PLEASE READ: SHOULD WE KEEP OFFERING NEWS YOU CAN USE? We need to know how many people use and value these news items for classroom discussions. Please take one minute to Thanks!

February 29, 2008: An alternative rock radio station in Toronto, Canada is running TV ads that some listeners say mock older people, according to an article in the Toronto Star. According to the article, "The 30-second TV spots were shot in an authentic mid-century, wood-panelled basement 'rec' room. A stout old woman with straggly short grey hair, wearing baggy old sweats, is listening to classic rock. It's the kind of music, the commercial points out, you'd hear on Toronto radio station Q107. In the original spot that began airing in October, the old woman falls down while pushing a carpet sweeper. In another, she's pushing the sweeper while trying to dance to the music but has to sit down and use her inhaler. In the current one, she's just dancing, a geriatric hipster. (All three can be viewed at 925jackfm.com.)In the second part of each commercial, a hot young babe comes down the stairs. Ignoring the old lady, except for a disdainful look and some eye-rolling, she switches the radio dial from a big Q on the right to the Jack FM logo on the left. In skin-tight miniskirt and clingy top that bares her taut midriff, the babe sinuously shimmies and shakes her booty, wildly tossing her luxuriant, wavy black hair while listening to alternative rock...the kind of music, the commercial makes clear, you'd hear on Jack FM."

The "national imaging director" for the broadcasting company that owns Jack FM says they are just "having fun" and demonstrating that their station has "a more youthful feel and more energy" than the hugely popular and successful Q107. The Toronto Star columnist responds: "But forget for a moment about making fun of Q107. Isn't making fun of old people, explicitly exaggerating their unattractiveness and deterioration in contrast with the appeal of youth, at the very least, well, tasteless? And isn't ageism just as untenable as any other discriminatory "ism" – say, for example, racism?"
    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Go to the Jack FM website and watch the three TV ads (see photo link on home page). Do you agree with the "imaging director" for the radio company, or with the Toronto Star columnist, or somewhere in between? When does teasing or "having fun" cross the line into demeaning attitudes toward a certain group of people? Is there a way that Jack FM could "have fun" with contrasting themselves to Q107 without, as the columnist points out, "explicitly exaggerating their unattractiveness and deterioration in contrast with the appeal of youth"? Or is the ability to contrast the two stations humorous only when one of the parties is demeaned? Can you find other examples in media of demeaning a group or class of people in an attempt at humor? (Possible source: SuperBowl ads for GoDaddy.com). Could you create an ad for Jack FM that contrasted it to Q107 without demeaning older people? Consider a class project in which teams of students create ads that attempt to do this. Submit your winning ad to Jack FM and its parent company for consideration, and see what kind of response you get from them.

Nov. 27, 2007: In a recent study in the US, a survey revealed that watching rap music videos that are overly sexy and violent led to alcohol abuse and promiscuity among young black girls. Based on a survey of 522 African-American girls aged 14 to 18 who were asked how often they watched rap videos, questioned about their sex lives and asked to provide a urine sample for a marijuana screening, researchers found young black girls who frequently watched rap music videos were more likely to binge drink, have sex with multiple partners, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image. Published in the Journal of Women's Health, the report entitled 'Images of Sexual Stereotypes in Rap Videos and the Health of African-American Female Adolescents,' evaluated that the glamourised depictions of alcohol and drug used in conjunction with sexual imagery within in rap music videos suggested that "African-American girls' perceptions of stereotypical images of women may contribute to adverse health outcomes."

"I want to be a hip-hop video girl," says Kelly aka Lady Love from south London. "Well that's what men want me to be so I aim to please. I watch the videos on MTV Base, The Box and others music channels to get ideas on how to act sexy." Admitting that she is not a virgin (she lost her virginity at 13) Lady Love watches music videos with the devotion most record companies long for and logs as much time in front of the TV as some spend in a full-time job; making her an expert on rap and hip-hop videos. "You have New York—style videos, with the high-class, skinny girls who look like models. They just stand there looking good. And there's this one 50 Cent video with women on leashes. "Then you have videos from Down South, with half-naked rump shakers, and others where the guys sit in barbers' chairs, and the girls show up in tight pants and bend over, and their booties start jiggling. I love watching them all. I wish I could be like them."

