But Wait: How DOES The Media Tell You What To Think?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 лип 2016
- Viewers like you help make PBS (Thank you 😃) . Support your local PBS Member Station here: to.pbs.org/donateidea
CONFORM CONSUME OBEY
Tweet us! bit.ly/pbsideachanneltwitter
Idea Channel Facebook! bit.ly/pbsideachannelfacebook
Talk about this episode on reddit! bit.ly/pbsideachannelreddit
Idea Channel IRC! bit.ly/pbsideachannelirc
Email us! pbsideachannel [at] gmail [dot] com
Does the media control our brains?.... Probably not, but you can’t argue that the media-news, entertainment, even educational media-is able to handily deliver messages which impact the way we see the world. We learn our personal values from our parents, friends, colleagues, and authority figures but we also gain tons of insight about ourselves and the world from the arts, sciences, politics, entertainment, journalism... much information about this stuff gets to us through the media. The question is: as the media is bringing information and insight to us, and that info-slash-insight is having some kind of impact on our thoughts and actions, how exactly does that happen? In today’s “But Wait!” episode, we explore 3 different possibilities. Let us know what you think in the comments below!
-- MERCH! --
bit.ly/1U8fS1B
T-Shirts Designed by:
artsparrow.com/
-- TWEET OF THE WEEK --
/ 753674411568345088
-- Links --
No Don't Die
www.nodontdie.com/mike-rugnetta/
The Hustle Economy
www.amazon.com/Hustle-Economy...
-- ASSET LINKS --
00:00:50
Fox News Wayne Simmons
www.epictimes.com/10/16/2015/f...
01:05
Art Trip: Tijuana
• Art Trip: Tijuana | Th...
01:06
Why Salt and pepper?
• Why Salt & Pepper Ende...
01:07
Ted Cruz
• Will Ted Cruz Rejoin T...
01:07:16
$100 Stolen
• $100 STOLEN?/TOO STUPI...
01:08
Ukraine's Brutal war
news.vice.com/video/ukraines-...
01:34
Media is Mass
ramonatodoca.com/themediumisth...
01:43
Magic Bullet
• The Original Magic Bul...
01:54
Komm Zu uns
s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/...
01:58
Germania
worldwarera.com/en/all-posters...
02:01
Make Mine Freedom
• Make Mine Freedom (1948)
02:14
Make Mine Freedom - Continue
• Make Mine Freedom (1948)
02:18
My Japan
• MyJapan1945 512kb
02:34
War of Worlds
magazine.funnewjersey.com/the-...
02:38
Adolf Hitler
• Video
03:46
Computer hoodie
design-interactions2007-2014.r...
03:48
The confession
• THX 1138 (3/10) Movie ...
04:24
Ghostbusters
• Ghostbusters - Janine ...
04:46
They Live Sunglasses
• They Live Sunglasses
04:51
Ted Talk Tristen Harris
www.ted.com/talks/tristan_har...
04:54
5 Easy Self-Care
• 5 Easy Self-Care Tips ...
04:58
Your Illness is not your Fault
• Your Illness is Not Yo...
05:01
First Time Eating Hawaiian Food
• FIRST TIME EATING HAWA...
05:08
Two Step Flow Media
www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenov...
05:57
Media Maze Image
www.emaze.com/@AIWLOCOQ/The-H...
06:03
Global Social Media
www.marketingprofs.com/article...
06:19
PBS Nova Creatures of the Night
• Video
07:08
Media Brainwash Image
lh3.googleusercontent.com/-r6...
07:10
$100 Stolen - Continue
• $100 STOLEN?/TOO STUPI...
07:13
Why Salt and pepper? - Continue
• Why Salt & Pepper Ende...
08:05
Mere Exposure
changingminds.org/explanations...
10:19
Ghostbusters - Continue
• Ghostbusters - Janine ...
-- MUSIC --
Monotone - Minimalist
/ minimalist
-- PERSONNEL --
Written and hosted by Mike Rugnetta (@mikerugnetta)
(who also has a podcast! Reasonably Sound: bit.ly/1sCn0BF)
Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)
Media is powerful NOT because of the message content, but because it shapes the *context* of followup processing of the content.
For example, if media tells you Trump should win over Hillary, you may disagree but now you are framing the conversation as Trump vs. Hillary. Why not frame it another way?
"Violent revolution: a viable option? More at 5."
+
that is called agenda setting. I think that is the "scariest" part, because (at least in theory) we can always think about what the media tells us and develop our own opinion (though most of the people don't actually take the time to go more in depth about what they maybe just briefly see on the news), whereas we completely ignore many other events that gatekeepers decided not to cover...
i would say media is powerful because it shapes how much wrong it let people think and do, if media was influencing good things we should not be having this conversation at all.
