MEDIA LITERACY
MEDIA LITERACY
There is increasing recognition of the need for a higher level of media literacy in modern society. Media literacy may be defined as the “ability to access, analyze, evaluate, and process media” (Steyer, 2002, p. 195). Its goals are to teach children to use media consciously and selectively and to think critically about media messages and images. Media literacy may be conceptualized in different ways, including as a public policy issue, an educational curriculum issue, as tips for parents, or as an area of scholarly inquiry from a variety of disciplinary perspectives (Christ & Potter, 1998). Although there were consumer media-education movements as far back as the 1970s, interest has greatly increased since then (Alvarado, Gutch, & Wollen, 1987; J.A.Brown, 1991, 1998; D.G.Singer & J.L.Singer, 1998). See Potter’s (2001) textbook for the most comprehensive recent formulation of media literacy.
Consistent with recent theory and research on mass communication, the contemporary emphasis in media literacy is more on empowerment of choice rather than protection from some pernicious influence. Realistically, no one can be completely shielded from media and popular culture; they are omnipresent and enduring parts of our lives. Rather, we must learn to live with not only traditional print and electronic media, but also with all the new technologies of mass, personal, and computer-mediated communication (Dorr & Kunkel, 1990; Ganley, 1992; Mundorf & Laird, 2002), including what is popularly known as cyberspace (Borden & Harvey, 1997; Kiesler, 1997; Noll, 1996). See chapter 12 for more discussion of new technologies.
149 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication
our interpretations from media (Potter, 2001). We need to teach our children that they are not powerless pawns of media.
Different scholars identify different types of media literacy. Meyrowitz (1998), for example, suggests three. Media content literacy focuses on characters, themes, information, behaviors, and so on. Media grammar literacy looks at learning the formal features of each particular medium. For example, as children mature and experience more TV, part of the perceived reality naturally arising from that experience is a knowledge of how to interpret the cuts, fades, dissolves, and general montage techniques used in the editing of film to make a TV show. Very young children may misinterpret things that they see on television because they fail to understand these techniques. The third type of literacy, medium literacy, involves learning the specific conventions, modalities, and processing requirements for using each particular medium. Messaris (1994, 1997, 1998) argues that there are specific conventions of visual literacy that require different skills and understanding than what is required for understanding purely verbal media. For example, television to some extent and especially some computer-mediated communications like hypertext on the World Wide Web are notoriously nonlinear in character, in contrast to radio and print.
Media literacy can be carved up in a different way into four inter-related dimensions, each of which must be developed, and each can be thought of as
a continuum (Potter, 2001). The cognitive dimension involves, thinking, knowledge, and mental processes. It draws heavily on one’s knowledge structures. Some examples of such cognitive knowledge are understandings of formal features of a medium (e.g., a TV exterior shot of a house followed by a cut to an interior shot suggests that the room is inside the house pictured just previously) or structural understandings like knowing that companies buy commercial time on TV shows to sell products. The emotional domain concerns the emotional response to media. For example, we understand that suspenseful movies make us anxious and understand the techniques used to evoke that feeling (e.g., scary music, certain editing techniques). The aesthetic dimension involves appreciating the content from an artistic point of view, such as understanding certain TV genres as a group or appreciating the style of a certain director. Finally, the moral domain concerns compre- hending the underlying values portrayed by a particular medium, show, or episode. For example, action-adventure shows and movies may convey that the use of violence is acceptable against “bad guys,” and soap operas may convey that prevailing sexual values involve considerable promiscuity.
Curriculum Development
Numerous attempts have been made to develop curricula for use in schools to help children become more critical viewers of television. These programs
Children and Media 150
have been more widespread in places like Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom than they have in the United States. For an extensive review and careful evaluation of some of these projects, see J.A.Brown (1991) and Potter (2001). Such curricula have been developed by school districts, universities, religious organizations (e.g., U.S. Catholic Conference, Media Action Research Center), private companies (e.g., The Learning Seed Co., Television Learning, Ltd.), United Nations/UNESCO, and other governmental or public interest groups (e.g., Scottish Film Council, Western Australia Ministry of Education, National Congress of Parents and Teachers). See Buckingham (1993, 1996, 1998) for active programs in the United Kingdom.
Although even a superficial examination of the different media literacy curricula is beyond the scope of this book, as an example we briefly examine an early program developed by Dorothy and Jerome Singer and their colleagues at Yale University starting in the late 1970s. They offered eight lessons to be taught twice a week over a 4-week period to third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade children. Topics included reality and fantasy on TV, camera effects, commercials, stereotypes, identification with TV characters, and violence and aggression. Evaluation studies showed sizable increases in knowledge in the experimental group, particularly at immediate testing. The program was then extended to kindergarten, first-, and second-grade children; extensive pilot testing suggested that such children could be taught considerable amounts about the nature of television through such a curriculum (J.L.Singer & D.G.Singer, 1981; D.G.Singer & J.L.Singer 1983; D.G.Singer, J.L.Singer, & Zuckerman, 1981; D.G.Singer, Zuckerman, & J.L.Singer, 1980).
