"All in the Modern Family"

Much like "All in the Family", "Modern Family" portrays a contemporary American family in a sitcom format. One difference between the two is that "Modern Family" is considerably more subtle than "All in the Family". One, "All in the Family" has a laugh track and Archie is considerably more vocal about his prejudices than any character on "Modern Family". However, they both rely on the differences between generations to create comedic situations. Both programs dealt with the issue of homophobia. But, again, "Modern Family" doesn't contain the outright homophobia that "All in the Family"'s Archie displayed. In "Modern Family", the son is gay and for the most part is accepted by his family. There are humorous moments where his father is made slightly uncomfortable when he spends time with his son's partner, but it is clear that the father's discomfort is the joke. "All in the Family" contains many jokes that are flat-out ridiculing homosexuality. While it is true that the audience is supposed to then think about why these jokes are inappropriate and Archie's attitudes should be examined, the difference still persists.

Government and Radio

I believe that government regulation had the greatest effect on shaping 1920’s radio since government regulation made radio, as an entertainment device, possible in the first place. American government regulation describes the government’s hand in influencing and changing an aspect of American life. This is usually through legal means. Not necessarily ‘legal’ as some people think of the word, but it is done through laws for the most part.

During World War I, the government took over the radio for the Navy to use. This action forced companies to have to be innovated in improving radio technology. Later, the government decided to regulate by selling radio to private hands. If it was not for this, radio could still be an only government enterprise. 

Cultivation and Crime

A few weeks ago, a horrifying story made national headlines. While walking in a park, Bethany Storro claimed that an African-American woman walked up behind her and asked her, "hey pretty girl...do you want to drink this?" Bethany then claimed the woman splashed her face with a cupful of acid, giving her severe burns. It was this week that Bethany Storro admitted that her story was a fabrication. There are many questions about the incident (namely, why would she do this), but one detail stood out to me. When she chose to make up the identity of her attacker, she said that her attacker was African American.
I believe cultivation theory played a significant role in Bethany's description of her attacker. Cultivation is the idea that media shapes our perception of the world to a certain 'reality'. For example, Americans, after watching news outlets, may perceive black people to be much more likely to commit crimes than white people. This would be a result of repetitive stories highlighting crimes perpetrated by black people while underreporting crimes perpetrated by white Americans.

(A composite sketch made from Storro's description of her attacker. From mynorthwest.com)

Bethany Storro confessed to planning the fake attack, so she certainly gave thought to who she would blame her attack on. She was concerned with making her story as believable as possible. At a certain degree, we as a society have been cultivated to perceive African-Americans as dangerous criminals. That allows a non-existant African-American woman to be the perfect scapegoat for a fake attack. Although police now claim they were suspicious of her story from the beginning, news outlets were much slower to write about inconsistencies in her story. It is just one disturbing aspect of a deeply disturbing story.

A link to the story on ABC news

"Come as You Are"

A few months ago, the following advertisement premiered in France. Despite the fact that the ad did not run in America, it became a topic of conversation among American conservative pundits and people who found the ad to be perplexing. After all, what does McDonald's have to do with sexual orientation? In this ad, McDonald’s attempts to use framing to shape the viewer’s perception of McDonald’s as a safe and inviting place.

Watch the advertisement here

The advertisement's storyline is simple enough. A young man chats on the phone in a hushed voice in a McDonald's restaurant. It is apparent that he is speaking to his (male) sweetheart. He quickly gets off the phone when his dad sits down at their table. The father remarks that it is too bad for his son that he goes to an all-boys school. If he did not, he would certainly be a lady-killer like his dad was during his high school years. Obviously, he is oblivious to the reality of his son's life. The commercial ends with the words "come as you are" written in French across the screen before the McDonald's sign appears. 

The commercial was subject to much ridicule, but the commericial itself is an attempt at framing. Framing describes the phonemenon of how media tells you how to think about their subject, whether it be a product, restaurant, person, or any number of things. For example, word choice in an article about Sarah Palin could describe her as 'fearless' and 'independent'. That media outlet employs framing to get the reader to see her in a positive light. Another media outlet could use the words 'unpredictable' and 'ignorant' to portray her in a negative light.  Here, the commercial tried to get the audience to view McDonald's in a new way. They wanted their audience to think of McDonald's as a welcoming place where they would not be judged and could be themselves. The boy's private life is of no concern the people at McDonald's. Whatever he does, he is still welcome to come and buy their food. Part of the resistance to this advertisement comes from the fact that the attempt at framing was so apparent. Since the storyline has so little to do with the product, it is clear that the commerical was not about selling food, but getting the audience to see McDonald's in new way.

The advertisement originally came to my attention through Jezebel.com. Their original post about it can be found here.

This link is an example of the debate stirred by the advertisement. In it, Ed Schultz chastises Bill O'Reilly for his comments on the commercial.