Canadian media effect: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Fix links to disambiguation page Media |
Conducting merger as proposed on media influence page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#REDIRECT [[Media influence]] |
|||
{{Multiple issues |
|||
| essay=December 2011 |
|||
| wikify=December 2011 |
|||
| refimprove=December 2011 |
|||
| orphan=December 2011 |
|||
}} |
|||
{{mergeto|Media influence|discuss=Talk:Media influence#Merger proposal|date=February 2012}} |
|||
'''Media effects''' are the perceived psychological effects and influence that the [[Mass media|media]] has on society. Due to the unique combination of factors that influence identity and self perception, various media may emphasize these factors in ways that influence how people view their country and various issues within their respective communities. This effect is particularly evident in [[Canada]] due to its unique policy of [[bilingualism]] and [[multiculturalism]]. Canada is officially a bilingual country with both [[English language|English]] and [[French language|French]] on equal status at the national level, and as such this dual-linguistic and colonial history may be consulted by the media to influence a uniquely Canadian perspective. Canadians are reminded of the [[British colonialism|British colonial history]] in that Canada remains a commonwealth country that pledges allegiance to the monarch of England. This observance of [[royalty]] is held in common with the home of the royalty itself, the UK, along with many other commonwealth countries. The media’s coverage of information that pertains to the royal family and the commonwealth reinforces national identity in different commonwealth states. Canada is a unique case in that it is maintains close cultural links with the [[United States]] which is not a commonwealth member. Additionally, Canada is a home to French language and culture which has been a rival to its English counterpart in previous times. Another significant factor in national and [[cultural identity]] is the welcoming of multiculturalism and [[diversity]], which the media may influence and remind the public of by representing this on television programs, in news coverage of cultural festivals, and in the multilingual media services. All of these practices are a constant reminder to Canadians that their country is multicultural and officially bilingual with a diverse history and a unique identity. Consequently the media influences social attitudes about acceptance of this identity, as well as influencing the public’s opinions of which issues are considered controversial based on the tone of their media representation and which particular subjects are given more or less [[censorship]]. Film restrictions to viewers of certain ages are less strict compared with the neighbouring United States’ standards on film ratings. As a result of this, levels of [[violence]] or other controversial content in films and media may be perceived as less remarkable to Canadians, whereas issues that are more frequently mentioned in the news attract more public interest and concern. |
|||
=== Media’s potential message and its potency === |
|||
Canadian scholar [[Marshall McLuhan]] said that “the medium is the message”, and by that understanding it is apparent that the way in which news is conveyed relays something about the situation itself, thereby having an effect on public perspective.<ref>McLuhan, Marshall. ''Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.'' New York; Toronto: McGraw-Hill. 1964.</ref> If news footage is shown on television, then the primary evidence for the situation becomes visually-based. If this is the case, then viewers know that the filmed footage was in fact of something that was recordable and verifiable beyond that of eyewitness accounts. The medium in this case is the message in that it reflects the perceivable nature of the event’s circumstances. Use of photographic and video footage is the most potent method for persuading [[public opinion]] to understand the reality of the matter, or at least aspects that the media would prefer to draw attention to. Danesi argues that Marshall McLuhan was the first to focus on the power of media effects, “showing how the “meaning structures” that the media produce shape human [[cognition]]”.<ref>Danesi, Marcel. “The Medium is the Sign: Was McLuhan a Semiotician?” in MediaTropes eJournal Vol I (2008): 113–126.</ref> That is to say that exposure to media alters the cognitive functions of the human mind in such a way that it influences their perception of reality. Since knowledge is informed by what sensory functions relay to the mind, people begin to depend on media for knowledge that they would otherwise not have access to due to not having witnessed it firsthand. The media is often influenced by standards imposed by [[investor]]s and potential supporters, whether political or business-related. However, the aforementioned has more of a hold on the media in Canada in that political authorities recognize the potential influence the media has on the public. There has been at least one reported instance of a Canadian reporter being fired for criticizing the [[Prime Minister of Canada|Prime Minister]].<ref>CBC News. “Opposition questions PM over media influence”. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2002/06/18/mills_reax020618.html> June 18, 2002.