"Understanding knowledge as an essential element of love is vital because we are bombarded daily with messages that tell us love is about mystery, about that which cannot be known. We see movies in which people are represented as being in love who never talk with one another, who fall into bed without ever discussing their bodies, their sexual needs, their likes and dislikes. Indeed, the message is received from the mass media is that knowledge makes love less compelling; that it is ignorance that gives love its erotic and transgressive edge. These messages are brought to us by profiteering producers who have no clue about the art of loving, who substitute their mystified visions because they do not really know how to genuinely portray loving interaction." - bell hooks from her book All About Love: New Visions By this point you will be aware of the powerful role the mass media play in society, but you may not yet question whether society benefits from this arrangement. In general, the mass media could do a better job of representing all sorts of groups and group cultures. The mass media could also represent abstract concepts like love, trust and greed in more meaningful ways. This is not to say that the mass media have failed in this regard, but there is much room for improvement. As active audience members, as hybrid producer-users or "produsers" (Bruns, 2007) you must not only be selective but also critical of what you consume. Whether you become media professionals or not, it will ultimately be your job as media consumers to remake the mass media in ways that better represent the depth of human experience. Whether your interest is a religion, a fandom, or an abstract concept like love (one of the greatest of abstractions), you have the power to participate in the media production redefining how others understand it. This unit gives you some tools developed by mass communication scholars to develop your critical eye when viewing messages as products in the mass media. If massive numbers of "producers" can reshape the media landscape we have to re-think the role of mass media professionals. Assisting people in the process of meaning-making - that is, making mass media with audiences instead of for them, and aiding them in their own communication efforts - could open up a new purpose and new industries for those who are mentally prepared and daring enough to take the lead. Topic 2: What is media literacy? Media literacy is a term describing media consumers' understanding of how mass media work. It includes knowing where different types of information can be found, how best to evaluate information, who owns the major mass media platforms, how messages are produced, and how they are framed to suit various interests. In a global society that gets most of its information through digital networks, it is incredibly important to know how and by whom media messages are made so that as consumers we can discern how the mass media are being used to shape our opinions. We can reply to or comment on messages in the mass media, or we can demand a seat at the table when messages are being constructed. This is the nature of participatory media. Being media literate gives us the tools to participate well and with purpose. It is important to consider your role in contributing directly to mass media content. Your inputs to cultural trends Topic 1: Foundational Principles Before we discuss the Uses and Gratifications Theory (or simply Uses and Gratifications and or UGT) more closely, we should stop and discuss a larger question that is central to many of the communication theories, and which can be applied to a variety of different theories we've already discussed, and to those we will discuss as the course moves forward: Does meaning come from structure (grammar, medium, institution, culture) or does it come from individual agency (our interpretation, personality, intelligence)? This debate between Structure and Agency is an important one to consider as a communication scholar and is a great example of how theoretical assumptions will inform your understanding of media and society. If you believe that structure is the primary place in which meaning is constructed, then you will focus your attention on the culture, grammar, institution, or medium: for those are all factors that "structure" the meaning of any message. You may, for example, as Agenda Setting Theory suggests, believe that those "institutional" choices - by editors, by news agencies, by politicians, and media owners - shape, or "structure" the meaning in such a manner as to actually dictate that meaning to the audience. In these models, things outside the individual are viewed to have more power over interpretation than those factors specific to the individual. On the other hand, if you are someone that believes in Agency, then you would consider the specific ways in which an audience member engages with a media text. You would want to ask "why" someone watches a particular program, you would want to understand "how" watching informs that person's identity, or "how" they use it to develop relationships. For example, you may watch sports with your friend, despite the fact that you don't like sports, because that is the only thing your friend wants to do on a Sunday afternoon, and you can only visit him or her on Sundays. In this example, watching sports has nothing to do with the content of the message for you, and everything to do with how you use that content to build a better relationship with your friend. Media Effects Theory, and other theories that assume that the audience is passive, neglect to take into account how consuming media may serve very different purposes than those intended or "structured" by the message. Uses and Gratifications Theory seeks to determine some of these alternative reasons and purposes of media consumption. Topic 2: Overview of Theory Uses and Gratifications Theory can be broadly understood as a functionalist approach to media consumption. Unlike Media Effects Theories, which pose questions about what "MEDIA DOES to people," Uses and Gratifications Theory asks "what do PEOPLE DO with media." This focus on function, rather than content, shifts the theoretical assumptions about media consumption from "structure" to "agency" and looks at the audience as active and engaged, rather than passive and apathetic. Uses and Gratifications Theory is informed by social and psychological theories about "needs" fulfilment. What dictates what people do with media is what people "need" from media. The needs of the audience are the motivation for the consumption of media, NOT the needs of the producer of content (which Media Effects proposes). Therefore, Uses and Gratifications Theory can pose interesting questions around what types of moods or emotions encourage what type of media consumption, whether or not age impacts the meaning of a program and how it is used, and how education and social background shape the consumption of media. In other words, depending on who you are, what educational level you have, what interests you have, what gender Example: You watch The Walking Dead because you can't think of anything else while you are watching it. Topic 3: Implications and Applications Some criticism can be levelled at the Uses and Gratifications Theory. First, asking audiences why they watch certain programs will certainly force them to justify their consumption when they may really not have had any good reason to watch. When posed with the question of "what purpose" media serves in people's lives, they will likely create a reason when one may have not been present. Second, by swinging the pendulum from content and intent to audience use and gratification, some feel Uses and Gratifications Theory ignores the propagandistic impact of media on audiences and overlooks how structures such as power and privilege may be shaping media content. In other words, by assuming the audience is immune to the content of messages and will use them (messages) how they feel best suits their needs, do Uses and Gratifications overlook the existence of Media Effects? Regardless of such criticisms, Uses and Gratifications broaden our understanding of how we, as individuals, interact with media messages and how we may use them strategically to fulfill social and personal needs. In this theory, the audience is engaged, goal-oriented, strategic, and has the agency to interpret media messages according to their own hierarchy of needs. Finally, one place where we see the application of Uses and Gratifications pushed even further is in the need for parasocial relationships. Parasocial relationships resemble those we have face-to-face but they are mediated and one-sided. These are increasingly common in our present age as a "use" and perhaps reveal a great deal about our desire to connect with all that we consume (a need we "gratify"). Watch the video below where Dr. Jennifer Barnes asks us to think about the implications about how the relationships we develop with fictional characters might be leveraged to do some good. She also poses some great questions we ought to ask about media representations: TED* Imaginary friends and real-world cons... Watch on YouTube Watch lat... Share TEDXOU. (2015, March). Imaginary friends and real-world consequences: Parasocial relationships: Jennifer Barnes [Video file]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22yoaiLYb7M