Media ownership in Australia is extremely concentrated. Fears are rising that we could end up in a similar scenario like the 1930’s when Hilter controlled Germany’s media, which was then used to further his propaganda. Throughout societies there are still strong fears which depict beliefs of modern day propaganda. This can be identified through the example of Isis and how they are conveying their intentions and meaning through the use of media.
However, on the topic of ownership, does Beyonce have control over her media articulating the question does Beyonce matter? (1) In my opinion yes of course she does, but why does she? All we have to do is take one look at the title in which she was acknowledged for in 2016,‘The most charitable celebrity of 2016’ (2) and the following in which she has attracted on a global scale. These two substantial reasons are contributing features in why she matters. However , the face of Beyonce has changed from iconic pop sensation of todays generation to most charitable celebrity. Through her experience and expertise in the music industry she has created her own personal interpretation and perception of the media and utilised her fame and pop influence to addresshumanitarian issues(3) and promote social change. Beyonce has brought awareness to many significant causes this year such as raising awareness for racial inequality being the advocateforBlack lives matter (4) movement.Queen Bey has donated 82,000 in the past year to families in Flint for the water crisis. Additionally she has raised awareness for gender equality.
Thesehumanitarian acts(5) explain how Beyonce has control and ownership of her media platforms. Through her social media accounts being silent on her private life articulates she is the dominant regulator of her media platforms. Her successful ownership and control of her accounts and can be identified in comparison to the Kardashians. The Kardashians utilise and promote their media platforms in a distinctively different way. For example this can be depicted through the Kardashians continuous use of media to portray their daily lives. However do they always have control over their media. A example of no control was through the leakage of Kim Kardashians sex tape.(6)
Beyonce states in youtube video; ” The more you have to work for it the more you cherish it. Every time i think of doing something silly, something that is going to be detrimental to my career, I think about all that hard work and time I have sacrificed in my childhood, my family time and all the people who have worked so hard. I could never disrespect all that i have worked for, I could never disrespect my fans or the opportunity i have been given.”Watch here.(7)
So I think this sums up why Beyonce matters and how she controls every form of media that is posted online. Queen Bey has created large social change through her media platforms and choice of personal causes , in which she influences public opinion leading to social change around the world. She has public attention at the click of a button.
What is the real message this advertisement is trying to convey? Is it glorifying Violence against women? Were your first thoughts, Domestic Violence?
My initial thoughts to this image depicted sadness, pain, vulnerability and a victim to domestic violence. However, this is an advertisement from the Bulgarian fashion magazine 12(1). The idea in which they were trying to imply was the message of ‘beauty throughout pain’ and how women can be a victim to domestic violence however still show their strengths and resilience. The company photographed the women to express their strengths throughout the face of adversity. However her body language says otherwise…
The denotations(2) such as the use of morbid(3) colours in the background of the image, transferring them into the foreground make this image so emotionally compelling(4). Expressing pain, suffering and helplessness. Integrating softer, pale colouring to her skin, has assisted in drawing attention to the main figure, to portray the specific meaning in which is trying to be conveyed. However has their message been portrayed the right way? The positioning of the text, the colour contrast of black and white and the capitalisation of the words ‘VICTIM OF BEAUTY’ on the left hand side of the image articulates the message. This image also implies a subtle theme of sexualisation, through the use of a red laced outfit which has sexualised the model. Although, this image has created several interpretations of what it is trying to imply, leading to the question is this advertisement glorifying violence?
The connotations(5) of this image are expressing how women have beauty no matter what the situation may be. However this is not how the advert has been seen in the public eye. When i first came across this advertisement i was appalled at and felt as if it was expressing a sexiest view of how domestic violence usually occurs more often among women than men. Although this advertisement was produced for a specific meaning(6), it created a controversial discussion on a international scale. The Bulgarian Fashion Magazine tried to console the issue which arose on a international scale, read it here(7). However we have to question ourselves was this advertisement generated to improve the companies visibility on media platforms to promote their magazines? Or was it purely to convey their intended message of how there is beauty throughout pain ? Her body language is distressing and un-easy to look at. This image may provoke many issues which can lead to emotional effects of individuals depending on their interpretation which may stem from past experiences and beliefs. This advertisement has created many different beliefs among individuals. Some indivdiuals beliefs were identified from the ‘Fashionista’ –
ALISON MELDRUM: “THIS IS APPALLING. INCREASINGLY, VIOLENCE IS BEING ‘NORMALISED’ IN TEEN RELATIONSHIPS TO AN ALRMING EXTENT WITHOUT THIS KIND OF STUFF.” –Fashionista (8)
LINDSEY SCHUYLER: “WHY DO YOU AUTOMATICALLY JUMP TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE? WHY ASSUME WOMEN CAN’T GET INJURED ON THEIR OWN? I THINK IT’S A REALLY INTERESTING SHOOT, THE CONTRAST OF WHAT CAN BE DONE WITH MAKEUP IS PRETTY AMAZING, IT’S LIKE TWO WORLDS OF SPECIAL EFFECTS COLLIDING.”– Fashionista (9)
KRISTEN MAY LEE:”YUP WHOEVER DID THIS SHOOT HATES WOMEN…” – Fashionista (10)
These views are only some of the controversial issues, which arose from this project. As this image has many interpretations i believe the one in which stands out is domestic violence. The differentiation is in the individual’s beliefs, opinions and past experiences which effect the way in which they may react to this advert.
Does reading some of these denotations and connotations of this advertisement change your belief on the image?
Within todays society the ways in which people watch television has dramatically transformed. People now have a greater variety of choice in what they consume and how they watch it. The real issue which the media faces is: Is television creating violence among individuals?
Every form of media has a specific audience, and all individuals have their own opinions and views. These views are generally generated from their past experiences and the content on what they are viewing. This is said to be a contributing factor to aggressive or violent behaviour within society. However can parents control and protect their children from experiencing violence on television or within video games(1)?
Through the evolution of technology and the emergence of various technological devices(2) it has lead to parents having limited to no control over what their child is playing or watching. The majority of kids having some form of access to technological devices. As children are a vulnerable form of audience they are imagined most at risk to violence. For example the amount of children playing violent video games which in turn is seen to make them act violently within society. This can be seen through American psychologist Alfred Bandura who is a advocate for the social learning theory, in which he experimented through ‘The Bobo Doll’(3). Through his series of laboratory experiments to demonstrate the social learning of aggression among children he found that many individuals believe that watching violence promotes violence blaming the media for the acts of aggression within society. Researching the psychology of whether media is the stem for violence among children, showed a distinction between the effects that television plays on children in comparison to those who play violent video games. The research conducted by psychologists Douglas Gentile and Brad Bushmanon on the effects televisions has on children suggested that; (4)
“Exposure to media violence is just one of seven factors that can contribute to aggressive behaviour.”
However it was found when looking into the effects of video games it expressed that;
97% of adolescents aged between 12-17 play video games. Numerous play violent games including ‘Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty.
Andersons research found that playing video games can increase a persons aggressive thoughts feelings and behaviour both in laboratory settings and in daily life.
So what is the truth? Is the media to blame for the violence occurring within societies and is it stemmed from a young age?
Heres a link to a youtube clip which sums up my blog post! This video is from a past University of Wollongong Student. Watch it here.(5)
American psychological Association. (2012). Reassessing Media Violence effects using a risk and resilience approach to understanding aggression. [Online]Psychology of popular media culture. http://www.drdouglas.org/drdpdfs/GBRisk2012.pdf [Accessed 10th March 2017]