A second sample project is that of Dorr, Graves, and Phelps (1980). Their materials used taped TV excerpts and group discussion, role playing, games, and teacher commentary. One emphasis was on the economic bases of the broadcasting industry, stressing, for example, that the bottom-line purpose of television is to sell advertising time to make money. A second emphasis, very much in line with the theme of this book, stressed how TV programs vary greatly in realism. It encouraged children to critically evaluate the reality of each show in several ways. In evaluative research, Dorr et al.’s (1980) curriculum was shown to engender a questioning attitude about television and skepticism about its accurate reflection of reality.
A third project was an 18-lesson, 6-month classroom intervention for third and fourth graders (Robinson, Saphir, Kraemer, Varady, & Haydel, 2001). This program was designed to reduce television, videotape, and video game use, which would thus lead to fewer effects of those media on the children. It succeeded in doing so, and also in reducing the number of children’s reports of requests to parents to purchase advertised toys, especially in the children who reduced their TV and video use more.
151 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication
However, it did not affect the parental reports of toy purchase requests, compared to a control group. Still, this suggests that it is possible to reduce television and video consumption and such reductions can have other positive effects.
What Can Be Done in the Home
Media education should not be limited only to the classroom, however. Whatever the negative effects of television on children, they can be mitigated, and perhaps even redirected to positive changes, through dialogue in the home leading to the development of so-called “receivership skills” (Ploghoft & Anderson, 1982). Such parental mediation, as it is called, can take any of three general forms (Nathanson, 1999). Active mediation involves talking with children about television. This mediation may be either positive (e.g., endorsements of content) or negative (e.g., condemnation of content). It may be fully intended as mediation (strategic mediation) or only thought of as irrelevant conversation (nonstrategic mediation) (Buerkel- Rothfuss & Buerkel, 2001). Restrictive mediation involves setting rules and limits on television viewing. Coviewing involves watching television with children. These categories are not mutually exclusive and in fact often co- exist in a family. For example, parents may limit children watching certain shows and may coview others-with their children, while making both positive and negative active mediation comments. All of these types of mediation probably occur in all families at some point, but parents would be well-advised to recognize their mediation or be more intentional about it.
Although it is obviously not possible to do all the mediation one might like to, even occasional mediation by parents may be helpful. As the family watches television together or discusses shows previously watched, conversation may occur about deceptive advertising, stereotyped group portrayals, antisocial values, or excessive sex or violence. Parents can question children about their reactions to what is on TV, thus better understanding the perceived reality constructed by the child. They may comment about their own reactions, thus providing a balance to what may be
a skewed portrayal on TV. For example, parents could voice their concern about a violent scene and share that they remember being scared by such scenes as a child (Nathanson & Yang, 2003).
Parental mediation has measurable effects. Johnsson-Smaragdi (1983) found some evidence that family interaction, especially for children around
11 years old, was facilitated by television viewing, at least when it was seen as an important family interactive activity. Negative active mediation can induce a mistrust of television, lower levels of aggression and skepticism toward television news, while positive active mediation is related to positive attitudes toward television and improved understanding of cognitively
Children and Media 152
Engelbertson, 1999; Austin, Pinkleton, & Fujioka, 2000; Nathanson, 1999). Even sibling coviewing, without parents, may have some positive effects, e.g., in reducing fearful responses to suspenseful programs (B.J.Wilson & Weiss, 1993).
Television may be used as a catalyst for discussion of important issues within the family. Although it may be difficult for a parent and child to discuss topics like sex or drugs, it may be easier in the context of discussing
a TV program on that theme. Even if the program is not particularly well done or consistent with the family’s values, it still may serve as a relatively nonthreatening catalyst for discussion. Parents should take advantage of such opportunities.
Television need not be an antisocial medium that isolates one family member from another (the “shut-up-so-I-can-listen” model). It can be an activity that brings them together to watch as a family, but also to talk about the content and other topics that it leads to (the “hey-look-at-this” model). It can help family members learn each other’s reactions to many topics and situations. It can be a stimulus to cognitive, emotional, and personal growth. All of this is not to say that it will be such a positive influence, just that it can
be. The more carefully that programs are selected and the more intentional the parent is about discussing the content, the better the outcome. Austin, Roberts, and Nass (1990; see also Desmond, Singer, & Singer, 1990, and Nathanson, 1999) developed and tested a model of how parent-child communication about TV and its portrayals can affect the children’s construction of reality. Social, cultural, and family structure variables also have a role in determining the effect of family interactions on the impact of TV on children (Greenberg, Ku, & Li, 1992; J.C.Wright, St. Peters, & Huston, 1990). For an excellent general book to help parents guide their children through the decisions and challenges of television, see Chen (1994), and for the specific issue of dealing with fear induced in children by violent media, see Cantor (1998).
One final point regarding parental mediation and discussion of media within the family should be stressed. It is difficult to have much mediation of any sort if the children or teens are usually watching TV or using computers in their own room. Keeping the major media hardware, especially the television set, in public areas of the house is an important way for the parents to keep some control on what children watch but also will allow many more opportunities for parental mediation. If a parent laments their child or teen’s amount of TV or program choices and the lack of control the parents have over this, they have contributed greatly to that problem by allowing personal television sets in bedrooms. Although many people relent and allow this in response to the frustration of dealing with arguments among kids over what to watch, those disagreements can themselves be positive times of learning valuable negotiation skills.
153 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication