- Graham Murdoch’s citizenship framework versus that of Anna McCarthy
Though this question calls for a compare and contrast of Graham Murdoch’s citizenship framework versus that of Anna McCarthy’s the two articles complement each other nicely. Graham Murdoch’s modern ideal framework for understanding citizenship argues that as an American life evolved from the simple to the modern society of today. Anna McCarthy’s The Citizen Machine: Governing by Television in 1950’s America’ describes the understanding of citizenship as a medium to a growing society of free people. The two insights complement each other well citizenship is an evolving state of needs that the media has a large influence over. Graham Murdoch’s modern ideal framework for understanding citizenship.
In order to understand the framework required to understand citizenship as a modern ideal, we need to begin by defining citizenship. The definition of citizenship is the right to participate fully in a society’s social life with poise and without fear (Mudoch, 1999, p. 8 ). As the average American day to day life evolved, the needs for understanding the rights and duties of citizenship have reflected this evolution. This evolution produced two major domains within society the state/government and civil society. Both government and civil societies demonstrate their commitment to the common good by providing citizens with rights.
An example of the rights provided to citizens is the right to knowledge. Though all citizens have a right to information, the information provided does not come with explanations about the historical context of the facts. An understanding of the information from the eyes of people originating from other societies requires interpretation that may or may not be given to them.
Another right of interest is the right to participation. All citizens have an equal right to participate in all areas of society however the evolution of society has shifted from asymmetric to semantic relationships. An industry that can illustrate this shift towards a more inclusive society is the media. Before people simply watched the programs that were made available, now society demands to be involved in the creation and selection of programming available through the media. Representation of various peoples is now an expectation of the media. Society has evolved to demand that various cultural groups and the news of the people be available via the media. Society expects that the media respects society's various religious and cultural norms. Television broadcasters have evolved to addresses these various representations and cultural, ethical dilemmas' dilemmas in either open or closed debate forums. The dilemma of representation often involves the scheduling rather than just a particular program.
The strength of using a model ideal framework to understand citizenship is the recognition of society’s evolution and can adapt to the needs of understanding the needs of tomorrow’s citizens. One weakness of using the model ideal framework to understand citizenship is in the definition of a model ideal. What is the ideal citizen? What are the ideal rights prescribed to that model citizen? With such a vast variety of cultures and people the definition of the norm and ideal are impossible.
Graham Murdoch’s modern ideal framework for understanding citizenship goes into great detail about the rights of citizens provided by the state. This protection of the rights of citizens encourages the evolution to a neoliberal free market society (Graham Mudoch, 1999, p. 8 – 10).
Anna McCarthy’s The Citizen Machine: Governing by Television in 1950’s America’ describes the understanding of citizenship as a medium to a growing society of free people. Communication strategies to promote the free world economy, anti- war political views, citizenship ideals, and philanthropic visions used television to reach a mass audience. Society was on the peaceful side of a chaotic period. Wars about class and race were major concerns amongst citizens, the threat of nuclear war weighed heavy on the minds of the people. During the post-war period in the United States, television played a crucial role in the libertarianism movement. Society learnt about their human rights and liberties though educational programming.
Near the time of the neoliberalism movement, television was invented and quickly became a popular channel for mass communication. McCarthy described the role television played in the developing sectors namely: business, philanthropy, social, reformers, labor leadership, public intellectuals, and the media profession. Some powerful Americans came to the realization that the television could unite the country and aid in the revolution that later ended racial violence.
One strength of McCarthy’s version of the framework of citizenship is the ability to pinpoint the political climate using television. One weakness of McCarthy’s version of the framework of citizenship is the lack of evolutionary insight. Social media have overtaken television as being the most popular news source; in the near future social media will become the new platform of political debate archiving McCarthy’s framework.
Graham Murdoch’s framework for understanding citizenship as a complex ideal of modernity knits together with Anna McCarthy’s framework for understanding citizenship as a Cold War discourse for governing. The combination of the two articles provides understanding to the circumstances that formed the foundation of American citizenship in the 50’s.
