Spring 2004    
ISSN 1096-1453    
Volume 8, Issue 1     Editorial Media Literacy is a relatively new academic domain, although mass media have existed for centuries, impacting lives from its beginning. Think of Paine’s Common Sense impact on the American Revolution. Still, in the 21st century, media literacy has become associated with broadcast media and advertising, with a belief that those in power are trying to persuade the populace. Probably the most important factor that distinguishes media, relative to media literacy theory, is the reason for its existence: a conscious, constructive message to gain profit and/or power. Each medium has its own “language” and protocol for communicating its message. Photography’s visual experience highlights a personal and lifelike quality. Film is a collaborative effort; its unique feature is high-resolution capture of movement. Television’s distinguishing feature is its immediate worldwide distribution. Radio requires imaginative engagement, and often acts as “background” in contrast to the deliberate action of going to movies. Another aspect of media literacy is context. Why is a particular message being delivered? Who is the targeted audience? What are the surrounding elements–historical, cultural, organizational -- that shape meaning? Media producers build on audience knowledge and emotions to offer highly connotative messages to leverage pre-established associations. Still, regardless of the conscious intent, each person perceives messages differently depends on one’s personal background and perspective. The media literacy field examines each of the above processes. In teaching this domain, academicians focus on consumer and producer roles. How can faculty provide students with the language, skills, and methodology that ready them for these encounters? How can they prepare students to recognize, engage, and interrogate power structures they encounter? Several questions arise when discussing how to teach media literacy: how young can students be taught media “language” or the critical analysis of media? What media literacy elements cross cultural borders? Do universal symbols and icons exist relative to media literacy, or must all comprehension and analysis be couched in terms of particular culture-bound values and semiology? Still, many academics avoid studying the role of media in the lives of students because media triggers such emotional connotations, particularly in terms of consumerism and cultural values. The connections, the argument follows, between media and popular culture, between media literacy and critical pedagogy, or between popular culture and post-modern theory are less than rigorous. Still, media’s predominance in faculty and students' lives demands that they reconsider what it means to be literate in today's world. Nevertheless, entities who strongly advocate media literacy often call upon students and other media consumers to act consciously in response to the act of putting forth a message. The focus changes from the message or goal to the producer. At what pointdoes the student become part of the media? Do universities strive to profit or influence? Academicians cannot totally separate themselves from the media. That awareness, in itself, has the potential to look at this issue more thoughtfully and sympathetically.Dr. Lesley S. J. Farmer,    California State University, Long Beach E-mail: lfarmer@csulb.edu |