Simulacra and Simulations

This week’s reading discussed the dangers of simulation and how society is largely simulated without people knowing. Simulation is when something is copied and reflected from a real truth but is not really true itself. For example, actors and actresses are constantly simulating real life through their performances. If a television programme showed two characters going through a break up, although the feelings and reactions the actors might show could be accurate to how people in this position would feel, the whole situation is in actual fact just simulated to appear like real life. Simulation, according to Baudrillard’s theories, can be dangerous as it is difficult to distinguish between what is real and what is not. If someone is so good at simulating a particular state of mind then how do we know that they are not being truthful?

Hyperreality was also a common theme in the reading this week. If something is hyperreal, it is always constant. An example used to demonstrate hyperreality throughout the reading was Disneyland. Baudrillard said that Disneyland was presented in the way it is to distract the public from the fact that the rest of America is also hyperreal. Although I do not agree completely with this statement as I myself do feel that there must be some reality and truth in the world, I do agree that certain places which are marketed as being average, real and true are in fact hyperreal. For example, Celebration Town in Florida USA. This town was planned and manufactured by the Walt Disney Corporation. It was based on an idea from Walt Disney himself who wanted to create a perfect community where everyone is equal and citizens would have no worries or stresses about crime or any other unpleasant facts of life. Although this town is marketed as just a great place to live, to me there is something hyperreal about the way it was created and the way it is run. Although, some people would argue that the reason for this is the mere fact that this town is a Disney creation and that every product from Disney demonstrates hyperreality.

http://celebrationtowncenter.com/

I have also learnt this week, the vital differences between modernism and post modernism. Modernism is the idea that there is one definitive truth and nothing else can rival this. There are no questions, just facts and men are the centre of the earth as opposed to God. Post-modernism on the other hand is the complete opposite as the post-modern society questions the truths that modernism spelt out for them. There is no longer only one truth but instead different versions of truth which everyone is free to either believe or disbelieve. As a result of the post-modern society, audiences are given a lot more credit to understand different ways of entertaining for example through the use of parody and pastiche. A parody is when elements of a certain product are imitated. For example when Family Guy used elements from Star Wars in their programme. This is also an example of intertextuality.

Pastiche on the other hand is when elements from different products are put together to create something new.

Audiences: Passive or Active?

One of the main theories that stood out to me from the lecture was the Hypodermic needle model. This theory believes that audiences are greatly affected, personally and mentally by the media which they consume. For example, crimes committed by young offenders are often blamed on the violent video games that they may have played.

However, Empiricist research into the effects of the mass media seems to prove otherwise. Paul Lazarsfeld conducted research into the voting behaviours of American citizens in the 1940’s. His research led him to create the two-step flow model which talks about how the mass media talks directly to the professionals in a certain subject, who Lazarsfeld referred to as opinion leaders. These opinion leaders then pass the knowledge on to the rest of the population. For example someone who is known to have a broad knowledge of films will give advice to the recreational film watcher on which films are the best. This theory goes completely against the idea of the Hypodermic needle model as well as the Frankfurt school’s theories, as this study shows that it is not the mass media that influences audiences the most, but instead is the trusted friends and family of each individual who hold most power.

Studies like Lazarsfeld’s prompted a change in the way in which audiences are perceived. Rather than the audience being seen as passive, as the Frankfurt school thought, they were seen as active. The uses and gratifications theory explains this point saying that audiences are not merely dummies that sit in their living room being bombarded with endless messages not knowing the effect that these messages would have on them; instead they can understand what the media can provide for them and consume media products according to what they wish to get out of it.

Nowadays, the idea of an active audience has been taken one step further as audiences are now interactive. Through the use of YouTube, audiences can now be their own producers and make their own media products. Inevitably this means that the audiences are now controlling the media rather than the media controlling the audience.       

The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer

After reading this, I felt that Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s views were in some ways rather paranoid but in others incredibly insightful and thought provoking. The media is something which I always knew affected lives and I have always had some sort of awareness that it may be affecting me personally, possibly in a negative way. This is a point that Adorno and Horkheimer explored as they talk about the way in which an audience’s perception of the media has changed. At one time seen as an art form, audiences are under no dissillusion that this is the case in modern society as most are aware that the media is a business, out to make money. The fact that people accept this and allow it to go on is what enables the power of the media to grow.

The media, according to Adorno and Horkheimer is ruining high culture and folk culture by the creation of mass media products aimed at as wide an audience as possible, for example the X Factor. There is a distinct loss of individuality within mass culture as everyone in a particular market are brain washed into liking the same things as they feel like they need to fit into a mould. If everyone else likes the X Factor then they should too. Particularly the people working within the media itself need to fit into these acceptable moulds. For example, when Christine Bleakley left The One Show, the BBC replaced her with a woman who looked almost identical to her. The audience were obviously aware of this as they poked fun at this fact in various newspapers and magazines, yet on the whole it does not occur to the mass audience that this was not merely a coincidence but was a carefully planned move to ensure that the audience would not be disrupted by anything new and different, as difference and individuality, according to Adorno and Horkheimer is something that the media does not like to deal with.

Adorno and Horkheimer also felt that the media controls class systems by catering certain products towards certain people. They used the example of magazines. The cheaper magazines are aimed at the working class as they will have less money to spend on such things, whereas the more expensive magazines are aimed at the middle or higher class individuals. Knowing this, the media can decide what content should be included in which magazines, therefore controlling what each social class of people will be reading. Although I feel that this is a valid and carefully thought out point, I don’t entirely agree as I know that many middle class people will also choose to buy the cheaper magazines and vice versa therefore the idea that audiences are forced to read what is created for their market cannot be entirely true.

One of the main issues that Adorno and Horkheimer brought up is the major affect that bombardment of media has on society as they feared that people can no longer tell the difference between what is real and what is not. Films and television programmes pretend to depict ‘real’ lifestyles which makes an audience think, why is my life not like that? For example when a woman watches an episode of Desperate Housewives they will look up to the characters as idols and want to have a life like them, forgetting that these people and the lives they supposedly lead are not actually real. The boundaries between real and artificial are constantly being blurred as even shows that claim to be ‘reality programmes’ are false. Although it is usually stated in the credits of these programmes that some scenes were created for entertainment purposes only, it does not state which scenes they are referring to.

Although Adorno and Horkheimer, at first glance may come across as paranoid, they bring up some very good points backed up with well explained theories. I do not agree with all their opinions but this reading has definitely opened my eyes to the controversy surrounding the media and enabled me to question what is right and what is wrong within the media industry.