How to detect Media Bias and Propaganda
Pages
8-9
Assignment C 1. Read DePoy, D and discuss the concepts presented. presented
below:
Popular Culture and Stereotypes As indicated by Fussell
(1983) and Hebdidge (1979), cultural productions, artifacts and objects have
multiple uses beyond their direct function. In the case of music, music preference
and consumption provide a means of group inclusion, group exclusion and group
identity (Hamilton, 1981; Hebdige, 1979; Shepherd, 1991; Stevenson, 1995) The
body of literature on popular culture and stereotype therefore is crucial in
providing the foundation for examining the socio-cultural factors that bear
on music preference and choices, and that impact music commodification and dissemination.
Before beginning a discussion of the cultural and social factors affecting music
preference and popularity, several pertinent definitions and constructs are
clarified below. Culture The definition of culture presented herein and used
for this study is derived from the discipline of anthropology. Culture is used
to describe the patterns and shared meanings of individuals in relationships
in and among groups (Geertz, 1973; Rossi, 1980; Storey, 1993). Rossi (1980)
states that any study involving individuals in a complex social system must
consider the values, shared history/myths, and inter-group relationships, especially
as these relations relate to social divisions (i.e. class, race, gender) through
which socioeconomic power is allocated. Subculture and popular culture Two important
elements of culture that underpin the developmental framework of this study
are subcultures and popular culture. Popular culture was addressed in the seminal
works by the Frankfurt School. The Frankfurt School, established in 1923, is
most famous for its development of critical theory and its various critiques
of contemporary culture (Adorno, 1972; Storey, 1993). The Institute’s primary
work regarding popular culture can be found in the writings of Theodor Adorno,
Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, Leo Lowenthal and Herbert Marcuse. Of these,
Adorno (1941) and Benjamin (1966) spoke specifically to the positioning and
use of art and music in popular culture. Adorno (1941) saw all popular culture
as unoriginal. That is to say, popular culture produces products that engender
the characteristics of sameness, interchangeability and predictability. Regardless
of the mass medium, it is quite possible from the beginning of a production
of popular culture to know the final outcome. According to Adorno (1941), the
culture industry produces two complete products: cultural homogeneity and predictability
(Storey, 1993). Moreover, popular culture is a contrived set of functions designed
to manipulate the working public into complacency and an uncritical approach
to life (Storey, 1993). Adorno therefore sees popular culture as essentially
negative, with its purpose to maintain workers and consumers in an unquestioning
position (Paddison, 1993; Storey, 1993). Although from the same school, Benjamin
(1966) views popular culture as both demon and angel. Drawing on Marxist analysis,
Benjamin concludes that mechanical reproduction destroys traditional art forms
and their specific emic (authentic) meaning. Yet, reproduction also places art
in such a way as to meet the beholder or listener in his/her particular situation.
Reproduction allows individuals to actively make meanings specific to their
own cultural context without necessarily considering the historic referent of
the original. The action of making meaning is bounded by rituals that serve
to include or marginalize (Auge, 1979; Geertz, 1973). Similar to Benjamin, Hebdige
(1979) addresses cultural meanings. However, he suggests that meanings are embedded
according to the individual’s membership in one or more subcultures. That is
to say, individuals, belonging to a variety of groups co-existing within a culture
and move freely among them. For example, the concept of class, as conceptualized
by Fussell (1983), can be seen as a particular subculture. Fussell holds that
individuals purchase specific items and seek out and participate in various
activities that indicate group membership, and in the process create lived cultural
meaning. A complete discussion of Fussell’s work is beyond the scope of this
investigation. However, his work is important in that it positions the concept
of group belongingness, in this case class belongingness, as being illustrated
by the purchase of artifacts and the production and performance of specific
rituals. Summing the elements of reproduction, marketing, distribution, and
media on a national/international (mass) scale, the concept of popular culture
emerges as a subculture whose member identity is manipulated by mass media (Storey,
1993; Willis, 1991). Moreover, membership can be bought or obtained by ownership
of commodities and participation in rituals stereotypically attributed to cultural
subgroups (Hebdige, 1979; Storey, 1993). Thus, the notion of group membership
and/or exclusion as demonstrated by music preference is illuminated by this
synthesis of works. Further clarifying the role of artifacts, productions and
rituals is the work of Storey (1993). She presents a number of different and
competing theories from which to analyze the concept of popular culture. Drawing
on the works of Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci and his concept of hegemony,
a working definition of popular culture is one that considers the articulation
and negotiation of dominant ideology with subordinate and oppositional subcultures.