Agreed. This, I think is important to think about also because "gate keeping" doesn't just shut out topics, but allows more subtly consumers of media to project their own opinions onto the topic, and then get stuck inside their own echo chamber. Current example: if gate keeping in media dictates that major news will mention, talk about, or discuss the deaths of Black people at the hands of police officers, and the recent deaths of police officers, the framework is then set up to project a consumer's own biases onto that. And so it feels more like we, as a consumer, are not being influenced by the media (because you can say "well, I hear this this and this on the news, but here are all of my already formed opinions about that topic"). And that means we are less likely to think about why the media would only talk within the parameters of dead Black folk and dead police officers, and not talk about historical trauma, or lack of funding, or anything around the specific news item itself.
One idea I didn't really hear you touch on is media as a bottleneck for ideas. The media can make sure that only certain ideas get through. And it taints ideas that travel through other media as 'fringe' or even crazy.
Word.
But what about fringe stuff that rises to the surface? "Nerd culture" comic book lore becoming THE money making genre for Hollywood. Fringe artsy film movements being absorbed and used by popular directors, at least aesthetically. Yes there is a bottleneck of what can become obscenely famous, but there's always all sorts of stuff growing underneath that waiting for its shot.
+
international stuff is where the worse gatekeeping and tainting is because it cannot be easy confirm or disproof by the common guy
+theDCification I mean capitalism plays into all of this, of course fringe cultures have seeped into the mainstream. If there's a built-in audience, there's a guaranteed profit, and if you dumb it down enough (which they definitely have) than there's even more profit for them, because if there's pretty people and loud noises suddenly the people who used to make fun of the comic book nerds in their school in the eighties are now super pumped to go see the new Captain-HulkMan-HawkWidow movie. And no, I'm not calling these people fake nerds, I'm saying that the film isn't ACTUALLY a part of "nerd culture" but rather a product meant to PROFIT off of "nerd culture". This problem of "fringe" things being treated as weird or nuts is more of a problem in educational media and in the news media, anyway. A good example of this is how the libertarian party is treated in the mainstream.
Hegemony is the process of turning an ideology (political or religious) into a social norm. All media is inherently political and carries with it a message, this occurs regardless of if it is one that supports current norms or opposes it. This is not to say that you would be mind controlled, but instead that popular opinion can over time and with enough exposure be altered or enforced.
Take any news article and compare its headline from different sources. What each headline says will tell you everything about what that individual news company want you to think about the reasons behind the article. By performing enough of this constantly and unrelentingly it is possible to make the masses believe intentionally skewed or just false information.
Jeremy Corbyn is an example of this. He has been called dangerous, a failure and weak. They have straw manned his views to the extent where only 11% of articles even represent what he actually believes. Yet the influence is so much that many people (granted it is by and large people who were already against him) do not even understand his beliefs.
Recently on Facebook I saw a local page ask the question "was your vote in Brexit influenced by the media?" the answers were a resounding "No." I personally believe that the medias influence in the UK is so strong and so relentless that it has actually pushed people into believing that they are not consuming any ideology and that any ideology that they have must be their own, otherwise why would they think it.
Brilliantly explained.
Great insightful comment!
I have come here to chew bubblegum and make obscure references to cult movies. And I'm all out of bubblegum.
isnt this a game reference?
+
+Blue★ No?????
The games that you've likely seen, or heard this in, is referencing the movie "They Live" Where the protag goes into a bank and says the line, "I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass, and I'm all out of bubblegum." The beginning of this episode GIF and the pictures of the black and white "OBEY" are from the movie.
Everyone thinks that quote comes from Duke Nukem now, sadly.
I am consistently impressed with how this channel continues to raise the bar on the types of questions you explore.
in my childhood, I watched a muppet, sesamestreet-like with cartoons, who taught me at the end of every show than I shouldn't watch advertising on TV...
I miss this guy... when I think of it, it was one of the only show who just wanted to entertain me without selling any crap. I wish this spirit could come back today
You should watch Don't hug me I'm scared
+Dylan Vellut Nah
+TheAmusingOddities damn pesky bee, got there before me
+J Roberts. It's a little baby pidgeon!
I hate you, you hate me
I hate you all in harmunee !
i wish i had an insightful comment but i just wanted to say this was a great episode and i really enjoyed it.
By saying you enjoyed this episode you are saying Mike is doing a good job and should keep making episodes like this, helping him to plan for future ideas and thus being insightful.
+
Are you his grandma?
+
+
Political opinions probably work memetically through society, new information, tribalism, confirmation bias, persuasion, emotion, and many more factors. Media probably doesn't directly make our opinions, it absolutely influences it though. Very little of this is based in science though.
It probably works in a scientific fashion. It just may not have been proven yet.
The main problems with media are that they:
-tend to educate too little (give background, context, show different sides)
-tend to focus on hype and their own percieved audience's interests and viewpoints rather than to try to look as objectively as possible at issues and potentially productive solutions and show nuance.
-tend to (unconsciously, perhaps) encourage people to look for more of the same rather than to encourage openmindedness (is that a word?).
-sometimes tend to obfuscate whether something is an opinion piece or a newsreport and at other times do say so but have something be heavily coloured by opinion while it is advertised as a newsreport.
And that's mostly talking about 'old media'. 'New media' has possibly more issues because it feels (hunch, not fact) more of a Wild West with both very good and very poor examples of how to do it right.
I wonder how many will get this:
_Sniff_ Pure Ideology _Shirt Pull_
It's not just what's *in* media that influences our perception of the world, but what is not. If only certain kinds of people show up in media, you become familiar with them and either identify with them, or feel like you have to identify with them to interact with other people.
CGP Grey's "This Video will Make You Angry" ties well with this the gratification theory of media. Rather than having a taste maker or large agency determine which media should be absorbed, media creates enticing labels for us to read while looking in the aisles.
These labels often override our logos by impacting our pathos; our emotions, especially anger, can easily allow for draw and appeal. From there we create our own personal taste makers in regards to our feeds and friends. We are attracted to individuals who share a post about something which also enraged or tickled you. You could make the case that we are looking for medicine in the pharmacy and rather than looking at what is in the bottles we use our personal biases and the opinions which support our perspective to formulate a decision. Like a disease, the more infectious the idea, the more likely it will be distributed.
and if its in the supermarket, its convenient but not ultimately full choice of available labels to be enticed by. we may chose to go to an indenpendant shop and have this echo chamber challenged, but maybe that shop is also doing the same thing with the labels. we may chose to go to a different kind of shop entirely, or even quit shopping if we really wanted to (by growing our own produce)...or a different medium of shopping, like home delivery, internet or whatever...but few do, right....for the most part we are only chosing between products in our local supermarket, and don't take the 'meta' leap to consider there is a different level of choice.
Great new series. I like the complexity of the subjects being talked about, it has that nice "I've got a lot to say" feeling about it.
No! I am an independent being in full control of my thoughts and opinions! I am an individual who is not affected by propaganda and trends! I support things that are right, not things that are popular! if I go too far with this the sense of sarcasm is going to wear off.
I propose a fourth model where the media steers discussion by controlling *which* opinions get repeated. For example in Europe economic austerity features a lot in the news. But the mainstream channels only offering different views of how it should be delivered, and what effects it is happening. Dissenting views suggesting alternatives to austerity, or even just opposing it, are not shown.
I do notice, that standards are employed for selective reporting, but also it can be so far as subtle language and tone of voice to imply something is 'true' or 'accused', for example, or whether a political acts is implied to be bad or good. and all through that they've not lied once, its just the subtle ethical swaying, and omission.
Love these videos. I cant wait for the next one!
This was my favorite Idea Channel video in a long time. Great work!
When a non-news or non-issue are headlines over and over again, how is this not influencing the public?
Just watched They Live for the first time yesterday. Amazing!
As a media "influencer" and mentor for other influencers... this is what is always on my mind and the ethics of it. I teach Singularity Storytelling, and my thought process is exactly that every day - Why do I like this. Then it goes back to me consciously choosing my experience and enjoying the feelings that they bring me, with the emerging technologies and how as a species we are evolving we do need to become more conscious of "WHY" we do what we do, consume what we consume, etc. Because once a full on merging of technology and humanity occurs we can't just let things to chance.
Fantastic episode! I'm really loving this new format. Seems a little more structured and I, at least, find it easier to follow than your regular stuff.
When I read anything about anything through media outlets. I read several articles from different outlets so I can manage to filter through their opinions and find the facts. Because even though most people aren't trying to. Someone is always trying to sell you something. Whether a view point or a product.
And I don't want their view point, I want the facts so that I and my friends can just talk about the facts of a situation. So that we can allow our experiences and opinions to change as we change. So that we can learn. And I always remember there is a why to anything, whatever it is, whoever says it.
I agree. I think it's great you try and hear more than one voice on a topic or current event. A step further that I have found to be helpful, is to remain open to the truth wherever it is. Even if the truth and the facts differ from what you thought previously. See where the connections are, not where you want them to be. Go down the rabbit trails. Question the ideas of those you agree with and disagree with. See if they are telling the truth. If they say such and such is something then fact check it as best you can. Like a detective, follow the evidence. Don't decide the "truth" and then look for evidence to fit your premise. Instead fight against your premise and see if there is another possibility. Sadly, when I dug for the dirt, against my firmly held feelings or beliefs about something, I generally found it. People are not as perfect as we think they are. They are often liars. Sad to say. I found out the hard way. It can be a little disheartening when you find your heroes are just sinful creatures like the rest of us...except they pretend to be better than us. They pretend to be righteous and are just human, like everyone else. You can fact check a lot by going on government websites for instance. You can see clearly how they vote. Talk is one thing, how they vote is completely different. You will know them by their actions. What do they do? Not talk, but do? Who are their friends? What do they act like in their free time and in their work? Do they talk or do? Are they liars? Fact check, fact check , fact check. And if you are looking for truth it will show up, if you are truly seeking for it.
My dear Mr. Rugnetta, you've just summarized the first year of my communication career in a 10 minutes video. This is why I watch Idea Channel. Kudos.
