The Intersection of Normality and Consumerism on Television - Case Study Example

Consumerism and the Representation of Normality Introduction The intersection of normality and consumerism on television in the post-structuralist era is a highly fluid concept that demands a number of critical interventions. This essay investigates topic from a women’s studies perspective, as it relates to notions of collaboratively defined normality, the definition of the feminine and masculine, and the practical application of such theoretical insights. Collaborative Normality When considering daytime talk shows Wood (2007) notes that past research has investigated the shows with feminist interpretive lenses, advancing theories that evaluate the programming for its role as empowering female consumers in opposition to dominant cultural paradigms. Other researchers have noted that the chaotic nature of the talk show complicates unitary interpretative formulations, “Its play with discursive boundaries and identities, with chaos and contingency have made it threatening to critics desperate for clear labels and stable structures (Munson as cited in Wood 2007, p. 3).” In formulating a unique interpretive approach to the representation of ‘normality’ daytime talk shows Woods (2007) advances an analytic methodology based on Bahktin’s theory that “entails understanding the communicative relationship of viewers with the particular programmes as specific (mediated) ‘speech genres’” (as cited in Wood 2007, p. 5).” This is an approach that analyzes viewer utterances as an element of the interpretive object. Using this interpretive approach Woods examines the responses of a number of consumers as the representation of life on television talks shows. Woods notes the responses of the viewers and categorizes them in degrees of participation. One strand of the investigation reveals that minimal responses to the television talk shows, such as “mhm” or “yes”, are means of the viewer engaging in collaborative creation of meaning, where what socially constitutes normality is determined both at home and in the studio. Other means of establishing normality in this context include adjacency pairs. These are elements of speech interaction where a member in the studio will pose a question, oftentimes rhetorical, and the viewer at home will answer. Adjacency pairs have particular relevance in revealing hegemonic masculine agendas, as the woman viewer at home will often disagree with the studio experts, offering a more insightful feminine interpretation. In addition to adjacency pairs, Woods research formulates a number of elements of this collaborative meaning construction that include turn-taking, and secondary textual interrogation, where the viewer offers their own expert analysis. All of these elements have the potential for a feminist critique of their socially constructed meaning. In addition to these elements there exists a tertiary understanding of the text. In these instances the viewer can be said to be inspired by the studio discussion to formulate a divergent response. The response is not entirely related to the studio discussion, but builds off of it in interrogating other instances socially constructed meaning, or ‘normality’. Consumption of the “Feminine” While Wood’s analysis viable sociolinguistic interpretations of the collaborative meaning process, when consider its implications for feminist theory, it’s important to note Fenton who addresses the challenge of sufficiently defining the ‘woman’ in a post-modern context. Fenton states asks, “If we must forfeit the category ‘women’ for the sake of philosophical sophistication, what political groundings does feminism have? (Fenton 2000, p.3)” Traditional research has understood feminist identity, or ‘normality’, in terms of an overarching dialogue that is formulated and maintained by television and the media in general, and then passively absorbed by consumers. Other more advanced interpretive mechanisms developed examples that went beyond merely positioning the viewer as naïve and passive recipient of information. For instance, Modleski (cited in Fenton 2000) argued that the observer of the soap opera is positioned as a caring mother. Influenced by Foucault, post-structuralist interpretations of media created reality argue that the signification of the ‘normal’ female isn’t a matter of directly related consumption, but an element of a highly complex negotiation of meaning, where texts offer competing feminine narratives that function to create the ‘woman’ identity. Approaches that go beyond this investigation question the very nature of the text as an outside reality. Theorists such as McRobbie argue, “We do not exist in social unreality while we watch TV…Reality is relayed to us through the world of language, communication, and imagery” (cited in Woods 2000, p. 7). In this sense the normality that is represented and consumed on television isn’t a media manipulated dialogue on what constitutes femininity, but actually is lived reality. Therefore, critical approaches that sought to critique the representation of femininity in soap operas, or television dramas, are misdirected as there is no overarching oppressive dialogue to critique. When constructing identity in contemporary discourse theorists have argued that consumers take a more active role in meaning negotiation. Rather than having femininity relayed to them through mediated media and television images, women are understood to engage in a process of meaning collaboration with the text. One sees this concept echoed in Woods (2007), but Fenton extends it to include not only collaborative utterances, but also the very means by which images are interpreted for their functional value. The concept that viewers actively negotiate the meaning of images and can resist significations that have been structured by advertisers or television executives has particular relevance for consumerism. In this regard, it’s the role for culture critique or analyst to deconstruct the means of signification in an effort to empower the consumer. It seems that by post-structuralists accounts the ability to definitively define ‘normal’ feminine identity has been entirely destabilized. While researchers acknowledge that past-structuralist frameworks of signification, the ability of these frameworks to determine meaning on a global scale is great doubted, and can only be said to occur on local or individual levels. This view greatly complicates the dissemination of a unitary feminine discourse of normality to consumers through media and televised reality. Practical Applications Lewin-Jones & Mitra (2009) consider the practical applications for the theoretical approaches to media mediated identity discussed by Fenton. The article cites a number of instances where researchers determined that television advertising actively affected children’s gender perceptions. It states that, “the gender of the model used in commercials can have an impact on childrens perception of who should play with particular toys” (Pike & Jennings cited in Lewin-Jones & Mitra 2009, p. 3). In their own research Lewin-Jones & Mitra (2009) determined that television advertising does engage in significant amounts of gender stereotyping. They state that, “Commercials classified as male tend to show actors engaged in more physically active behaviour, with a greater element of aggressive behaviour. In contrast, commercials aimed at females tend to show domestic settings and more passive behavior” (p. 17). When consider the relevancy these findings hold for contemporary formulations of the ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ the article notes that there is an underlining sense of female subordination to male signification codes. For example, it states “The narration in the neutral advertisements is also closer to that in the male commercials, with a predominance of male voiceovers” (p. 18). While the Lewin-Jones & Mitra (2009) study objectively demonstrates the different means of advertising to boys and girls, it fails to adequately indicate whether this significantly determines their identity. Indeed, their research states that children often came to recognize the differentiations, “When children did articulate reasons for their classification of specific advertisements as male or female, they tended to highlight product type and aspects of behaviour shown in the advertisements, and to voice their reasoning in generalisations about what “boys” or “girls” like doing” (p.19). In this regard, one must question whether it’s possible for children to gain a meta-critical perspective on ‘normal’ masculine and feminine identity constructs; it’s also necessary to consider the television ‘reality’ of the advertisements. Conclusion In conclusion, it’s nearly impossible to definitely state what occurs at the intersection between consumers and televised culture. In the post-structuralist environment identity is understood and fluid and shifting. While theorists recognize that the media promotes along divergent gender lines, it’s difficult to determine if this is shaping gender identity or a reflection of it. Ultimately, it’s necessary for human to be active consumers in Digital Culture, questioning the meaning and implications of the images and advertising they consume. References Fenton, Natalie (2007) ‘The problematics of postmodernism for feminist media studies.’ Media Culture Society 2000; 22; 723 Lewin-Jones, Jenny; Mitra Barbara (2009) ‘GENDER ROLES IN TELEVISION COMMERCIALS AND PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN IN THE UK’ Journal of Children and Media, Volume 3, Issue 1 February 2009 , pages 35 – 50 Wood, Helen (2009) ‘The mediated conversational floor: an interactive approach to audience reception analysis’ Media Culture Society 2007; 29; 75 Read More