Says Dr. Alvin Poussaint, noted professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and the author of numerous books on child psychiatry, with particular focus on the raising of African American children, "They are shaping young peoples values because young people imitate what they watch on the box. A lot of videos, in particular rap and hip-hop, degrade women and depict them as sexual objects as hos and bitches." Source: The Voice (UK) Nov. 25, 2007.
    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Do you watch music videos? If so, how often? How are women depicted -- what roles do they play? Are women of color portrayed in a more sexist and/or sexual way than white women? In general, are women in music videos usually shown as actively engaged in the world, or more as accessories, props or "eye candy"? How often are men seen in music videos acting the way women are usually shown? If that idea makes you laugh, why?

Dec. 6, 2006:  The network best known in the United States for airing video messages from Osama bin Laden has launched an English-language news channel - known as Al Jazeera International (AJI) - despite the fact that not a single US cable company or major satellite provider had agreed to carry it, reports the Christian Science Monitor." Al Jazeera bypassed the cable companies to stream on the Internet... The move is seen as a stopgap until AJI can find a home somewhere on US television. 

Not surprising, given its pedigree, the new channel has already proved controversial. Critics argue that allowing Al Jazeera International to air on American television would be essentially giving a megaphone to those who spout anti-American propaganda. Supporters of letting the network air argue that seeing the way the Arab world views the US might broaden minds here. But the 'should we or shouldn't we look at Al Jazeera International' debate is going on in virtual darkness. Few Americans have actually seen AJI."

    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Do you agree or disagree with those who say that allowing Al Jazeera international to air on American TV would be like giving a megaphone to those who hate America? Who gets to decide whether Americans can think for themselves or if they should be "protected" from anti-American sentiments? Should government get involved in these kinds of decisions, or should it be left completely to the free market (i.e., if a company wants to air Al Jazeera international and try to make a profit doing that, that's their business)?

Nov. 2, 2006:  Media consolidation comes at the expense of ethnic diversity and serving the interests of women and minorities, according to several academic studies recently released by the Benton Foundation and the Social Science Research Council. A Howard University study examined U.S. Federal Communications Commission data on minority and women-owned media and found that women hold a majority interest in only 3.4% of radio stations, while minorities own a majority interest in only 3.6%. Peter DiCola of the University of Michigan study found that large media groups focus almost all of their programming on "just six types of formats: news, adult contemporary, rock, classic rock, country, and top 40," making them less likely than smaller media groups to offer diverse fare including classical, jazz, folk, tejano, or gospel. Another survey, of minority audience members, found that many feel the news does not help them to understand the problems that are most important to them -- safety, lack of income, and lack of affordable housing -- while a significant number of African-Americans perceive widespread bias against their communities. This citation is from PR Watch. Original Source: Benton Foundation, Oct. 23, 2006

    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Who owns the airwaves? Who controls them? Are they the same groups of people, and if not, why not? How did corporations gain control of (and free use of) public airwaves without having to give anything back to the public? Does this corporate control of public airwaves fit with your personal definition of how communications should work in a democratic society that is supposed to be "of, by and for the people"? What could media corporations give back to the public if they wanted to (or were forced to through government regulation)? Should they be re-regulated? How can citizens work toward this goal? Are you willing to do anything today, this week or this month toward this goal?

April 5, 2006:  McDonald's has announced a casting call for consumers to grace its worldwide cup and bag packaging. As an extension of its "I'm lovin' it" campaign, the fast-food chain is soliciting digital photos and stories describing what people love.  McDonald's, along with its ad and packaging agencies, will pick up to 25 winners and fly them to London for a photo shoot. The contest is the latest attempt by a marketer to shine a spotlight on ordinary people. "If you use real people — especially those who have volunteered, not just that have been solicited on the street — it gives the campaign more credibility," says Renee Fraser, a consumer psychologist who owns an ad agency. "It also says to the consumer, 'You're important.' "

