Communications and Media

The medias participation in activism may be understood within the context of the dialectic method wherein the media occupies the role of the synthesizer of the different perspectives in society. Although the media participates and incites activism, the perspective it provides does not necessarily take the form of an anti-thesis to the hegemonic beliefs and practices in the social sphere. Such is the case since it merely chronicles the different views in the social sphere. To a certain extent, one may even claim that the media operates outside the dialectic of social beliefs since ideally its main role lies in providing accounts of the events andD  or issues in the social sphere. Nevertheless, despite the objectivity associated to the various forms of media in all social and political settings, it cannot be denied that, whether implicitly or explicitly, a specific form of media has a tendency to lean to a specific view of reality. Baudrillard (2002) notes this as he claims that there are two predominant views of the media wherein the media is either seen as a technological or ideological tool. As a technological tool, the media may be used to topple andD  or forward different ideological beliefs. As an ideological tool, on the other hand, it may be used to forward a specific view of reality. In both cases, whether the media is perceived as a technological or an ideological tool, it remains to be the case that it provides a challenge to those who partake of its contents. Baudrillard claims that the media provides an original strategy, an original response in the form of a challenge (2002, p.102). It challenges those who perceive it to react for or against it.

It is within this theme of the medias function in society that I would like to dwell on in this discussion. This theme of the medias role as technological and ideological tool has been continuously raised in the readings throughout the semester. By focusing on the technological and ideological functions of the media in relation to its role as a tool for eliciting communication in society, it is possible to show how the different technological innovations in the media have also led to the predominance of different ideological beliefs in society. This shows that as a synthesizer of beliefs in society, the media continually opts to be separated from hegemonic practices in the social sphere. In other words, although specific technological innovations also represent a hegemonic movement in society, the media is always capable of distancing itself from this movement as it adopts an activist stance against it. It is able to do so by representing the counter-narrative against the grand narratives in both the private and political spheres in society. 

Medias capability to provide counter-narratives as well as synthesize beliefs in society is dependent on its existence in a democratic and liberal setting. Such a setting provides diverse beliefs. Naturally, societies which adhere to the tenets of liberalism and democracy will be flooded by too many ideas, worldviews and values. The production of beliefs in such a setting enables the emergence of a capitalist system that utilizes these different perspectives to further its cause. Commercialism thus, produces confusion and perhaps, intellectual anarchy, by flooding too many false notions, as exemplified in the slogans that capitalists use to market their products. In a certain sense, the rise of commercialism endangers the very fabric of society societys cultural, historical and intellectual heritage. Eventually, marketing and advertising were able to replace political discourse. People, oftentimes readily accept the truthfulness of advertisements. They rarely take the time to think for themselves the truthfulness of slogans and advertisements on the television and the Internet. Such a setting of course, poses serious threats not only on the individual but more importantly, to the whole of society.

In order to combat this threat, Benjamin (2002), in The Author as Producer, requires the consumer to think, to reflect on his position in the process of production (p.80). He claims, We may depend on it this reflection leads, sooner or later, for the writers who matter, that is, for the best technicians in their subject, to observations which provide the most factual foundation for their solidarity with the proletariat (Benjamin, 2002, p.80). Within the context of media, Benjamin requires all those who consume information from the media to consider its content. Such is the case since if one considers the content of the media one realizes that it is also shaped by the predominant ideology in society. If the media will be a tool for activism, it is necessary for the media to recognize the different ways of countering the predominant capitalist systems in our society. In a similar vein, the consumers of the information given in the media also need to assess its content since it is ultimately dependent on them whether a specific content, hence a specific belief, will proliferate in society.

The media as a tool for activism, in this sense, takes a dual role not only as it is required to provide accurate information but also as it must necessarily require those who consume it to critically assess the information it provides. This view was presented by several authors and groups such as Bey (2003), Boyd (2002), Boyd  Duncombe (2004), the Critical Art Ensemble (1994), and Hobsbawn (1971). Their articles tackle how media may counter the grand narratives and hence the hegemonic beliefs in society. In reading Critical Art ensembles (1994) article along with Hobsbawns (1971) article, one arrives at the conclusion that the media can be a useful tool for activism as it provides a location for countering certain hegemonic views.

