"How Do Film Industries Influence Women's Perception of Body Image"

In my case study, "How Do Film Industries Influence Women's Perception of Body Image", we discussed that the film industry has become one of the most powerful influences on women and their perception of sefl-image. Over time, from the Victorian Era of the 1800s to the present, media has begun to set an unrealistic standard for the "ideal" body of women.
Body image is a term that relates to an individual's internal perception, evaluation, and thoughts about one's person appearance. With the ever growing film industry women are constantly finding themselves conforming to the molds that are illustrated in the Hollywood sphere. Media has formed a habit of only casting one type of woman for their leading roles, neglecting to inform the audience of the digital or surgical alterations, airbrushing, or other editing effects. Women are increasingly objectified to unnatural expectations od beauty that are put forward by models and actresses who do not reflect the average appearance of women in society.
The "ideal" body of women has changed profoundly, but it seems to be a continuous vicious cycle to follow. During the Victorian Era of the 1800s, women's ideal body type was plump and full-figured; women accentuated their hips and buttocks with restricting corsets. At the start of the 19th century, slenderness was more fashionable. The 1920s gave way to the slim flapper who bound their curves to achieve a washboard look. Energy and viltality became central and body fat was a sign of self-indulgence. In the 1930s the film industry had begun to produce the first movie stars and it was referred to as the "age of glamour". A tall slender figure was the most sought after. Marilyn Monroe set the standard for the 1950s and even into the 1960s. Acceptance of the voluptuous woman, and the need to build back the curves that defined a women was imperative. The 1960s saw a split between the supermodels and the movie stars. The models were leaning towards one end of the body mass index with the "thin is in" look while the actresses were still illustrating the classical womanly figure. From the 1980s to the present, being ultra thin is the look women are trying to obtain. More recently, the thin has become thinner, and the ability of most women to achieve this look is near impossible.
Mass culture and the media serve to project the body ideal and turn gentle concern into obsession. The media has given us very rigid, uniform beauty ideals. TV, magazines, and movies mean we see beautiful people more often then our friends and family; the ideal becomes more familiar to us and thus appears more normal and attainable. The movie industries reinforce the importance of a thin body as a measure of a women's worth.

Children's Movies and Aggressive Behavior

In my case study, “Children’s Movies and Aggressive Behavior”, I discussed the effects of the film industry on young children. This idea is taken from the Cultivation Theory. This theory states that what we see and hear through different media is responsible for shaping our conceptions of reality. Heavy viewers, or those who watch a lot of film or other media, will tend to see reality in a way that is portrayed by the media. For instance, if someone watches an abundance of violent media, they tend to view reality as a violent place where no one can be trusted and crime is right outside their door.

So in essence, those who watch more movies and TV have a harder time separating reality and what they see on screen. Their reality has more similarities to onscreen productions then to actual life.

I discussed two different studies that were done in reference to media influence on children’s aggression. The first one was conducted in the 1930s. Herbert Blumer’s studies found that media did have an effect on kids. He called this effect emotional possession. Emotional Possession is the idea that viewers identify with the characters and situations on screen. Children, or adults for that matter, can lose ordinary self control as unleashed feelings gain expression (seeing them on film). For some viewers, the behaviors associated with emotional possession become entrenched and leads to long lasting behavioral effects. The next study I covered was the Bobo doll experiment. Albert Bandura conducted this in 1961. Smaller groups taken from 36 girls and 36 boys of ages 3 to 6 were exposed to violent action or aggressive behavior then sent to play with toys such as the Bobo doll. Other smaller groups were not exposed to violent acts at all. The groups of kids that were exposed to these violent acts displayed more violence when playing with the toys afterward. This study proved that children are very likely to replicate the actions of role models.

In the presentation I explained a few reasons why children were so drawn to this violent behavior from movies. Filmmakers stylize violence and heighten its emotional impact by using stimulating music, recognizable actors and effects. Violence has also now become a movie norm. In children’s movies those who endure the violence are relatively free of suffering. Justifiable aggression is one of the last reasons and I demonstrated this with the clip from Beauty and the Beast. The Beast used violence and won the girl in the end, therefore justifiable. Kids watch movies and idolize those characters they see in them, because being so young, what they see in movies is a big part of their everyday lives, so it only makes sense that these characters that display aggressive behavior become child heroes. These characters are so attractive because they are displayed as the good guys. They fight with a purpose and always get the girl and are rewarded. Many times they are the hero in the story and are shown in a very positive light by filmmakers.

