My Take on Michel Foucalt’s Institutions

In today’s lectorial, we had a discussion about institutions and variations on them in society. Essentially, an institution is a man-made construct concerned with structures of society. This can be anything from ‘marriage’ or ‘divorce’ as social institutions, or media institutions such as the ABC News, HBO or community media channels.

What stuck with me most after the lectorial was philosopher, historian, social theorist and literary critic Michel Foulcalt’s ideas of relationships between society and individuals. In his 1961 book Madness and Civilisation, Foucalt explores the institution of mental asylums from the Renaissance (1500s AD) up to the contemporary society of his time in the late 1950s-early 60s.

In his book, he explored the societal implications of what constituted as ‘mad’ or ‘sane,’ and the way that society dealt with ‘mad’ people. His study became an exploration of what was considered ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’ according to social values. In summary, he maintained that unlike inthe Renaissance, when those deemed ‘mad’ were believed to be on a cosmically higher level than others in society, in the Classical Age (17th to 18th/19th century), those considered mad were simply thrown into asylums out of the way with other undesirables for the protection of society.

Moving further on to his contemporary era, the modern era, he asserted in his findings that while there were attempts being made to ‘cure’ these people in institutions under the guidance of medical doctors, there was on one level a great contrast in power between patients and doctors and on another level an inherited social value from the Classical Age that those who were ‘mad’ were undesirables to be hidden away for society’s protection.

Foucalt’s study on mental asylums as institutions through history are important factors of my studies because it highlights the central significance that sociology, society and society’s values have in media and communications. What I got out of this lectorial revolving around institutions, elements of sociology and Michel Foucalt’s case studies was the sense that institutions are an immensely important construct and organisation of structures in society.

Basic Comms 101 by Me

In my New Media New Asia class, for a group assessment task, my group pitched an idea for an app that would incentify taking public transport in China to reduce congestion and air pollution.

Essentially, in big cities in China such as Beijing or Shanghai, public transport is not utilised the same way as somewhere like Melbourne, because there is a more prominent culture of hierarchy and status for the Chinese, and one way of showing off status is by owning a car. Thus, logically, it makes sense that people in China are more interested in showing off the fact that they have a car than waiting an hour for a bus.

The feedback that we got from our tutor for this pitch was that we should reconsider how to approach the issue. What we wanted ultimately from this app was to change the behaviour of people in China; and this, to me, has become a key factor in the philosophy and aims of media/communication practitioners.

Behavioural change through our app, as our tutor suggested, would be based around Acculturation (Merriam Webster definition: cultural modification of an individual, group, or people by adapting to or borrowing traits from another culture). In a sense, this app would be aimed at 18-30 year olds in China, students and young professionals, in the hopes of normalising use of public transport for their generation and future generations.

Behavioural change in communications is vital to communications now that I think about it more closely. Raising awareness, as enlightened to me in my earlier classes, is not actually that important on its own. Raising awareness doesn’t do anything on its own. When David Attenborough released his documentary about the Great Barrier Reef in December 2015, sure he wanted awareness of the environment’s vulnerability to be raised. But what the producers, writers and Attenborough ultimately strived for in the making of the documentary was to change the behaviour of those who watched it in a way that would benefit the environment’s health.

So now, after this enlightening class, I intend to go forth in my media career with a better understanding of what my intentions are: do I want to tell a story, show off some pretty pictures, or do I want to encourage a change in behaviour?

My Take on Broadcast and the Post-Broadcast Paradigm

The second half of our lectorial today was about the role and nature of audience in media. Key terms that were discussed were broadcast and post-broadcast.

  • Broadcasting refers to how media is/was distributed to ‘mass audiences,’ mostly via television or radio. Broadcast media included things like the news or generic television shows catering to general demographics i.e. Families
  • Post-Broadcast refers to this idea more specific, niched audiences becoming consumers of media, rather than just simply mass audiences

I was interested in how the change in communication technologies have contributed to the change in how media is received. Distribution of media evolved from from TV broadcasts to online content, changing how audiences could access this content. When this occurred, media creators and practitioners altered their approach to getting audience attention by going online. Now there are platforms like Netflix, Apple TV, Spotify and TIDAL all encouraging the individual nature of consumers.

