Leslie Tran31 March 2006Profs. Halpern and TraversOral Thesis

DEMOCRACY AND MEDIA LITERACY

INTRODUCTION

One of the hallmarks of a representative democracy is civic engagement, that is, citizen

involvement with community and participation in political affairs. Whether it is through writing

letters to congress or holding rallies in the streets, citizens have many opportunities to make their

voices heard. Scholars like Robert Putnam assert that democracy requires a high degree of civic

engagement. As citizens are part of the democratic process, government works better when

people are involved.

In studying the interplay between people and institutions in America, Alexis de

Tocqueville recognizes the importance of political and civic associations. For him it is the people

that supply the fuel for democracy. Americans are able to overcome individualism and come

together because they adhere to what Tocqueville terms as the “principle of self-interest properly

understood.” In calculating the utility of virtue, men “are reduced to inquiring whether it is not to

the individual advantage of each to work for the good of all, and when they have found one of

these points where private advantage does meet and coincide with the general interest, they

eagerly call attention thereto. Thus what was an isolated observation becomes a general doctrine,

and in the end one comes to believe that one sees that by serving his fellows man serves himself

and the doing good is to his advantage (Tocqueville 523).” When citizens realize that their self-

interest coincides with the public interest and take note of their interdependence, they have a

strong desire to form associations and work together to achieve their goals.

Unfortunately, some scholars note that the number of Americans in civic associations is

dwindling. In Bowling Alone, Putnam makes the claim that civic engagement in America has

1

declined. He notes that “collective forms of engagement, such as attending meetings, serving on

committees, or working for a political party, had diminished much more rapidly over the last

several decades than individual forms of engagement, such as writing to Congress or signing a

petition. Both forms of engagement can have political consequences, but only the former helps to

foster and reinforce social connections” (229). As a result of such decline, communities are

becoming more fragmented. Less Americans are coming together to form social networks and

build social capital.

To explain the decline in civic engagement, Putnam focuses much of his attention on how

electronic media and entertainment is taking up most Americans’ leisure time. Instead of

spending evenings socializing with community members or organizing campaigns at the local

church, more Americans are choosing to stay at home to watch television.

I agree with Putnam’s assessment of modern-day democracy. The advent of technology

and innovation is changing our approach to democratic practice and causing a decline in civic

engagement. However, it is not the mere presence of electronic media that isolates most

Americans from their communities. Technology provides society with many benefits and it does

us little service to develop an adversarial relationship with the things that make our lives easier.

Rather than solely examine the negative effects of technology use, one must also look at how

readers and viewers use and interpret media messages.

Putnam cites numerous studies that suggest that not all viewers are the same. For

instance, “selective viewers (that is, those who turn on the television only to see a specific

program and turn it off when they’re not watching) are significantly more involved in

community life than habitual viewers (those who turn the TV on without regard to what’s on and

leave it on in the background), even controlling for education and other demographic factors”

(224). Such studies point to a correlation between community involvement and one’s approach to

2

media. What we choose to watch also correlates with our level of involvement in the community.

As Putnam notes, “The more time spent watching news, the more active one is in the

community, whereas the more time spent watching soap operas, game shows, and talk shows, the

less active one is in the community (243).”

In this case, the “ideal” citizen is not only active in the community but also informed.

Rather than view uninspiring television, he/she chooses to watch informational and educational

programming. However, in the age of electronic media and spin, an informed citizen must have

the literacy skills to sort through mixed media messages. In this paper I examine the intersection

between politics and the media, and the need for media literacy. As defined by the Alliance for a

Media Literate America, the goal of media literacy education is to “empower people to be both

critical thinkers and creative producers of an increasingly wide range of messages using image,

language, and sound. [Media literacy] is the skillful application of literacy skills to media and

technology messages” (www.amlainfo.org). In the second part of this paper I discuss how

educators can begin to think about incorporating media literacy into their curriculum.