During the discussion at the end we focused on the main question of this class, who controls/monitors the media? We decided that violence is usually overlooked in children’s media because there is usually a bigger part of the story that is focused on. We also talked about the control that parents have over what their children watch, but we decided that at one time or another, kids will be exposed to some kind of violence. Some examples I shared in class were Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, Pocahontas, and Beauty and the Beast.

· Some other links you could check out are: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4586465813762682933#docid=7341218559556376241

The Wonderful World of Disney and Feminist Criticism

“How do Media Industries Shape Media Audiences?”

In my case study, “The Wonderful World of Disney and Feminist Criticism” our discussion was based on the idea that the heroin characters in the Walt Disney movies was biased on the role that the female characters portrayed. We began with the discussion of the Cultivation Theory in that it is based solely on television. Cultivation theory is not concerned with the “effect” of particular programs or with artistic quality. Rather, it looks at television as the nation’s storyteller, telling most of the stories to most of the people most of the time. Heavy viewing may thus override differences in perspectives and behavior that ordinarily stem from other factors and influences. Thus, television cultivates common perspectives; it fosters similar views and perspectives among those who, on the surface, should be very different. We then led into the topic of “Gender-Role Stereotyping” in which we found that study after study has found that women are under-represented and that most television characters are gender-typed. This led us into the main topic of “Feminist Criticism,” we learned that fairy tale’s entertaining and enlightening stories activate children’s curiosity and creativity, while their moral lessons provide mechanisms for coping with the complexities of life. The “truths” validated through folktales; however, often reinforce disparaging images of females. Walt Disney’s classical tales on film has earned condemnation for their stereotypical, sexually provocative, and demeaning portraits of females. Critics note that “isolated” and “voiceless” Disney heroines typically exist in a world in which fathers are the sole proprietors of parenthood, mothers are conspicuous by their absence. Snow White was our first example and we talked about her being the “motherly figure” by washing dishes and cleaning, and the idea of her wearing high heeled shoes and what exactly this portrayed to the viewers. Beauty and the Beast’s Bell and also “Mulan” were other examples we focused on and their differences in the way they portray these female characters. We concluded that by looks alone, kick-boxing “Mulan” would seem to have little in common with dainty Snow White. But looks are deceiving. Disney has changed only the trappings and in recent cases the skin color of its heroines. At heart, they all still identify with male authority instead of seeking their own empowerment. And in the end a good-looking boyfriend remains the truest measure of feminine happiness and success.

I felt like the class discussion with this topic fit well because we have a lot of girls in our class who had strong opinions because we were raised with this era of movies. The majority of the class felt that the way these heroin characters were portrayed does in fact have an impact on the children that watch these movies.
Here is an interesting website I found a lot of my information from: http://www.newint.org/issue308/dolls.html

Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell

In November 1983, Hustler magazine published a parody of a Campari advertisement. Campari had been an advertiser in Hutler for some time, and often published risqué, suggestive ads. The November '83 ad was a mock interview with Jerry Falwell, a prominent American televangelist and political figure. The "interview" centered around Falwell's "first time." The tongue-in-cheek ad was meant to be a double entendre, with "first time" referring to Fallwell's first sexual experience and his first consumption of Campari. The ad made Falwell appear to be an incestuous drunkard who preaches while "sloshed." Understandably, Falwell did not like the ad and sued Hustler for libel and infliction of emotional distress. Falwell was awarded $150,000 in damages for the infliction of emotional distress charge but lost the libel charge. Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler, appealed to the appeals court but the original ruling was upheld. He then appealed to the Supreme Court, who reversed the lower court's decisions, citing Flynt's First Amendment guarantee to free speech.

So was the Supreme Court ultimately right? Did Larry Flynt have the right to publish the Campari ad? Did Jerry Falwell deserve any award for damages?

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's rulings because of prior legislation dealing specifically with the media's First Amendment guarantees. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan the Supreme Court set the "actual malice" standard, which would guide the Court's judgement in the Hustler case. "Actual malice" is knowledge that the information was false or that it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. The New York Times case also emphasized that public officials cannot recover on the tort of libel.

So legally, Flynt and Hustler were completely free to publish the Campari ad. But does that make it OK? Was the interpretation of the First Amendment right to free speech misused? Should there be moral and ethical qualifiers for free speech or is anything fair game?

Newspapers: Will Government Intervention Place Constraints on Freedom of the Press?

In my case study, “Newspapers: A Thing of the Past?” our discussion centered on the falling trend of newspapers. The ensuing debate that is argued by scholars is: Are newspaper declining due to 1) economic recession or 2) permanent decline?

During our class discussion, an important point was made that newspapers, just like other types of media, depend on entertainment value in their sale. This fact alone puts newspapers at a disadvantage because print is static; unlike TV news stations and websites, which are constantly updating, the printed newspaper cannot achieve this type of sensationalism. In light of this, newspapers have begun to use New Media to reach broader audiences. For example, the Wall Street Journal, a major newspaper, has made it available for readers to subscribe to both print and electronic versions of their newspaper. The WSJ website is more than a newspaper, but a community, that allows readers to click on videos, link to sites such as facebook and share articles with friends. The face of newspapers have been altered by the onset of new technologies

Even though new mediums have allowed newspapers to expand their target audience, this still does not account for the fact that print newspapers are struggling to keep afloat. One of the solutions that has been proposed to help newspapers that are going out of business is government intervention. John Strum, the president of the Newspaper Association of America spoke to Congress about the declining interest by advertisers to use newspapers. If newspapers were to be subsidized by Congress or given tax breaks, would this compromise newspaper’s ability to effectively report on government issues? In response to the question “What are the constraints on free speech and the First Amendment for the news industry?” future government intervention could be a hindrance to these rights. Historically, newspapers have been guarded by First Amendment rights and have avoided government control, but future legislation may damage this image of “freedom of the press.”

As seen in our class discussion, the decline of newspapers (cyclical or permanent) can be argued by both sides: some classmates believed that by 2040 newspapers would be gone, while others believed newspapers would bounce back. However, no matter how hard newspapers are failing, they must look to new mediums to save their industry, not the government; otherwise, the question of freedom of the press will be a lost cause.

First Amendment Rights, The Media, and The New York TImes

On Tuesday, I presented a case study about the 2006 New York Times SWIFT story and what constraints exist on free speech. The article disclosed classified information that revealed how the Bush Administration was tracking terrorists by following their money using the Society of Worldiwde International Financial Telecommunications, a company based out of Belgium. I examined all the controversy in the news that surrounded this article in order to figure out whether more contraints should be placed on newspapers and their ability to disclose government information.

When I first asked the class whether anyone had heard about this scandal, I was surprised to find that no one had any knowledge about the incident since it happened only three years ago and received substantial news coverage. Once the discussion started and people had at least a general idea about the event, one question, was it ethical for the New York Times to publish these articles, sparked a little bit of conversation. Most people who voiced their opinions seemed to all agree that the New York Times article disclosed information vital to the War on Terror and should not have been published. However, considering the early morning, the discussion questions did not spark any significant debate.

The main question of this case study was what are the constraints on free speech and the First Amendment for the news industry? In regard to this question, specifically speaking in terms of newspapers, the contraints are very slim. As can be seen through the SWIFT stories, newspapers are under no obligation to keep from printing any type of factual information, even if such articles could be detrimental to the presidential administration or any government agency. Of course, there are certain things that are prohibited, i.e. libel, false claims, etc., but for the most part, newspapers are free of any constraints as far as who decides what does and does not get published. In this respect, the government has not enacted any such restrictions.

You can view the New York Times SWIFT story at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html

Globalization and Disney

In my presentation, I discussed the world reknown Disney corporation and how it has grown to be so big and famous and profitable. Disney, as most know, are very well known for entertaining children. They have been doing so since 1923. In class I showed a movie clip the Disney website. It was a trailer from the movie Toy Story, a movie that is kind of old but still enjoyed by many. I briefly discussed the definition of globalization and the history and origins of it. I then discussed the forms of globalization seen in the Disney corporation. 

The Disney Corporation has come a long way since 1923. They have not limited there sales and services to the U.S., but, instead reached out globally. They have parks and resorts across the globe, ranging from the U.S. to China to France. Disney also has a disney store chain in North America and Europe. The disney store is accessible online and can be accessed all across the world. I also talked about the internet group that Disney has. Disney is affiliated with many groups, organizations, tv shows, and various media networks. Disney has several websites on which you can play games, watch clips of some movies, buy merchandise, and many other things. They also have international versions of the website such as www.hongkongdisneyland.com. 

In the class discussion about my presentation, we talked about globalization in general and what they thought it was in their own words. Some of my classmates shared what forms of globalization they seen in the Disney corporation from my presentation. One of the students also shared an experience in which she traveled and noticed globalization. But for the most part, the class discussion was just a recap or overview of the presentation.

Disney link:

http://disney.go.com/index

Globalization and Starubucks!!!

Last Thursday I presented a case study on the global giant Starbucks. Most people agree that they have very good coffee, but few look behind the beverage to see how successful the company has been in integrating themselves in the world markets today. A big portion of how Starbucks has been able to integrate so well was with the help of the media and media organizations. Starting in the early days, Starbucks took the approach to business that less advertising was more, and that their company’s success hinged on word of mouth recommendations. Years later, after taking the company to a global market there started to be criticisms from media sources about the treatment of coffee growers in other countries as well as the employees in the stores. Fortunately Starbucks was able to take this criticism and, rather than try to bury the problem, they sought to fix it by partnering with conservation and free trade organizations to help out local farmers and subsidize incomes and to give employees better benefits.

Looking back at this week’s question, “How does globalization shape media products and industry?” I would say that globalization of industry is greatly influenced by the media. As one person said in class, the media serves as a watchdog agency to try and prevent these big companies from dominating people and countries who are otherwise unable to help themselves. The media is also able to help influence the policies of global businesses to benefit the local population rather than to ignore their needs and civil rights. Though the media can be beneficial to the globalization of industry, there is also the possibility that media coverage of the globalization of industry has harmed the image of industrial societies. In some cases the media coverage of, for example, the quashing of unions within Starbucks, has shown that, although globalization can be a force for good, it can also be a controlling force. If a company is able to fire employees in industrial societies for being a member of a union, how are they going to try and control the local farmers in Rwanda?

The media has in the past shown itself to be the mediator between global businesses and civil and moral rights for farmers and employees around the world. In the future I believe that the media will be able to continue this tradition of “watchdog” and help to keep the big businesses in check.

Here are a couple of links from the powerpoint as well as some other interesting things about Starbucks:

Starbucks Union
International Conservation and Starbucks
Photograph Depicting the globalization of Starbucks and McDonalds
How accurate do you feel this cartoon is in depicting the role of the United States' globalization of the world?
www.starbucks.com
They have their own YouTube Channel!?!
Just for fun: Miss Swan at Starbucks and the Starbucks Rap
Craig Ferguson on Starbucks...and some other stuff. Skip to 1:30 for the Starbucks Rant
Not all private promotion is welcome at Starbucks
Mocking the Starbucks way

Globalization

When we were discussing globalization today, it reminded me of a short documentary I saw about a month ago. The question was asked whether or not globalization is a good thing or a bad thing. In this video's case, I see it as a bad thing. It isn't the globalization of corporations like Starbucks, but the globalization of modern technology. That technology opens up a whole new world, a world with a vast variety of culture and customs. In the video you can see how the media (specifically television) affects a culture that hasn't had that kind of exposure before.

Here is a summary of the video:

Hidden near the Himalayas between India and Tibet, the kingdom of Bhutan has long been shrouded in mystery. Sometimes called "the last Shangri-La," it's a lushly forested land where people wear traditional robes, where policy is guided by "Gross National Happiness," and where Tantric Buddhist saints are celebrated with paintings of gigantic penises. But Bhutan is on the verge of change. This year, it will transform itself from an absolute monarchy to a parliamentary democracy -- a move that leaves many young Bhutanese puzzled and uneasy. "When His Majesty first informed us he was going to change the government, there were lots of people who couldn't speak," says one activist. "They wished it was just a dream." Current Correspondent Christof Putzel travels to Bhutan to find out how young people are dealing with democracy, westernization, and other challenges to their unique national culture.

Vanguard is Current TV's award-winning documentary series. Whether it's half a world away or in our own backyard, Vanguard goes there to bring you stories about the most important issues of our time. Led by reporters Laura Ling, Christof Putzel, Mariana van Zeller, Adam Yamaguchi and Kaj Larsen, Vanguard airs on Wednesday at 10 pm Eastern and Pacific and can be found online at current.com/vanguard.

http://current.com/items/88884836_lost-in-democracy.htm