</ref> The federal government sponsors news and other public services, and as a result, news companies might find themselves hard-pressed to avoid opinionated criticism of leaders. This fact demonstrates that the media is influenced by their financial investors, ultimately reflecting that there is a media effect that has the potential of generating positive or negative opinions of various policies and policy-makers. There is no strict law of censorship in this case but rather a prioritization of investment and cautious handing of media effects. However, it is not just government and business investment which influence the media’s priorities but it is more significantly that of the consumer [[demographic]]. Carey argues that the news reaffirms people’s mythologies and preconceived values rather than informs them of something they would prefer to dispute.<ref>Carey, James W. “Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society”. Revised Ed. New forward. G. Stuart Adam. Routledge: 2008. P.8.</ref> In this way, different media venues will present information with a different bias in order to satisfy the consumer market, while capitalizing on this in such a way that the media is able to enforce public values on the subject they wish to draw attention to. Essentially the media is capable of informing the public with the details they know will have most effect on their values and lead them to develop the desired opinion on a specific issue. |
|||
== National Identity == |
|||
Canada’s population is roughly one tenth that of its southern neighbour, USA. As a result of this small population and a lower GDP, Canada may receive less attention internationally when other countries think of [[North America]] or countries in which English is the de facto most spoken first language. Canada’s media is its main resource in promoting [[Canadian identity]], and consequently the patriotic representation of the nation in the media has a clear effect on the public, awakening a strong support for Canada’s collectively unique factors which determine its identity. In order to emphasize values that Canadians are proud of, the media cites national achievements such as [[medicare]], social safety nets, and multiculturalism, in contrast to the United States, in which [[health insurance]] is more privatized and [[immigration]] is more within the framework of a melting pot. Other points of cultural are societal distinguishing between Canada and the US include Canada’s more regulated laws in regards to firearms compared with ease of access in the US, in addition to Canada’s more peacekeeping-oriented reputation in military situations. Significant masses of Canadians are influenced by these differences accentuated by the media, as is evident in [[social networking]] trends such as [[Facebook]] pages which speak proudly of Canada’s healthcare benefits in contrast to the US. Canada's attitudes toward healthcare have largely been influenced by emphasis the media gives toward healthcare under the national medicare system as a source of pride for Canada.<ref>Soroka, Stuart N. and Patrick Fournier. “The Sources of Attitudes on the Canadian Healthcare System.” Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. September 27, 2011. http://www.chsrf.ca/PublicationsAndResources/ResearchReports/CommissionedResearch/11-09-27/f7ff4e41-7002-4c9b-be8d-3ca2b329c8d3.aspx</ref> The media responsible for inspiring this [[patriotism]] is not limited to news media, but further extends to television commercials and multicultural programming. |
|||
== Multiculturalism == |
|||
Since multiculturalism had become state policy in Canada in the 1970s, the [[Canadian media]] have promoted multiculturalism in various ways ranging from news coverage of cultural events, depiction of diversity on television, and broadcasting in various languages on issues that concern different cultural communities in Canada. All of these factors in the media have influenced the way Canadians perceive their country as a multicultural nation that values its diversity and strives to ensure equality. However, despite an acceptance of multiculturalism as being integral to Canada’s reputation, significant percentages of the population hold negative views in regards to religious minorities among other intercultural tensions.<ref>Geddes, John. “What Canadians think of Sikhs, Jews, Christians, Muslims…” Macleans Magazine. http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/04/28/what-canadians-think-of-sikhs-jews-christians-muslims/ April 28, 2009.</ref> The effect demonstrates that while media does raise awareness and influence Canadians to consider new perspectives, many people continue to hold their own preconceived notions in regards to controversial subjects. |
|||
== Sovereignty == |
|||
The status of [[Canadian sovereignty]] and the historical conflict of [[Quebec separatism|Quebec separatist movements]] have posed a significant question to the public regarding Canadian identity, particularly in how it has been angled and covered by the media over the years, effectively influencing the way Canadians regard the situation. This is not limited to national opposition of separatism, but the media also plays an important role within Quebec internally in regards to the use of French-language media to shape Québécois identity and [[cultural nationalism]].<ref>Taucar, Christopher Edward. “Canadian Federalism and Quebec Sovereignty”. Peter Lang: 2002.</ref> Another issue of Canadian sovereignty is in regards to the Arctic. It has drawn in significant media coverage in recent years as [[Territorial claims in the Arctic|arctic sovereignty]] has been contested by various nations with territory in the arctic region. [[Russia]] in particular has planted a flag in the seafloor of the [[North Pole]] and this has sparked controversy in Canadian media as discussions have been underway to increase Canadian military presence in the arctic. The issue of foreign ships cutting through Canadian waters for profitable purposes has alarmed Canadians that their territorial sovereignty has been infringed upon and as such, new coverage of this situation has had an effect on the way Canadians perceive their nation’s sovereignty and the issue of national priorities.<ref>CBC News. “Battle for the Arctic heats up”. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/02/27/f-arctic-sovereignty.html August 20, 2011.</ref> |