POLITICS AND THE MEDIA

“When no firm and lasting ties any longer unite men, it is impossible to obtain the cooperation of any great number of them unless you can persuade every man whose help is required that he serves his private interest by voluntarily uniting his efforts to those of all the others. That cannot be done habitually and conveniently without the help of a newspaper. Only a newspaper can put the same thought at the same time before a thousand readers…I am far from denying that newspaper in democratic countries lead citizens to do very ill-considered things in common; but without newspapers there would be hardly any common action at all…So hardly any democratic association can carry on without a newspaper” (Tocqueville, 517-518).

Alexis de Tocqueville clearly understands the role of mass communication in a

democratic society. The media provides a forum for associations to unite under a common belief

or goal. As Putnam writes, “Television [or media] at its civic best can be a gathering place, a

3

powerful force for bridging social differences, nurturing solidarity, and communicating essential

civic information” (Putnam, 243).

Unfortunately for the average media consumers, the line between entertainment and

information is not so clear. In the realm of politics and public policy, that line is made even

blurrier by political actors and the news media. One of the most basic requirements of democracy

is a citizenry that can make informed political choices. In Policy Paradox and Political Reason,

Deborah Stone lays out the art of political decision-making and what is involved in policy

analysis. Stone notes that it is not the supply of information and news reports that is essential to

the decision-making process. Rather it is the ability to interpret such information. She writes that

“in the polis…information is interpretive, incomplete, and strategically withheld…When the

newspaper reports that a share of General Motors stock sold yesterday for $80…we are confident

that the information is accurate and that it makes sense to think of that kind of information as

being correct or incorrect. But in politics, the important thing is what people make of such

reports…Interpretations are more powerful than facts” (21).

Political candidates and policymakers are familiar with the old adage that says, “How we

define problems is how we find solutions.” Stone points out that “because politics is driven by

how people interpret information, much political activity is an effort to control interpretations.

Political candidates and their campaign advisors are notorious for their creative presentation of

information, otherwise known as ‘manufacturing an image’” (21). In controlling interpretations,

political candidates manipulate numbers and omit facts to frame social problems in terms of their

own agendas. The objective is to lead the public to believe that one politician’s solution is more

superior to the others. As Stone writes, “Problem definition is…the strategic representation of

situations. Problem definition is a matter of representation because there is no objective

description of a situation; there can only be portrayals of people’s experiences and

4

interpretations. Problem definition is strategic because groups, individuals, and government

agencies deliberately and consciously design portrayals so as to promote their favored course of

action (Stone, 106).

As political candidates are experts at using the media for their advantage, citizens have

the job of critically examining the validity of political messages. What critical media consumers

believe to be true depends on the source of the information and how it is presented. They look at

the medium, the context of the message, and the choice of language to determine the reliability

of the message. Such skills form the basis for media literacy. In making a political decision,

media literate citizens are able to synthesize the facts, analysis the problem, and weigh the many

options offered by competing politicians.

MEDIA LITERACY

The educational philosopher John Dewey (1916) points out that one of the most

important roles of public education is to provide students with the skills to effectively participate

in democratic society and to act as responsible citizens. Dewey maintains that it is the

responsibility of schools to educate students for social change. In a similar vein, Paolo Freire

(1972) presents an education model that emphasizes empowerment, critical thinking, and self-

awareness. He advocates for what he terms as “problem-posing education.” “In problem-posing

education,” Freire writes, “men develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in

the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a

static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation” (70-71). Freire believes that through

problem-posing education, oppressed individuals and groups can be empowered to enact

systemic change.

The educational philosophies of Dewey and Freire lay much of the groundwork for media

literacy education. The goal of the media literacy movement is to educate individuals on how to

5

use media wisely and empower them to take control of media messages. Before the media

literacy movement took hold, parents and educators were worried about the effects of technology

on youths. Studies that cited the high number of hours children spent in front of the television

made parents anxious.

Those who were wary of technology’s influence worried that the younger generation

would be negatively impacted by the sexual and violent content on television. Critics of

electronic media blamed school shootings and violent crimes on such things as video games, rap

music, and movies. Such fears were solidified in 1972 when the Surgeon General’s Advisory

Committee on Television and Social Behavior raised the connection between television violence

and antisocial behavior (Goodman 2003). In order to protect children from these influences and

end the dominance of electronic media, critics of media technology advocated for homes without

video games and promoted national campaigns like “Turn Off Your TV” Week.