For instance, in the last decade, the cable network Adult Swim has become increasingly popularised as audiences are able to access their shows (including Rick and Morty, Aqua Hunger Teen Force, Robot Chicken and Family Guy).  The network has further developed itself by producing video games and music. Adult Swim’s penchant for creating mature, adult-oriented content in the form of animations and cartoons has attracted an incredibly tightly niched audience.

Without the formation of online streaming and downloading of media content, the kind of TV, films, music and content being produced would seem more generalised in the hopes of ‘entertaining the masses’ huddled together around the TV in the living room.

My Take on Copyright

Discussing copyright in our lectorial today was like a trip down memory lane back to VCE Studio Art. I’m grateful for having listened in those few Studio Theory classes on copyright, because a lot of what I knew came flooding right back: moral rights and obligations, duration of copyright and fair dealings.

We really only scratched the surface in VCE, and my first impression of the lectorial was a fleeting sense of panic: I immediately thought of any original artistic content, whether it was a drawing when I was 12, a photo series or a film that I’d posted online, and its vulnerability in cyberspace. Even further, what about things I had uploaded with copyrighted content? On YouTube, for instance, I tried to upload videos with a song from the 2007 film Hairspray, and about a week later the sound was muted because I wasn’t allowed to use the song. That, I think, was a fairly decisive but relatively appropriate manner in which to deal with the issue of copyrighted music being unlawfully used; I went on with my business, and forgot about the whole thing until now. In other areas of the internet, lack of understanding and the living, breathing environment of cyberspace makes enforcement of copyright laws nigh impossible except for in rare circumstances. But that is a post for another day.

Until this class, I always thought of copyright laws as being arbitrary. I still believe that to some degree, but now I feel I can respect those laws a little more since I have a better understanding of what is and isn’t allowed. For instance:

  • Ideas are not copyrighted, but content is

An idea can be recycled in anyway shape or form. If someone comes up with an idea for a film, and someone else wants to use that idea in their own ways. They may write different scripts or draw up different storyboards; as long as the actual material content of the films contains certain dissimilarities, everything is cool. It’s only if one of these products either takes content from the original, or replicates it until it is substantially similar, does this become an infringement of copyright. The only instance in which substantial similarities stop being grounds for infringement are when the product is made on the grounds of parody, satire, criticism and review or for educational purposes i.e. for an assignment.

  • Duration of Copyright

This got me a little confused. I remembered from VCE and had my thoughts confirmed that generally, copyright lasts for the remainder of the creator’s life plus 70 years afterward. However, the whole shimozzle regarding how to deal with works created before copyright was created in 1968 got me puzzled. The system of how copyrighted works are classified before 1st May 1969, to me, seems complicated and unusual. Then again, I was only able to see the slide for a brief moment before we moved on.

Copyright was a friendly little blast from the past in today’s lectorial, and I felt pleasantly as though I was eased into it having done Studio Art last year.

My Take on Medium Theory

For our PB4, my group has been given the subject of Technology and Mediums, and we seek to explore the evolution of cameras and photography since the beginning of the 20th century and its place within society as a media form. Relative to our topic of Mediums, I read through Meyrowitz’s reading regarding Medium  Theory.

To start off with, Medium Theory is the study of the distinctions between mediated forms (audio, print, text, visual, etc.) on social, psychological and physical levels. The simplest summary of the definition of Medium Theory in my opinion can be found in a quote by Marshall McLuhan, a literature scholar: ‘The medium is the message’ (1960s). The meaning behind this quote is that social influences that arise out of the media are influential not because of the message that is decoded, but because of the medium’s effect on recipients.

Distinctions made between different medium forms include the degree of verisimilitude (dictionary.com: ‘the appearance or semblance of truth[reality]”), the degree of human intervention and interaction required of varying mediums, and the degree to which a medium can be distributed or received simultaneously to many people in many locations at once.

