<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>NewscorpwithFoxviews</title><description /><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/board/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8.aspx</link><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</lastBuildDate><item><title>Media Watchdog turns on its owner</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8/Media_Watchdog_turns_on_its_owner-973.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Some social problems in our culture have proven to stem from messages in advertising, stereotyping genders and ethnicities, the glut of information, and irrelevance of what is presented to the public, but the most imperative threat to our society is what Neil Postman describes as the great loop of impotence. “News elicits from you a variety of opinions about which you can do nothing except to offer them as more news, about which you can do nothing.” Justin Lewis in his documentary “Constructing Public Opinion,” states that the government and corporations are able to control what is published because the people with the most access to the media are powerful political figures, so the news becomes an “elite oriented nature of reporting.” The spiral of silence for the public derives from corporations controlling a large portion of the media and gives Americans very few choices, as Ben Bagdikian in his book “The New Media Monopoly” states “The political and social content produced by media for the U.S. has a vastly important consequence: The United States has the most politically constricted voter choices among the world's developed democracies.” Social and community issues are therefore not covered in depth, and what is published has a negative effect as &quot;Fundamental deceptions damage the public's ability to maintain a rational view of the real world,” states Bagdikian. How the public’s opinion will be represented is then turned over to the elite, becoming a re-packaged bundle of entertainment and disinformation shrouded in symbolism, and sole purpose is to use emotions to sell products and services, as observed by Sut Jhally. Entertainment is the key factor in perpetuating the great loop of impotence, produces agenda setting and fragmentation further distorting reality and creates opportunities for corporations to promote their interests that does not mirror public opinion. Disseminating the idea of perfection and inner conflict, advertisements are critical in devaluing people to objects (Jean Kilbourne), and places values in products (Stuart Ewen). Imagery is a powerful socialization tool in America, conditioning people to become consumers and prohibits the “capacity for social action that might change the conditions limiting human fulfillment.” (Herbert Schiller, Passivity). The most striking characteristic of the great loop of impotence is its deep embedment in our society, which it hides behind our subconscious. Some solutions to this problem are to disengage ourselves from advertising, as suggested by Bernard McGrane, and we need to educate the younger generations about what the story is being told in advertising. I also agree with Ewen that the communication outlets should not be run by few corporations, allow more freedom of choices to challenge the monopolies, (Jhally), and give the public a voice. The most important solution to impotence I believe will rely on informed citizens to, what Alexander Meiklejohn asserts, use the First Amendment rights and vote.]]></description></item><item><title>Please use reply, not post -- </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/Please_use_reply__not_post_--_-5180.aspx</link><pubDate>Thursday, February 23, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Please use reply, not post -- thanks. Pilgrim]]></description></item><item><title>Media watchdog turns on it's owner</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8/Media_watchdog_turns_on_it_s_owner-972.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Some social problems in our culture have proven to stem from messages in advertising, stereotyping genders and races, the glut of information, and irrelevance of what is presented to the public, but the most imperative threat to our society is what Neil Postman describes as the great loop of impotence. “News elicits from you a variety of opinions about which you can do nothing except to offer them as more news, about which you can do nothing.” Justin Lewis in his documentary “Constructing Public Opinion,” states that the government and corporations are able to control what is published because the people with the most access to the media are powerful political figures, so the news becomes an “elite oriented nature of reporting.” The spiral of silence for the public derives from corporations controlling a large portion of the media and gives Americans very few choices, as Ben Bagdikian in his book “The New Media Monopoly” states “The political and social content produced by media for the U.S. has a vastly important consequence: The United States has the most politically constricted voter choices among the world's developed democracies.” Social and community issues are therefore not covered in depth, and what is published has a negative effect as &quot;fundamental deceptions damage the public's ability to maintain a rational view of the real world,” states Bagdikian. How the public’s opinion will be represented is then turned over to the elite, becoming a re-packaged bundle of entertainment and disinformation shrouded in symbolism, and sole purpose is to use emotions to sell products and services, as observed by Sut Jhally. Entertainment is the key factor in perpetuating the great loop of impotence, produces agenda setting and fragmentation further distorting reality and creates opportunities for corporations to promote their interests that does not mirror public opinion. Disseminating the idea of perfection and inner conflict, advertisements are critical in devaluing people to objects (Jean Kilbourne), and places values in products (Stuart Ewen). Imagery is a powerful socialization tool in America, conditioning people to become consumers and prohibits the “capacity for social action that might change the conditions limiting human fulfillment.” (Herbert Schiller, Passivity). The most striking characteristic of the great loop of impotence is its deep embedding in our society, which it hides behind our subconscious. Some solutions to this problem are to disengage ourselves from advertising, as suggested by Bernard McGrane, and educate the younger generations about what the story is being told in advertising. I also agree with Ewen that the communication outlets should not be run by few corporations, and allow more freedom of choices to challenge the monopolies, (Jhally), and give the public a voice. The most important solution to impotence I believe will rely on informed citizens to, what Alexander Meiklejohn asserts, use the First Amendment rights and vote.]]