I’ve been talking too much lately, so let’s hear from someone else for a while.
This is Dr Jared Ball talking to DaveyD over at his TV Channel.
He comes at this subject from a different perspective from the one that talks about Hip Hop as a form of ‘urban media’ via the conscious mouths of Public Enemy and KRS One, etc. Here Dr Ball talks about Hip Hop as a form of Mass Media in the larger sense, and how the movement has been consciously and unconsciously exploited – economically and psychologically.
This is a powerful 10 minute lecture that contains arguments that I would suggest can also be made about all other music genres and youth sub-cultures. More than only about Hip Hop, it is about the commercialisation of a cultural phenomena. But even though I say that, the important thing that makes Dr Ball’s argument so clear and relevant to Hop Hip is that it is a sub-culture that, for better or worse, has large influence of particular cultural groups, (and I say this with a heavy heart, as a child of Hip Hop).
Anyway, enough of what I think. Here’s DaveyD interviewing Dr Jared Ball.
Understandably, for people who don’t know the community media sector exists at all, it can often be difficult to get their head around exactly what community media is, and how such organisations operate. And even after being in existence now for 9 years working as a company, (Firstborn Studios - formerly known as Firstborn Creatives), it still isn’t always easy answering these queries in a concise way.
Here are some frequently asked questions, perceptions and misconceptions about community media in relation to Firstborn that I will explore below. If you have any others please feel free to add them in your comments. Sorry that it will also sound like an advert for Firstborn. Hopefully it is also informative about the activities of a tiny aspect of this community media sector. Lots of other organisations are out there also doing amazing work in this field. The following views are mine only and don’t necessarily reflect all the views at Firstborn. (Maybe they do, but I can’t speak for them!)
Q: Isn’t community media just another name for community radio?
A: No it isn’t. Community Radio is a large part of the sector, but not the only part. We are not a community radio station, and we are not a community television station either. We work primarily in video but also interactive, animation, graphics, photograpy and other visual digital media, working in a participatorary way with groups of partcipants, young and elders.
Q: But if you’re not a community television station, how does your work get seen?
A: Various ways. We mostly produce work for certain audiences, such as care workers, educators, etc. So rather than making films for the sake of making it, we would ensire that the end product is being used in some way afterwards, in addition to the process being a positive experience for those taking part. We sometimes distribute DVDs free in different places as moving image magazines. We also arrange screening events and specific spaces where work is being used, discussed, used in conferences, informing policy to MPs, whatever and wherever it will inject a different ‘voice’ into the ear of the audiences. We do very little work now that is about making films for films sake. For us the media in not the message. The medium is the process and the message is the end result. Both elements are important and vital to a rich participatorary creative experience.
A: Is all you do train people how to use cameras and how to edit.
Q: No, not at all. Take a look at some of the educational work we have done. 10% technical training + 90% intellectual engagement = 100% new skills and transferable experience. We do believe that there are very real cross-curricular gains to be had by taking part in participatorary media projects in the short, medium and long term for participants involved. Not only if they wanted to work in the media industry, but even if they want to do something completely different with their lives. Community media is about 90% community and 10% media. The full educational gains are there in spades, deeper than only mere training.
Q: What is it that makes you different than a “normal” production company?
A: Tricky question. We do produce direct commissioned work that is not working in a ‘workshopped’ participatorary way with individuals, but we still make sure that the only work we take on has social interest of some kind. We won’t do work that is plainly corporate with no social/community gain, or abour issues that we feel are contrary to the wishes of the communities that we serve. It would be easier to show you rather than try to describe it in words.
Q: Isn’t all community media work about bad quality sound and dodgy camera work?
A: Thankfully those days are now long gone! Just look at the quality of any of these videos for proof of that. Whether it’s working with a group of primary school children on a video project, or producing a documentary for television broadcast, we feel high production values are key to everyone involved being proud of their achievements and gaining value in the wider world. Very often community media products that have bad quality audio and picture get politely patronised by the audiences, who allow the bad quality due to it being made by a bunch of cute kids. I think everyone and anyone who has working in community media & arts will have been guilty of that at some point in their career I’m sure! Well we are really striving for a parity of quality in process, product and meaning, to ensure the experience has value from a 360 degree angle, and not only if you are the grandparents of the young producer involved.
Q: Do you only work with young people?
A: Even though a lot of our work has been with young people, especially the participatorary workshop projects we have done, we don’t work exclusively with young people. For example we also work with senior citizens groups, museums & heritage sector and also the health & well being sector. Here’s some examples of the latter.
Q: Aren’t all community media people anarchists and want to smash the state and see all mainstream media institutions like the BBC closed down?
A: No not at all. Nothing could be further from the truth. We see we play a valid role in creating and encouraging platforms for different ‘voices’ that are not aired on/in mainstream media, but we see our role as a compliment to mass media, and also a compliment to mainstream education. Not anti either of them. An alternative to them in certain instances – (e.g. to hear a different opinion in the media, and a different way of learning outside the classroom), but we work closely with mainstream media and formal education institutions and we always will. We see them as vital co-players in building an equal civil society, and acknowledge they have their role to play, within certain constraints and limitations, and we have ours. The anarchist side of community media is just one element of this sector, but like community radio, there are many many different aspects that not everyone working in it draws on. The anarchist radical media agenda of wanting a more democratic media and a fairer society are values that a lot of us working in less overtly political areas of community media also share, but we just choose to do our work in different ways with different motivations and agendas on our sleeves. A more free and open acces mass media would be great for all, but I don’t personally applaud the closing down of all these newspapers that are falling victim to the free online news culture and blog revolution. Mass media has its uses also. (This is too much to get into here. Maybe some other time!)
Q: Uhm..I’ve got a few more questions but I’d better stop here as otherwise you’ll be going on all day!!!
A: Yes, that’s a good idea. Good chatting with you. Get your people to call my people and we’ll do lunch. Mwah! Mwah!
It has always struck me just how slippery the term ‘media literacy’ is, with a different emphasis depending on the agenda of the person talking about it. I used to get frustrated by what I saw as a watering down of the notion, wanting the literacy aspect to acknowledged as the critical pedagogy that resides in community media activity, and that was me wearing my personal agenda on my sleeve. I now feel however it would be more useful to slow my judgement and analyse each different face of media literacy in its own right, as each interpretation of the term contains pragmatic, theoretical and/or ideological meaning for each different type of user, so that is worth looking at without undue dismissal.
In future articles I will be exploring the idea of media literacy in the nine predominant guises that I have seen it discussed within the community media sector, media education events, published research and academia. As with all identities of phenomena there is some overlap different contexts, though they will be analysed from the perspective of emphasis, and therefore argue that the identities described here are valid. Notions described in the future will be:
- Media Literacy as media savvy
- Media Literacy as semiotics
- Media Literacy as creative activism
- Media Literacy as cross-curricula engagement
- Media Literacy as IT support
- Media Literacy as media sector training
- Media Literacy as process
- Media Literacy as informed media consumption and media use
Interestingly, given this fractious identity, the actual definition of media literacy itself is, with slight variations, mostly settled in a broad consensus without too much debate. It is the interpretation of the accepted definition which is the cause of the majority of debate. Even though there is not one single definition, in loose terms it is widely acknowledged as being about;
- the right to have access to media platforms & tools;
- the need for people to be empowered to understand the media and its ever changing nuances;
- the ability to create media communications if so desired.
Some example of this are;
Ofcom’s definition is; “the ability to access, understand and create communications in a variety of contexts.” They acknowlegde they are mostly concerned with media literacy as applied to digital technology and that people should be able to use the equipment to get the most out of it. (Media Literacy as Media Savvy / Media Literacy as IT support).
According to The Media Literacy Task Force:
“If people are to participate fully at work or in their community, or communicate effectively with family, friends and colleagues globally, or consume media intelligently they need to be media savvy. They need to understand how media works and to feel comfortable questioning what they watch and read. They need a sense of who knows or owns what, and to what extent what you see is really what you get. And, very importantly, they need to become confident in using and exploiting the possibilities of new devices and media channels.” (Media Literacy as Media Savvy / Media Literacy as informed media consumption and media use / Media Literacy as semiotics / Media Literacy as IT support)
The Center for Media Literacy‘s view is: the ability to communicate competently in all media forms as well as to access, understand, analyze, evaluate and participate with powerful images, words and sounds that make up our contemporary mass media culture. Indeed, we believe these skills of media literacy are essential for both children and adults as individuals and as citizens of a democratic society.
(Media Literacy as Media Savvy / Media Literacy as creative activism / Media Literacy as process)
At some point in the not-to-distant future I will expand on these ideas in a case by case basis in future blog articles, and also write this up as a full academic referenced paper.
Until then, thanks for popping by. Comments always welcome.
Culture Secretary James Purnell says in today’s Guardian (5 Jan 08);
“Community arts in many ways can be excellent in a different way from, say, the National Theatre. But what I wouldn’t say is, ‘We’ll tolerate average work because it happens to be in a particular location.”
In another part of the article the MP says, “If any part of our cultural sector is substandard, it’s not worth subsidising. Garbage in, garbage out.”
The article, by John Harris continues;
“He (Purnell) talks about ‘engagement with communities’ and the need ‘to spread the best culture around the whole country’. The (Sir Brian) McMaster review outlines the need for some big institutions – the Royal Ballet springs to mind -to get out more; the new idea, Purnell says, is ‘touring in a strategic way”.
The McMaster policy review’s official title is Supporting Excellence in the Arts and will be published by the government next week. Purnell is an enthusiastic advocate of the review telling the Guardian, “When Brian talks about the potential for a New Renaissance, I don’t think that is an overstatement. It’s exactly true.”