"People are getting tired of the prepackaged slick look," says consumer behavior expert Michael Solomon. "Consumers know that when Michael Jordan says he uses Product X, he's being paid a bazillion dollars to do that."  Technology is helping to drive the consumer-content craze. Companies promote their contests on Internet sites. And as digital cameras become ubiquitous, it's easy for consumers to take and upload self-portraits. The rise of social networking sites such as Myspace.com, which provides destinations where people can post and share pictures, also helps. "Technology has changed how people feel about sharing their identity," Solomon says. What's more, "People love visibility and celebrity, as evidenced by a lot of reality shows and American Idol," Fraser says.
    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: How do you feel about this new trend? Do you think consumers will be more susceptible to a sales pitch if the persons depicted look like "real" people instead of models, less susceptible, or no effect? Why or why not? Why have retouched photos of attractive people always been used in ads? Do you think this "real people as models" trend will be a lasting one, or that it's just a passing fad, something to help corporate advertisers differentiate themselves from their competitors?

Sept. 5, 2005: Hurricane Katrina's path of death and destruction unfolded before the world's eyes last week. Much is being said about how news reporting's relationship to government information sources has changed with this event, as reporters openly challenged the statements of officials whose platitudes contradicted what the reporters saw with their own eyes. Journalist Farai Chideya offers links to alternative news sources, many offering a perspective from the African-American journalism community (scroll down the home page). The Online Journalism Review from USC Annenberg School of Journalism provides another list of alternative news sources.. For photos, see these links at Media Literacy Clearinghouse.
    Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: See the above Media Literacy Clearinghouse link for general media literacy questions that can be used in conjunction with discussing this tragic event of historic importance. Read this article in National Geographic's October 2004 issue, eerily predicting -- 11 months ahead -- this very event AND the terrible consequences of failure to prepare. For a list of resources exploring media representation issues post-Katrina, particularly regarding looting and crime, use Google to search "looting racism Hurricane Katrina."

August 19, 2004: "For too long, rumors have been accepted as truth," says one of two new U.S. radio ads launched by the government of Saudi Arabia, to highlight 9/11 Commission findings favorable to its country. "But, the ads don't address Commission criticism of Saudi Arabia, which the report called 'a problematic ally in combating Islamic extremism,'" writes Associated Press. Through PR firm Qorvis Communications, Saudi Arabia is disputing charges by Daniel Pipes that the Kingdom pays Middle East academic experts to speak on its behalf. But Qorvis is doing "ongoing education to communities around the country regarding the importance and value of strong U.S.-Saudi relations," including offering pro-Saudi speakers to universities. This citation is from PR Watch. Original Source: Associated Press, August 17, 2004.
        Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Why would a country's government employ a professional public relations firm? What is the purpose of public relations, and can it really affect public opinion? If not, why do corporations and governments spend millions on it? If so, how are we affected? How might we find out when a message has been "spun" by p.r. experts, and how might that affect our thinking about the message, and our interest in finding alternative viewpoints?

June 15, 2004: FaithfulAmerica.org, which describes itself as "an online community of people of faith who want to build a more just and compassionate nation," will run commercials on the al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya Arabic language networks apologizing for the torture of Iraqi detainees by U.S. servicepeople and military contractors. The ad states, "As Americans of faith, we express our deep sorrow at abuses committed in Iraqi prisons." FaithfulAmerica.org spokesperson Bishop Melvin Talbert is an ecumenical officer of the United Methodist Church, to which George Bush belongs. A State Department spokesperson would not comment on the ads, but former ambassador to Syria Edward Djerejian said they "could be harmful ... [if they are] an attempt to criticize the current administration," but if they just "say torture is contrary to our religious beliefs, then that I think would be helpful." This citation is from PR Watch. Original Source: Newsday, June 11, 2004.

     Classroom focus/media literacy discussion: Why might the former U.S. ambassador to Syria have suggested that an ad criticizing the current administration could be harmful? Do you agree or disagree? How might Arabic viewers respond to such an ad in which Americans visibly exercise their right of free speech? We list books and other resources on our Religion & Media page that address these issues.