The Role of Ideology in Media - Literature review Example

Running head: IDEOLOGY IN MEDIA Ideology in Media Name: Course: Tutor: Date: Ideology in Media This paper seeks to shed light on the broad topic of ideology with particular emphasis on the role of the media in propagating certain ideologies. The paper will limit itself to electronic media articles that have been written over the years and how they have helped to reinforce certain ideologies in the minds of the consuming public. The paper will also offer a commentary analysis on a sample piece of writing that will highlight the ideological argument(s) inherent in the writing. The word ideology stems from the word idea which generally implies that it has a lot to do with a people’s idea/ perception about something. In the context of media, an ideology is a system of values and beliefs that help to shape a people’s worldview or reality (Croteau & Hoynes, 2003). An ideology thus refers to a particular definition of the society or the world around us. The media plays a critical role in forming beliefs and inculcating the same beliefs in the minds of the consuming public. This has earned the media the famed description of being pace setters and trend setters. Issues that qualify for public debate are usually brought to the fore by the media and as such the media plays a critical role in setting the stage for public debate. Eagleton (1991) points out that it is primarily through ideology that social beings make sense of the world around them. Ideologies may at times be so ingrained as to cause people to miss the reality that is happening around them. This is because ideologists tend to view the world using certain preconceptions that really limit their openness to any new information or idea (Eagleton, 1991). Other groups that propagate ideologies may include the family unit and religious groupings. Dominant ideologies refer to the set of ideas and beliefs that are embraced by a majority of people. According to Marxism theory, the dominant ideologies usually represented the ideas/ beliefs of the dominant class in the society – this was usually the very powerful social classes. According to Crotea and Hoynes (2003), the dominant ideology is usually in contention with other subordinate ideologies. The media is however known for propagating dominant ideologies so as to win the favour of the dominant class. However, the media also plays as the front where competing ideologies face off with each other to determine which ideology gains the support of the masses. A notable example is the raging debate on the morality of abortion. The term representation refers to the ways in which people encode the world in order to share their versions/ ideologies of it with other people (Bennet, Slater & Wall, 2006). For instance, print media uses language to describe and convey their ideologies to the masses. Language generally is the description in words of a given phenomena. In contrast, the representation used in the electronic media is usually through the use of images. Thus in print media the ideologies being communicated have to be derived from the words that writers use whereas in electronic media the ideologies are inferred from the images that are used. According to Bennet, Slater and Wall (2006), a discourse refers to the forms of language and communication which articulate the ideology. An example of a representation is given by Browne (2006) when he observes that the media has constantly represented the middle class as being the more satisfied and successful group in relation to the working class. This has led to the term middle class, gaining favour with the masses. As an illustration of the ideologies that are passed on by the media to the masses; a critical commentary of an article will be given. The article is titled ‘Last two years of the Afghan War have been the deadliest.’ The news article was authored by Dark Politricks on 3rd July, 2010. Politricks is a site that self admittedly seeks to expose the dark side of politics including corruption, propaganda, war on terror and the state of police among other issues. As such it is expected that any news article featured would be laden with one or a couple of these issues. The author commences by availing factual information from the CNS news story that postulates that the Afghan war has claimed more victims in the Obama presidency than it has ever had in his predecessors’ tenures. Whether it is true or false the author does this comparison so as to show the gravity of the subject matter seeing that the Obama presidency is still undeniably in its early stages. The author observes that the death toll of the militants has drastically risen since 2006. He validates this claim by saying that in June of this year, 102 NATO deaths were reported; which translates to about three deaths in a day. This he says is in sharp contrast to the Taliban deaths which are fewer and comprise not just combatants but also innocent people who were not really at the war front. The sad state of affairs is depicted by the attitude that the Talibans are displaying towards the war ravaging their nation. Dark politricks notes that from press statements issued to the BBC in the recent past the Talibans obviously think that they are winning. They assert that they do not perceive the importance of negotiating with foreigners seeing that they have the upper hand in the war. This confident and reckless attitude from the perceived enemy indicates that the war is far from over and as things stand the Talibans see no need to negotiate since their losses are minimal. They are thus likely to hold their guns until the foreigners count their losses and decide to withdraw. From this observation, the author sees no end to the war in Afghanistan. The author rules out the possibility that the Talibans are probably chest thumping by claiming that in the war that was waged back in 2001 the CIA purportedly took power from the Taliban. He says that despite what was reported the CIA did not win the war against the Taliban. Perceptibly there would have been no point of waging another war soon afterwards if they had actually