With the prevalence of media technology everywhere, it is difficult to control an

individual’s use of technology and quarantine him/her from media messages. As Galician (2004)

suggests, “A more enlightened and empowering parental practice would be to provide

“immunization” (10). While electronic media can offer low quality content, the fact of the matter

is that it gives its viewers pleasure and entertainment. Alvermann, Moon, and Hagood (1999)

note that “the purpose [of media literacy education]…should not be to destroy pleasure but to

explore them to uncover new and different forms of enjoyment” (35). There is great potential for

the media and its use if individuals approach it with a critical perspective.

When it comes to the media, it is better to give individuals the tool to critically interpret

and create media messages than to prevent or reduce media use. If we are illiterate in a discourse

community, our only option is to ignore its messages or accept it. However, if we are critically

literate, we are able to deconstruct information and challenge it (Harris 1993). Media literacy

6

gives individuals the tools to think critically and analytically. According to Bergsma (2004), “At

the heart of [the philosophy for media literacy] is an inquiry process developed into a construct

called the empowerment education spiral and that consists of four components – awareness,

analysis, reflections, and action – all designed to enable students to fully comprehend and act on

the content, form, purpose, and effects of media messages” (156). Critical literacy enables people

to deconstruct symbols and numbers to understand their implications and significance. As power

is possessed by those who define the problem, media literacy acts to empower individuals by

making them aware of the problem and enabling them with the tools to define it for themselves.

FROM THEORY TO PRACTICE

The call for media literacy is clear; individuals must have the critical and analytical

thinking skills to challenge media messages. However, the shift from theory and research to

practice is still in its infancy. According to Goodman (2003), much of the momentum to bring

media literacy into classrooms in the 1990’s “tended to come less from the grassroots than from

government and private agencies. Among the agencies and organizations that played an active

role were the National Drug Control Policy and the Center for Substance Abuse Preventions,

parishes of the Catholic Church, lobby organizations for regulation of children’s TV such as the

Center for Media Education in Washington” ( 14-15).

However, there are non-profit organizations that are trying to bridge national initiatives

and classroom goals. These organizations provide professional development for interested

educators who wish to incorporate media literacy into their practice. Project Look Sharp (PLS),

for instance, is a media literacy initiative of Ithaca College that provides support, resources, and

training for K-12 teachers. Rather than treat media literacy as a content or skill area, PLS

emphasizes media literacy as a pedagogical approach. Its goal is to help teachers integrate media

literacy and critical thinking cross the curriculum. Following the ideas of many theorists like

7

Renee Hobbs (1997), PLS recognizes that media literacy “incorporates many elements from

multiple illiteracies that are already central to today’s education, including information literacy,

computer literacy, scientific literacy, and cultural literacy” (Scheibe 61).

At the basic level, literacy involves the ability to read, interpret, and produce texts. To

help students explore multiple meanings of texts in media literacy, PLS introduces the following

set of questions to students at the beginning of every school year:

1. Who made – and who sponsored – this message, and what is their purpose?2. Who is the target audience and how is the message specifically tailored to that audience?3. What are the different techniques used to inform, persuade, entertain, and attract

attention?4. What messages are communicated (and/or implied) about certain people, places, events,

behaviors, lifestyles, and so forth?5. How current, accurate, and credible is the information in this message?6. What is left out of this message that might be important to know? (Schiebe 63)

By asking students to refer back to these questions whenever they want to evaluate information

or images, educators promote a standard practice that students can transfer to their daily lives.

As a pedagogical approach, media literacy mainly draws on the philosophies of Dewey

and Freire. Media literacy educators create democratic classrooms in which students have some

say in the content material. In their study of popular culture in the classroom, Alvermann, Moon,

and Hagood note that practitioners start with student interests and what students already know.

Working together, teachers recognize students’ pleasures in the media and give them the tools to

demystify their pleasures. As mentioned earlier, the objective is not to create an adversarial

relationship with the media; the goal is to empower individuals to take control of media

messages and interpretations.

