MASS MEDIA CRITICISM

The purpose of this course is to foster critical thinking and promote skills for assessing and conducting original critical examination and research, either as an academic or as a professional in the field. In other words, by the end of the semester I expect you to be able to read an article or watch a program or observe a genre of mass media and put it into sociological and/or political and/or business and/or aesthetic perspective and be able to discuss it rationally, clearly, and with a minimum of academese or sociological gobbledygook, supporting your arguments with evidence; no more "I don't like it", "Why not?", "I don't know, I just don't". We will be reading and examining various critical studies and methods, discussing them, and then applying them to the real world, usually through the use of video or overhead examples from the real world.

This course is a seminar--thus I expect a few things from you as members: 1) show up for class--it is difficult to have a constructive conversation when you're alone (you may be awe-struck by the intelligence level but the arguments tend to be one-sided); 2) read the assignments on time and be prepared to talk--I tend to ask questions to which I expect answers in which the BS quotient is low; 3) do outside work, even if it is not assigned--read constantly, watch TV (yes, this is one course where GILLIGAN'S ISLAND is almost a requirement and GENERAL HOSPITAL can help you get a higher grade).

Also bear in mind that since this is a discussion course it may not follow the course outline: rigid structure is the last refuge of the mediocre and incompetent and we will follow a course of discussion that is effective rather than dogmatic. If it takes longer to adequately cover a topic than allowed for, or if it gets particularly interesting and valuable to continue talking about a particular area, we will continue with that section. You will also notice that many things that lead to big discussions are minuscule details, things you would never notice -- except I did and I expect you to as well. It might be one brief image, or just a few words, or the order in which things are presented, during the course of a long presentation. But, as Roald Amundsen (find out (extra credit (brief biography explaining why he))) said, "It's in the details." The details are the essence of criticism.

You may have noticed that the course description in the Bulletin says this course is about critical analysis of research in news and news determinants. Wrong. News will certainly be a part of the semester's offerings (using the term along the lines of "sacrifice") but we will also be discussing cognitive theory, symbology, psycho-. socio- , neuro- and sociobiology, newspapers, magazines, advertising, commercial and cable television, and anything else that comes to mind that is part of the worlds of mass media and the ability to criticize them. It is not a course in literary, internet or film criticism, although we will discuss books and movies if they impact on mass media.

You will note that, at the end of this, there is a Course Outline. It is a listing of the topics I hope to get to during the course of the semester, and the readings I expect you to do. However, bear in mind this is a course in media criticism, which means things change constantly. Thus, don't be surprised if we don't get to things on time, or indeed at all. It all depends on what's happening in the world, and the world of media, during the course. For example, during the Persian Gulf War, a once in a lifetime opportunity for examining the media, we devoted eight weeks to the coverage of the war. That was the only semester when that was done. Media and the law courts is a thing of great importance now -- the summer of '95 was the first time we discussed it, and it will be part of this class. Who knows what will be important this semester? What we do will depend on what's happening; how long we spend on it will depend on the same. Thus, the course outline is what we will do if nothing happens -- and if I flap my arms and fly south for the winter.

COURSE GROUNDRULES

There will be no exams: exams are designed so that the student can regurgitate that which rhe will forget fifteen minutes later but make the instructor think rhe's actually accomplished something. At the senior/graduate level it is a foregone conclusion that you are all masters at this game. Your grade (sorry, a necessary(?) evil) will be based upon 3 things: class participation (don't worry if you're shy--I pick on people indiscriminately and at the least desirable moment (it's part of my charm) and Murphy will take care of the rest)(15%); a final paper, due Friday of Closed Week no later than 2 pm, which will be a paper 8 to no more than 10 double-spaced pages (25%) ; and four other papers, due at the beginning of class every three weeks (Friday of weeks 3, 6, 9, and 12), two pages in length (4 X 15%=60%).