managed to silence the Talibans. Instead, the reality on the ground was that the CIA just managed to dispel the Talibans who dispersed back into general population and the Al Qaedas back to Pakistan probably to live to fight another day. This according to the author explains the resurgence that came soon afterwards. The author postulates that even the leadership in the Afghan nation is corrupted. He purports that the last election was massively rigged so as to give victory to Karzai and his cronies. Karzai is primarily a puppet of the West who is only there so as to advance his own individual interests and those of his masters. To validate this claim, the author notes that the sphere of influence of Karzai’s government only spreads to Kabul and a few other localities. Dark politricks then questions the validity of the claim by the US and other nations in the west that are aiding the war, when they assert that they are trying to build confidence among the Afghans towards their government. The question he poses is how this confidence can possibly be built when the west appears to be propagating or encouraging corruption and undermining democracy at the same time. The author criticises the West of invading the country stating that what the Talibans are doing is basically to defend their country from the rule of invaders. Many of the people in Taliban just want their lives back and they see the NATO led forces as the hindrance to their living a peaceful and successful life. Dark politricks seeks to dispel the claims that most of those fighting are terrorists. He makes a claim that most of those fighting haven’t even heard of Al Qaeda or even caught sight of the Twin Towers. They are mainly poor and dispossessed people who at times just fight for the basic reason that what they get from the Taliban would actually pay more than looking for a job and working under the Karzai government. Additionally, they fight to protect their land to what they view as invasion by intruders as well as to avenge the lives of family, friends and countrymen who have been killed over the years in the unending war. The author claims that the West is engaged in double speak and practices high levels of hypocrisy. While purporting to support democracy and stand for all that it represents back at home, this conviction is forgotten in other places. The driving force becomes getting the man that they support in office; at whatever cost. This is done in total disregard of the wishes of the voting people who ultimately have to live with the bad leadership that is imposed on them by the West. It would appear that as long as it serves the interest of the west then nothing else really matters, effectively ensuring that the interest of the west override those of the people casting their votes. The author claims that the war on terror in Afghanistan and other parts keeps the military wing supplied with contracts but at a huge expense to the nation. The cost is too expensive to incur in terms of the financial, moral and human losses that the nation has to deal with in the aftermath. The war in attempting to bring peace and make the world a safer place has only succeeded to make it more unsafe. This is because, as dark politricks puts it, for every father, mother or son killed is a family member vowing vengeance against the west. The author concludes by stating that it would be in the West’s best interests to end the war and bring the troops back home. This would be a blessing to both the Afghans and the West. The author has done a good job in the presentation of his points. From the outset it is clear that he/ she is against the War on terror. He continues to defend his position by giving a detailed account of the losses that the West is experiencing in its quest to silence the Talibans. Dark politricks outlines the losses in lives of the troops vis a vis the local people. His main argument is that the war is not a righteous war as it is usually claimed. The war is shrouded with mystery, self interest and corruption, all vices that the west claims to seek to eradicate in the areas of attack. However, the author claims that this is just double speech and that the West is only there to look after their own interests The author makes serious claims against the West. He is trying to spread the idea that the war against terrorism is one that is for the sole benefit of the West and their supporters in those countries such as Karzai and his cronies. This is the ideology that he attempts to put across through the use of language representation. This is also the dominant ideology that prevails today among many people who now believe that the war on terror is just a front for silencing opposition for selfish gains. A research published in the BBC shows that most people, not just in America, but the world over would like to see a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan (2007). This shows that the view that the author is trying to propagate is in reality the dominant ideology. The dominant ideology that the war was driven by self interest and thus should stop by having the troops back home was supported by 67% of those polled. The other alternate or opposing ideology would be those who are of the opinion that the War should continue since it would help put a stop to terrorism and restore Afghanistan to normalcy and back to the path to economic recovery. The author succeeds in representing the West as being hypocritical and insincere by showing through language that they support democracy at home but not in other countries when it does not serve their best interests. Dark politricks has however failed in some respects. For instance, while giving the figures for the number of NATO fatalities he does not give the figures for the Taliban fatalities but just makes the assertion that a lot more NATO troops have lost their lives as compared to the Talibans. The author, having made such a serious claim needs to validate his assertion with figures. The source of information of the NATO fatalities is not also given. The author should have strived to ensure that such sources of information are given as this lends credibility