CONCLUSION

A healthy democracy requires an informed and active citizenry. According to Putnam, the

proliferation of media technology presents some serious challenges to the health of American

8

democracy. Many Americans are soaking up their leisure time with isolating technology instead

of joining community organizations. While technology can help Americans become informed,

the average American uses media technology primarily for entertainment. In addition, the gray

line between information and entertainment in the media makes the political decision-making

process even more difficult for the average citizen.

To meet these challenges, media literacy education offers many valuable solutions. It

rejects the image of the passive observer and provides individuals with the tools to engage with

the media. Media literate individuals are empowered with the skills to deconstruct symbols,

control interpretation, and take action. The action component to media literacy can get TV

viewers off the couch and into the community to enact social change. In order for media literacy

to have an effect on American society, it has to be pervasive. According to Rogow, “To produce

a media literate citizenry, media education will have to be included across the curriculum and at

all grade levels, including higher education, with each educator doing an appropriate piece and

each piece being valued for its contribution to the ultimate goal” (Rogow 32).

Despite the great potential of media literacy for individual development and democracy,

the movement to bring media literacy into the classroom is still in its infancy. According to

Goodman, “It is important to keep in mind that [developments in media literacy initiatives] are

still very much the exception, and are unlikely to grow to any scale given their lack of coherence

as a field of study and the factory system that still dominates the way the vast majority of schools

are structured” (15-16). The movement also lacks teacher-led initiatives and action at the

grassroots level. National associations and local civic organizations must work together to give

the movement some legitimacy.

Professional development opportunities can help inject new ways of thinking about

technology and its uses into teachers. As Rogow notes, “Too often those who oppose media

9

technologies in the classroom lament that teachers use television as a babysitter or computers as

a reward. But few administrators or education schools have ever provided pre-service or in-

service training that would help teachers learn to do anything else. So the withholding of training

becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for the failure of technology to improve instruction” (Rogow

32). Incorporating media literacy into the classroom can be easy but it is not self-evident.

Teachers may need the extra push to take the first initiative.

10

REFERENCES

Alvermann, Moon and Hagood. 1999. Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Bergsma, L. 2004. “Empowerment education: the link between media literacy and health education.” American behavioral scientist 48(2), 152-164.

Dewey, J. 1916. Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education (1966 edn.). New York: Free Press.

Freire, P. 1973. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.

Galician, M. 2004. “Introduction: high time for ‘dis-illusioning ourselves and our media.” American behavioral scientist 48(1), 7-17.

Goodman, S. 2003. Teaching youth media: a critical guide to literacy, video production, and social change. New York: Teachers College Press.

Harris, K. 1993. Critical literacy as political intervention: Three variations on a theme. In C. Lankshear and P. McLaren (Eds.). Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern. New York: State University of New York Press.

Hobbs, R. 1997. Expanding the concept of literacy. In R. Kubey (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Scheibe, C. 2004. “A deeper sense of literacy: curriculum-driven approaches to media literacy in the K-12 classroom.” American behavioral scientist 48(1), 60-68.

Stone, D. 1988. Policy paradox and political reason. New York: HarperCollins.

Tocqueville, A. 1988. Democracy in America. Mayer, J. P. (ed.) New York: Harper Perennial.

11

Leslie Tran27 April 2006Profs. Halpern and TraversOral Thesis

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alvermann, Moon and Hagood. 1999. Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

This book addresses the importance of critical media literacy and offers insight on how to bring it into the classroom. Using a constructivist framework, the authors recommend starting with student interest in popular culture and then giving them the tools to critically analyze social, political, and economic messages from different forms of media. They offer teaching strategies and different cultural resources to help make media literacy in the classroom a reality.

Bergsma, L. 2004. “Empowerment education: the link between media literacy and health education.” American behavioral scientist 48(2), 152-164.

In discussing media literacy and health promotion for youth, Bergsma argues that empowerment education is an effective model for achieving personal and social change. She uses Friere’s construct of empowerment education to create a pedagogical link between public health and media literacy. In both areas, people have the power to define problems, critically analysis, envision improvement, and develop social actions.

Dewey, J. 1916. Democracy and education. An introduction to the philosophy of education (1966 edn.). New York: Free Press.

Dewey discusses the aims of education and its function in society. In a democracy, education’s role is to help us share in a common life and instill in children the values of associations. Dewey holds that growth, experience, and activity are what ties learning to civic engagement and help democratic communities flourish.

