Mass Media Anthropology

Francisco Osorio

visibility

…

description

155 pages

link

1 file

As a member of the social sciences, anthropology until recently (1980s) did not work systematically with mass communication. We did not know if anthropological research were following the same trend or not (comparing to communication research). We did not know if anthropology were answering questions posted by communication research. We did not know how many studies were conducted by anthropologists or where they were writing. We did not know if anthropology could make a contribution. The purpose of the present work is to answer all these questions in order to help in the institutionalization of an anthropology of mass communication. I think it is time to coined the term mass media anthropology.

Figures (48)

I grouped the 45 essays into six main categories, according to the themes and problem anthropologists have studiec over this period. The argument for classification is attending to the principal question they try to resolve. Therefore. the inquiry is a problem or theme in media anthropology research. In each category, I will present the essays, making a summary and commenting. The table below presents an outline. (*) Media Anthropology Theory

According to this information, I can conclude that anthropologists largely have studied television’s effects in nations and not in the societies they traditionally study. A naive explanation is that indigenous people do not have access to television. Nevertheless, this is a bad explanation because there is access even in places without electricity because of the use of batteries (Liechty 1994), and even if the cost of a television set is high compared to the monthly income (Miller 1998, Mankekar 1993, Pace 1993). In addition, the Warlpiri of Australia have the own television station (Michaels 1991). A better explanation is that anthropologists have focused on nation-states rather than indigenous societies. Why do they do that? One possible way to explain this is to attend the contents and problems of the anthropological research. What cultures did anthropologist study? The following are the societies anthropologists have been conducting recearch on media effects. What cultures did anthropologist study? The following are the societies anthropologists have been conducting

With this chart summarizing the anthropological media effects, I will concentrate in the remaining themes appeared in the journal review. Anthropological Media Effects (1970-1999)

What medium did anthropologists study? The media analyzed by anthropologists are television, newspapers, radio and cassette. Because some articles consider more than one medium, I add the term “mass media”, meaning any combination. Therefore, I can conclude that television is the medium studied most. What cultures did anthropologists study? Anthropologists have studied mainly nations. Cultures such as Batak, Mursi, Navajo, Maya, and Somalia identified usually with the discipline. Therefore, I can conclude that most of the research has been conducted in non-traditional settings from a classical anthropological point of view.

In the next chapter I will compare anthropology with other research traditions. In chapter 4, I will return to anthropology, this time looking for knowledge about the mass media outside anthropolo gical journals. What years did anthropologists conduct research? I can conclude from the following table that the interest i mace camminicatinn ic orawing

An analysis by date exhibits that most of this research is from the 1990s. The next table displays the articles by year.

This work is an anthropological examination of the cultivation effect hypothesis develops by the communicati scholar George Gerbner and his college Larry Gross. I will present their results in the next table.

Consequently, the mass media appears as a new object of study to anthropology because of the theoretical shift from modern to modernity. Alan Hoben (The Dictionary of Anthropology 1997) gives the next argument that helps to understand the “gaps” on mass media anthropological research. As we know, Ruth Benedict worked in the 1940s and 1950s with the mass media. During the 1960 and 1970s there is almost no research, which grows up from the 1980s to 1990s. Ruth Benedict (as well as Clifford Geertz decades later) worked for the government. However, anthropologists have had an ambivalent relationship with government-sponsored development. Hoben distinguishes four periods.

The Ethnic Context of Mutual Aid (in percentages) Orientation means a social interaction that helps define what happens on the screen by filling in gaps in the plot or by identifying characters in the thick foliage of the Ewing family tree. Interpretation offers help to fellow group members who need an explanation or who find interest in why something has happened or why a character has behaved in a certain way. Evaluation (moral, aesthetic, ideological) means that certain members in a group may think well of the outcome of an issue raised in the program, while others disagree. Thus, groups sit in judgment of the values of the characters through the marshaling of their own values to evaluate or censure.

Liebes and Katz arrive at the conclusion that the two more traditional groups (Arabs and Moroccan Jews) prefer linearity. They tell the story in closed form as if it were an inevitable progression, and the characters they describe are rigidly stereotyped; indeed, they are often referred to by role —family role— rather than by name. The Russians speak of the episode in terms of themes or messages. They ignore the story in favor of exposing the overall principles which they perceive as repeated relentlessly, and which, in their opinion, have a manipulative intent. While the Russians invoke “ideological” theory, Americans and kibbutzniks tell the story “psychoanalytically”. They are not concerned with the linearity of the narrative but with analyzing the problems of characters intrapersonally and interpersonally. Their retellings are open, future-oriented, and take into account the never— ending quality of the soap—opera genre.

Statements in Referential and Critical Frames (in percentages) Liebes and Katz arrive at the conclusion that most statements in all groups are based on perception of the program as real. Although the Russians are more critical, invoking most meta—textual references, Russians are not so lighthearted about the program; they seem to take it very seriously at both the referential and the critical level.

Carey uses news as a contemporary example. He says that under a ritual view, news is not information but drama. He says that it does not describe the world but portrays an arena of dramatic forces and action; it exists solely in historical time; and it invites our participation based on our assuming, often vicariously, social roles within it. Finally, I would like to highlight that even for anthropologists this perspective is new. During the 1970s, symbolic anthropology was just being born. Seeing this paper from the past, the reading stress as an alternative way to understand communication, heavily mark by what it is called now the transmission view. My opinion is that this paper is an invitation, one in which a classical anthropological concept like ritual has a central place.

Anthropological Schools in Mass Communication The cultural imperialism school argues that there is a powerful influence of television in people. The role of culture in this school is to determine behavior. The role of people is to be a passive receiver. Using a metaphor, I label this theory “television as absorption”. According to this theory, American television is the cause of consumerism and the reason why women are changing their roles in traditional societies. It explains national identity as the powerful use of television by nation-states in order to create a given order.