2b) Steven Classen’s article ‘Watching Jim Crow: The Struggles over Mississippi TV (1955-1969) published in 2004 describes the role television played in the civil rights campaign. Activists in Jackson Mississippi disrupted commercial and traditional consumer practises in protest of segregated television. Reverend Dr. Everett C Parker led a covert investigation that documented the programming available in the southern states. The civil rights case against the broadcasting corporations began on September 2, 1963. The event that launched the case came just five days after the rest of America had seen the pictures of Martin Luther King on television along with the historical march in Washington. The residents in Jacksonville, Mississippi were offered a tailored version of the news story. Jacksonville WLBT station aired their three hour American Revolution episode after censoring the evidence of the abuse the black population was suffering. The censored version of the news provided by WLBT had omitted the images of white on black violence using a technical difficulties excuse. The argument made by the activists was that the stations failed to provide African American viewers. The area’s black population represented 50% of the general population. The activists argued that with the majority of American viewers the television broadcasting stations had an obligation to educate and inform their publics about the racial, political movements happening in the north. The consumers had a right to information.
Regarding Steven Classen’s article, the civil rights campaign caused Jackson, Mississippi’s television broadcasters to censor the broadcasting. The censorship led the television broadcaster to minimize the availability of African American news, which led the activists to investigate, document and report the situation. President Kennedy announced the consumers’ bill of rights in 1962. It was during a time of civil unrest. African Americans were still breaking free and testing their new found freedoms. Television became a channel for freedom. In the early days of the civil rights movement, the media ignored the African American views and opinions censoring the news. African American groups began to boycott retailers that continued to segregate their population. President Kennedy’s consumers’ rights bill offered a shallow solution to the civil rights movements. The consumers’ rights bill used an economical point of view rather than offering sympathy towards the rights of African Americans. Television viewer’s rights to information led the activists to challenge the broadcasting channels racist practises.
The case, constructed on civil and consumer rights eventually led to the broadcasting stations being required to offer an accurate portrayal of the news. The unavailability of African American content contradicted civil and consumer rights. Beginning with grassroots activism in 1961 the case came to a standing in 1966 in front of the court of appeals. The censorship of images that showed the violence happening against the African American viewers by white society being censored by a predominantly white broadcasting corporation added to the heated political climate of the time. The courts came to the conclusion that broadcasting corporations exist to serve the needs of the viewers. Recognizing the lack of flexibility of the FCC the court of appeals granted the case standing due to the nature of the case. Proceeding cases only addressed the interference caused by broadcasting signals and the corporations’ duty not to cause societal harm. The signals from the broadcasting company WLBT did not cause interference. No person was physically harmed due to the company’s operations. The case of the rights of the viewers to receive an accurate portrayal of the news was adequate for the courts of appeals to hear the case. The court’s decision can be summarized by the words of Edmond Cahn “some consumers need bread, other customers need Shakespeare; others need their rightful place in American society – what all consumers need is protection by the law who will consider the people’s needs as being more important than administrative convenience (p. 71).”
African American activists challenged the broadcasting practises by making complaints to the FCC and later bringing the matter before the courts. The federal response to the civil movement used a legal liberalism approach that the FCC couldn’t afford. The social significance that the issue played had a great impact on the racial rights movement. Television became a civil rights medium that spread the news of each progressive step towards racial equality.
3.1) Pierre Bourdieu’s framework for understanding taste hierarchies argues that a culture is a reflection of economic status. Bourdieu describes the that the cultured society is an upper middle-class white family, with generational wealth. As Bourdieu explained good taste comes from being raised in an upper middle class family and attending a prestigious university. Good taste is not a direct result of money but comes from being raised in an environment that supports the upper middle class culture. Pierre Bourdieu’s framework for understanding taste hierarchies can be used still today. Children in upper middle class homes have access to extended cable and satellite television and pvr where children in lower class households can only access online television and Netflix. There are still trends where only the upper middle class and above are fortunate enough to the evolved within. The same description as during Bourdieu’s studies where it’s not exactly a financial issue but rather a nurture issue that acts as either an enabler or a limiter. Children who grew up in poverty lack the basic social skills required functioning in middle class society mainly because they never were taught.
These taste hierarchies reflect the variety of cultures within our society that television broadcasters have a duty to inform. Though Bourdieu believes that society should cater to the taste class within the hierarchy that has been proven as being contradictory to the democracy this country was founded upon.
