The Public Sphere

The Media Theory toolbox comprises of media theories that are used to shape ideas of what media does to people and what people do with media.

Media theories so far range from:

• Media effects/Casualty (Alfred Bandura)
• Linear Models of Communication (Artistotle)
• Ideology (Louis Althusser)
• Semiotics (Pierce and Sassure)
• Coding and Encoding (Stuart Hall)
• The Public Sphere (Jurgen Habermas)

The ‘public sphere’ is explained by Jurgen Habermas, ‘The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere’ as:

A social space in which different opinions are expressed, problems and general concern are discussed and collective solutions are developed.

He also describes it as an imaginary ‘coffee house’ where people get together and debate current social, political and cultural issues of the day. According to Habermas, key features of an ‘ideal’ public sphere are that it is:

• Separate from the state
• Separate from the official economy
• Egalitarian and open

My public sphere

The public sphere in which I am involved with ranges from Channel 9 News, social media such as Twitter (using the trending hashtags) and Instagram. Although I read the news and current debates on issues, I don’t participate in the discussion on these platforms.

However, I listen to a weekly podcast called Shameless Podcast, which features two journalists who discuss social, political, cultural and headline news of the week and debate their views on the topics. It operates as a listening platform but The Shameless podcast have a Facebook group which their listeners come together and discuss their own views on the weekly topics either under a thread or posting their own research into the group. This Facebook group is my main public sphere for discussion and debate.

Issues:

The main issues that arise with this type of public sphere are:

• the audience can’t debate with the hosts live
• the Facebook group that operates can be ‘mediated‘ by the hosts
• the hosts don’t discuss their viewpoints with experts live on the podcast.
• the hosts chose which topics to cover (although they often disagree with each others view points) so they can control what you hear from them and what you see in the Facebook group
• the audience have the freedom to believe what they want to believe

Included/Excluded

The podcast is very broad in the topics that are covered on a weekly basis both on the podcast and in the Facebook group, some topics include:

• Sexuality
• Gender
• Politics
• Pop Culture/ Celebrity
• Ethics and morals
• Media
• Feminism

The audience is encouraged to debate their own points of views and discuss whether they agree or disagree with the content the hosts have presented to them. The hosts engage with the Facebook group as well by acknowledging their audience when they have a differing or interesting point of view.

They also interview people relevant to social and cultural issues to gain an insight into the issues at hand such as media personalities, athletes, activists, people with a disability, transgender people, people with an illness, entrepreneurs, influencers and reality tv personalities.

Who may be excluded?

• The audience is excluded from discussion with the hosts but can participate with each other through live threads.
• Discriminatory comments are mediated in the Facebook group
• No politicians have been interviewed
• Scientists or ‘experts’
• Someone who may not be interested in the topics they cover as they are more ‘feminine’ topics (emotional, trivial, fragmented)

What role does the media play in all this?

The media’s role in my public sphere (the Shameless podcast and Facebook group) is at the center of the discussion. It operates solely around news headlines of the week and relevant social issues brought to their attention through the media.

There are two views of how the public sphere has been effected due to the rise of the internet:

• that it has been degraded due to consumer capitalism and fragmentation of the media
• that is has been enhanced through the emergence of different public’s and ‘spaces’

The phenomenon of ‘fake news‘ demonstrates how the public sphere can bee seen as being degraded, as “participants more likely to believe headlines to be credible when they aligned with the user’s political beliefs” (Moravec et al. 2019) this type of influence can be dangerous for society.

The new public sphere has allowed for a wide range of viewpoints and connectivity of audiences, “People started to be individual information sources, and they became a part of limitless sharing community.” (Alp Cenk Arslan, 2019). This is due to the ‘freedom’ of citizen journalism and the ease of access to the internet.

Although it may be harder to find reliable information through the rise social media due to find reliable information, it is important to realise how the internet has shaped the public sphere/s in which we engage today.