></description></item><item><title>Please use reply, not post</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/Please_use_reply__not_post-5179.aspx</link><pubDate>Thursday, February 23, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Please use reply, not post -- thanks. Pilgrim]]></description></item><item><title>Masculine Men and Submissive Women</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8/Masculine_Men_and_Submissive_Women-969.aspx</link><pubDate>Monday, February 20, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The most pressing problem with American mass media is the way it portrays both the ideal man and the ideal woman. The ideal man is shown as tough, masculine, dominant over women, and having the perfect body. Men in media are shown with large muscles, attractive, masculine features, and, more often than not, surrounded by beautiful, submissive women. In media, viewers are given the impression that if they do not fit this image, they are not a &quot;real&quot; man. This goes for women as well. Women are shown in media to be thin, toned, have, feminine features and be submissive to men. Just as men are told they must alter themselves to fit media's image, so are women. Unfortunately,k this is how society is. There is no solution to this problem. We can attempt to make the media change the way it portrays both men and women, but that will most likely never happen.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Lewis Brittany 2) Masculine Men and Submissive Women</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Lewis_Brittany_2__Masculine_Men_and_Submissive_Women-5386.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I completely agree with the fact that men should not feel pressured about the media and how it tells them they should act, feel, and look like the stereotypical muscular man who only has a tough facade.  I believe this shouldn’t be expected for men, but also for women as well.  For a women we have the same standards put to us about how we should look and feel on a daily bases, based on what the media flashes in front of our faces throughout our daily lives.  It’s easy to point the blame at the media and the standards it puts us up to, and to also accuse the men who try to follow the medias trends accountable for how we then feel.  This is a blaming war that seems to never end.  There comes a point when we need to stop making excuses for ourselves as to why we feel so persuaded to look a certain way, buy a certain product because of what were told, or what we see.  As mentioned earlier in this discussion a question was said about what will make us realize that the bodies portrayed in these magazines and commercials we see on a daily bases are actually nothing like their original images before being posted to the public.  The example that was given is the dove commercials and how they’ve used real women who haven’t been photo shopped or edited in their commercials and magazine ads.  You would think that this would begin to make people think and realize that the images they see have clearly been touched up more then just a “little”.  In many respects, yes, there has been a recent revelation with advertisements and how fake the majority of their images can be, but nowhere near enough of a realization to make us want to stop blaming these ads for how we perceive the world.  This process of blaming the media for what our world now perceives as beauty may be true at times, but as our society advances and the truth is being displayed in front of us about how these images we see are really made, then who’s to blame anymore? Ourselves for not wanting to believe the truth, or the media who continues to produce a false image?]]></description></item><item><title>Please use reply, not post --and Submissive Women</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/Please_use_reply__not_post_--and_Submissive_Women-5178.aspx</link><pubDate>Thursday, February 23, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Please use reply, not post -- thanks. Pilgrim]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (Long, Kayla 1) Masculine Men and Submissive Women</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___Long__Kayla_1__Masculine_Men_and_Submissive_Women-5102.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Shown in the movie “tough Guise” it proves that men think they need to be tough to attract women. Yes, women like being protected and thinking they have a tough man to keep them safe, But women also like when a guy who knows how to be sensitive and loving. There should be a healthy balance between acting like nothing bothers you and showing a sensitive caring side. This is the part in the media that is not shown; you don’t see an ad with a man acting vulnerable.  They don’t want people thinking that is considered “cool”. To the media that is the woman’s job. Women are the ones that should be the sensitive vulnerable ones.  A solution mentioned in the movie “Tough Guise” was that if women would show that they liked a sensitive, not always so intimidating tough guy, the cultural environment might change.  This is what needs to happen because all the men and women who do not fit the “ideal” man or women in the ads feels like they don’t fit in. This isn’t right, everyone is different and should be able to fit in regardless of what the media tries to make us believe is the correct way to act, dress and look like.]]></description></item><item><title>RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8/RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-963.aspx</link><pubDate>Friday, February 17, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[After many weeks in J190 and many videos and much exposure to media theories, various problems of the media, evidence and assertions from scholars Ben Bagdikian, Robert McChesney, Neil Postman, Mark Crispin Miller, Stuart Ewen, Jean Kilbourne, Sut Jhally, Alvin Poussaint, Naomi Klein and dozens of others, YOU have now been exposed to many media problems (including areas such as violent masculinity, gender representation, consumerism, propaganda and others). YOU are now, in a way, an expert well qualified to assess the media.<br /><br />So, Pilgrim asks this question: <br /><br />In YOUR view, what is THE MOST PRESSING PROBLEM with American mass media -- and what how can it be solved?<br /><br />Argue fully why your problem is THE main problem -- and explain your solution if there is one you think will work.<br /><br />------<br />In your OTHER TWO ENTRIES later in the week, you may want to tell a fellow group member why hers/his problem is not all that important, focus on a flaw in another's argument, offer an alternative solution, offer supplementary material for another's argument or argue why your problem is more important than another's.<br /><br />Pilgrim hopes you learn much from this exchange, and he will drop in with a comment here and there. Good luck.<br /><br />P.S. Remember -- put a 1 after your name in your response to this question; put a 2 and a 3 on your next two entries.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: RE: (Krause, Korey 2) Mass Media Deception</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE__RE___Krause__Korey_2__Mass_Media_Deception-5381.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I also agree with both responses to how the media is able to twist the truth so much to the point where we are unsure of what’s really true or completely fiction.  The manipulation of the media happens so frequently that we’ve become so accustom to glancing over what seems to be completely over exaggerated and straight into the parts we really want to read or know about.  By doing this I believe we are becoming part of an ongoing cycle that keeps allowing the media and the way they can market a product or decide what we should or shouldn’t know that much easier.  There was a recent study done with Target about how they can now predict when their consumers are going to be pregnant.  Based on their marketing techniques and the surveys they would get from their research about what females (ages 20-40 years old) would buy, they could then determine which ads they would focus on sending out to each customer in the mail.  By knowing they bought an X amount of lotions or certain types of groceries Target would know what ads they should send out to each women who might be expecting.  This stagey when sending out ads shows just how easily the media can market and manipulate what we see, watch, and how we consume our products.     ]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Kuplent, Brianna2) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Kuplent__Brianna2__-5375.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I completely agree with you on the fact that showing &quot;real&quot; images in ads is not the most logical answer, because it has been done before. The ironic part of companies that began ads similar to &quot;campaign for real beauty&quot; like Dove promotes is that the majority are just as bad with photo editing, air brushing, and manipulation of their images as any other company. Even Dove still manipulates the  majority of their photos and airbrushes/tones all of their models despite the fact that they &quot;campaign for real beauty&quot;.The fact of the matter is these companies are probably never going to stop using manipulation and airbrushing, because a law will never be able to pass in Congress completely restricting this practice. I think this problem is so complex that it would be hard to deal with and see any sort of immediate effects, but I think we could start by making companies disclose the fact that the photo has been altered in the magazine to their readers. I think it would actually be interesting for them to have to exactly disclose how they altered the photo, but that might be asking for too much. I think a good step in the right direction would be just simple disclosure to the fact that the image shown is distorted or configured to appear a certain way.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Lee, Ji 1) Mass Media Deception</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Lee__Ji_1__Mass_Media_Deception-5364.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I believe this is a very pressing issue also. People watching these ads and taking in these messages aren't even aware they are being influenced. You've made some valid points with your facts about time magazine. I think your argument could benefit by mentioning the mass media creating a phantom liberal. In today's news and politics the majority of politicians and news representatives are conservatives. Even though there is a clear majority, the media makes it look like there is a close battle between the two. You've made a very strong argument here and I agree that we should learn to see the truth in the mass media.     ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Klingman, Samantha 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Klingman__Samantha_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5362.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I agree with the real solution of reshaping the next generation's value or perspective for the problems with the mass media you suggested. In these days, young children are exposed to so much media already, considering how they are too little for things that are violent and sexual. And the most annoying problem with me for this issue is that the mass media which create all these false concepts towards not only young kids but also public only care about their profits and benefits. Recalling from your statement that says, &quot;violent masculinity, over-sexualized female image, advertising everywhere, corporations owning media outlets, etc.&quot; represent the best examples of the false concepts that are spreader by mass media to American youth. In order to keep our young generation from this manipulated media values, I think more specifically, we should train them to have a critical thinking skill to make a right decision as a future consumer or a public voice. It might sound too tough for such young kids but if we think about them as the next &quot;us&quot; to judge and lead our media society, it might be worth a try. So I'm suggesting to have young children to see as many documentaries or informative media as possible that give right images of genders, advertising intentions, etc. It is a simple method but a lot of people are negligent about teaching their children these things when it comes to the reality. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: RE: (Krause, Korey 2) Mass Media Deception</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE__RE___Krause__Korey_2__Mass_Media_Deception-5342.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I see your point of approaching to the solution for this problem. I think that although, I suggested that we should think critically and be knowledgable to not to be deceived by media, it seems almost impossible to make mass media to be changed and not deceiving public. It's because I think that those who manipulate public by media are not easy to reach by a minority like me or other individuals. For example, think about the case of Ophra's lawsuit towards some huge meat company as we've seen from the video in class (sorry, I don't know the title of it).<br />I know it's not directly related to my topic but it shows that even a high class, very famous, and powerful figure in the US has failed to prove that the meat company's uncomfortable truth. And we all know the truth from a lot of documentary films that how some meat factories treat animals inhumanly and still produce them as a good looking product so consumers buy them. So instead of questioning how to eliminate this problem, we should rather try our best to spread through internet such as Facebook, Youtube, etc., or any other forms of media that we have around us to let as many public as we could reach about any deceptions from media. And just hope that we as the US public can show how  we can have bigger influence and power over a few deceiving media manipulators to be weakened and maybe eliminated someday..?    ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Klingman, Samantha 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Klingman__Samantha_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5337.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I completely agree that media is in the business of selling the idea of constant consumption to American youth. From an early age, we are taught to buy the newest and best things. The best toys, the newest cars, etc. However, our society is completely capitalistic in nature. It is a sad but true statement. Our lives are run by money and objects and the pursuit of both. Noting anyone does with ever change that, unfortunately. We can talk about changing it and the fact that we must change it, but our culture will always be this way.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Klingman, Samantha 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Klingman__Samantha_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5313.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[	The system you describe is indeed reinforced daily, but I have seen a shift lately that, while enforcing generally the same cycle, may itself offer at least a partial solution.  In the past, especially when communication was not what it is today, what was considered “popular” was determined purely by the big players (corporations, celebrities, etc).  To an extent, this is true today, but with the advent of the internet and, in more recent years, easily accessible social media, the population itself is, more and more, putting new ideas, items, and movements into the dead center of pop culture.  This is exemplified by the push for “green” habits and technologies, and a greater social consciousness, even when these are things that are directly prohibitive to the capitalistic goals of big business.  Smart businessmen and entrepreneurs, are capitalizing on these trends themselves, and shifting their business models to reflect popular interests.  If, and we'll see what happens, more businesses were to follow this model in order to not perish in a climate that increasingly vilifies the faceless corporation bent on greed, then perhaps the lessons and messages put forth could become better ones.  While the motivation behind the ads and control schemes would remain the same (profits), and the pervasive psuedo-mindcontrol would remain in our system, it could at least be tolerable if the new messages being propagated were things we would consider “good,” and in line with our cultural values.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (PILGRIM -- 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___PILGRIM_--_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5304.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I think there are many problems with the mass media today ranging from violent masculinity, over-sexualized female image, advertising everywhere, corporations owning media outlets, etc. However, I think the most detrimental issue in media is selling the idea of constant consumption to American youth. We are in a sense brainwashing them to believe that it is necessary to constantly consume, reinforcing a very viscious cycle of materialism. This will only continue to fill our landfills of more plastic products, emit more toxins and pollutants in the air from the &quot;bigger&quot; and &quot;better&quot; cars on the market, and enforce the twisted idea that materialism and appearance of wealth and the media's distorted/unrealistic view of beauty equals success. How can this possibly be healthy for children as young as four and five to be told that spending money is a good thing? Is it healthy for a five year old girl to compare herself to a Barbie or a photoshopped celebrity with unrealistically curvy bodies, airbrushed faces, large breasts, and that the only way to become successful in their future is to look this way? Is it healthy for a five year old boy to watch countless movies showing emotionless men holding weapons and acting as the &quot;tough guy&quot; without being allowed to show any empathy towards other people? Our society continues to discuss the issues within our media, but meanwhile we are only further enforcing these ideas to the children we raise. If we want a real solution to the mess we have created, we need to begin changing how we educate our children.]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Lyshall, Kristen 1) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Lyshall__Kristen_1__-5303.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The point you bring up is undeniably important. While advertising, the media, and big corporations coax us into consuming and believing that the issue of the environment, an issue that will have an incredible affect on the entire world, is not an issue that needs to be brought to the forefront. Many leaders of big corporate businesses will even try to convince us that global warming is not real. And for many people, it works. There is almost no way of escaping this consumerist lifestyle we all live at the moment, and if we keep living like this our children and their children will be headed toward a future of destruction faster than we realize. The only thing I can see saving us from our own inevitable destruction is a revolution. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Lee, Ji 1) Mass Media Deception</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Lee__Ji_1__Mass_Media_Deception-5302.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I completely agree with you. It is ridiculous that one should have to sift through television, magazines, the internet, etc, with a fine-tooth comb to find to truth. There is almost no escaping the manipulation that the media (and corporate businesses behind them) have on us. As you said, even things that we would never question, even things we believe to be the complete truth, are often times skewed and manipulated to morph Americans into a particular mindset. My question is, how do we rise above this, eliminate this? Is there a way that we as a people can force the leaders in deception into giving us the truth? Or will we forever be a country drowning in deceptions?]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Landis, Brandon 1) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Landis__Brandon_1__-5299.aspx</link><pubDate>Sunday, February 26, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I understand what you are getting at.  For some reason the media with it's advertisements and such have become this authority figure that society feels they need to follow.  We would feel out of place if we don't pay attention to the ads and listen to them.  They tell us to buy something, we should.  Go eat here, go drive this, try and look like this.  We are resented to this types of orders every day that soon enough we want to follow them to be accepted. It's sad because we should be able to think and consume that way we want, but subconsciously i don't think that is ever possible because in the back of our mind we are consuming because of a certain ad we saw once or because of how ads are being distributed by the consumers wearing them.