Class Participation: I hope you will enjoy this course so much you'll look forward to coming and dread missing a day. I also hope my arms won't get tired when I fly south for the winter. I'm not going to waste time or insult you by taking attendance to find out if you show up. However, there are so many of you that this means you're going to have to get me to notice you and remember your name. Naturally, those faces that are the most familiar to me, those that I see everyday, are going to do better than those faces I never see. The best way to get noticed, of course, is to speak up, join the conversation, argue (with me or your classmates). Just remember, when you do speak up, have something to say. By that, I mean what you say should be germane to the topic and supported by some kind of evidence; try not to editorialize (see below). I don't care if you agree with me; in fact, I'd prefer you didn't. If you have questions, about anything, ask. If you have comments, let's hear them. I will also assume that you've done the readings, that you will refer to them and be able to answer questions about them. I don't want this to be a lecture course, I want to talk about it. Think of it as an overloaded Socratic discussion -- the teacher on one end of the log, 50 students on the other (no comments about my weight), and they talk about it.

Guidelines for the papers: The choice of topic for each paper will be up to you, with a few restrictions: no more than two papers on the same topic (advertising [e.g., two print ads or two commercials or one print ad, one commercial], politics, news, soap operas, religion, etc.), a letter-grade drop for each paper beyond two on the same topic; facts, opinions, ideas, etc., must be supported by some kind of proof (in other words, endnotes and bibliographies are not only encouraged but required, if only as proof that no one else has had the good sense to think of your incredible insight first). I will naturally expect the topics to have something to do with mass media criticism (not literary or cinema criticism), show a large degree of insight and thought, be concise and to the point, and be interesting.

Papers that I find particularly interesting (either because they are so good or so bad, but rest assured I won't embarrass anyone with censure (or praise, for that matter)) may well form the basis for a discussion.

THREE TYPES OF PAPERS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE and, regardless of quality of writing, will not receive a grade higher than a "C":

1) reviews -- reviews are your opinion of the quality of a media presentation and are concerned with whether or not your reader should like or dislike that presentation. Reviews are not acceptable because they are simply your personal reaction to a presentation, and say nothing about how the presentation might affect the average audience.

2) Editorials -- editorials are your personal opinions about what appears in the media, the contents of a media presentation, and how you believe other people should think about those contents. Editorials are unacceptable because they are usually based on your gut reaction and a priori assumptions, are presented with a multitude of logical fallacies, including but not limited to circular arguments, ad hominem and ad populum attacks, and special pleading, and often ignore reality in favor of the way you would like things to be. For example, you may not like the use of sex in advertising, but nonetheless it is used; don't waste time saying it shouldn't be used, talk about the possible effects on the audience of its use, and support those effects with independent evidence (quotes, statistics, content analysis, interviews, research) rather than your personal opinion of what those effects might be (at no time may you assume that your reaction is universal -- you may be right, but you just may be weird (and being Comm students, the latter is the most likely)).

The general rule to follow when writing your critiques is that no one cares what your opinion is, only what the evidence shows. If you make a statement as though it was a fact, show that it is a fact with some kind of evidence. For example, if you say The O.C. is extremely popular with young people, support that statement with 1) what do you mean by young people (to a 90-year-old 60 is young, to a five-year-old everybody is old), and 2) that Neilson or other ratings show that The O.C. is more popular that age group than other age groups. "Extremely popular with young people" is an unacceptable opinion, ratings are facts.

3) Cinema or literary criticism -- This is a course in mass media criticism. For the purposes of this course, movies and books are not mass media. They may be used as examples for analyzing mass media, but you cannot write a paper about a movie unless it has had a major effect on another medium. For example, Star Wars has had a large effect on other media, including its use of special effects that are now standard in TV and commercial production, its influence on science fiction on TV, etc.. However, you cannot write a paper on the movie Star Wars without the focus of the paper being on television. (See “Why Not Movies” on my web page for a full explanation of why I don’t consider movies as a mass medium for this class.)