to the information supplied. Similarly, the claim that most Talibans don’t even know Al Qaeda but fight just to make a living should have been backed by some form of research that proves this as the case. Dark Politricks has succeeded in putting across the view that the war against the Talibans is driven by corruption and self interest displayed by the west. As such, he has managed to advance/ offer proof to the ideology that politics is indeed a dirty game laden with lies, corruption, dishonesty and other vices. A look at other articles highlights the key ideologies that each represents. Tripod contains an article titled ‘the dirty game,’ that makes use of language to advance the ideology that politics is a dirty game. The article paints politicians as selfish, power hungry individuals and politics as being a game having indefinite rules where everything goes. The author compares the traits of politicians as being similar to those portrayed in the book “lo prince” by Machiavelli. That book according to the author gave politicians advice on how to retain their positions through a number of techniques which include lying, being hypocritical, opportunistic or even a killer to achieve the position and retain it. On the same issue of politics, the Ghanaian Social Democratic Party secretariat in Germany on the eve of Ghana’s presidential elections in 2008 posted an article on the issue of politics being a dirty game. Shocked by the many presidential candidates at the time, the author questions what it is that drives the politicians to hunger and give up everything for power. In an answer to his rhetorical question, the author reckons that maybe it is the benefits that come with being in such a position of seniority that attract people. The author is of the ideology that politics as presently constituted in Ghana is indeed a dirty game. The author however appears to be open to other ideologies as he states that this state of affairs need not be the case. In yet another article on the same issue of politics, Tracy (1999) gives an account of the ills of politics. Tracy gives the tale of the involvement of President Nixon in the Watergate scandal. The author also documents proof that Nixon was responsible directly or indirectly in the assassination of the 35th president of the United States- J.F Kennedy. He substantiates his claims by giving factual narrations from people who were involved at the time. The author notes that the very idea of the 37th President having a hand in the assassination of the 35th president shows that politics is indeed a dirty game. This is the ideology that Tracy seeks to reinforce in her article. In yet another article on the growing ideology of politics being a dirty game. The recent win by Greene in the South Carolina’s democratic nomination for U.S. senate, has left many shocked (Kinnard, 2010). The surprising bit is that Greene until then was an unknown, unemployed military veteran who had little to show for assets. Questions are being raised concerning where he got the funds to run his campaign, with most suspecting foul play. The author however, points out that the state of South California is usually home to very dirty politics and this incident does not surprise him as it is just another case of South California’s dirty politics. As such, the author supports the ideology that politics is a dirty game. In summary, most of the beliefs that people hold are rooted in ideologies which assist people in making sense of the world around them. The media serves as one of the channels through which ideologies are disseminated. The analysis of the articles presented support the ideology that politics is a dirty game. This has been proven through the representation of the different authors through the written word. References BBC. (2007). “Most people 'want Iraq pull-out.” Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6981553.stm Bennett, P., Slater, J., Wall, P. (2006). A2 Media Studies. Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=RJBFvzaycCIC&pg=PT160&dq=ideology+in+media&hl=en&ei=DmJCTOeeHIyG4ga3k9mLDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=5&ved=0CDwQ6wEwBA#v=onepage&q=representation&f=false Browne, K. (2006). Introducing Sociology for AS Level. Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=EW7QeHW3i60C&pg=PA172&dq=dominant+i deology+media&hl=en&ei=pLdCTOOhKMik4Qbo7LWrDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=4&ved=0CDcQ6wEwAw#v=snippet&q=discourses&f=false Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (2003). Media society: industries, images, and audiences. Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=UkHMl0uhhZYC&pg=PA161&dq=croteau-+media+ideology&hl=en&ei=GVFCTO32Iojd4Aax3YzgDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false Dark Politricks. (2010). “Last two years of the Afghan War have been the deadliest.” Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2010/07/last-two-years-of-the-afghan-war-have-been-the-deadliest/ Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideology: an introduction. Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=Jk2h8zoHfcIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=ideology&hl=en&ei=6adCTPP0LYSD4Qb6mrioDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=book-thumbnail&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6wEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false Ghana Social Democratic Party. “Is politics a dirty GAME?” (2006). Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/features/artikel.php?ID=110379 Kinnard, M. (2010). “In state where dirty politics is status quo, conspiracies abound on surprise SC Senate nominee.” AP. Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://crimewatch.gaeatimes.com/2010/06/11/in-state-where-dirty-politics-is-status-quo-conspiracies-abound-on-surprise-sc-senate-nominee-33023/ Tracy, M. (1999). “Dirty Politics -- Nixon, Watergate, and the JFK Assassination.” Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://mtracy9.tripod.com/kennedy.html Tripod. (n. d )“The dirty game.” Retrieved on July 10, 2010 from http://biotsavart.tripod.com/dirtygame.htm Read More