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: RE: (Long, Kayla 2) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE__RE___Long__Kayla_2__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5292.aspx</link><pubDate>Saturday, February 25, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[<br />I agree that money is the main objective for all capitalistic conglomerates but I feel there is a difference in the importance of capital for independent or small companies as opposed to the media giants. Where I see a difference between the small and giant companies is in how money is spent and who is/are the main benefactors. For the top conglomerates obviously the main objective is to make the most money regardless of the effects of their actions. Individual CEO's make millions off of giant companies while employees in sweatshops across the world are putting their health at risk everyday for a less than livable wage. Though this may be my own personal opinion, I feel that in much smaller companies money is used more wisely. For example, in a small company,is seems more likely that each employee would be paid fairly and given great benefits. Though the company is still driven by money, they use their money to actually keep the company and it's employees going while hoping to gain a profit. This said, media corruption is always a possibility regardless of the size or a company or their financial spending. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Krause, Korey 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Krause__Korey_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5279.aspx</link><pubDate>Saturday, February 25, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The majority of media is run by large corporations. However this is not necessarily a bad thing. Independent companies are always give the reputation of being 'noble' in the sense that they are not just in it for the money. We live in a capitalistic society where money is everyone's objective. Media conglomerates, big or small, are all out to make money. This goes for independent companies as well. Even if large media conglomerates were eliminated, it would not necessarily mean the end of media corruption because of the constant desire for money.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Lennon, Anna 1) Media and Gender Roles</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Lennon__Anna_1__Media_and_Gender_Roles-5250.aspx</link><pubDate>Friday, February 24, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I agree with the point you are making about how media shapes the gender roles and how they should be viewed.  I can't remember which video it was but I know there were a few that showed how women should always be wanting a man and showing how they are helpless without them.  How they want men to be overbearing and they showed this through modeling ads where the men were holding a woman down for example.  Media will depict men as having to have the 6-pack abs, big muscles, nice hair, all the essentials in order to get what we want from women and that is completely untrue.  This scares me because people actually buy into this view of society and treat other people this way.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Lennon, Anna 1) Media and Gender Roles</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Lennon__Anna_1__Media_and_Gender_Roles-5243.aspx</link><pubDate>Friday, February 24, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I agree that a major pressing issue of mass media is the social construction of gender roles. Most people say that the average 3,000 advertisements they see a day don’t affect them, but face the truth it does. It is proven every time you go to the store or pick a restaurant to eat at.  Women, when you go to the store for new make up, your mind does a scan over the products down the makeup isle. If your choosing between two brands of mascara for instance you, will most likely choose the one that had some impressing advertising champagne that stuck in your memory. See, at the time when you saw that advertisement you probably didn’t think it made an impact, but in the long run it did. You chose the mascara that showed the lady with fake eyelashes on that said, “your eyelashes will grow after a few uses”. In really that’s a lie, but it does influence a lot of people to try it. For the men it works the same way, if they are watching a football game and during the commercials there is an advertisement for a new and improved shaving cream that shows an attractive woman all over the man because of how well their shaved and how they smell, that is going to spark the minds of the men seeing the commercial. At the time they might not think that the advertisement influenced them but the next time they go to the store for shaving cream most likely that ad will play back in their mind. There is a good chance they will pick that specific brand of shaving cream.  This is how our minds work, if we see a positive commercial about a product and we think its not going to influence us, most likely we are incorrect. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: RE: (Levy, Eric 1) &amp;quot;10 Day Culture&amp;quot;</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__RE___Levy__Eric_1___10_Day_Culture_-5201.aspx</link><pubDate>Thursday, February 23, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[It's common knowledge that our culture is a fast-paced one and that our collective attention span is relatively short, so while I don't think 10 day culture is necessarily a revelation, I do think it lead you into a very interesting point: News coverage with relation to “10-day culture.”  You just touched on this shortly but it got me thinking about why and for how long a news station would run a story.  In class today, “Outfoxed” made it clear that ideological goals and agendas can certainly be a factor, but I think that even in more neutral and objective journalism the 10 day culture and lifespan of a story, no matter how large or important, still exists.  One reason for this, I imagine, has to do with advertising revenue.  Knowing that our country as a whole lives in a rapid paced environment, many people probably won't continue to tune into a news station night after night if the same stories are always present.  As viewership decreases, so would ad. revenue, which would be counterproductive to the news business which is, just that (a business).  In this sense, as Bagdikian touches on across multiple chapters, and as we've seen in class, media is controlled by corporate agendas.  Not that we didn't already know that, but this exploration has also shown that not only is what we see controlled, but also how long we see it for.  In fact, if our public had been conditioned (for some reason) to prefer longer, more contextualized, and more debated news coverage, corporate media would likely cater to that format as well, because it would produce more familiarity, viewership, and, in the end, advertising profits.<br /><br />As an add on, “Outfoxed” has made it clear that sometimes the news media does want a certain message or idea remembered, and so it is repeated over and over again.  As an alternate theory, one might propose that, by contrast, other stories aren't played continuously because someone in a position of power has deemed them unimportant or not worthy of taking up our brain-space when other messages could be propagated.  It could be one, it could be both, or it could be that advertiser interests in addition to corporate-agenda style media together created a perfect storm for “10 Second Culture.”]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Lewis Brittany 1) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Lewis_Brittany_1__-5197.aspx</link><pubDate>Thursday, February 23, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I agree with the argument that the &quot;ideal&quot; man and woman image is causing people to seek perfection when its impossible, and distorting their reality trying to achieve it. But haven't they already tried to show &quot;real&quot; people in ads? Like the Dove commercial where a model is still beautiful after taking off her make-up and the self-esteem campaigns, but its just another ad for Dove. In order for people to wake-up from this &quot;reality&quot; that is constantly being put in front of them, I think all of the ads would have to consist of real people and some reflection of those ads is needed in order for your solution to work. Like what you said, people are being lied to, but do they think about it consciously? Kilbourne said in &quot;Killing us Softly&quot; that commercials are designed to sell sex and everything else in order to get a person's attention subconsciously, so how are we going to lure people away from that? It will take educating the younger generations who will model after us, and allow access of information from different mediums to have people compare and see the lies.]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Landis, Brandon 1) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Landis__Brandon_1__-5155.aspx</link><pubDate>Wednesday, February 22, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I agree that there is increasing problem with the fact that mass media is taken at face value by the majority of Americans. According to the five negative effects of mass media on humanity (Ernest Van den Haag), mass culture appeals to basic instincts but at the same time tends to isolate people from one another. These affects of mass media contort an individual's conscience into not being able to accurately differentiate between the truth and lies. As Walter Lippman states: there is &quot;no liberty for a community that cannot detect lies&quot;. Television gives a new definition to truth, and broadcasts all stories and news as entertainment. Newscasters follow rules such as bite sized is best,to avoid complexity,and to use visual stimulation to substitute for the truth (MacNeil News Hour). It is no wonder that after years of these practices on television the majority of Americans accept news and mass media as the unbiased truth. From a young age the modern child looks to television shows and celebrities for clues on how to respond to the world. As suggested, the development of internet journalism and independent news has created another avenue for delivering the truth to the American people. But as these various media communications are developing, people become skeptical of their integrity. The presence of big name news stations delivering repetitive right-wing, filtered news makes people believe that they are getting all the information and internet journalists and independent news reporters must be radicals. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE:  (Landis, Brandon 1) </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE____Landis__Brandon_1__-5152.aspx</link><pubDate>Wednesday, February 22, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[<br /><br />I agree that there is increasing problem with the fact that mass media is taken at face value by the majority of Americans. According to the five negative effects of mass media on humanity (Ernest Van den Haag), mass culture appeals to basic instincts but at the same time tends to isolate people from one another. These affects of mass media contort an individual's conscience into not being able to accurately differentiate between the truth and lies. As Walter Lippman states: there is &quot;no liberty for a community that cannot detect lies&quot;. Television gives a new definition to truth, and broadcasts all stories and news as entertainment. Newscasters follow rules such as bite sized is best,to avoid complexity,and to use visual stimulation to substitute for the truth (MacNeil News Hour). It is no wonder that after years of these practices on television the majority of Americans accept news and mass media as the unbiased truth. From a young age the modern child looks to television shows and celebrities for clues on how to respond to the world. As suggested, the development of internet journalism and independent news has created another avenue for delivering the truth to the American people. But as these various media communications are developing, people become skeptical of their integrity. The presence of big name news stations delivering repetitive right-wing, filtered news makes people believe that they are getting all the information and internet journalists and independent news reporters must be radicals. ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: The Methods of the Media </title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE__The_Methods_of_the_Media_-5136.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[For me, the most pressing problem with American mass media is how it goes about relating to the public by using Propagandizing, Advertising, or Publishing magazines/ articles, etc.   In society today it’s hard to realize just when we are being hit with the newest ads or products that stream across our television screens, newspapers, and magazine ads.  Our generation won’t look at ads for more then 20 seconds if it doesn’t catch our attention, move across the screen at a quick pace, or have some kind of catchy phrase or jingle in the background that will stay with us throughout the day.  The way the media publishes their ads and displays their media to the public is strictly based on these statistics and studies that tell them they have to constantly think outside of the box with news way to grab our attention.  In the movie “Toxic Sludge is good for you” we see several different ways these marketing companies go about selling and advertising their products.  Some of the ways the mass media try’s to relate and grab the viewers attention is by using professional athletes to speak for how well a certain shoe or sports drink helped them improve their sport game, and that it can also do the same for anyone else.  