Ouellette
The significance of taste hierarchies is demonstrated (p.38) in Ouellette’s Oasis of a Vast Wasteland as they describe the shift in television programming to reflect the needs of the viewers. As society came to realize that television should reflect the needs of the viewer broadcasting corporations shifted their programming to serve their audiences. Cultural forums came to realize that television was a medium designed to serve the public. An example of the taste hierarchy in application was a comment made by Edger of the acclaimed Roger and Edger television critic duo. Television critic Edger Dale (page 8) asked the audience if you can ever give the public what they want. His question prompted an open debate about the changes to television if the majority was accommodated. The majority of the American public is anything but upper middle class white families. Poorly-rated, hardly view shows that targeted the upper middle class began to be canceled leading to numerous complaints further demonstrating society’s taste hierarchy being challenged after the civil rights movements. No longer was society being oppressed by the upper classes as they viewed television.
Newman/Levine
The significance of taste hierarchies is further illustrated in Newman and Levine’s Legitimating Television (p.11) in the section Denaturalizing Television. The authors describe the situation they discovered as they explored the exclusive British scholars program creators. The authors said they the snobbery they discovered in the British academic world is not exclusive. The authors’ belief that the media industry is dominated by snobbery (p.12) continues to illustrate the taste hierarchy. They are doubtful that the academics could even discuss the popular dramas that reach the broader audience. There is a distinction about the limited programming available for the upper class well educated few and the broader audience. Newman and Levine also demonstrate the significance of producing programming tailored for various levels of society within the taste hierarchy.
Muller& Hermes
Muller and Harmes demonstrated the significance of the taste hierarchy in The Performance of Cultural Citizenship: Audiences and the Politics of Multicultural Television Drama. Muller and Harmes argue that the popular culture is a valuable resource that can be used to measure cultural citizenship (p. 193). Muller and Hermes elaborate on the significance of the taste hierarchy to also include cultural differences amongst immigrants. The authors’ state that the performance of a society’s cultural citizenship extends to the extent that citizens feel either included excluded by society. By creating television programming that is designed to include various members of society the government can build stronger cultural citizenship. Mass culture plays a significant role dominating the hierarchy of a democracy.
Muller and Hermes demonstrate the significance of the taste hierarchy in their example using the ‘West Side: A Multicultural Drama Series’. Airing on both local and national broadcasting networks in 2006 and 2007 the series was a cross between a soap opera and a reality TV show. The show set in the city of Amsterdam addresses day to day multicultural problems. The study done by Muller and Hermes showed that though the show occasionally caused discussions about cultural citizenship amongst its viewers. The findings showed the various levels within the taste hierarchy. Where some people from an upper class well educated point of view found the show stupid; other people from various walks of life found the show to be relatable.
Muller and Hermes than focused the study on the engaged audience members for further analysis. The performances gave people an opportunity to reflect upon cultural citizenship that they could relate to. Some viewers reflected that the problems that occurred on West Side regularly happened in their lives. The content provided on the show gave Muslim audience members a chance to review their experiences in a way that they could learn and discuss the various situations arising from the mixed culture in Amsterdam. In the findings, Muller and Hermes reported that the television show was much more relatable to a lower class society. The targeted audience of the show is the mass Muslim immigrants who live in the city of Amsterdam. One of the main benefits that the show provided the taste hierarchy of society with was the detailed descriptions of the many do’s and don’ts best practices of multicultural etiquette.
Works Cited
Classen, Steven. "Watching Jim Crow: The Struggles Over Mississippi TV 1955-1969." Duke University Press. Durham & London 2004.
McCarthy, Anna. “The Citizen Machine: Governing by Television in 1050’s America” (2010). Reference & Research Book News, (4).
Muller, F., & Hermes, J. (2010). The Performance of Cultural Citizenship: Audiences and the Politics of Multicultural Television Drama. Critical Studies In Media Communication, 27(2), 193-208. doi:10.1080/15295030903550993
Murdoch, Graham. “Television and Common Knowledge” Routeledge London and New York 1999.
Newman, Michael & Levine, Elana. “Legitimating Television: Media Convergence and Cultural Status”
Ouellette, Laurie. “Viewers Like You: How Public TV Failed the People” Columbia University Press 2002