References:

Cenk Arslan, A. (2019). Has Social Media Changed The Public Sphere?. Avaliable at https://medium.com/@alpcenkarslan/has-social-media-changed-the-public-sphere-90866ef34fb9 (Accessed on 15/04/2020)

Middlestone, R. (2020). The Media Theory Toolbox. Avaliable at https://moodle.uowplatform.edu.au/pluginfile.php/2225781/mod_resource/content/1/BCM110%202020%20Week%205%20Lecture%20Public%20Sphere.pdf (Accessed on 15/04/2020)

Moravec, P.L. Minas, R.K. Dennis, A.R. (2019). Fake news on social media: People believe what they want to believe when it makes no sense at All. Available at https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=09adf1b5-5ab9-47a7-b751-6449bcb41b82%40sessionmgr4007 (Accessed on 15/04/2020)

Media Industries & Ownership

What comes to mind when you think of news on your social media platforms?

Do you think they’re reliable? Well sourced? Do you agree with what they’re saying most of the time?

Chances are you will agree with most of it and it will interest you. Why? Because it is targeted directly at you, tailored for you and aligns with your ideologies. Cool right? Wrong.

You don’t have to research too hard to find out who owns the news you rely on and what they are connected to politically and their ideologies on the world. They are wealthy and well involved in exactly what you read or consume. You may think that because it is on your social media page that is wide-spread news and that’s just what the news is right now. It is wide-spread in a way that targets an audience with what they want you to know and in doing this, influence you into having the same ideologies.

This is something I was partially aware of in an advertising sense but I hadn’t really thought about the political power until recently. I source most of my news on television from the Today Show, Nine News, Studio 10 and more in-depth news from A Current Affair and 60 Minutes. All of which come from the Nine Network except for Studio 10 which is Network 10. I don’t consume social media news as I don’t find it reliable but I do know people who rely on it heavily; which is a worry.

Nine Entertainment is a publicly listed company on the ASX. In 2018, Nine merged with Fairfax (Sydney Morning Herald and The Age) after laws in 2017 by the Turnbull government abolished cross-media ownership which before, meant that it prevented media companies from owning two out of three platforms in a single market (radio, newspapers and tv stations). This change was a problem for media companies who argued they needed this in place to survive against Facebook and Google who dominate the market. Chairman of Nine Entertainment Co, Peter Costello, in Nine’s 2019 Annual Report argued “There is more competition for audience, and more competition for revenue. The merger with Fairfax ensures us a strong future within that environment.” They are now operating under the ‘Nine’ brand with Fairfax name being scratched altogether.

Costello is also concerned about the regulations around Facebook and their dealings saying, “The ACCC has rightly acknowledged that these businesses need regulatory oversight in areas including… the spread of disinformation on their platforms and copyright.”

Facebook has been under fire for disseminating its users’ information to companies like the Cambridge Analytica which was an agency hired by 2016 Trump election campaign. They basically took Facebook data from its users and developed strategic ways to manipulate people politically by using this data.

I have trust in the news sources I access as I am quite aware of the bias that can be portrayed and ‘click-bait’ headlines that can keep popping up about the same topics. I am concerned about Facebook “news” and how literal people take information from there. Especially after watching The Guardian’s coverage on Cambridge Analytica

The Guardian: Cambridge Analytica

This idea of concentrated media ownership fundamentally opposes our right in a democratic society to vote freely. “The public sphere influences how people choose to exercise their vote.” (Baker, 2006 (p.7) If our news is flooded with what our politicians want us to read, that undermines our democratic right. “To be self-governing, people require the capacity to form public opinion…” (Baker, 2006 p.7) How do we achieve this if we are relying news sources that are politically biased?

References:

Baker, C. E. (2006) ‘Democracy at the Crossroads: Why Ownership Matters,’ in Media Concentration and Democracy: Why Ownership Matters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Communication, Society and Politics), pp. 5–53. Viewed 9th April 2020 https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yxA1Cc8pB3UC&oi=fnd&pg=PA5&dq=media+ownership&ots=_lBE8YL0l6&sig=Gvvaf99qVpXkDHmsezxWz9qEMQ4&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=media%20ownership&f=false

Nine Entertainment Co. (2019) Annual Report, pp 1-3. Viewed 9th April 2020 http://prod.static9.net.au/_/media/Network/NineEntertainmentCo/PDF-Downloads/Nine-Entertainment-Co–2019-Annual-Report.pdf

Representation & Interpretation

Photo by Leah Kelley on Pexels.com
This is NOT a pipe

How do we make sense of media messages? How one interprets messages depends on underlying factors such as their upbringing, religion, views or background knowledge of the message. As well as denotations and connotations and ideological positions.

This was introduced by Stuart Hall who introduced the Encoding and Decoding model in 1973 which was the opposite of media models before him which suggested that audiences just ‘accepted’ what was put in front of them and could not distinguish this from reality. Stuart Hall suggested there was an encoding where the creator creates an image and the decoding is how the audience ‘reads’ the image. Both of which are dependent on a ‘framework’ of knowledge which can be vastly different and may effect the message of the said ‘image’.

Figure 1.1. The communication process. Encoding, media, and decoding (Hawkins, 2016).

In an advertisement by Zomato, a online food service that ‘enables digital access to thousands of restaurant menus’, has come under fire after an advertisement they had put on billboards in New Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata, among more cities.

Denotations

What appears on the advertisement are the words ‘MC. mac n’ cheese? BC. butter chicken?’ as well as a slogan “we’ve got it all. order food online on Zomato”. The logo appears with the rest of the words in white writing on a red background. It doesn’t seem “offensive” as the backlash on twitter would suggest.

Shame on you @ZomatoIN ! Absolutely shameful what you’ve attempted to do. Your investors should be sickened by your behaviour! @smritiirani : this is outrageous. @ascionline pic.twitter.com/pSChhHSrxo

— SUHEL SETH (@Suhelseth) November 30, 2017

Connotations

The backlash was sparked in 2017 after the launch of the billboards because of the letters ‘MC. & BC.’ are short for Hindu language ‘swear words’ which are sexist and disrespectful towards women (mothers and sisters in particular). Upon first glance and without any background knowledge of the Hindi language or culture, this would not seem like an offensive advertisement at all. Although if someone were to have this prior knowledge or brought up in this culture, it is understandable that one would find this offensive.

It could be seen as simply a reference to mac n’ cheese and butter chicken to someone who does not share this culture, which I personally would not blinked an eyelid at and some of the public at the time even thought the ads were witty and a clever play on words. After seeing the controversy online, and understanding the meanings behind these words, you can see how the public was outraged.

Zomato eventually took down the advertisements and issued an apology via twitter saying, “Hey, while we didn’t mean to, we can see why it can be offensive to people, and we apologise for it. We will take this ad down with immediate effect.” Zomato ‎Co-Founder, Pankaj Chaddah.

Hey, while we didn't mean to, we can see why it can be offensive to people, and we apologize for it.
We will take this ad down with immediate effect. cc @AksharPathak @prao24

— Pankaj Chaddah (@pankajchaddah) November 30, 2017

Therefore, it is easy to see the obvious differences ideology makes in the representation of an image/advertisement. However, ideology is the most prominent influence on how a person perceives the messages around them especially around culture and consequently the confusion around language interpretation.

References:

https://www.exchange4media.com/advertising-news/zomato-takes-down-controversial-ad-after-public-outcry-87415.html

Hall 1973 Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse Accessed 22nd March 2020 epapers.bham.ac.uk/2962/1/Hall,_1973,_Encoding_and_Decoding_in_the_Televsion_Discourse.pdf

What is an audience these days?

Photo by Aleksandar Pasaric on Pexels.com

What does it take to be part of an audience in the modern media of today? What is an audience and how does it differ to that of the 19th century? Audiences have no doubt changed over the last two centuries, but not too much despite the take off of the internet and streaming services we see today.

There has definitely been a life-changing transformation since the early days of content creation and mass media viewing. This changed from having to view content in a single area containing a large gathering of people to watch the ‘same’ material. Which, overtime, revolutionized the way in which we consume media, being able to watch alone whenever, wherever on multiple devices across multiple platforms but still able engage with other audience members online.

However, we still view in a ‘traditional’ sense when we gather for a lecture, watch tv with friends or family, in a cinema or watch a sporting match or concert/festival at a venue with a group of people. An audience today is much different in the sense that the WAY in which we consume media has changed but we haven’t completely disregarded the ‘traditional’ audience setting such as a cinema, play or concert. But the question is, if we are on our phones consuming different things in the same space are we an audience with the people around us or are we part of different audiences relating to the content in front of us? This is something I had to think about. In a way we’re part of both. We are consuming different media to each other despite being in the ‘same’ space but we aren’t necessarily having the ‘same’ shared experience. Similarly, we are engaging in an online audience by tuning into streaming services or social media and we may not be in the same space as the audience consuming the same content but we are sharing a similar experience. Despite the distance between the audience, we can share our experience and be critical on the content through online threads such as Twitter or other avenues.

