information about an event or person, it may also contain unsupported or unverified information. This statement also applies to "time honored" resources like "Britannica," yet their social status offers them instant credibility. Postman in 1969 realized that there was great need for educators to teach students how to discern what the true message of what was being said is and what the potential risks were if they did not. I think in today's world Postman would be banging the drum for media literacy education even louder than before.
Google Doc Evidence
Citation:
Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2005). Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education. Toward Critical Media Literacy: Core Concepts, Debates, Organizations, and Policy, 26(3), 369-386.
Postman, N. (2007, July 22). Neil Postman – Bullshit and the Art of Crap-Detection. Retrieved August 23, 2014, from http://criticalsnips.wordpress.com/2007/07/22/neil-postman-bullshit-and-the-art-of-crap-detection/
Russell, C. (2013, January 16). Cameron Russell: Looks aren't everything. Believe me, I'm a model. Retrieved August 23, 2014, from http://youtu.be/KM4Xe6Dlp0Y
8 comments:
I enjoy reading your response to the Neil Postman speech. Your connection between his speech on decoding messages relating to teaching students how to learn and how to think is a great point. I hadn't thought along those lines, but the skill is definitely transferable across many different studies in life. This is my first introduction to critical media literacy and I can't help but wonder what voices we have speaking for critical media literacy in todays world.
In your response about the video, you mention the idea of "what she was" -- the construction to sell products. I got a different perspective from her message, one that she was well aware of how she- "what she was" was completely different from the construction of what those others had "made her." I feel she was comfortable in the distinction, at least at this point in her life. I believe I enjoyed her showing us who she really was, as opposed to what the design team constructed, as my favorite part of her speech.
Being able to present things like this to our students is a great tool for us to pass on to our students in an effort to begin dissecting media messages.
You have made great insight into the reading and video. Reading your responses was very enlightening and made me think even more critically myself about them. I think starting off philosophically was the best way to start out, because philosophy is the art of critical thinking. This might be a little off topic, but it has always been my firm belief that philosophy should be offered, if not required, in schools to help students start thinking on this next level.
Rafe, I think you pointed out the fact that Cameron felt she could not be taken seriously with the model outfit on more than I did. And it was definitely a good point to make. It is that image that we so secretly want to be but at the same time hate. We loath the fact that some people win the genetic lottery and we laugh at the people who don't. Think about how cruel kids can be when it comes to looks. How connected is it to what they see in the media? You tied it straight back into self-esteem just like I did. And I think that is a powerful point to make. How much of ourselves do we criticize because of what we see in the media? I know the new trend is for celebrities to fight against skin perfecting technology in photo shoots. I know Lorde recently went against the media for "fixing" her skin and all her imperfections in a photo.
Good job also pointing out who is in power in the media. The dominate, socialites are in great power in our media and finding their hidden messages and decoding them as such is important.
Your posting has truly resonated with me. (And you are an excellent writer, might I add.)
I enjoyed your philosophical questions at the beginning of your post. I have also recently began to delve into philosophy in my spare time.
Your quote, "I truly believe the better an educator prepares students to learn how to learn and ultimately to learn how to think then the world is a much better place" is a brilliant example of why you will make an excellent educator. If we can teach students to learn how to learn and critically think, then we are equipping them with the tools necessary to tackle the world's problems. In my personal opinion, this is sometimes more important than teaching content as this is something that can be transferred across disciplines.
This is also where I believe critical media literacy will come in-this will teach students how to analyze and just think about something.
Rafe, I absolutely agree that Postman's drum could be heard across the land today. He would probably shake a fist at ye olde Wikipedia & possibly shed a tear for the poor students who trust it as gospel. Researching your resources is all I feel I've done in my studies. It's definitely time to teach crap-detection to our students.
I'm really glad to know this groups values philosophy! I agree with you Rafe that part of Cameron's talk was to reveal how exploited she had been as a child. This realization has come in hindsight after receiving a fine education at Columbia University. I would like to add that Wikipedia is remarkably democratic, transparent and surprisingly "crap-free". It is an amazing community dedicated to "truth" and "neutrality" I'll work in an assignment later on that deals with the "modern wonder" we call Wikipedia.
Dr. Lindstrom I agree with you about Wikipedia and was just using it as a familiar "open source" the fact is that because it can so easily be updated the material it contains proves to as accurate as any other online encyclopedia (maybe more so). I think the main thought I was trying to convey was that there are always more details that warrant exploring. The idea that the media may offer an explanation doesn't mean it ends there because as the great Paul Harvey said,
"and now the rest of the story," which I always took to mean, the surface may be true enough, but try to find out what lies beneath the surface. This exploration and thirst for better understanding is the "what" I want students to learn not just some bit content. True meaning is often what is holding the surface up.
Rafe-
As always your writing connects with me as a reader. I agree with your statement regarding educators needing to arm students with the tools to understand the power of media or risk the "freedom of thought".
Post a Comment