I also strongly urge you to take advantage of the Writing Lab in the English Department. Nothing will lower your grade on papers faster than poor grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, etc.. If you can't construct coherent sentences and paragraphs, spell, and properly punctuate, you can't write a critique, and your grade will reflect that fact. It may be that you are one of those unfortunates whose English classes emphasized "personal growth" and "self-esteem" over following the basic rules of Standard Modern English, that little mistakes didn't matter as long as you "expressed yourself." However, the lackadaisical attitude toward little mistakes such an approach fosters can, and often does, lead to a lackadaisical attitude toward bigger and bigger mistakes. (This is why Com 295 instructors seem, and are, so picky -- you aren't allowed to make mistakes, since a "little mistake" can lead to a big lawsuit.) When you're in the job market, employers are not as kindly disposed toward mistakes as English teachers (I know -- I've been both): little mistakes lead to little unemployment checks. In other words, start early, rewrite often, and use that spell checker (remembering at all times that it doesn't catch all errors) and PROOFREAD! Grammar,

class=Section5>

syntax, spelling and punctuation will be taken into account when I grade your papers; poor English will result in a poor grade -- the most brilliant critical insight is worthless if you can't communicate it clearly. On your first paper I will use diacritical marks to show where you have made errors and how they should be corrected ("it's" when it should be "its", "your" when it should be "you're", when you confuse "to," "too" and "two" or "there," "their" and "they're", I'll write "frag" in the margins when you've used a sentence fragment, “NAS” when what you wrote is “Not A Sentence,” etc.). On all future papers I will only put a red circle around or a checkmark in the margin next to the error and it will be your job to find out what that error is and not repeat it in the future. If there are too many errors, I will simply refuse to finish reading the paper, and you will receive an "F" (I've done that; you don't want that). You may think this is harsh, or that you don't like writing, but a major part of your job in any field of communication or business will be writing for the rest of your life (the president of TBS said the first thing they look for in an employee is someone who can write), so you might as well get the practice in now, when an "F" means failure, not fired.

There will be no excuses for late work: late is defined as not turned in during the class period in which it is due. When an employer says rhe wants something at 10:00 am Wednesday, rhe wants it at 10:00 am Wednesday, not 2:00 or 5:00 or sometime Friday -- get used to the concept of submitting assignments when they are due. Turned in late is the equivalent of not turned in at all. Thus, it will be turned in on time by you or your proxy or your undertaker, or it will be an F.

A FINAL NOTE, ON PLAGIARISM: Although it may be hard to tell, I’m not a total moron. If you plagiarize (e.g., copy out of a book or off the internet or someone else’s paper), the odds are I’ll catch it. If I catch it, I’ll give you an “F” on the paper, turn it over to Student Affairs, and check everything else you do (i.e., I won’t trust a thing you do for the rest of your college career). A second case of plagiarism, or plagiarizing your final paper, will result in an “F” for the course, and you will not be allowed to repeat the course (I’ve done that) and I’ll again turn it over to Student Affairs (this can, and has, resulted in loss of scholarships and even expulsion). In other words, do your own work.

Week 1: Why bother? This week will be spent in discussing why we should even bother criticizing mass media, and some basics in how to go about criticizing, including observation, examination, analysis, and communication of conclusions. (Berger, Preface, Ch. 1 (Semiotics))

Week 2: Since we're bothering, how? Continuing on methods, particularly semiotics.

Week 3: How else? (Berger, Ch. 4-8, Epilogue; Berger, Ch. 2, (Marxist Analysis), Ch. 3) Paper 1 due Friday.

Week 4: OK! OK! What else!?! Jeez! (Psychoanalytic Criticism))

Week 5: There’s more!?! (Sociological Analysis and examples)

Week 6: And even more! (in Sitcom, NeoAristotelian) Paper 2 due

Week 7: NeoAristotelian, Part Deux.

Week 8: News--if that's what it is. We will begin discussion of news media and what they consider news, how they present it, and how people react to it.

Week 9: Film at Eleven. Television news (both national and local), news and the courts, documentaries, docudramas, and other forms of created real life. Paper 3 due

Week 10: The Selling of the _________. Political advertising and the packaging of the candidate.

Week 11: And now, a word from our sponsor. Print and broadcast advertising--its purpose, uses, abuses, and effects. (Taflinger, Taking Advantage)

Week 12: We'll be right back. Continuation of the discussion of advertising. Will include such things as institutional advertising, health (AIDS, smoking, fundraising, etc.). Paper 4 due

Week 13: Doing the Final Paper. Actors in Blue. Lawyer, cop and detective shows .

Week 14: Love in the Afternoon. Soap operas.

Week 15: The Giggle Box. Sitcoms. (Taflinger: Sitcom) Final paper due Friday, no later than 2 p.m. Any paper received after 2 p.m. will receive an F.