Freire, P. 1973. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.In this book Freire presents the banking model of education in which educators perceive students as empty receptacle and see their work as transmitting knowledge. He contrasts this model with empowerment education in which learners are seen as individuals with consciousness. Freire explores the role of dialogue in learning and social change.

Galician, M. 2004. “Introduction: high time for ‘dis-illusioning ourselves and our media.” American behavioral scientist 48(1), 7-17.

Galician advocates for a media literate society in which everyone feels empowered to challenge media messages. This article serves as an editor’s introduction to American Behavioral Scientist’s special double issue on media literacy. Part I focuses on media literacy strategies the classroom and Part II deals with strategies for the general public.

Goodman, S. 2003. Teaching youth media: a critical guide to literacy, video production, and social change. New York: Teachers College Press.

Goodman uses his 20 years of experience working with inner-city youth to explore the history and potential of critical media literacy. He examines and reflects on the promises and

12

pit-falls of his model of media education. Media literacy, Goodman argues, can mend the cultural divide between the traditional curriculum and the cultural contexts in which urban students live. He also explores the intersection between literacy and media education.

Harris, K. 1993. Critical literacy as political intervention: Three variations on a theme. In C. Lankshear and P. McLaren (Eds.). Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern. New York: State University of New York Press.

Harris presents three cases in which critical literacy plays an essential role in challenging the common discourse. Despite the drastic difference in the three cases, Harris effectively argues for the need for critical literacy in everyday life. Rather than accept messages at face value critical literacy allows readers to challenge the messages and reestablish control of the discourse.

Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Putnam argues that Americans are not as connected as they were 5 decades ago. Less social capital is being formed due to the decline in civic engagement. As a result, American society faces some serious challenges if it strives to be a participatory democracy. Putnam backs up his claims with survey data and behavioral trends. He maintains that electronic entertainment, pressures on time and money, sprawl, and generational change all contribute to the decline in civic engagement.

Scheibe, C. 2004. “A deeper sense of literacy: curriculum-driven approaches to media literacy in the K-12 classroom.” American behavioral scientist 48(1), 60-68.

Based on her work with Project Look Sharp, a media literacy initiative, Scheibe holds that media literacy can be effectively incorporated into the current curriculum. If viewed as a pedagogical approach rather than a subject content, media literacy has a greater potential of crossing the disciples. The author offers examples of how media literacy can be incorporated into social studies, English/language arts, math, science, health, and art, and ways to assess its effectiveness in the classroom.

Stone, D. 1988. Policy paradox and political reason. New York: HarperCollins.Stone uses her model of the polis to illustrate the art of decision making and how policy analysis stems from different ideas of the good life, i.e. liberty, security, equity, and efficiency. This work presents policy analysis and policy making in the real-world as a complex social and political process rather than a rational endeavor. In terms of media literacy, she notes that the interpretation of information and messages plays an important role in the decision-making process. Problem definition and solutions also play a large part of political discourse.

Tocqueville, A. 1988. Democracy in America. Mayer, J. P. (ed.) New York: Harper Perennial.Democracy is America is a collection of Tocqueville’s observations and insights on the state of American political society in the mid-nineteenth century. In this two-volume work Tocqueville takes on the role of an environmental engineer and examines the interplay between people and institutions. He notes five key features of American society: love of equality, absence of tradition, individualism, tyranny of the majority, and importance of free association.

13

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL EXERCISE

1. Steven Goodman notes that the media literacy movement in schools is not so strong because, unlike Britain and New Zealand, there is little energy at the grassroots level. In order words, there is not enough teacher interest to legitimize the movement. How can we raise more awareness about media literacy to energize the base?

2. Is part of the problem a generational one? Can the generation what grew up with technology lead the media literacy movement and bring it into the classroom?

3. Will media literacy and production encourage democratic practice? Can the average citizen ever take on big media with technology like Blogs and Podcasts? What are the implications of media literacy education for our democracy?

4. How do we bring media literacy education to adults/those who are no longer in school?5. Money talks in politics. Does media literacy have the potential to equalize voices on the

democratic stage?

14