These varied cultural and ideological values and elements are continually mixed
into different permutations giving rise to the meaning of style, what’s in and
what’s not (Hebdige, 1979; Webster 1988; Story, 1993). Turner’s work provides
additional insight into the socio-cultural meanings of rituals (Turner 1974,
1982, 1988). Turner (1974) was concerned with symbolic interaction. He posited
that the evocation of nostalgia and sentimentality, the concept of frontier,
and exotic otherness were intertwined symbolically in his construct of communitas.
Thus, in a complex industrialized society, individuals symbolically enact a
ritualistic return to nature and use nostalgia, sentimentality and frontier
to bound the limits of their own social identity. For example, outdoor music
festivals, such as those attended by bluegrass and jazz listeners, are examples
of Turner’s communitas (Turner, 1974; Turner 1982). In these environments, diverse
individuals are united without their identifying cultural trappings for the
moment but can return to their respective subcultures following the experiential
gathering. Stereotype Ashmore’s concern with stereotypes adds another significant
lens through which to examine music preference. Ashmore (1970) posits that there
are three theoretical lenses through which stereotypes can be examined: the
sociocultural perspective, the psychodynamic perspective, and cognitive perspective.
Ashmore further states that there are multiple relationships between the three
perspectives. For this investigation, the socio-cultural perspective will be
used to yield the following definition of stereotype. Stereotype is a mental
category based on exaggerated and inaccurate generalizations used to describe
all members of a group. Furthermore, stereotyping is a natural phenomenon in
that all humans develop mental categories to help make sense of their environment
(Bennett, 1995; Hamilton, 1981; McLuhan, 1970; Resnick, 1991). Adding to the
definition of stereotype, consistent with the works of Adorno (1968), Benjamin
(1966), Hamilton (1981), Hebdige (1979), Oskamp (1991), and Storey (1993), is
the sociological understanding that stereotypes help develop strong in-group
feelings and identity. Interaction of Culture, Subculture, Popular Culture,
Stereotype and Music Preference From the above definitions and discussion it
is possible to posit a framework for examining the cultural, subcultural and
popular influences of stereotypes in promoting certain music genres and conversely
preventing other music genres from gaining widespread audience appeal. As reported
above, DePoy’s pilot study (1995a) findings suggest a range of stereotypes evoked
by bluegrass music. Of particular importance in explaining DePoy’s findings
is the scholarship advanced by Linn (1991). She suggests that popular culture’s
bias against white Southerners, based on racist and ignorant hillbilly stereotypes,
keeps bluegrass music at the fringe of mainstream culture. She additionally
positioned bluegrass as the “most sentimental and antimodernist subgenre in
country music” (Linn, 1991, p.143). It is interesting to note that bluegrass
music has had immense popularity in other countries where “hillbilly” stereotypes
have little if any cultural referent (Jabbour, 1996). One plausible explanation
about non-musical reasons for the ranges of popularity of the various musics
is illuminated by Linn’s work. Within the framework of popular culture, Adorno’s
essay, Popular Music (1941), positions popular music as a critical production
of mass culture. Adorno articulated and brought to scholarly debate the notion
that popular music is music commodified, void of authenticity, standardized
and pre-digested for its listeners (Adorno, 1941). Moreover, popular music is
manipulative and serves to homogenize listeners while marginalizing those who
do not partake. Popular music is defined as the music forms that are developed
for and disseminated through mass media and are consumed by audiences for which
the music has no “authentic” meaning (Adorno, 1941). Authenticity is embodied
by context and purpose embedded in the culture for which the music was created.
(Benjamin, 1966) The meaning of popular music moves away from its authentic
roots to be valued only as a product for consumption (Adorno, 1941). Applying
Adorno’s notion of commodified music to bluegrass, it is clear that bluegrass,
while commodified somewhat, is not produced and consumed by mass audiences (Jabbour,
1996) and therefore has limited value in a culture in which consumption reigns.
