Reading and Discussion One: Postman, Russell and the art of detecting bullshit.

This assignment had me thinking a lot about the messages the media sends me every day, and the way I take for granted that I understand these messages.  First, I read experts from Neil Postman's Speech.

I totally agree with the provided excerpts of this speech.  Postman asserts that all communication has deep and profound hidden agenda, and he voices his opinion that students should be taught to discern this "bullshit" so they can do some "earthly good".  I think about this in relation to social media, like Facebook.  An innocent posting of funny cat video can easily have a hidden agenda (google "like farming").  The power social media has to manipulate and mis-educate is scary.

I find it humorous that in 1969, Postman described the media in such a way that I would find myself describing simply Facebook today.  People today face extraordinary amounts of media “bullshit” today compared to 1969.  If there was a need in 1969 to educate people on how to critically think about what they see and hear, then it has become an emergency today.  I am often faced with students whose opinions have been formed by what the read on social media.  Many students seem to embrace a frightening attitude – if it’s on the internet it must be true.  If Neil Postman were making this speech today, he would probably be completely overwhelmed by how much information and how many hidden messages are blasted at us at every waking moment of every day. 

Postman is especially right about why we should teach students to not only understand but critique media messages.  It is difficult for students to think and feel freely when they are not aware that they are being manipulated by hidden agendas.  This ties closely with the video of Cameron Russell, seen here, in which Russell shows her audience how messages are perceived quite differently when the messenger takes on different appearances.  Russell describes how she is insecure, and that her modeling photos are not her, but rather a construct created by the scores of people involved in the media created using her body.  If students look upon media such as what Russell shows her audience without knowing the smoke and mirrors used to create the image, they may tend to project what they see upon themselves because they take it for reality.  Russell cites a percentage of young girls who are unhappy with their bodies, and the percentage is high.  I wonder if these percentages would be any different if these girls had been given rigorous education on media literacy, as well as critical analysis of media messages.  

According to Kellner and Share (2005), "The process of empowerment is a major aspect of transformative education and it can take many forms, from building self-esteem to creating alternative media that voice opposition to social problems." (p. 371).  The authors refer to teaching media literacy and critical thinking as empowerment.  The insecurities of many can be chipped away when they are given the power to see through the many mixed and derogatory messages that saturate the media.  

Empowerment = crap detection.  All three sources mentioned here (Postman's speech, Russell's video, and the journal article by Kellner and Share) support the idea that crap detection, or empowerment, is absolutely necessary to free us from the snares of the media's hidden agendas.  

"Teaching critical media literacy involves occupation of a site above the dichotomy of fandom and censor" (Kellner & Snare, 2005, p. 373).  There are two sides to critical media literacy.  Not only should students be able to step back and see the negative hidden agendas in media, such as sexism and oppression of minorities, but they must also be taught to recognize that media can also provide significant positive contributions to education.  

Kellner and Share end their article by reinforcing the message their media is sending: "it is not enough to merely understand media, students need to be empowered to critically negotiate meanings, engage with the problems of misrepresentations and under-representations, and produce their own alternative media" (2005, p. 382).  

It is one thing for a student to understand what he or she is seeing in the media.  It is another thing altogether for that student to apply the understanding to his or her life and the lives of others and to then synthesize more appropriate media.  It is my hope to take part in this process for the students I will teach in the future.

Evidence Chart

Resources

Kellner, Douglas, and Jeff Share. "Toward Critical Media Literacy: Core Concepts, Debates,        Organizations, And Policy." Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 26.3 (2005): 369-  86. Web. 24 Aug. 2014. <http://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/2005_Kellner-  Share_TowardsCriticalMediaLiteracy.pdf>.

Postman, Neil. "Bullshit and the Art of Crap-Detection." National Convention for Teachers of English  [NCTE]. , Washington, D. C. . 28 Nov. 1969. Lecture.

Russell, Cameron. "Cameron Russell: Looks Aren't Everything. Believe Me, I'm a Model." Youtube.  TedTalks, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 24 Aug. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM4Xe6Dlp0Y>.