I am a part of an audience at the touch of button on my phone, everyday. I click on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube multiple times a day. As a consistent social media viewer, I am part of the active audience when I am making sense of the media text in front of me and being critical of what I am viewing.

Even though social media audiences typically tune into what they want to engage with, the experience of having access to this kind of content is not always pleasurable. You may not agree with other online audience members or watch someone you don’t agree with. The negatives I normally come across on social media as a viewer is content creators misinforming their audience/s. Another common negative is when other audience members share their malice or hatred against the creator or other viewers via comments or live threads.

Unspoken ‘rules’ are interesting as audiences don’t abide by them all of the time. For example, when you’re at the cinema, there is an unspoken or ‘universal’ rule that you don’t kick the back of the chair of the person sitting in front of you. However, the last few times I’ve been to the cinema, the back of my chair has been kicked.

Online, I think it is similar. Most people have a shared ‘rule’ of not commenting negatively on other people’s content even if they don’t agree however, like kicking cinema chairs, this is very prominent in today’s online content. Imagine if this type of commenting was just as prominent when going to the cinema or a live show, it is simply a waste of time. Why pay for a ticket if you’re going to be negative? Similarly, why tune into someones channel if you’re not interested?

It’s interesting to think of an audience as something that is a ‘similar’ experience as though we all have similar feelings about content. I agree in some regard, I think that when we’re at the cinema or watching tv from home, we are often manipulated into thinking a certain way about characters or the story line with the use of media techniques. However, I think this is the opposite when viewing social media content because content can differ from one minute to the next as creators tend to be focused on a niche group of people. Therefore, I don’t believe we all have a similar experience when viewing social media content because of the differing interests we have.

I also think it’s interesting the idea of audiences of mass media content used to be seen as passive and naive where as now, it’s nearly the opposite. If you’re not informed or don’t keep up with the media you’re ‘falling behind’ or lacking knowledge of events around you. Gauntlett (2002) study of media audiences suggests that audience members “take the bits they like, and discard the rest”. This suggestion, in my opinion is accurate in the way we consume social media, we “take the bits we like…” (tune into content that is niche to our interests) “…and discard the rest” (don’t bother tuning into what we don’t like).

Streaming gives us the freedom of being part of an audience when and how we like. We can use streaming to view as a family or with friends or we can view on the train on a smart phone and still be an audience of content.

Streaming also gives us the freedom to be an active member of an audience in the comfort of the space where we consume it. We can critique using online platforms to connect with other audience members and share ideas or concerns about the same interest in content.

While audiences have changed, there is always going to be a need for members of the audience to be active and critical about the content they’re consuming. We are seeing this more and more with the rise of streaming and social media platforms allowing for this type of connection with each other. Audiences are more critical about the content they are consuming and the media in general.

References:

Gauntlett, David 2002

WHY on earth am I blogging??

Photo by Lisa Fotios on Pexels.com

A little bit about myself to start with. My name is Chelsea, I’m 19, studying a Bachelor of Communication and Media (first year) which I moved to Wollongong to pursue. I come from a (very) small town about 450kms West of Wollongong.

My interests include sport, the beach, reading, true crime, reality tv (definitely counts) and water skiing.

I’m creating this blog not only as a requirement of my course for BCM but to practice my writing and creative skills to build a portfolio for the future. Some topics I may write about will be all things media-related. I would love anyone to engage in my blog who has an interest in media or BCM students. Also, follow my twitter account (@woodoro2). I would also like to connect with you, so please feel free to comment and follow. In the upcoming semester/ year I’m hoping to become more confident with blogging and sharing media through different platforms and have a solid foundation for a future portfolio.

What will my blog consist of?

• My thoughts on my lectures and tutorials
• Digital Artifact ideas/progress
• Anything else I find interesting

My goals in my classes this year is to engage as much as possible and start building my presence online by deep diving into blog writing. Subscribe to follow and keep up to date! With that said, here we go! #2020