Initially, I held the assumption that capitalism and the media operate with one goal in mind, that being to ensure the continuance of a capitalist culture. Capitalism, through media and advertising commodifies values such as individuality. By linking the false notion of individuality to a certain commodity, consumers think that they are unique, that they are different. A deeper analysis however reveals that the aforementioned claim to individuality is nothing but an illusion a figment of the mind manufactured and institutionalized by capitalists. It is not only the case that it is manufactured and institutionalized it is also sold to the consumers. Aside from generating feelings of being in control, the media industry also generates feelings that people are capable of rebelling against popular culture.

Even brilliant and innovative television producers and directors may be tempted to think that by coming up with a new idea, they are rebelling against popular culture. But the crucial point that must be underscored here is the fact that since these people are all engaged in a competition against rivals, they would naturally do what is best for their respective television networks. And so, they think and do the same things thinking and trying to come up with something new, something unique that they can offer in the hope that they would provide entertainment to the audience. Again, the point is clear these television show producers and directors just like everyone else are caught up in the web.
My derogatory views towards the media however changed as I realized that even if there are instances wherein it seems to enable the continuation of capitalism, it also opts to end it by introducing activist stances or counter-narratives in its content. Bakhtins (2002) discussion, for example, shows that by introducing the grotesque in certain forms of the information or images given by the media, it inadvertently signals the consumers to question the relationship established by pop culture with a specific image that enabled its conception as the grotesque. An example of this is apparent as Steinem (1999) argues that the negative connotations associated with female menstruation is in itself a result of a patriarchal society which opts to find ways to show the limitations of the female mind by virtue of her possession of natural female characteristics. Female menstruation thereby is considered as a grotesque event. This is also similar to the negative connotations associated with AIDS. Crimp (1990) argues that the association of AIDS with homosexuals allowed the conception of the disease outside the field of health and medicine and within the field of ethics.

In the case of menstruation and AIDS, although the media is also used as a tool for the proliferation of certain sexist beliefs in society, the media may also be used as a tool for showing the misplaced assumptions behind certain connotations associated with individuals and their biological traits or the disease common in their population. This is possible since the media may also inform the consumer that these connotations are merely based on false assumptions. Introducing these connotations in a grotesque manner may be considered as the medias way of probing the public to think about these associations and the mistaken propositions behind them.

Within this context, one perceives how the media as a technological tool for communication may also question the predominant ideology in society as it forces the consumers to question the assumptions within it. Although such a view of the consumers is highly idealistic since it assumes that they are capable of thinking outside the predominant paradigms, it is important to note that the social conditions in our society enabled the creation of free thinkers.

In our period, these free thinkers may be able to combat the different forms of oppression, exploitation, and injustice in society as they may use the media as a tool for countering the beliefs that enables all forms of injustice in society. Those who dissent enable the beginning of a new ideology. The media as a tool for expressing dissent may be utilized by the members of our generation in order to create a setting wherein the capitalist economy provides equal opportunities for all the members of society thereby enabling the realization of the ideal setting in the free market envisioned by our forefathers. We recognize that the kind of advertisements we see on the television and the Internet, these are mere chimeras of the values that they promise. This is one of the issues in a free democracy. Given the wide range of choices we have, what will we choose Given the many values there are, what values will we adhere to If we are to be more specific about this, we may ask ourselves the question as to what it is that we must do, do we conform or do we dissent How do we distinguish the truth given that we live in the time when the dominant paradigm is that there are multiple truths

In a free democracy, it is important to have dissenters because contrary to popular belief, they do have something good to contribute. Unanimity, although usually held as a sign of agreement and cooperation may also mean inefficiency and stagnation since there is no opposing side to check whether the decisions, policies and statutes are arrived at through proper deliberation. In the government, it is important to have dissenters it is always healthy to have an opposing side to ensure that there are checks and balances. The media serves as the vehicle for expressing these opposing viewpoints thereby enabling the checks and balances in our time.

Our generation may thereby attempt to end all forms of oppression and injustice in society by utilizing the media as a tool for dissent. By providing dissenting views as well as by utilizing the media as a tool for the development of critical thinking, it is possible to awaken the masses in their slumber. It is possible to allow them to realize that not all forms of information provided in the media are true. It is possible to utilize the media as a tool for developing critical thinking that will allow the members of society to recognize the forms of truth and untruth that are propagated in one of its most encountered vehicles for information, that being the media.