Monthly Archives: August 2006

YouTube – Lewis Black Demands CNN Remove banner from screen

YouTube – Lewis Black Demands CNN Remove banner from screen

Why do I keep reading about media and media literacy when it is happening all around me?  Here’s a segment from CNN with Lewis Black in which he complains about the crawl at the bottom of the screen.  It’s distracting, he says, from the people talking.  But part of the new media is having multiple things going on at once.  Is it distracting?  Or is it more a commentary on the people talking…that what they are saying is mostly just sound-bitey pieces, already scripted…after all, Black was there selling his book.

Making Connections

Haven’t posted for awhile. I took a vacation last week and mostly just read including Margaret Mackey’s Literacies Across Media. It was a report of her research into how children interact with various media from printed texts to video to computer games. One of her conclusions is that students don’t seem to prefer one medium over another. Instead, they have ideas about how media and content relate to each other. For instance, they don’t like the e-books, feeling instead that books are a more appropriate format for printed text. (Can’t curl up with a computer, they suggest.)

I am particularly interested in her work with video games. How are students learning when they play a game? What kind of critical thinking skills are at work? Do they use/learn content knowledge?

I think in terms of research I am also interested in trying to define media literacy skills and see if/how they are being implemented in contemporary classrooms.

So, the connection that I made was that media literacy is really just an updated term for rhetoric, both studying the “texts” that others have created as well as creating on your own. Media replaces printed text, a broader word that takes into account the new ways in which we can share and archive information. But this new media rhetoric also takes into account a widening of access so creators can become as prevelant as consumers. We can speak up, speak back, speak out, in ways that simply weren’t available even a decade ago. It is a new rhetorical universe–postmodern, postdisciplinary, postelitist–in which we learn to question every word and image, learn to look for manipulation even from journalists and scientists, who claim objectivity. Because we all have access to the tools of representation, we understand how these tools can be used to misrepresent. Yet, the irony is that everything we see, hear, read are representations. There is nothing pure, nothing sacred, nothing that can escape representation. And with that representation must, in this subjective world in which we live, come interpretation from both creator and viewer. There is no single message that exists beyond those interpretations.

LearningTimes Network –

LearningTimes Network – “MacArthur Series”

Found this link somewhere in the NMC Campus in Second Life.  Here’s the best argument I’ve heard for media literacy and technology integration:

“The working hypothesis of the effort is that digital media tools have advanced significantly in recent years, enabling new forms of knowledge production, social networking, communication, and play. People who have grown up with access to these new digital tools are engaged in an unprecedented exploration of language, games, social interaction, and self-directed education that can be used to support learning. They are different as a result of this exposure to and use of digital media and these differences are reflected in their sense of self, and how they express their independence and creativity, and in their ability to learn, exercise judgment, and think systemically.”

News photography and Photoshop – Reuters Newsblogs

News photography and Photoshop – Reuters Newsblogs

“The rules are – no additions or deletions, no misleading the viewer by manipulation of the tonal and colour balance to disguise elements of an image or to change the context.

Photoshop is a powerful image processing program with many more tools to help photographers produce the best quality image they can for the type of photography they do. There is not a Photoshop program for use by news photographers and another for advertising, where image-changing is tolerated. What we in the news photo community need to regulate is what tools are used for photojournalism and what are not.”

This is from a Reuters News Blog by Gary Hershorn concerning acceptable uses of Photoshop software for photo journalists.  Reuters “terminated its relationship” (their words) with Adnan Hajj, a freelance photographer who evidently doctored at least two of a huge collection of photos he had taken for Reuters. I can’t help but wondering if I’ve seen the photos?  CNN has an example of one before and after where he darkened the smoke.  We haven’t, as far as I know, heard a motive.  So was he just trying to make it better? It doesn’t seem as though he made it look much worse.

It’s interesting that Reuters says that it is acceptable to doctor advertising photographs but not news photographs.  Yet, banning any kind of editing doesn’t do away with bias.  After all, the photographer chooses the subject, the moment in time.  Only he knows the truth of the event, has seen all the frames leading up to and moving away from the single frame he chose to preserve.

Another great conversation for a media literacy course.  I think what makes sense for a college course would be a general introduction to media and then spending the semester being part of it through blogging and podcasting, using these formats to comment on the media.  The course would not have any kind of judgment involved in it: we’re not trying to protect our students from the media.  Instead, they are going to be immersed in it in a more conscious way.

State Contractor Files Federal Lawsuit Against Me » Maine Web Report

State Contractor Files Federal Lawsuit Against Me » Maine Web Report

So, I keep thinking that I need to get back to reading about media literacy and working on my bibliography.  Then, I take “just a second” to check my rss feeds on netvibes and some media story captures my attention.  Today, Andy Carvin pointed me in the direction of Lance Dutson, who was sued by the advertising agent for the state of Maine.  What did he do?  He published a copy of their ad that includes a 1-800 number that goes to a sex site.  I missed this when it first broke in April.  Grad school does that to you.

Stories like this illustrate the fact that the curriculum for a media literacy course is happening right now.  What are the issues here?  If a print or online newspaper like the NY Times published the ad along with the news story, I don’t think the ad agency could do anything but hang its head.  So, why go after the blogger?  Because he isn’t a “real” journalist?  He does belong to the Media Bloggers Association, and pressure from bloggers and others led to the lawsuit being dropped.

This is old media versus new media.  Once again, as in the case of Wikipedia, old media resorts to the courts while new media resorts to public opinion.  Old media thinks it can own stuff, particularly software, so a seemingly cutting edge company like Blackboard, which even though it operates on the web really acts like old media, uses the patent system to put pressure on competitors.