I feel like I'm back at first year of college, studying all the theories and the effect on people and stuff. It's nice
People generally watch what reinforces their own opinion. Simple. Also there is the general desire to be informed, but I think if it were purely that, there wouldn't be as much desire for shit like Us magazine or as many celebrity stories on CNN
Two step flow matches perfectly the "read title (maybe skim article) -> read top comment(s)" cycle on Reddit.
9:09 That thought process is actually more or less always in the back of my mind when I'm watching a TV show
Great video man. Love the humor and your in depth explanation and counter points is very enlightening. Welcome to my opinion leader team!!
I used to work at a large pizza chain in my college years and it was there that I learned the power of advertising and the media's effect on people.
I remember that we normally sold maybe 1 or 2 calzones a month; that is, until an ad campaign ran for calzones. There was no "deal" or "sale", but people all of the sudden went absolutely bonkers for calzones: making them our highest selling item for the duration of the campaign.
Today, I work in advertising and I can assure you that we do have meetings about how to get people to do the thing we want you to do. In my case, it's to get you to watch our TV channel. However, even with mastery of the art of advertising, I can't *force* you to watch our shows if you don't find them interesting. So most of my current job is about convincing you that our shows are interesting.
The pizza chain's advertising team had it easy I think: pretty much everyone's already interested in pizza.
The only way for one to remain uninfluenced by "media" is to be a direct witness of an event. Even honest representation, can unwillingly cause a difference in the perception.
I know that I have a media/social bubble, but living without one would be maddening.
Love the breakdown Mike! Awesome video as usual :)
I learned about something similar in a college class: it was a psychological tic called something like the "one story effect", where hearing only a single perspective about an issue over and over causes people to think it's the case in general (or maybe relating how common each perspective is to how often they hear that perspective). You can basically see it in effect today with things like paranoia over Muslim immigrants in America, or how people think of Africa (a continent that almost never shows up in the news). It might be something like people being led to think a certain way simply because they've never seen any other perspective as common or "normal".
Paranoid about Muslims, . . . They were brought over on a lie, where's the wmd? And they are useful idiots, art of war, divide and conquer. The deep state don't work for you. . . To keep your job you have to take the clot shot. . . .looks like you don't think to hard.
Have you looked at the syllabus for my first year communications class? This is straight up stuff from my old communication classes and I love it! haha. It's explained in a much more exciting way compared to my how my prof did it. Since we're still talking about these kinds of media effects theories, it would make sense to now talk about Encoding and Decoding, since it's related to how audiences make sense of the media. Also cause Stuart Hall is the bomb, ok?
What a great episode. Thanks ;)
I know why I watch IC: you ask thought-provoking questions in an interesting and respectful way, with added subtle but not overly distracting humor, and have a pleasant speaking voice. You try to be fair, respond politely to your comments, and admit when you are wrong or didn't think about an angle or point of view. (I may also be somewhat swayed by your adorable puppy-dog eyes when you get all wide-eyed and earnest, though...but I swear, that's not the main reason!)
I've worked in the news in some capacity or other for the last 3 years, and I think one of the interesting things about how this all works is what we *don't* tell people something. As the self-imposed gatekeepers of knowledge, if a story doesn't run for whatever reason, most people will never experience it in their daily lives, even if it may be important. For instance, if a report comes out talking about how crime is down across the country, it may not run if it comes out the same day as some national tragedy like the Orlando shooting or the Dallas ambush. Media is by its nature, required to keep itself alive, so some messages may be more difficult to find if they go against what that particular media sources is selling.
Wow. Amazing comment. Thanks for sharing your insight. This makes a lot of sense.
A blast from the past. UA-cam recommends me this video even though the channel is dead for 6 years
Great video! Very educational. Loved the sociological aspects of it. It's exactly what I needed for my exam! :)
The vast majority of my media consumption is through youtube (from my subscription feed, sometimes related videos, and videos linked from other sites). UA-cam allows me to specifically seek out the kind of content I am interested in even if I don't know what I like or why I like it. The types of videos in my feed cover a wide range: comedy, science, education, gaming, vlog, music, etc. One thing I have noticed about my subscriptions is that most of them have a good character/narrator/host. The content being delivered to me is less important than who delivers it and how they do it. I guess maybe I'm lonely and desperate for friends. (Mike, you make a good imaginary friend in case you were wondering)
omg you mentioned this to me at Vidcon on the last day of my Vidcon vlog series! It was so great to meet you there! :D
So youtube glitched for me and showed a black screen and I thought it was intentional..
I guess there is one more important aspect out there - social inclusion.
Social media first offers an array of social bodies, and then allows you to become part of one/several of them. It is especially evident when you look at UA-cam creators and their "fans", or even political parties with their voters.
Of course, one can say that it is still a "two-step flow" theory, but the thing is that there is much more than just an authority figure: there is a whole community with certain benefits and drawbacks of being included in it.
And one can choose (unconsciously in most cases) which community to join and follow.
