MASS MEDIA CRITICISM
COMMUNICATIONS 460/560
Instructor: Dr. Richard F. Taflinger
Phone: 335-1530
Office: Murrow 241
Office Hours: MWF 12:00 - 1:00 OBA
E-mail: taflinge at wsu.edu (office); richt at turbonet.com (home)
Home page: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~taflinge/index.html
Required Texts: Berger, Media Analysis Techniques; Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death; Taflinger, Sitcom: What It Is, How It Works; Taflinger, Taking ADvantage.
THE SYLLABUS
Undoubtedly, the longest it'll ever be your misfortune to meet. Read it! You will be held responsible for everything in it. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse.
OBJECTIVES
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, slide, 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 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 two 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 wings 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., 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 MELROSE PLACE 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 everyone is
old), and 2) that Neilson or other ratings show that MELROSE PLACE is more
popular than other shows with that age group. "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, 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
Wednesday, rhe wants it at 10:00 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 PLAGARISM: Although it may be
hard to tell, I’m not a total moron. If you plagarize
(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 plagarism,
or plagarizing 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.
THE BOOKS
There are several required texts, paperbacks where I
could get them, but at this level in your careers you're going to want to keep
them to use in the future. I can almost guarantee that what you buy for
this class you are not going to want to sell back at the end of the semester
because you'll use them from now on. Some of the reading assignments may
appear on the surface to be carryovers from the Spanish Inquisition ("No
one expects the Spanish Inquisition!" (what's that from?)), but I have
taken some care to get only books that are at the least interesting and have a
FOG number below 35 (For example, Amusing Ourselves to Death is assigned
to read in one week. I originally read it in one sitting, so anyone
should be able to read it during the five weeks before we get to it.) You
may also think that, since we don't specifically discuss in class the articles
and books assigned, that you don't need to read them. WRONG! I have
never been a believer in the lazy technique of reading the book to the
class. I will assume you have read the assignments by the time we reach
them, that you know what they contain, and will use them to answer questions
and as support for your comments in class and your papers. For example,
if you discuss advertising appeals (such as sex or self-esteem), you'd better
have read Taking ADvantage, because I'll
assume you have, and that if you don't 1) agree and acknowledge, or 2) disagree
and shoot down what it says with better evidence (not opinion, evidence), I'll
have to believe you didn't do your research and that will hurt your
grade. (Whatever you read, whether I wrote it or not, I don't care if you
agree or disagree with what is said -- just support your point of view.)
The books for the course are: Berger, A.A., Media Analysis Techniques; Postman, N., Amusing Ourselves to Death; Taflinger, R., Taking ADvantage; Taflinger, R., Sitcom: What it Is, How It Works (the latter two are photocopies available along with the other books at the Bookie).
COURSE OUTLINE
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,
Week 2: Since we're bothering, how? Continuing
on methods, particularly semiotics.
Week 3: How else? (Berger, Ch. 4-8, Epilogue;
Week 4: OK! OK! What else!?! Jeez! (Psychoanalytic
Criticism))
Week 5: There’s more!?! (Sociological Analysis and
examples) Paper 2 due WEDNESDAY
Week 6: And even more! (in Sitcom, NeoAristotelian)
Week 7: NeoAristotelian, Part Deux.
Paper 3 due
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. (Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death)
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 4 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) Paper 5 due
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.).
Week 13: Doing the Final Paper. Actors in
Blue. Lawyer, cop and
detective shows .Paper 6 due
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.
You can reach me by e-mail at: rich at turbonet.com
This page was created by Richard F. Taflinger. Thus, all errors, bad links, and even worse style are entirely his fault.
Copyright © 2005 Richard F. Taflinger.
This and all other pages created by and containing the original work of Richard
F. Taflinger are copyrighted, and are thus subject to
fair use policies, and may not be copied, in whole or in part, without express
written permission of the author richt at turbonet.com.
Disclaimers
The information provided on this and other pages by
me, Richard F. Taflinger (richt at
turbonet.com), is under my own personal responsibility and not that of
In addition,
I, Richard F. Taflinger, accept no responsibility for
WSU or ERMSC material or policies. Statements issued on behalf of