Moreover, examining bluegrass music through Adorno’s lens reveals that bluegrass,
as a primarily oral tradition, does not lend itself to easy replication and
thus homogenization by those outside its authentic culture. Whereas Adorno (1941)
saw the culture industry working to produce cultural homogeneity, Hebdige (1979)
suggested that different subcultures are using the same signs, symbols, artifacts,
and rituals in popular culture and are arriving at different and sometimes competing
meanings based on individual group values. It is therefore reasonable to expect
that the positive meaning that bluegrass has for some groups is countered by
the negative meaning that it has for others (Hebdige, 1979). It could be argued
that any music, regardless of its classification as belonging to a particular
form or genre, could be considered “transauthentic” music (DePoy, 1996). Transauthentic
music is defined as music that is categorized and named despite its authentic
meaning in a culture. The music transcends its authenticity by virtue of being
studied and defined, in that its essential elements and its structure are delineated,
known and can be reproduced for commercial exploitation. Thus, when we speak
of rock, classical, rap, and even bluegrass we experience a pre-digested image
of what the music should sound like before we ever hear it. Even with music
such as bluegrass, which is not widely disseminated over mass media, it is certainly
possible for transauthentic music to be evaluated and used for specific mass
purposes because of its fit with “predigested” views of its structure, function
and meaning (Benjamin, 1966). This use can coexist with authentic cultural meaning
and individual meaning as well (Gridley, 1991; Linn, 1991). Bluegrass, as a
music that emerged from Appalachia, exemplifies the coexistence of authentic
and transauthentic elements and has diverse meanings and uses for differing
subcultural groups. Batteau (1990), in his discussion of Appalachia as a social
construct, poses theoretical explanations for how a culture and its artifacts
are viewed and used by cultures of which Appalachia is not an integral part.
The Invention of Appalachian Otherness Batteau presents an historical review
of the social conditions by which Appalachia was invented out of political desiderata
popular at different times. He asserts that Appalachia is the manifestation
of urban imagination. For the past hundred years or so, “the folk culture, the
depressed area, the romantic wilderness, the Appalachia of fiction, journalism,
and public policy has been created, forgotten, and rediscovered primarily by
economic opportunism, political creativity, or passing fancy of urban elites”
(Batteau, 1990, p.1). It was only in the early 1900’s that the term Appalachian
American gained popularity to describe the inhabitants of an area much larger
than New England and encompassing over two hundred mountainous counties in nine
states from Alabama to Pennsylvania (Batteau, 1990). The constant reinvention
of Appalachia appeared to have had a profound effect on the popular view of
the region and its inhabitants. From colonial times until the late 1800’s, the
Appalachian region was viewed as a hostile impassable wilderness inhabited by
wild mountain men with little use of the outside world (Batteau, 1990). Over
the past hundred years, the region has been identified as having specific social/cultural
characteristics which were and are viewed as “different”. Different has denoted
a variety of perceived characteristics attributed to the rural folk who live(d)
in this region. According to Batteau many of the characteristics associated
with Appalachian Americans served the socio/political agenda of various public
interest groups. Batteau asserts that much of what is believed to be the “real”
Appalachia was invented, with negative and positive stereotypes functioning
to marginalize the Appalachian folk from mainstream America. Beginning with
reconstruction after the War Between the States, marginalizing has kept the
Appalachians isolated, allowing for a rich culture to develop unique to the
region, yet maintaining mountain dwellers in an oppressed social/economic position
(Gaventa, 1980). These people, who provide the cultural context and foundation
for bluegrass music, are often seen embodying both the negative and the positive
values associated with poverty and hard times. As with many other cultural groups,
these people also made music central in their lives (Batteau, 1990). It would
therefore follow that their music engenders both negative and positive stereotypes
as well.
TERMS
Culture
Multiculturalism
Multinational
Monocultural
Eurocentric
Political correctness
Race
Marginalized
Class
Gender
Oppositional reading
Heterogeneity
Colonialism
Homogeneity
Imperialism
Patriarchy
Matriarchy
Otherness
Ethnicity
Oppression
Hegemony
Naturalism
Third world
Multiple reality
Popular culture
Ritual
Myth