Something that interested me in this reading was the history of medium theory being dated back to Socrates in ancient Greece. Now, first and foremost, I am someone who admires Socrates; my favourite quote by him is ‘All I know is that I know nothing,’ and it really feels relevant to my brain at this point of the year. Anyway, he argued that writing had negative effects on the mind; he believed that we literally no longer needed to use our brains to remember things because we could write it all down. This interests me in regard to the subject of mediums and medium theory because I see it as a fitting and humbling show of the beginnings of communication media studies, way before media was even a thing. Additionally, I find it ironic that Socrates thought writing was bad for you because if he was zapped across time to the present day, imagine his reactions to phones, tablets, laptops, smartboards, printing presses, etc.

 

My Take on Narrative in Documentary

My favourite documentary is Rize, dir. David LaChapelle in 2005. It follows the dance phenomenon of Krumping in South Central Los Angeles, a dynamic and revolutionary dance style that the black community turns to instead of violence and drugs. It stunned me when I first watched it, and I was inspired by the incredible dancing and enraptured by the stories of individuals in the community.

I think what struck me about Rize, and was reminded of in the M. Rabiger reading on drama and narrative in documentary, was the struggles that people went through every day in this community.  What struck me in particular was a quote from the reading by Michael Roemer: ‘Plot is really the rules of the universe at work.’ The way that I understand this quote is that although a complication in life, or of the universe, may be resolved, there is always another complication after that.

In Rize, there are many conflicts within the community that practices Krumping, despite their efforts to avoid things such as drug hustling and gang activity. After the Battle Zone event that goes successfully for Tommy the Clown, he comes home to find his house was broken into and robbed. In another incident, a young girl is killed and the grief felt by her family and the community reveberates through the film. These events of the documentary encapsulate the idea Roemer suggests, because in Rize, despite the fact that the community gets through incidents and crises in many shapes and with varying outcomes, there is always another complication that arises.

The Problem with the Cultural Appropriation Debate

A topic of discussion that I have noticed appearing frequently on social media lately is that of cultural appropriation. Cultural appropriation is concerned with the ethics of appropriating different aspects of different cultures in art, pop culture, and media, particularly in a way that is exploitative.

First, let’s get some clarity, since I didn’t know much about the subject myself and had to do my research; The debate surrounding culture-appropriation typically involves the terms ‘appropriation’ that is, “to take or use (something) especially in a way that is illegal, unfair, etc.” and compares it with ‘appreciation’ (“to understand the worth or importance of (something or someone”).

There are two sides to this debate. One side believes that cultural appropriation can be disrespectful, offensive, and insensitive, while the other believes cultural appropriation is a mythical construct imagined by ‘feminazis’ and PC (politically correct) fanatics wanting something to complain about. There are plenty of shades between these polarised views, but on the internet, the extremes dominate.

On one level, I see the validity of arguments damning cultural appropriation: it’s never ok to make anyone feel bad about themselves, and it’s definitely not okay to exploit the cultures of others in demeaning and disrespectful ways. For example, I understand that an Indian feather head-dress will look rad with your next music fest outfit, but in Native American culture that head-dress was once only allowed to be one by warriors and chiefs who earned each feather by accomplishing one courageous deed at a time. Herein lies the difference between appropriation and appreciation; I cannot speak for all head-dress-wearing music-festival party legends, but I would venture a guess that most would not appreciate this, and therefore i question whether the choice of garment is really respectful.

Being blind to the positions of minorities and less fortunate cultures and religions and furthermore being disrespectful to these cultures, direct or indirect, is also not okay. On another level, I believe that harmonious coexistence between races and cultures will flourish through appreciation and sharing of different cultural ideas, designs, artefacts etc.

Ultimately, however, I struggle to show my support for any of these ideas simply because I do not want to get involved in unnecessarily hyped up, hostile and often greatly misinformed internet fights.

Many people refuse to believe cultural appropriation exists simply because they do not want to be associated with SJWs (social justice warriors) or feminazis. They also discredit and remain indifferent to these ideas because the way that they are presented is often in an hysterical, OTT mindset that is, ironically, socially unnacceptable.

The whole debate, thus, has turned from a well-informed discussion about respecting each other as human beings into a petty argument often confused by individual egos and opinions. The environment that the internet offers for discussing ideas like this can easily become hostile and unpleasant when frustrated people feel they aren’t being heard. It’s like two people covering their ears and screaming across a room at eachother. If we’re to have any chance of taking full advantage of the amazing potential of the internet for communication and connection, we need to find ways to ensure that everyone feels respected, that everyone feels heard, and that the outcome is not to prove a point, but to learn.

My Take on Photography vs. Cinematography

A latest interest of mine has been practicing my photographic skills. Inspired by such talents as Ansel Adams, Lars Tunbjork and Bruce Weber, I have made sure my camera is used more in my day to day activities.

What has caught my interest lately is how different photographers are creatively motivated, and how this changes their style of photography. My fellow photographer partner in crime, who is studying a Bachelor of Industrial Design, prefers zoom and telephoto lenses, whereas I, with a keen interest in media and cinema studies, prefer a fixed wide-angle lens. My motivation is to capture story, meaning and artistic value through my photographs, and believe that my 24mm wide angle lens grants opportunities to mimic the styles of the Coen Brothers and Wes Anderson. However, the motivations of someone in the career of industrial design is to capture the most aesthetically pleasing image meant to communicate to a viewer the functions, appearance and design of a product.

Should we Prioritise Psychology in Media Studies?

In 2015, the subject Psychology was the most popular subject among VCE students; at the school I attended, there were two full classes out of our 80 student cohort studying the subject. However, only a handful of these students studied Media as well, or went on to study a Media based subject after high school. I did not study it with an ill-informed prejudice against science subjects, and now I wish I did.

In my New Media New Asia class, our current assessment is to pitch an idea for a mobile app that informs its users of how they can be more sustainable citizens. One group came up with the idea of getting users to donate to charities, however the idea would have some flaws if put into action.

Firstly, human beings, as put by my tutor, tend to be selfish. By understanding this inherent selfishness that is evident in human nature, the designer of an app like this could give incentive for the user to donate, and also feel as though they have been personally fulfilled in some way.

Take the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge for example; the campaign to  raised over $100 million in donations, and was immensely succesfully. My understanding is that the challenge, while allowing all sorts of people globally to raise awareness and donate money, also gratified some subconscious selfish desires to be noticed or admired.

What the Ice Bucket Challenge did was that it had people showing off that they had been nominated, indicating that they had popularity. Secondly, it involved people showing off that they were ‘generous’. In fact, many people who did the challenge did not necessarily donate, but rather they wanted to simply show everyone they knew, and the whole world, that they had done an uncomfortable and amusing challenge.

In summation, the brains behind the challenge knew that they could make a campaign successful by creating a rewarding incentive for anyone who joined. The challenge placed ordinary people on the same level as celebrities and movie stars, becoming one of the most successful social media campaigns in the last few years. Understanding psychology was key to making the Ice Bucket Challenge go viral.

My Take on Story-Telling

Today’s lectorial on storytelling really got me interested in my own experience with storytelling. Since I can remember, I have loved to create and imagination stories and worlds and fantastical journeys, and expressed these in drawings and attempts at writing books. Whatever I came up with, I had to get it down in some way, and I could spend a few hours or weeks obsessed with an idea; one of my primary school teachers thought I’d be CEO of Puffin or Penguin books. As I entered middle school and high school, that passion waned a little; I spent less time creating and more time consuming media, which isn’t so bad really. But now that high school and VCE is over, I want to get back and create again.

Something that I think became a weaker point in my productions towards the end of highschool was my ability to create a strong story, and instead spent all my time trying to impress myself and others with what I thought was avante-garde film techniques, cool editing and an unusual and difficult to function piece of steadying gear I got for ten bucks on eBay. It wasn’t until I looked back on these old films I’d made, and also until this lectorial, that it became apparent to me that the techniques, gear, cinematography and visuals that go into a film don’t mean anything without a solid story.

I also got this epiphany watching Casey Neistat’s vlogs and films, in which he encourages aspiring filmmakers to care less about the gear and equipment you use, and more about developing a story or idea. Story is what drives the film, and the equipment, regardless of whether they are a point and shoot camera or an expensive camera drone, are just the tools we use to present the story.