Media Theorists on Justin Biebers Recent Exploits - Essay Example

Justin Bieber’s recent exploits The value of communication as a means for covering various social and personal needs cannot be doubted. Still, not all communication approaches are equally effective in regard to the above role. For example, for certain people communication is a tool for showing to others the personal perceptions on critical social issues. However, there are also people who believe that communication is more appropriately developed through the publication of negative news in regard to the personal life of individuals. The role of communication in promoting social beliefs and in supporting specific modes of behavior is explored in this paper. Two articles referring to Justin Bieber, a quite popular pop star of Canada, are set under examination using the views of media theorists, such as James Carey, Walter Lippmann and John Dewey. It seems that the articles on Justin Bieber are not aligned with the common views on media and its role as a communication tool. However, this phenomenon could be possibly explained if taking into consideration the continuous changes on social culture and ethics in societies worldwide. For Dewey, a popular media theorist, communication is a vital part of life. In fact, Dewey characterizes communication as ‘the most wonderful of all things’ (Dewey, 1939: 385 in Carey 11). Based on this view, the article of Friesen could be characterized as reflecting modern communication trends. Indeed, in the particular article reference is made to the changes that three young girls, Saghi, Celina and Giselle, have made on their daily life in order to be closer to their favorite star, Justin Bieber (Friesen 1). These changes are not unique; rather, they are similar to practices of the fans of other stars worldwide. From this point of view, the article would be welcomed by Dewey, being considered as a reflection of the life style of modern young people. Carey would react differently in regard to the article of Friesen. Indeed, as Carey notes when he comments the above view of Dewey, meaning the description of communication as provided by Dewey, communication is not wonderful and only ‘on some occasions communication could be considered as satisfying’ (Carey 11). In this context, the article of Friesen, initially, would not be welcomed by Carey. Through a second thought, Carey could consider that the article of Friesen is aligned with his view on the role of press: for Carey, people are those who provide to the press information that needs to be published, and not vice versa (Munson and Warren 191). The above relationship between people and the press is derived from the critical role of the press in securing democracy, as Carey believes (Munson and Warren 191). Moreover, for Carey, communication reflects a critical need: the need to share information (Munson and Warren 197). From this point of view, the article of Friesen could be characterized by Carey as important, presenting the daily life of three young girls, as described by them, as aligned with their need for being, continuously, close to their idol. Indeed, in the article of Friesen the three fans of Bieber share with the readers their daily life and their concerns, making the communication with the readers direct. Such approach is fully aligned with the view of Carey in regard to the role of communication within society. According to the above, the views of Carey on media and press could lead to contradictory assumptions in regard to the value of Friesen. However, if they are reviewed carefully these views are not contradictory but, rather, supplementary. More specifically, Carey could found the article of Friesen as an important text, as part of the press in general, even if the content of the article would not be particularly cheerful, at the level that it shows an excessive dependency of young people on popular artists. At this point, reference could be also made to the potential reaction of Lippmann to the article of Friesen. Lippmann has highlighted the need of the public to keep certain limits when interfering in issues that are related to the public interest (Schudson 1033). However, in the specific case the issue under discussion cannot be characterized as ‘a public affair’ (Schudson 1033), such as, for example, a political issue. The relationship between a pop idol and his fans can attract the interest of many people but not of the public in general and cannot affect the public interests. Therefore, Lippmann could consider the structure/ content of the article of Friesen as acceptable at the level it could reflect a critical aspect of democracy: the right of speech and of presenting own views. Similar assumptions could be developed in regard to the article of Everett-Green. In the particular article, where the trials that Justin Bieber faces are analyzed, emphasis is given to the negative aspects of a specific social trend: money is often used for justifying social behaviors, i.e. as a reason for making a social behavior acceptable. The specific article seems to be quite irrelevant to the view of Dewey on communication, as presented above. Still, Dewey could possibly consider the article as quite satisfactory at the level that it would meet an important characteristic of communication: ‘the transmission of information’ (Carey 11). Thus, Dewey would consider the article of Everett-Green as important, offering information on a person who is popular worldwide. In other words, Dewey could think that through such information the fans of Bieber could be informed on the negative aspects of their idol’s personal life, a fact that could lead them to reconsider their thoughts for the particular person, as these thoughts can highly affect their daily life, as proved through the article of Friesen. Carey would be expected to have a totally different view in regard to the particular article. This assumption is based on Carey’s view that communication can often cause feelings of depression (Carey 11). Moreover, Carey does not accept the view of Dewey that communication is critical for securing ‘the transmission of information within society’ (Carey 11). Rather, for Carey, communication should rather serve the need of people to share their views and concerns (Munson and Warren 197). In addition, Carey believes that the existence of society is not entirely based on information (Carey 11). Because of the above Carey would characterize the article of Everett-Green as satisfying, in terms of the description of specific facts which are important for informing the public on the negative aspects of the life style of famous people. Still, the description of the events, as included in the particular article, is rather poor, not including personal thoughts of other people in regard to the specific events. In other words, the article of Everett-Green meets the requirement of objectivity, which is important for the press, but does not give to the readers the sense of the sharing of information, a practice which is vital part of the role of press according to the Carey. As a result, when reading this article Carey could possibly consider it rather as a source of depression, being based on the negative aspects of a person’s personal life in order to attract as many readers as possible. The only point which could possibly attract the interest of Carey could be the following: at the end of the article the author states his own view in regard to the power of money within society. Indeed, in the last two sentences of his article Everett-Green presents his own view for the negative role of money in shaping social behavior and social beliefs (Everett-Green 3). However, the level at which the article gives the feeling of sharing information is quite limited, if compared to the size of the article in total. Thus, the article of Everett-Green cannot be considered as meeting a critical requirement of communication, the sharing of information, as this requirement is considered critical for Carey. Under these terms, for Carey the epistemological value of the article of Everett-Green would be low, even if its value in market terms would be satisfying, while Dewey would have a different view, in the context described above. As for Lippmann, the article of Everett-Green would also serve the need of the society to have access to information, a need that it an indispensable part of democracy (Schudson 1033). Therefore, Lippmann would welcome the article of Everett-Green as a source of information and as a means for describing events that can affect the daily life of many people, meaning not only the current fans of the specific artist but also other young people worldwide who have similar life style. The issues discussed above reveal an important fact: the views of media theorists on communication and on the role of media may be highly differentiated. This phenomenon is based on the fact that for these theorists communication has to serve different social needs. Also, for these theorists, media and the press should set different priorities: for certain media theorists, such as Carey, communication should be a means for sharing information while for others, such as Dewey, communication should focus on the transmission of information, an activity that can secure social structure. In this context, the articles under examination can be considered as having different value, depending on the theory used for analyzing their content/ structure. In any case, both these articles are found to meet certain requirements of communication, a fact that verifies the value of these articles as means for providing information and for sharing personal views/ experiences, as these activities are key parts of communication. Works Cited Carey, James. Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society. Oxon: Psychology Press, 1989. Print. Everett-Green, Robert. “Justin Bieber: A look at the trials of Canada’s huge pop-culture export.” The Globe and Mail 31 Jan 2014: B1+. Print. Friesen, Joe. “Bad boy or not, his fans are still Beliebers.” The Globe and Mail 30 Jan 2014: B1+. Print. Munson, Eve, and Warren, Catherine. James Carey: A Critical Reader. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. Print. Schudson, Michael. “The “Lippmann-Dewey Debate” and the Invention of Walter Lippmann as an Anti-Democrat 1986-1996.” International Journal of Communication 2(2008): 1031-1042. Print. Read More