Revised Chapter 10 Concept Map

Reflection of Learning

In revising my concept map, I wanted to go even further into the definition of Cultural Proximity, and learn more about how local media can spread to other cultures. I did some outside research and found a great article called “Multiple Proximities Between Television Genres and Audiences: The Schism between Telenovelas’ Global Distribution and Local Consumption.” This article went into the popularity of Telenovelas throughout Latin America, and outlined the reason Telenovelas are so popular across cultures. As I put in my concept map, the reason is that different cultures, while they are unique in many ways, also have similarities. These include historical, religious, ethnic, geographical, and linguistic similarities, all of which can be translated through media. In the example of Telenovelas, one similarity that has lead to increased acceptance and liking of certain shows is that the language, Spanish, is spoken in many different Latin American cultures. However, as I learned in my Spanish classes, different cultures have unique dialects, and meanings of words can vary depending on where you are in Latin America. This leads me to my next point – there are three main factors that limit Cultural Proximity. First, this language barrier throughout some parts of Latin America due to different dialects is an example of the Cultural Limits Cultural Proximity must overcome. It is hard for media to transcend boundaries if it cannot be understood by the viewer. Second, media faces Production Limits, which addresses the capability of local media producers to adequately meet and determine demand for their shows. Finally, Structural Limits are monetary limits consumers face in gaining access to media from other cultures – some may not be able to purchase satellite TV or extra channels in order to view media other than what is locally available to them.

Finally, one crucial part of understanding Cultural Proximity is realizing that people have different ways of culturally identifying themselves. People do not necessarily embrace the culture they are born into. In addition, people also move around the world and take their original cultural beliefs and ideals with them. One tenant of cultural proximity is that people want media that is familiar to them and their accepted culture – but cultures do not have as strong of barriers as countries; culture can travel with people through their movement around the globe, and thus culture is not static. For example, The United States is seen as a melting pot of different peoples and cultures. We see many different shows and movies in the United States that are consistent with this – the different cultures in the US have brought many diverse shows, TV’s and music into our country. In this way, media is constantly traveling back and forth and carrying messages and culture around the globe. This not only strengthens diversity in our country, but also strengthens the subcultures within it. In closing, making this map not only taught me more about the theories of Globalization, but also opened my eyes to the power media has in relationship to culture.

Source: Pastina, Antonio Pastina C. La, and Joseph D. Straubhaar. "Beyond Media Imperialism: Asymmentrical Interdependence and Cultural Proximity."Academia.edu. SAGE PUBLICATIONS, n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.

Chapter 10 Concept Map

Reflection of Learning

Creating this concept map definitely helped me further understand the differences between Cultural Imperialism and Cultural Proximity.  It also helped me pick out the most important information in chapter 10 and gave me a further understanding of the globalization concepts we talked about during class. While I have learned about globalization in my business classes, it was interesting to look from a more communicative viewpoint at the different theories of globalization. Before, I had a vague definition of globalization in my mind – I only know what implications it had in the marketing and business world. In particular, my international marketing class touched on how businesses must be culturally sensitive when going abroad in order to gain customers through appealing to their cultural beliefs and lifestyles. I now realize that this act of changing an ads messaging and/or adapting a product to suite a different culture is related to the theory of Cultural Proximity – people like what they know, and like to feel familiar and connected with products being sold to them. They want to feel understood, whether that be through a storyline, or through a product.

On the other hand, learning about Cultural Imperialism also made me think more deeply about the ads and messages I have been exposed to in the past and how they relate to this concept. In particular, I recalled the commercial Coke created for the 2014 Super Bowl. There has been a heated debate (both in the mass media and within our class discussion board) about what the true meaning and message of the commercial is. By having people of different cultures sing “America the Beautiful” in their own languages, is Coke celebrating cultural diversity, or highlighting the strength of American influence in other cultures? Basically, is this ad an example of Cultural Imperialism, or of Cultural Proximity? This question could be answered in many ways, but brings up the idea that these two concepts may become intertwined. While Cultural Imperialism is too narrow of a theory, and does not account for other culture’s media produced outside the United States, there are still instances where we see cultures trying to infiltrate foreign cultures through imperialistic means, whether to increase business or bring about political change.

While I do not have any further questions about the concepts at this time, I find myself pondering if there is a better theory that could be created to describe the globalization of media today. This book was published in 2009, before Twitter, Instagram, and other forms of social media really emerged and thrived, all of which add to the sharing of media across cultures. What power do these new media channels have? Right now, Twitter has the power to share international news instantly, and “trend” political movements. I would argue that the currently accepted concept of globalization, Cultural Proximity, should be looked at and changed a bit in order to account for these new powers within the mediascape of our society.

Revised Concept Map

Reflection

In revising my concept map, I wanted to look deeper into the ability of technology to change the meaning, and therefor the value, of images. More specifically, I looked into some of the ethical considerations we need to be aware of when it comes to all the things technology can do to modify images. Some aspects of technology are desirable, such as the ability to disperse images more widely and therefor disperse ideas more widely through technology like the Internet. However, technology has also given us the power to manipulate and change images to mislead people. So, while technology has allowed us to share images more freely, technology has also given us the ability to manipulate these images we are sharing. We spoke in class about how a photograph depicting a man being attacked by police officials went viral (due to twitter, which is a technology), but it was taken in a different location then it was believed to be in. This is a situation where social upheaval can be intensified because of a controversial picture, even though the picture was not in the correct context. This shows how technology can change the value of an image by misleading people about the context in which the picture was taken. In expanding my concept map, I made sure to connect this idea by adding more about how meaning is defined, more specifically, that it is subjective and based off of context through culture, positioning, and location.  

Through outside research, I came across another situation in which the context of a photo was changed by technology, where an Austrian newspaper published a “faked dramatic photograph of a family fleeing Syria's civil war-torn city Aleppo.”[1] Somebody had taken a picture of a family and used Photoshop to change the background, thus making it look like the family was scurrying out of a war zone, when in reality, the people in the photo were simply walking down a street. The article shows the original photo and the Photo-shopped photo, which I though was very interesting. The power of technology to change pictures in such a believable way is truly amazing. While the newspaper apologized for using a doctored photograph, some defended the use of the photo claiming it was “a journalistic device of a photomontage for the purposes of illustration.” If this was the case, they should have made it clear to readers that they were viewing a false photograph. However, they did not make it clear enough, and therefore the photo was misleading. On the other hand, is it ok to use Photo-shopped photographs to try to bring about social change? Sometimes you need to draw attention to a crisis in order to spark positive social change. Would it be ok to doctor a photo to make it appear more dramatic, if the end result was something positive that helped people? This is one of the ethical battles technology sparks.

I also found an article[2] that shows how technology that manipulates images can change meaning through changing the color of an image. The article brings up technology’s ability to change scientific photographs, more specifically, of stars in the night sky. I am in an Astronomy course right now, and have been learning about different forms of star clusters and interstellar objects and the identifying colors they give of. This article shows that by using Photoshop, one can easily manipulate images of stars to be a different color. We use these images to discover scientific truths about the universe around us, so the ability to change them posses significant threats to the credibility of our scientific discoveries. Because of technology, we cannot believe everything we see!

The examples above show the power of technology in changing peoples opinions and ideas about science and social events. I expanded my map to include this, because I think that in answering the question “how does technology affect the value of an image?” one must realize that an important part of the value of an image comes from it’s ability to persuade and inform. Technology has given us the ability to deceive and persuade people of false facts. I think that this is one of the main challenges society faces when dealing with technology and images – we must be able to trust what we are seeing in order to form our opinions and beliefs.

In conclusion, expanding and revising this concept map has made me more aware of how much power technology has. In a world flooded with images and technology, one must be hypersensitive and question the legitimacy of what they are seeing in order to make good judgments and form ideas.

Sources Used:

Lodriguss, Jerry. "The Ethics of Digital Manipulation." The Ethics of Digital Manipulation. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Mar. 2014. <http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/ETHICS.HTM>.

Wolf, Richard. "Austrian Newspaper Apologizes for Fake Syria Photo." Austrian Newspaper Apologizes for Fake Syria Photo. N.p., 9 Oct. 2012. Web. 20 Mar. 2014. <http://www.imediaethics.org/News/3284/Austrian_newspaper_apologizes_for_fake_syria_photo.php>.

---

[1] http://www.imediaethics.org/News/3284/Austrian_newspaper_apologizes_for_fake_syria_photo.php

[2] http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/ETHICS.HTM

Chapter 5 Concept Map

Reflection of Learning

Creating this concept map helped me understand the reading more thoroughly by making me piece through the information given in the text to map out a concrete idea of the most important ideas and topics the chapter talks about. For me, it was very difficult to not wander away from my focus question on the concept map, because all the concepts branch out and have so many sub concepts that relate to each other. At one point I had lines and bubbles everywhere and had to start fresh to really solidify the map and answer the focus question clearly and in a simple matter. I believe that chapter five’s main take away point is that technology which has allowed us to copy and reproduce images has vastly changed how images persuade societies. This goes along with one of the first points the chapter makes about how technology is an agent of society - technology is influenced and brought about from a changing society, while at the same time technology can mold and impart change upon society. This two-way relationship that society and technology have is crucial to understanding why changes in technology change the way we value images. Before we were able to modify images, copy images, and circulate images through the mass media, one had to go to the original image, wherever that may be, to observe it. While then, the image did have power in it’s authenticity and aura, I would argue that the ability to mass circulate an image so that many people could view it is more powerful than the power an image receives for being authentic. Reproduction of images has allowed us to create social change, such as the numerous modifications of the image of Che Guevara.

            This map related to what we have previously learned about how to value an image. It made me look more closely on how authenticity and originality of an image may not be the most important factor, like some theories we have studied before thought. In essence, this chapter and the map I created for it made me think differently about how to value the power of an image. I now think, as I said before, that the power of an image comes from its ability to persuade, and this ability to persuade can be maximized by the reproduction, modification and circulation of images.

            I cannot think about any issues that require further classification in this chapter – if anything, I was so absorbed by all the information and examples in the text that I could not piece together a clear thought in my mind for the concept map.

            What I have learned in this chapter can be applied to the analysis of a media text by looking at the original media text, how it has been modified, and the effect that copying or modification has had on the original intent of the image. What was the image’s original meaning, and how has technology changed this meaning? Is the meaning now stronger, weaker, or totally different? In conclusion, what we learned in this chapter about technology, how to value images, and the politics of copying images is something crucial to understanding images, the media, and will continue to be important as technology changes and adapts with society.

Sources:

 Ginal. "Summary: The Work of Art in The Age of Mechanical Reproduction."Introducing the Frankfurt School. N.p., 28 Feb. 2008. Web. 26 Feb. 2014. <http://frankfurtschool.wordpress.com/2008/02/28/summary-the-work-of-art-in-the-age-of-mechanical-reproduction/>