Thus, each social platform represents a distinct social group, and inclusion into this group (with its pros and cons) is a way how it actually "tells you what to think".
To continue the medicine metaphor, we could say the Hypodermic Needle Model is akin to direct advertising of medicine (TV ads, magazine ads, etc.). Meanwhile, being prescribed medication by your doctor is similar to Two-step Flow, in that pharmaceutical companies promote various medications to doctors in the hope that they will then go to prescribe those medications to their patients.
This! this has been on my mind for the past few months and I've seriously questioned if everything i do, like, or think about are actually my own thoughts or they are just others people thoughts that live in my mind, now I'm paranoid of everything i hear or watch
Mabey you should read some wittgenstein:)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations#Wittgenstein.27s_beetle
I think there can also be a polarising effect when people bring their pre-existing world views to a message.
I have often seen a politician interviewed on television where half the audience will say, "what a great interview, that reporter really nailed him with the questions he didn't want to answer", while the other half might say, "that reporter didn't show any respect at all, he didn't let him speak his opinion". Politics is the best example of this but any issue where there are two major opposing viewpoints can be used. One group might agree & have their viewpoint reinforced by the media message while other will claim bias & call the coverage unfair.
Great video guys. I really liked the little animations in this one!
It seems to me like all of these theories are different oversimplifications of something we just can't really simplify in that way at all. Humans are complicated, and I cant think of a more vague and wide question about complex human behavior than what is essentially "How do humans consume ideas?"
Its an interesting thing to think about, but it seems like as soon as someone wants to theorize a global and simple idea of how this works, they are already making a huge mistake. Not everything can be simplified in that way!
Probably the best thing that PBS produces
Excellent Video. The best I've seen in integrating different media in your presentation. I have to study it a bit more to see if I have any helpful comments. In general though this is right on target and very well done.
Media Literacy is as important now as reading literacy was after the invention of the printing press.
The only thing we need is the freedom to have our own opinions and not be afraid of thinking outside our social framework.
To continue with the drugstore analogy, if you consider the medicines as messages, then the drugstore owner would be media. They would pick out what "messages" you have access to in their store. Different media outlets would be like different stores, each having more or less selection of different kinds of messages. You, the consumer, would pick media outlets that tend to have more of the selections you like, or the ones you already have the habit of going to.
new person. so well done. so well done.
One believes things because one has been conditioned to believe them
-Aldous Huxley
That Big Science album in the back!!
I didn't realize you were in the Hustle Economy book. I've been reading small parts of that during my lunches. I'll have to keep an eye out.
So happy to see House of Leaves on your bookshelf! Maybe an episode about that and other unconventional literature like it?
Im 5 years late to this video but wow. It's refreshing to find a video that looks at multiple aspects within it. I could watch brain food like this all day. Thank you for making videos like these. 😅😅
There was no mention of the information that is left out, glossed over, or purposely left out of the media. My example is our past governor Jim Macgreeve that appointed his gay foreign born friend to be head of Homeland Security in NJ. He could not get a security clearance and therefore could not attend FBI briefings on the subject.
great episode !
:( I never would have thought PBS would sink so low as to say that mass media is not trying to conform us to their 'agenda'. I will be re-thinking my opinions about PBS!
Mike you are an "Influencer"...instant guacamole !
Love "They Live" thanks for the references. "I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass..... and I'm all out of bubblegum."
there's also something to be said about how people naturally copy what they see on TV and radio because they're so saturated throughout our daily lives and are therefore a sort of behavioral reference point from birth. Also, media can influence people through a fear of inadequacy by depicting people with certain traits as the butt of jokes and just as generally worth less than a "normal" person, so all sorts of complications exist cause of it. There's just SO MUCH to talk about on this subject
The Road Not Taken got into my head early and has impacted my reception of further media making my times more interesting in the Chinese proverb sense, but I wouldn't have it any other way.
I think the 2-step flow is the most accurate, the uses & gratifications has some truth but still opinion leaders will continue telling us what to think even if we choose other things to see in the media, also, opinion leaders tell us what to see.
Just to make clear: they tell us what to think and what to see but that doesn't mean that we always obey them.
I can generally name why I do or don't like something or why I feel anyway about most things. When I was in high school I was often confused by others who would say they simply liked something; to which I'd ask "But why!?" and they'd respond aggressively with "BECAUSE I DO!" I wonder if this manner of introspectiveness is something I picked up from some influential media.
The two step flow reminds me of the satirical news show, and how they play a reflective role on other news sources and putting them in a certain perspective and through this they get people more riled up than regular news
As someone who learned something similar to opinion leaders in marketing, I'm going to go with the Two Step flow theory. For the most part, I think human beings would rather elect a leader of sorts to help them form their own opinions as it's just easier than trying to find stuff you would enjoy on your own hence why a lot of unboxing videos and test videos are so popular on UA-cam.
That being said, being an opinion leader isn't permanent. If the people find that your opinions are now trash due to a myriad of reasons, you can easily be dethroned and someone new will take your spot as an opinion leader. It's like electing a representative for your area. You hope they have your interests at heart and when they don't you oust them.
I feel like this is lovely timing
This Script Generator is getting really believable
I must say, what a great and important thing is to have this kind of content, keep going PBS!
Btw, anyone knows about any other channel doing something similar? you know, talking about Media Theory.
I feel like this discussion, especially the metaphor about the medicine, relate to the current political landscape of the United States. We pick and choose media that expresses similar views to our own. Part of how the media keeps our attention is by demonizing people with opposing opinions and leading us towards an 'Us vs. Them' attitude. I think this is the sort of amalgamation that he talked about, with us first choosing the media that suits us and then our opinion leaders and the media filling our heads with biases that in turn benefit them. Which is why I believe that we should aim to always see both sides of any issue, through whatever means to avoid as much manipulation as possible and come to our own conclusions.
I've become very resistant to these kinds of influence ever since: 1, I was informed/educated of all the manipulative science that goes into things like advertising and 2, I learned that exposure to advertisements actually negatively affects your psychological health.
One thing I've noticed about my own media consumption, in particular with regards to news sources, is that there is some media I watch/listen to because I don't like it or I disagree with it. I enjoy, to an extent, going through the process of picking them apart and figuring out what's wrong with it. So I guess it is helping form/reinforce my opinions, but by forcing me to think critically about them rather than by just positively reinforcing them.
I'm often reaching in and telling stories about why I like the things that I like. Conveniently, that can be when I'm sharing it with someone else, or expecting to share it with someone else ("You have to try this videogame out: its x number of factors during play result in an abundance of comically chaotic situations!" etc.). It can also be when we're arguing over or debating our preferences for art and stuff. But sometimes I don't need to reach in: the mere enjoyment or repeated enjoyment impresses favorite 'moments' or images which help me identify the thing that I like, and those tethers between me and the medium present identifiable patterns or are suggestive of kinds of ideas.
This, to me, is a minimum of introspection. I'm not the only one, right?
Great information I can always go too
I'm the kind of person who will avoid a piece of media if people respond to "Oh, I haven't seen it" with "What do you MEAN you haven't seen/read/heard...?", or "Well then, you're not a nerd/geek/reader...". It's one thing to be surprised and to think I should consume a thing, but the people pushing it need to do so politely. Beyond that, the media I consume seems to be mostly the stuff that catches my attention when I hear it described by someone in a community that I'm part of, like booktube, Idea Channel (fun fact: I got into Night Vale after a video on this channel), and from there it webs out. If a creator of a piece of media I love makes something new, I'm so in.
I'm an overly-analytical person. I scrutinize pretty much every thought and emotion I have. In my alone time, I question the origins of my actions, emotions, and interests. I've concluded that no amount of media can change my behaviors, as I am a full grown stubborn adult. I know why I like the music I like, why I'm overly empathetic, why I'm un-motivated by money , and why I seek adventure. All of it can be traced to my childhood. My experiences as a kid were so profound, that they permanently shaped my fundamental opinions, interests, and even political views.
sidenote: if you _do_ happen to think about the media you consume in that kind of analytical way mike says "never happens"... get a journalism degree. we could stand to have a few more of you around. :-)
I think all of these theories work in different ways for different people. Like for instance, I have given up cable television but routinely watch youtube or netflix which can contain advertisements that effect me. There are some things that I took an interest in because others around me did, but then again there's a lot that I'm interested in that not a lot of people around me enjoy or agree with. I do not see media as a bad thing even if it is manipulative because that media is an expression of a person's ideals and ambitions. It comes down to the individual to decide whether the media is something they want to whole heartedly accept as fact or use it as a tool along with research and experiences to form an opinion.
These types of things really interest me because I often find myself enjoying the observation of human interaction and personality and how people think based on their personal experiences.
The My Pillow advertising would come on and I didn't like how he called it "my pillow" , I thought he was a bit creepy popping up in people's bedrooms and bathroom cabinets , etc. My son gave a my pillow to my husband for a Christmas gift. Their was a nice little note amongst the my pillow packaging. It was so nice I wanted to try it myself. I loved the pillow. I want one for Christmas this year. Perception can be skewed. I then saw an interview with the owner and heard his personal testimony on how his life was changed by God. I no longer saw him the same. I love him, I love the pillow. Lol! Strange how media can either work for or against a product or a person. I think though, that much of life comes down to the old addage: "Don't Judge A Book By It's Cover". See for yourself. Get to know people first hand. Test things out for yourself. Research on your own. It is great to hear others opinions or watch ads etc., but it gets down to what do you think about it? Is it what I want, is it true? etc...
I'm going to say that if you look at history it is clear that the media has extreme power over the way people think. Culturally, the world has changed so much and so suddenly in terms of values, aesthetics, and culture, and each of those changes happens yearly, monthly and sometimes even weekly. Prior to the advent of television and other forms of mass media, such abrupt and frequent changes didn't exist. What makes it so eerie is the way a set of values becomes commonly accepted throughout a social group, even when some of that social group doesn't even understand why they are supporting the issue. If it isn't the media, then where are these changes an ideas coming from?