|||
== Protests, public tolerance and support == |
|||
[[Media effects theory|Media effect]] becomes increasingly apparent in the way the media covers political and economic protests. The way in which the media presents the protesters often influences the way the public perceives them whether it be with support or opposition. When the [[G20]] summit gathered in [[Toronto]] in June 2010, there was massive public opposition due to the costs involved with funding the security and accommodations required to host the summit. These costs were reported in various media subsequently alarming the public to an issue they would otherwise not know many facts or figures about. This media effect is what motivated the protesters to stand against what they considered a waste of taxpayers’ money. As with many protest opportunities, there were rioters who in this case were known as the “[[black bloc]]”. They were responsible for burning police cars, breaking café and storefront windows, and prompting the police to respond strictly to the protests, initiating what had become an infamous crackdown that had wrongfully imprisoned many peaceful protesters. Initial news coverage showed footage of the damage the rioters had caused, leading to a generally negative opinion of the protesters by many of the public who had watched the television news. This opinion changed however when more details became apparent through social networking and subsequently the [[Toronto Star]]. As a result, the public learned of the majority of the protesters’ influence resulting in many losing trust in the current practices of the law enforcement system. This quickly changing public opinion and its connection to media coverage provide key evidence that the media’s coverage and choice of angle on events has a psychological effect on public opinion. |
|||
== Media effects in recent events == |
|||
Various issues such as the [[2010 Vancouver Olympics|2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics]], the G20 demonstrations, and most recently the [[Occupy Toronto]] protests have dominated Canadian news media coverage at height of their relevance. The [[Olympic Games]] were a source of pride for Canadians in hosting and succeeding in the largest international sporting event. Team spirit for Canada grew high at the time and many people were talking about what they had seen on television: the gold medal-winning goal scored by [[Sidney Crosby]] in the final Canada versus USA game. The same public that was proud of their country athletically had later in the year acquired mixed feelings about government spending on the hosting of the G20 summit in Toronto in June 2010. Protests turned into riots with television coverage showing burning police cars and broken coffee shop windows. |
|||
The aforementioned effect this coverage had on audiences ranged from outrage at the use of taxpayer money to association of protesting with [[anarchy]] based on the incidents provoked by a number of aggressive and anarchic protesters. The democratic right to protest had been seen as powerful, but its reputation as civil had been tarnished by a focus on the actions of anarchic opportunists and the occurrence of [[vandalism]]. This effect is observed more than a year later in the Occupy Toronto protests which have been inspired by similar protests in many other cities. Although it had not been considered a repeat of the previous year’s events, there was concern from many citizens regarding the possibility of such. |
|||
== The media effect of changing attitudes and expectations == |
|||
From the advent of the [[newspaper]] to the widespread use of the [[internet]], media has been used to communicate ideas to the masses, subsequently creating common opinions and generating support among certain attitudes and ideas. The values that have been gathering increasing support are that of democracy, equality, freedom, justice, and peace. Thanks to media effect, these values have been instilled in the masses and have become expectations of each and every individual in society. However, liberalized influences in the media have become a source of discontent and unease among those who harbour what they consider conservative values, and conversely those who those with liberal values are offended by conservative media. There is not a single voice or angle in the media but rather a divide in consensus on issues ranging from the economy to healthcare and the environment. Although there are disputes on many details of these issues, the media has had a unanimous effect in generating a public response to the big picture. Society is more environmentally-conscious than before and Canada has made healthcare into a national value that many are proud of. There is definitely the option to choose which media to pay attention to based on which angle agrees most with the individual’s values and ideals. However, there will nonetheless be a psychological effect of influence regardless due to the fact that most information originates from external sources, and while still reporting news accurately, the media may choose to emphasize certain aspects of the news in order to sway public opinion in their favour. Media effects are essentially responsible for trends in public opinion and consequently reflect how society is primarily influenced by what they see, hear, and read. |
|||
== Sources == |
|||
<references /> |
|||
{{improve categories|date=December 2011}} |
|||
[[Category:Canadian media|Effect]] |
|||
Revision as of 01:15, 9 April 2012
Redirect to: