SchooBlog!

Mini Assigment

One example I find particularly disappointing is the way the media continues to support deception on the part of our government. In this case, the gov. primes the media outlets by offering so called “video news releases” (VNRs) which are nothing more that gov. produced propaganda. News stations often pick these up as cheap (free) filler and incorporate them into newscasts so that there is no way for the average citizen to know the difference. Newscasts of important gov. business are therefore framed in a perspective that causes the viewers the least amount of dissension.

Another way this takes place is in gov. briefings. While these are deceivingly framed in a way that causes the viewers to feel like it is an open question and answer session with the person holding the conference, behind the scenes only those reporters who follow the rules and ask the right questions are invited back by gov. officials. Most of the time questions also need to be provided ahead of time and approved. This allows for those in power to prime news officials to produce the stories that fit best with their agenda.

Much like in the case of the Iraq war, if the media is not allowed to film our soldiers coming back in caskets and the government limits the news coverage of events on the battlefield by selecting only a small group of reporters to work alongside the military, there is no way for Americans to formulate an accurate analysis and make knowledgeable decisions.

In regards to priming and government propaganda I think some good research questions are:
1. On average how many VNRs does the gov. produce daily and how far removed are they from an accurate description of the event?
2. Does strategic communication by the gov. only persuade those who do not take the time to look at multiple sources or does it have an overall effect on all of society?
3. Is strategic communication by the govt. a fundamental property of a capitalist democracy or a infectious cancer?

Midterm

Introduction: NBC’s The Office
In almost every case the shows we watch and choose to follow, whether it be everyday or once a week, say a lot about who we are. Sometimes they compliment other social habits we have and other times they displace these habits. For me, NBC’s The Office is the only show I feel is worth taking the place of the other things I could be doing. Since 2005, when the first season was produced, I have watched nearly every episode the same day it was released. Lucky for me, last year they began posting episodes online so that I don’t have to rush home from class on Thursday nights to watch it.

Uses & Gratifications
Much like the definition we learned in class, I feel that I have selected The Office because of the escape it provides along with the comedy. It could be argued that I use The Office as a way to release all of the emotions that I have about where I work. While working in an office I often find it much to serious and lacking in social energy. Often we sit and discuss things and hold meetings but everyone is incredibly predictable. When I watch The Office everyone is somewhat spontaneous and there is usually something I didn’t see coming, such as when the main character recently started his own paper company.

Parasocial Relationships
If defined as being a symbolic relationship with a TV character as is done in Jonathan Cohen’s article, it would definitely be a stretch to argue that I have developed a parasocial relationship with anyone on this show. A lot of the humor in the show comes from the main character who is the manager of an office branch yet often acts in ways that are completely irresponsible, humiliating, or degrading to his employees. One thing that has happened however is sometimes I feel the overcoming urge to repeat lines that come from the show when I am with coworkers or friends. Fortunately though, the shows have never given me any thing but laughter. When two of the characters who obviously had a crush on each other finally hooked up, I didn’t feel an overwhelming amount of joy for any length of time. I also didn’t get upset when one of the characters was cheating on her husband. I’m not sure if this is because the show is meant for the most part as comedy or if I’m just not the type of person who suffers from parasocial relationships.

Expressions vs. Communications
In Sally Planalp’s book Communicating Emotion she explains that  “Communication, as opposed to emotion, is separable from the feelings themselves, happens if we intend it to happen, and is sensitive to audiences and situations”. This show especially is filled with all kinds of expression and communication. At some points the camera pans across the office, only to record the expressions that are visible. Much of the humor stems from the awkward situations that take place when the audience witnesses verbal conflicts or strange expressions. Both the characters communication and sometimes more importantly their expressions create strong emotions for the audience. Often the communication acts as the base of the show, but it wouldn’t be funning without the dorky expressions.

Medium Theory
For many of the reasons already provided, this show would not capture my attention if in any other format. Individually I react with humor to this show although on a macro level millions of people watch this show and view it as a part of American culture. I would definitely attribute this to the quality of the show and its writers but more importantly because a large network like NBC picked it up. The TV as a medium has almost always caused me to be very selective in what I watch by providing me with a remote to not only change the channel but often just to turn it off when I don’t see something I need to watch. When it comes to The Office especially, unless it’s a rerun or a commercial break, it demands my full attention.

Works Cited:
Cohen, Jonathan (1997). Parasocial relations and romantic attraction: gender and dating status differences. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 41, 516.

Planalp, Sally (1999). Communicating emotion. Cambridge University Press.