0:37 Holy crap I forgot about Arnold taking his space helmet off and freezing to death. Thank you, Idea Channel, for reminding me of one of the key moments of my childhood.
Also, MR. SNAFFLEBURGER REFERENCE IN THE DOOBLYDOO? YES PLEASE.
And the Magic Bullet infomercial is the best infomercial ever made. Thank you for that as well.
I've always loved Oscar Wilde's quote “Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.” I wonder if this could also be at play here. I know some of my opinions and even behaviours are adopted from people I respect, sometime it's conscious sometimes it's not. Our psyches are a patchwork or even a frankenstein of tidbits from people and media - then coupled with the mere-exposure principal we follow the path that aligns most with the patchwork we've created - sometimes consciously, sometimes not...
Interesting thought.
I found these ideas useful to me. Gratitude. All hail-
wat... guess i should make a "last time i was this early" joke.
meh. lets not
good choice...
wait a minute
There is nothing better than, a cup of coffee and the latest episode of Idea Channel.
I love that you touched upon education media, and I know this episode was entirely geared for the traditional news and popular media segments of our culture, but I as an aspiring teacher have been wrestling with the idea of education as inherently brainwashing. Sure we sugar coat it as informing the students so that they can empower themselves, but ultimately education seeks to affect the thinking of their students. Implicit throughout this video is the idea that brainwashing is conspiratorial and bad, but education is an example where brainwashing perhaps is good (with the understanding that students do still fall through the cracks). Are there other examples of productive brain washing? For instance alternative medicine is largely believed to be based on the placebo affect: where the mind believes it is healed and the body feels better. That is, in a sense, brainwashing as well. Where can we draw the line between the good and the bad manipulation of thought?
Hey'ya I loved this video! And I think there is an interesting aspect of this here on UA-cam, which is how we both quantify how popular something is, or how popular some ONE is. The former is referring to views, but it's the latter I want to discuss, which is the amount of subscribers someone has.
The reason why I only want to talk about subs is because, where an individual video that is really good, might get a lot of views, a lot of subscribers are a proof that you have made enough videos that are really good that people trust that you will do it again. Or put another way, you have earned a lot of peoples trust.
Let's start with an example: If someone has over 100,000 subs we can trust what they have to say, thus we will let them influence us a little. If they have 500,000 subs we listen a lot more, one million is the jackpot and they're word is law (or a nice rule of thumb).
Now if they have over ten million we stop trusting them, right? Nope, we do, except now we HAVE to trust them, except they are the leaders of their field. But it isn't the field of subject that they lead, just the field of education.
This get's funny when, due to this sort of conditioning that we have gone through, we (or at least I) might not watch a college professor with only 5 subscribers, because their presentation as an educator is quantifiabley worse than a lot of channels with less ACTUAL credentials.
What is the extra cherry on this is i am not saying that anyone would say what a college professor is wrong because of their amount of subscribers, the funny part is actually that even though we would all agree that this person knows what they are talking about, we don't watch them because of the quality of their video, when it is in fact the very that this person is not a youtuber (someone who strives for quality in their videos) which is what makes us able to trust them.
Now that I have proven that I have proven subscribers equal trustworthiness though, I have one last hypothetical example, and it actually relates very much to my own life, because I am going to be releasing my first analysis video soon, but I don't have a lot of subscribers (I have two but both are literally me) and I'm not a college professor either, so if you gave me a shout out, would I then become trustworthy?Just a few thoughts, even if this comment isn't featured rock on for inspiring me to right all this!
P.s. on a more related note, I one had my English teacher show me wisecrack back when it was just called thug notes and had only a around a 100,000 subs. This both made me want to listen to my teacher more (I take pride in the fact I am subscribed to a lot of educational channels and he showed me one I never heard of which blew my mind) and made me listen to wisecrack more and more as they started making better stuff. This caused a feed back loop where the more I liked wisecrack and the better I did the more impressed with my teacher I was for finding it so early on. Also My public speaking teacher (who was an English teacher but I never had him as one) got me into ted talks with the help of my art teacher. I think this is a conspiracy because these were 3 of my favorite teachers and I can't tell if it is because they we cool and thus new more about UA-cam, or I liked them because my brain associated the stuff said in those videos with the teachers.
Hey I'm Subscribed to you, am I also you?
John, you've been me for a while now, you're just a dummy account I made when I was bored.
Oh okay, well if that's the case then I think YOU'RE the dummy!
*pulls out gun* I don't know which one to shoot!
Your LYING!
First : I love your channel!
Next : I love how our generation, which grew up with TV only to reject it and turn for Internet, is shaping our societies. We are in a moment sometimes defined as "individualistic", but I think that "decentralised" describe it better. We do not care less for others, we just build our identities and goals differently... Because we're able to connect with people of same interests via Internet, regardless of space, we can embrace aspects of ourselves that we would have tucked away otherwise.