The idea of a renaissance in the arts is an in interesting one, but also problematic in the terms of how Purnell describes it. To dictate from the top-down the approach that the renaissance will take goes against the very nature of reactionary rebelliousness that lay at the heart of 15th Century Italian forerunner that Purnell and McMaster are prophesising. The heretic notions such as; the fact that the earth travels around the sun; the ‘right’ to publish and own personal Bibles translated into native languages other than Latin; and the realisation that the monarchy and clergy were not divine and citizens were equals with rights in society, were aspects of the anti-establishment feelings of the time that gave rise to the renaissance period. The leaders of the day were quick to captalise on the turning tides and cleverly appropriated renaissance ideas to suit their own ends in the tense relationships between church, state and nations, but the fact remains that the reformation spirit of the times were underground and punishable by death for treason and heresy.
Radical alternative media was at the centre of this spark for new thinking. As James Curran describes in ‘Communication, power and social order’ in Culture, Society and the Media (1988 – page 218);
“In a more general sense, the rise of the manuscript and subsequently of the printed book also fostered the development of an alternative culture. Although the bulk of scribal and early print output was in Latin and religious in content, the production and dissemination of vernacular texts helped to foster a parallel secular culture based on national languages and dialects, drawing upon indigenous cultural traditions.”
So, what is the refomation thinking in the UK today that this new Purnell/McMaster renaissance will follow? Well I would say that it will only come within a hair’s breadth of being a renaissance if it is led by the citizens not the leaders, and certainly broader than National Theatre and the Royal Ballet. It is all well and good for the financial gate-keepers of culture like James Purnell to say that ‘average’ and ‘substandard’ work will not be tolerated, as they want value for money. And I would also argue that cultural creative endevevours should be of a high standard to marry content with style, but as Purnell describes it is to see a renaissance as a glorified cultural tour, brining quality works to the people. As noble as that may, be, that is no renaissance, that is still a form of cultural imperialism.
A true renaissance cannot and will not be brokered by leaders or gatekeepers. It will be in places anarchic and in other places passivley (and maybe ignorantly) building on the shoulders
of those anarchic pioneers. At present the early (and I mean early!) signs of any new renaissance is in Web 2.0, in illigal counter-cultural activities such as graffiti, and also (of course) in the activities of the home bedroom music makers, film makers and other DIY producers of modern culural artefacts. Community & Independent media producers are the Galilleos and Martin Luthers to Mass Media’s Papacy, Emperors, and, ahem, Murdochs. But the 15th Century renaissance didn’t effect and influence the arts. It changed governments, influenced religions and shaped the cultural and moral values in the Western worlds. As idealist as we may be today, we still have a long way to go.
Are we actually in the midst of a new renaissance? It would be great if we were, but alas I guess I will never know as that surely is not the within the grasp of any of is to really know. We will be long gone and in a few centuries time it will be left to the historians of the day to define our ra for us. We are too close to recognise a renaissance if it came and gave us a lapdance! It’s also probably arrogant of us to even try define our endevevours in terms of refomations, renaissances, etc, but when people are passionate about what they do, what they believe in and the connection between the two, then, with feet firmly on the ground (like Galillio), it is good to think big.
I agree with James Purnell when he says, “Why shouldn’t we be that ambitious?”
Yes, as long as we are not attempting to shape others’ ambitions for them.
Why do I still get shocked by stories like this? And they want us to believe that they landed on the moon! LOL
Fema was widely criticised for its response to Hurricane KatrinaThe US Federal Emergency Management Administration has apologised for having its employees pose as reporters at a hastily arranged news conference.
No actual reporters were able to attend Fema’s televised briefing on the fires in California on Tuesday because they were only given 15 minutes notice.
Instead, press officers asked questions many described as soft and gratuitous.
A spokeswoman for Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff called the incident “inexcusable and offensive”.
“We have made it clear that stunts such as this will not be tolerated or repeated,” Laura Keehner said, adding that the department was considering whether or not to reprimand those responsible.
‘Error of judgement’
Fema employees posed as reporters at Tuesday’s “news briefing” with Deputy Administrator Harvey Johnson because an agency was providing a live video feed to US TV networks, according to the Washington Post.
Six questions were posed by the Fema officials and Mr Johnson even used the typical practice of calling for a “last question”.
“I’m very happy with Fema’s response,” Mr Johnson said in reply to one query from an employee.
After the Washington Post published details of the briefing, which one of its reporters listened to by phone, Mr Johnson apologised for the “error of judgement” and promised to do better in future.
“Our intent was to provide useful information and be responsive to the many questions we have received,” he said in a statement.
“We are reviewing our press procedures and will make the changes necessary to ensure that all of our communications are straight forward and transparent.”
Fema was widely criticised for its response to Hurricane Katrina. Its former administrator, Michael Brown, was forced to resign despite President George W Bush initially declaring he was doing a “heck of a job”.
