television

Media Literacy: Why We Should Be Teaching It to Kids

It’s that thing that’s super necessary if you want to understand the cultural landscape around you, and also that thing that’s annoying to have when you’re trying to enjoy an old movie or a reality TV show or a tabloid…

YouTuber and media literacy educator Melissa Fabello made a “Media Literacy 101” video, in which she outlines the super basic questions to be thinking about when consuming media:

1) What is the content of this product?

2) Is it really selling what it’s advertising?

3) Who made this?

4) Why do they want me to consume it?

Screen Shot 2014-04-13 at 8.51.52 PM

I feel pretty confident saying that I’ve become a pro at asking myself these questions without consciously thinking about it, but I certainly was not always that way.

I really only became remotely media literate late in high school, and after coming to college, I became a bonafide media skeptic. But until I was about 16 or 17 years old, I don’t remember many people talking to me about how to interrogate the images I saw, so for the most part, I didn’t.

I read magazines that marketed unattainable standards and scripts for how to be and how to act that were unrealistic, shallow, and ultimately ingenuine for me. In retrospect, had I understood and had the language to talk about the disconnect I saw between media representations of normalcy and the reality I was surrounded by IRL, the media would have been more dumbfounding, but I ultimately would have been happier.

A lot of misplaced energy spent on trying to attain the unattainable could have been spared, and I could have been satisfied with a more complex—and interesting!—reality than the one in magazines, on TV, in ads, in films, etc.

Meeting and becoming friends with intelligent and critical people who exposed me to new ideas and provided spaces for discussion empowered me. The women’s studies class and sociology class I took during my first semester of college empowered me. I’m glad I eventually found my way to these settings, but these environments need to be more available and more accessible to kids, long before their self esteems have time to be squelched by media images.

The profit-driven perspectives of those at the top of media food chains still confound me, but I’m more satisfied in knowing that I don’t have to be a sponge, absorbing every image I’m presented with. I can observe, I can be entertained, and I can ultimately choose to internalize only the bits of media I desire. And best of all: I can choose to mute all commercials.

“Cosmos” and Neil deGrasse Tyson, communicating astrophysics to a TV audience

IT'S ALL CONNECTED

IT’S ALL CONNECTED

“Have YOU seen ‘Cosmos’ yet???” has been one of my most commonly asked questions for the last week or so.

Astrophysicist, author, and all-around science advocate Neil deGrasse Tyson hosts “Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey,” a new installment of Carl Sagan’s 1980 “Cosmos” series.

My favorite episode of the four thus far is “A Sky Full of Ghosts,” in which Tyson explains perfectly to viewers that space and time are really two sides of the same coin, that most of the stars we see have already died, what black holes actually are, that gravity is the uniting force of all corners of space, and the fact that we can see certain stars at all is proof of the age of our universe.

I dare you not to be in total awe after this episode, of the science and of the effects and animation that carry you through Tyson’s mind-blowing journey.

He also debunks creationist views of Earth’s origins in every episode with so little effort and emphasizes the history of scientific discovery that have led us to what we know now. His enthusiasm for the scientific is infectious, as is his reverence for the things science has not yet figured out.

And finally, the show has proven to me that there is room for mass media and science to collide because we’re all innately curious, and curiosity is one of the driving forces behind our efforts to make sense of the starscape and our place in it.

 

“Broad City”: the most hilarious show about twenty-something-year-old women figuring out life in New York yet

Image

the glorious Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer

I started watching Broad City last night, and I cannot believe I did not start watching it sooner. This show focuses the best friendship of two women living in New York in their early twenties. And it does that without feeling like any other shows that may feature a similar description. And it’s hilarious.

(Also, in keeping with the show’s theme of finding round-about ways of getting things when money is tight, shout-out to the sister of the friend of the friend whose Hulu Plus account I’m currently using for this particular binge-watch….whoever you are, you’re the best.)

Screen Shot 2014-03-23 at 4.07.42 PM

In awe of your generosity ❤

Rather than ramble about why I like the show, here is a short list of reasons why you, too, should love Broad City:

-Ilana and Abbi’s terrified reaction to having to venture into the Upper East Side—not Harlem—is SPOT. ON. Ilana calls it “a horrible, vapid wasteland.”

-It’s actually laugh-out-loud funny.

-Lines like, “You’re so anti-racist sometimes that you’re actually really racist.” They really hit the liberal-arts-educated-but-still-trying-to-be-young-and-edgy nail on the head with that one.

-Despite doing a lot of positive things, the show is not self congratulatory.

Ilana’s outfits.

-New York appears as both completely fascinating and disgusting, both of which it actually is.

-It’s still funny.

-Lincoln, Ilana’s dentist non-boyfriend.

-And his endearing conversations with dogs.

-Abbi and Ilana’s experience with the accountant. (Particularly poignant because I was doing taxes five minutes before watching that episode.)

-The characters get to experience actual joy, even when their lives aren’t exactly representative of classical success. They’re resilient and find ways to get happy anyway. Y’know, what actual people do everyday!

Now, go forth and watch!

Now, go forth and watch!

A Snapshot of the Women’s Media Center Annual Report

Screen Shot 2014-02-23 at 10.12.14 PM

The comprehensive annual report from the Women’s Media Center revealed what I already expected to be true: media’s representation of women is seriously lacking, and in many cases, actually worsening. Here’s a handful of stats:

  • “The percentage of episodes directed by minority females slid from 4 percent to 2 percent. (That was the most glaring year-to-year change, driven largely by the cancellation of a single show, Tyler Perry’s House of Payne.)” This is just dismal.
  • “Fifty-two shows for which minorities made up 10 percent or less of the casts got the lowest Nielsen rating, 0.39 points.” Execs: people will actually watch your shows in greater numbers if they contain diverse casts. In addition to representational issues, shows are simply more likely to be of good quality if they are not grossly whitewashed. I’m tired and bored of watching this many white people on TV and in films, and I am not alone in this.
  • “Black women respondents said “Young Phenoms,” “Girls Next Door,” “Modern Matriarchs,” and “Individualists” were the black women they knew most in real life.” How about more representations of these kinds of women, rather than more of the “Angry Black Woman” trope?
  • “89 percent of tech start-ups are launched by all-male teams.” Again, dismal.
  • “The number of first-year undergraduate women interested in majoring in computer science dropped 64 percentage points from 2000 to 2011.” Loss of interest in growing fields is a real problem. As the daughter of two computer and telecommunication engineers, I grew up listening to my mom tell me about her college engineering courses, where she was one of only a few women in her entire department. But just when I get discouraged by the reality that this disparity in the tech world has barely changed, I think about Girls Who Code and Black Girls Code. Check ’em out, and tell every young woman you know the truth: coding is power.
  • “By 2020, the United States is projected to have 1.4 million computer-based job openings.” See my previous point.
  • “Leadership ranks in television news were 21.6 percent female. Leadership ranks in newspapers were 19.2 percent female. Leadership ranks in radio news were 7.5 percent female.” I’m wishing I were shocked. Glass ceilings still exist.

That’s just the result of a perusal, and I feel steeped by those percentages.

And one more thing to keep in mind: poor representation is a systematic problem that will require conscious action to be improved. These disparities will not simply even out on their own. So here’s to the individuals who will use whatever power and platforms they have to make next year’s report a lot more hopeful.