May, A. L. 2010. “Who Tube? How YouTube’s News and Politics Space Is Going Mainstream.” International Journal of Press/Politics 15:499–511.
Writer, Albert May discusses YouTube as an increased drive to make a profit and avoid copyright challenges, making YouTube one of the largest online video platforms. May explains that YouTube is becoming a hospitable place for news organisations that are targeting the mediums young audience, as it is so easy on rules and regulations. People are becoming comfortable, compared to other institutions like NewsCorp. The article explores the developments and tracks the audience changes to the largest YouTube news and politics sites. May uses News Publisher Dr Jon as an example of being affected by YouTube at a political time, proving the emergence of political youtubers.
‘The future prospects of online video in the news and political realm have significant implications because the growing audience for online video is decidedly among the young and rising generation, who have adopted it as their own’. As interesting as this article is, I don’t think its relevance is extremely high for the research on institutions. Looking at Youtube as part of as in institution is definitely important and crucial, however its political effect is not as important, and therefore was not the best reading.
Watts, T. (2011). Media Deception: You Are Not Getting The Truth. Newsfocus.org. Available at: http://www.newsfocus.org/media_control.htm [Accessed 18 May 2016]. (Watts, 2011)
Watts takes an extreme approach, as this opinionated article tackles media, and its influence over society. Watts explains that media institutions are deceived on a grand, with manipulation that is well hidden. He describes them as a hierarchy of an overly received media in which we place our blind trust’. From Watts’ perspective, society has been robbed by the media, due to the high level of trust society has to the higher institutions.
Current media is being run by six main co-operations, which have total control over what we see and hear on most platforms. And thus is easy to ‘propagandize and manipulate’ the people through media, suggesting that people may never know the truth. GE, Disney, CBS, Time warner, NewsCorp and Viacom, six corporate giants have vast numerous media holdings, through cable, radio, internet, magazines and newspaper, accounting for the major bulk of our entire media.
As i found Watts’ article to be extremely one sided and over generalised, it creates a major point in how media institutions and overthrowing society, to have access to knowing the truth, and will be extremely beneficial for the lead up to more research.
De Ridder, S. (2013). Are digital media institutions shaping youth’s intimate stories? Strategies and tactics in the social networking site Netlog. New Media & Society, 17(3), pp.356-374.
This source looks at the positive attributes in which media institutions like social media platforms are able bring to society. De Ridder explores social media institutions and their influence on the youth of today. Through certain personal stories of how media has such influence over sexuality, relationships, gender experience and identity. The writer explores differing identities that emerge as a result of social media, and how media institutions have allowed people to express their true self in a safe environment. However, this is a bold statement to argue, as social media is known to be a place where identities are often hidden, and fake.
De Ridder explains how large and crucial the role of social media and other big institutions have become, becoming such a big impact in many lives, particularly the youth of today. She concludes by questioning how to live such an intimate life with so many digital and networked media forums surrounding us. As such research showed that the mediation process remains invisible. As it is so crucial, due to new media companies arising, new media is constantly changing and thus need to be recognized. Overall, this article proves that media institutions are highly influential towards the youth, and are in fact extremely powerful.
McNair, B. (2015). ABC, BBC and the future of public service media. [online] The Conversation. Available at: http://theconversation.com/abc-bbc-and-the-future-of-public-service-media-44904 [Accessed 10 May 2016].
Brian Mcnair explores the long-established public service institutions that have slowly been given custodianship over the most recent years. He argues whether institutions should continue the viability and sustainability of the core principles, compared to the social media uprising, that is making the dominant institutions weaker which is testing public mood.
As the media environment is rapidly shifting due to public media service, changes are strengthening the rationale of public service media. Whereas other media institutions such as Foxtel, are against public service due to its high effect on its use being pushed down.
As Mcnair questions, Do the BBC and ABC need to operate all channels? More people are choosing to interact with public forms, as the role of public service media aims to constrain basic instincts of commercialism, giving a different cultural experience and engagement for society. The article debates to what public service media are for, and how they can best fulfil their role in the digital century, exploring the consistent style of public service media compared to an institution like Newscorp and BBC, which needs improvement in order to be ‘up to date’ in today’s society.
Hodgson, G. (2006). What Are Institutions?. Journal Of Economic Issues, XL(1), pp.1-10.
Hodgson elucidates institutions as a comprehensive term, replicating many different perceptions and ideas, hence there is no union in the definition in line with the specific theory of institutions. Hodgson breaks down the essay into five consecutive main points regarding institutions. The author justifies institutions, conventions and rules as form of social structure, involving human interaction and activity controlled by a certain rule. The concerning function, interaction and belief of an institution, and how people choose to follow certain institutions as a custom or habit. Hodgson outlines the difference between an organization and institution, covering the existing argument of how each term can be defined, as organizations can be seen as a special institution. The biasness of an institution is explained, as well as the differing view of the changing personality of agents involved.
Hodgson takes a subjective approach, as taking the idea of institutions being over generalized; he explains institutions from a holistic perspective. Thus, when thinking of institutions as an entirety, one needs to try and avoid preconception caused by the characteristics of a particular type of institutions that are generalized. Aiming directly at academic students, he explains institutions through a more analytical understanding rather than taking an explicit approach. Furthermore, Hodgson’s writings of what an institution fundamentally deconstructs all connotations, and explains what is actually means, giving a more objective understanding of the concept of institutions.
Silverblatt, A. (2004). Media as Social Institution. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), pp.35-41.
This source looks at social institutions, and they way an institution can impact society and social construct.Silverblatt focuses on the societal approach that forms based on media form, and the way media social institutions can form communication which can ultimately unify diverse groups of people. The way media as an institution can educate, provide stability and cause individuals to be so reliant on information are discussed as positive attributes of social institutions and can therefore bring change to society. Next, Silverblatt discusses institutions in regards to media ownership, and the power of the media as a social institution. Whether they are aimed to control thoughts and actions to turn a profit, or influenced by creating new media in reasoning of solely entertainment, promoting aberrant conduct. The idea of media ownership is explained through the difference between private and government ownership within the media industry, and how the impact fluctuates by audiences.
It also touches on the difference between privately owned and government owned media industry, and how their social impact can differ; for example in countries like China, where media is government owned, it is not so much for entertainment and exists mores as a guide to citizens on how the live and think.
Recent Comments