Showing these athletes jumping across the television screens and playing with the average boy next door not only relates to the public, but also draws us in with cool camera angles, fast images, and leaves us with a catchy message.  When relating to the public the media almost tries to get us to focus on individual’s not collective interests.  They begin to make the message relate directly to a certain demographic of people instead of trying to please everyone all at once.  Advertisers know just how to twist the words of an ad to make the public happy and agree with whatever it is they’re trying to sell.  It’s now up to us, as the consumer, to begin thinking for ourselves and begin to realize just what American mass media is doing when trying to relate to us.   ]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (PILGRIM -- 1) Mass Media Deception</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___PILGRIM_--_1__Mass_Media_Deception-5128.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[In my opinion, the most pressing problem with American mass media is that it manipulates public opinions by Propagandizing, Advertising, or Publishing magazines/ articles, etc. As Americans are exposed to so many different kinds of mass media such as TVs, advertisements, propaganda, etc., it is so easy to get access to public opinion. And some mass media tend to manipulate the public by commercials or propaganda. According to the video, &quot;Consumerism,&quot; it shows that how easy it is for advertising companies to change viewers into their future consumers. And people who got turned into do not really realize or notice that they got influenced or deceived even by mass media we truly love and trusted. For example, I just found this post about the TIME magazine's cover on my Facebook news feed that basically stated how the US TIME's cover was only the differente one than other countries' TIME's covers. The US version of the magazine was illustrated with a statement that says, &quot;Why anxiety is good for you?&quot; as the covers released from other regions (such as Asia, Europe) talked about revolutions. It seems like someone or some figures definitely did not want to let Americans to know about the revolution and instead, they put something else totally different. In order to solve this issue, I would suggest to get sharpen your critical views and thinking skills to see the truth and not-manipulated media by reading lots of resources and keeping yourself updated or getting into knowledgeable. Besides, knowing and studying current hot issues would also help you find deceived media so that you can keep away from them.  ]]></description></item><item><title>The environment weakens while we keep consuming</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/The_environment_weakens_while_we_keep_consuming-5127.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The most pressing problem with American mass media is the overproduction of commodities and overly excessive consumerism that’s using up our natural resources and harming the environment. I believe this particular point was brought up by Sut Jhally in a video we watched in class. He made the argument that corporations and monopolies are mass producing products and trying to sell you commodities you don’t need or already have. While they do this to maximize profits the natural environment is taking a toll. Jhally states that our natural resources are going to start running out within the next 60 to 70 years if we don’t take action. The issue of mass media and the environment was brought up again in the video “Toxic Sludge is Good For You”. In this video they explain that many of the environmental programs that we see are funded by the people that are causing the problem. They make it look like what they are doing really isn’t that bad; you should even support it because they’re helping the cause. Corporations try to deceive the public with this to keep them in the hearts of consumers, while ignoring the real environmental threat. This point also ties into the video “Constructing Public Opinion” when they talk about the phantom liberal. The phantom liberal means there is no longer a left wing in Washington, but the media makes it look like there’s a battle between both sides. This means that most of the issues liberals care about, like protecting the environment, are cast aside. Public concern follows media coverage, and as “environmental issues are getting worse, public concern is going down” (Constructing Public Opinion). We need to do something about this before it’s too late. Solving this problem can be quite easy, we just need to make the public aware and break through the constraining forces. There are many legitimate programs to get involved in and help spread awareness. Also we need to distance ourselves from the companies who sacrifice safety and sustainability for profit, by doing so we can cut off the problem at the source.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (PILGRIM -- 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___PILGRIM_--_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5072.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Of all the problems that mass media has created, I think a major one revolves around the idea that the US is a 10 day nation.  This means that when something big happens in the news(earthquake, oil spill, etc.) it is what we all are thinking about.  Through Facebook groups and statuses to emails, videos, we are all showing our comfort and care for the issue at hand.  But then it has come to my attention after about 10 days or so, we don't really hear much or talk about the incident that just happened.  In part because something else has taken its place.  So people will tend to forget or care less about the recent event.  I think this has to deal with that America has been taught to have such a short attention span, that it is difficult for us to focus on a major crisis for a long period of time.  The media is partly responsible since after a period of time they stop reporting on these natural disasters and incidents.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (PILGRIM -- 1) Media and Gender Roles</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___PILGRIM_--_1__Media_and_Gender_Roles-5066.aspx</link><pubDate>Tuesday, February 21, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[In my opinion once of the most pressing issues of mass media is the social construction of gender roles. Through advertising women and men are taught basic concepts for what is expected of both the male and female genders. Advertising is a $250 billion dollar a year industry and though many people may claim they are unaffected by advertising, the average American is exposed to 3000 advertisements a day. These advertisements sell success and normalcy, mostly through subconscious processing. For women, advertisements advocate perfect feminine beauty, an impossible ideal. They also present a standard for how women should behave in society, suggesting that model women are passive, vulnerable, silent and sexualized. For men, advertisements portray the ideal man as muscular, aggressive, stoic, violent, and unemotional. These specific traits are incredibly worrisome because they teach boys from a young age that to be masculine means to be violent. The combination of advertising’s social construction of gender leads to an unbalanced relationship between men and women, one where men are seen as superior and at times having power over women.  The consequences of such an unbalance are things like date rape, teen dating violence, a disregard for the mental health of young men, and a high percentage of eating disorders in women.  Though many more factors such as environment, family beliefs, geographic location and education are also responsible for the behaviors and attitudes associated with each gender role, in a mass media society advertisements have a large impact on the basic concepts of gender roles.]]></description></item><item><title>(Re: Pilgrim) The Problem With Media Today...</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/_Re__Pilgrim__The_Problem_With_Media_Today___-5057.aspx</link><pubDate>Monday, February 20, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I think that the most pressing problem with mass media is that, despite its changes in recent years, it is still taken by many, at face value, as an authority.  In the early days of American mass media, it served the purported “ideal” purpose we think of today:  An information sharing device to maintain general awareness and promote active and informed participation in democracy (this view is reflected by the scholars we've studied and also by our “Eight Functions of Mass Media” list).  Unfortunately, the reality of media has changed in recent years.  With the advent of television as a primary information source (as cited by Postman), and corporate consolidated media control (as cited by Bagdikian), media is now a corporate agenda-setting device for entertainment and advertising profits, rather than an investigative information tool of the people.  Unfortunately, many people still interpret what they see on news channels (one of which our group is named after) as unfiltered, unbiased truth.  In order to combat this, more independent news sources need to come into the collective consciousness of the American people.  Thanks to the internet, many such specialty news sources exemplify journalistic integrity and what mass media should be.  One of the problems with these, however, is that they are usually specialized (reporting on just politics, foreign affairs, etc.) and, separated, have little bargaining power when competing for the average Americans media time.  In order to remedy this, I propose that other sites, social media tools, and applications for mobile devices are developed that aggregate the information provided by these specialized outlets into one central news feed.  This will create the semblance of a full, well-rounded media outlet that can compete with the broad coverage of mass media conglomerates, while maintaining the high-caliber reporting provided by passionate, specialized reporters and websites.]]></description></item><item><title>RE: (PILGRIM -- 1) RESPOND TO THIS QUESTION -- to begin</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/RE___PILGRIM_--_1__RESPOND_TO_THIS_QUESTION_--_to_begin-5055.aspx</link><pubDate>Monday, February 20, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[I believe the biggest problem with the media in general is that the vast majority of everything is run by giant corporations. When it comes down to it, many problems in the media would be eliminated if there were no such thing as these ridiculously large conglomerates. Independent companies do not stand a chance against them when it comes to films, television shows, products, radio, record labels, news, etc. Just about everything in the media is simply a large corporation's scheme into getting the most money they can squeeze out of Americans. News stories would not be skewed with VNR's made by PR's of big companies to try to sneak their advertisements into news reports. Extremely costly advertisements and commercials would not be shown as often. The things we see on television and hear on the radio would have a much broader variety and Americans as a whole would be opened up to new ideas, sounds, and thoughts, rather than sneakily skewed into a certain corporation's way of thinking. The most talented people in the country may then have a chance at being the ones in the spotlight. Without these reigning corporations, we may have a chance at finding true talent in America, and finding the good again. The CEO of Disney has even been quoted to say that he has to responsibility to make art, or to even make it good. His only goal is money. These are the movies we show our children.In addition, The Walt Disney Corporation owns a giant conglomerate of companies that most Americans probably do not even realize are affiliated, and furthermore, all of these companies too only have the goal of making money. ]]></description></item><item><title>The Lies Of Media</title><link>http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/boards/post/NewscorpwithFoxviews-8-reply/The_Lies_Of_Media-5047.aspx</link><pubDate>Monday, February 20, 2012</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The most pressing problem with American mass media is the image they make Americans think is the “ideal” man or woman.  The media puts people in magazines, on TV and on billboards looking flawless supposedly due to the product they are selling. Whether its clothes, a fragrance or a beauty product the media brain washes Americans into thinking that buying their product will make you look like the model. As seen in the movie “ Codes of Gender” when men and women are posed together in an ad, it shows a sign of intimacy and makes people seeing the ad think if they own that product they will attract people of the opposite sex. Everyone wants to be attractive, so when the ads show attractive people together it brainwashes them into thinking they will be better looking. The problem with this is the people in the ads don’t really look that way in real life. The picture is taken, edited like crazy, then placed in the ad. That is the part that most Americans don’t think about. The only thing that it makes the reader think how much they don’t look like the model, and how much they wish they did. This is sickening because natural beauty is better than fake beauty. They think that the product will transform them the way the computer did to the models. The media lies to Americans everyday, every time they flip open magazine, drive by a billboard or turn on the TV. The only way this problem could be solved is if the media put real people in the ads without all the photoshoping and editing.  This would solve the problem of the ads lying about their functions and would also relieve Americans of the stress to look perfect like the people in the media, and be happy with the way they are because in reality the people in the media look just like you and I beneath all the products.]]></description></item></channel></rss>