We now know that we can build ourselves inside a society built also around "interest-groups" instead of only "Local-groups". Our societies are already starting to change because of that. People ask for decentralised decision making, decentralised urban planning, decentralised power-grid, etc... Pokemon Go (as you put it at the end of the video) is a perfect example!
So yeah, I do think media shape me and our society, but in the most interesting way! :)
I feel like in my life I've had a lot of usage, where the goal was to be the two-step middle man. My house was where everyone gathered for movie nights in high school, and I was always looking for the next big thing that everyone "had to see right now."
9:10 - I've actually thought something similar to that. In different words, though: "I need a new fandom to help define me". It's a bit of a sarcastic, self-aware comment, but there are really forms of media out there with ideas that I want to adopt as part of myself. It's sad, in a sentence, but beautiful in practice. If the mind is the soul and ideas add to the mind, why not find the best of humanities' ideas to have the best soul?
That is a pretty cool thought.
it's amazing how it sounds more logical to consider that our behavior and actions are determined by an outer source than admit otherwise. This way we are more likely to do things we'd be judged upon if it was purely made by our inner self and I think the media took advantage of it and made diverse products to reach most people with the "We Tell You What To Do" hint to let them feel less in charge of what they like and do
Interesting.
I bought a red t-shirt and some bookshelves after watching this.
I think it's also important to consider what 'needles' are available for Use and Gratification. I'm constantly seeking out media that portrays trans women like me as real, whole people(or characters in the case of fiction), but my brand of cold medicine isn't as widely available. And I think that is an experience a lot of marginalized people can relate to.
+
+
Mike Rugnetta. This subject may be one of the most important to pass through the periphery of any thinking being. Not only does the idea of electronic media influencing consumer behavior signal the falcon's screech, but ideas being disseminated generally is the bedrock of philosophical discourse and of great sociological import. What piques my interest is the question of 'how', indeed. I've conscientiously disavowed all exposure to advertising since I was a late teen (after discovering Adbusters and psychedelics 11 years ago). One of my favorite past times is asking people why they think what they think, especially regarding anything pop culture. My position is this: all ideas (commercial, artistic, philosophical, otherwise) must find a receiver, and therefore a believer. The 'controller', however, is a meta subject perhaps too complicated for this forum.
Finaly an episode i understad of idea channel in almost two years
Uses and gratifications, as presented in this video, is broad enough to include the previous two.
Nothing in it prohibits the media to tinker with their stuff so that it's more pleasurable for the general public. This may also include repeated exposure in an attempt to get the viewer used to whatever is presented. Repeat a lie long enough and maybe some people start believing it (assuming they weren't put off by it).
Similarly, having someone you look up to or just enjoy being with to agree with your stance is usually associated with feelings of happiness. The theory itself doesn't say anything about how happiness comes about - you may follow the beliefs of a good friend subconsciously because agreeing with them is more fun than disagreeing or because it increases the time you spend together.
I agree. I just posted something similar.
brb setting "instant guacamole" as my text message tone.
My 2 cents.
I graduated in advertisement. And back in university I noticed that people had a misguided view of what we were learning there. The field of study in Social Communications is not exact at all. I could calculate how many people I would reach through a campaign and how much that would cost me, but ultimately I couldn’t tell how many of those I reached actually received my message the way I wanted. Communications is a field of bets not one of certainty, no matter what we say to the client.
But it’s not just those who are in the field of advertisement that have this view. It’s especially outsiders who see it as a powerful force for changing the views of the masses. Often these people think they themselves are immune to the suggestions on TV. “I’m drinking this Heineken but it’s not because I just saw 007”.
There is a documentary that I always recommend called, “The Century of the Self”. It’s not perfect but it talks about Edward Bernays. I feel that a lot of the “evil media” reputation can be traced to some of the things he did and said. I think much of it is bullshit but… If you feel strongly about it, you watch it and make your own opinion.
What I want to say really is just that advertisement is much like hypnotism. If you believe in its power, it will have a lot of power on you.
I always teach two-step flow through The Joneses, that shoddy David Duchovny movie from 2009.... What are you thoughts on Gerbner and the idea of cultivation? For me it seems to hold some strength in the idea of progression and reinforcement of narratives over time. Certainly not a uniform effect on all consumers but I feel there's something to be said for continued saturation of a narrative...
Also, this totally ties back into Minions for me. I can't help but think part of the reason people like minions is that people see minions everywhere and think it must be good if everyone is talking about it. Same for Pokemon Go, or Hamilton, or anything that becomes part of the cultural zeitgeist. Doesn't always work of course (I'm looking at you 2013 Lone Ranger), but I feel part of the reason we think Minions et al are popular is because we're told they're popular.
I personally refuse to watch cable tv or anything that has commercials, as well as radio. I choose what I want to hear and sometimes, I change my mind on things just because something else makes more sense. Although I have not changed my mind on politics since college, and yes, it is different than it was in college.