Week 3 (2/25/21–3/2/21) — Theories of Media & Technology

“There is nothing natural about human desires.”

I was intrigued by this statement, mostly because I’ve never thought about the construction of desire in the way. We live in a society where we are socially constructed to think in certain ways to an extent. Of course, there are differences in how we might approach a topic or believe something. Still, generally, we are inundated with things of our own liking constructed to make you like it. I wanted to emphasize Zizek’s point regarding ideology and preferences and what a modern-day interpretation of this statement looks like. For example, with Apple Music or Spotify — the goal is to reinforce your specific taste; with Facebook, you’re generally given things by the algorithm which you like, and even with TikTok, there’s notions of a “straight TikTok feed or a gay TikTok feed, or even a “dog TikTok feed and a “cat TikTok feed.” We are conditioned to stay within our boxes and not necessarily look elsewhere, especially within TikTok.

In reflecting on this point, I also thought about the debate of Nature vs. Nurture regarding the idea of ideologies. I ask the question of whether our conditioning has, in a sense, become reflected in our genes make-up and reinforced through the environment in which we grow up within. It is something to think about regarding how media texts condition our choices as humans and the long-term effects of choices influenced by media texts on human behavior and genes.

This brings us to Hall’s theory on audiences and the three ways they can respond: dominant reading, oppositional reading, and negotiated reading. Within this theory, the argument is that while media texts might influence audience members, the viewer can still choose how it is affected. For example, if someone loves burgers and sees an advert for a new burger, they might be tempted to purchase that burger, but the advert itself doesn’t necessarily create that behavior. This idea argues that we shouldn’t rather generalize how and whether media affects each person the same way. In contrast, Zizek’s view forms the opposite approach, essentially saying that we are all manipulated into doing such things.

Another example of this could also be within the representation of masculinity in film and its performative nature. For example, when we discussed Batman, it made me think about the performative nature of masculinity within the film. Batman could see his father as more feminine than masculine, as he had a more caring approach. In contrast, Batman rejects that idea of feminity and takes on a more traditionally masculine role, especially behind the mask. Behind the mask, it is, to an extent, your macho perspective of males and violence. However, there is also a great deal of care that could also represent the savior complex, which is also problematic. So to an extent, I’m left conflicted; I’m not sure whether I would agree more with Zizek or Hall. When I look at tools like masculinity and even modern-day representations of masculinity, it feels so conditioned to become our nurture.

Furthermore, our conversation and the readings also centered on this point of change and how slow it is. Every system built, particularly, large institutions is inherently racist. And that, in a sense, does make it hard to make any change. The question becomes how do you make change without burning it all down and starting over, as symbolized within the Batman music. Every system is designed and operates to maintain the status quo because, without the status quo, it results in chaos. Again, another conditioning that we’ve been told. When there’s any change or movements, while they bring progress, there’s never any large-scale reversal of problematic systems that will make effective change. With the adoption of social media, movements now are commodified, and until they reach a certain point, produce little to no change, as they are fitted within trends. For example, with NFL, Kaepernick spoke out against racism in a peaceful manner while a member of the team and the NFL disagreed with his approach. However, a few years later, and more deaths later, they finally are onboard that racism is a thing while also profiting from people of color. I guess I wonder whether to make a change, whether we need to burn it all down, not literally. Our institutions have been set up to reinforce the status quo and are slow at making meaningful change.