Provide a critical discussion of Herman and Chomsky's Propaganda Model
Provide a critical discussion of Herman and Chomsky's Propaganda Model. In 1988 Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky wrote their book titled 'Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media'. Mass media plays such a dominant role in society as it can be seen to communicate ideas and transmit ideas about society's norms and values. Herman and Chomsky comment how in a world so full of conflicting class interests the media must present the views of the ruling class as societies collective thoughts. Further more, Herman and Chomsky view the media as something that not only serves the dominant elite but also show how private media is ultimately looking to make a profit, and therefore its ideas generally only appeal to the ruling elite it is interested in selling too. Herman and Chomsky use a 'propaganda model' as a framework for analysis for how the media in America is run. Herman and Chomsky use 5 categories in their analysis: ownership, advertising, sourcing, flak, and anti-communist ideology. These five ideas are seen as 'filters' that the media must pass through leaving 'only the cleaned residue fit to print' (Herman and Chomsky 1988: 2). Herman and Chomsky's model though can be criticised, and the following paragraphs will examine the first three categories in detail (as these are deemed the most important in the twenty first century) and how their ideas can be
Modern Political Thought.
GV 100 Modern Political Thought LT 04 * JJ Rousseau Born in Geneva in 1712. Mother died in childbirth, raised by father and relatives. He was apprenticed in his early teens but ran away when he was 16. He fell under the influence of the of his protector Mme de Warens, a catholic proselytiser who gave him free run of her home and library in return for his becoming her lover. During his time with her he immersed himself in study - becoming a self made intellectual - a writer, composer and music critic, novelist, botanist and political philosopher. Rousseau left for Paris in 1742 where he became familiar with many of the chief thinkers of the French Enlightenment. In 1750 he entered a competition from the Academy of Dijon and won with his Discourse on the Sciences and Arts, in which he famously argues that the spread of science and literature was morally corrupting. It was society and its ways that posed a threat to man, not a solution to his base and corrupt nature. * The Discourse on Inequality (1755): for and against the Enlightenment: society is the cause of inequalities and war amongst men; but man is capable of self-improvement, and of compassion towards others. In the Social Contract, published in 1762, he sets out to describe which kind of political society would enable us to remain free, equal, to live in peace and to express our compassion for others- the kind of
What are the main features of Marshall's theory of citizenship?
What are the main features of Marshall's theory of citizenship? T. H. Marshall's theory of citizenship is the most recent theoretical model developed in the 1950s. He elaborated his ideas around the three rights elements, civil, political and social rights. He argued for equality of status rather than that due to the labour market. Along with all theories Marshall did not go without criticism, I will conclude with some of these criticisms and focus on the contemporary problems of citizenship. Prior to explaining Marshall's definition of citizenship, more general explanations can be offered. Citizenship refers to the position of being a citizen, and the collection of rights and duties of this position. These rights define the socio-political membership with the consequence of allocation of collective benefits to the social groups, households and individuals. Citizenship therefore comprises the individuals as fully- fledged members of a socio- political community, whether it is an inhabitant of a city or as a native. This provides the individual with access to limited resources, supplying social or legal protection from unexpected uncertainties of the market place and related life-cycle disadvantages. Within the modern society citizenship creates new types of social solidarity in term of public relations of the exchanging of possessions with others for mutual benefit;
Discuss the Social Psychology of Prejudice
Discuss the Social Psychology of Prejudice Prejudice is an important topic in social psychology, it is regarded as a negative trait which needs resolved, it effects many aspects of social interaction, and it is seemingly universal (and in many cases, institutionalised). Resultantly, the question of what causes prejudiced attitudes has been prominent in research for the last sixty to seventy years, resulting in a number of different theories being offered. Despite this there is, as yet, no agreement over what the answer is, with the only fact seeming to be that there is no single definable origin. Indeed, even the task of defining the term 'prejudice' has proved to be less than straightforward. It is broadly agreed that it can be defined in terms of 'negative feelings towards persons based solely on their memberships within groups'1. But even then there is the point to be made that it seems to be multifaceted, with aspects and components falling within the boundaries of cognition, behaviourism, and other similar disciplines. There have been many definitions thus offered by those researching the topic (usually in support of their theories), but Ashmore2 found what he believed to be four basic points that seem to stay constant among them. Firstly they are manifested between social groups, secondly they are always negative, thirdly they are overgeneralised (i.e. based on
Outline your understanding of the main tenets of critical criminology.
Outline your understanding of the main tenets of critical criminology Critical criminology is widely seen as a very complicated and multifaceted topic, which according to Henry and Milovanic (1991), involves four somewhat related lines of inquiry that have appeared during the last decade or so: left realism (socialist); feminist theory; peacemaking criminology; and a postmodernist structuralist perspective. When applied to these four perspectives critical refers to the varying degrees to which, they attack mainstream criminologists for their scientific pretensions, that is their assumptions about an objective and stable reality that can be captured by mainstream theories, and conventional quantitative methods. Therefore critical criminologists claim that, mainstream criminologists' "knowledge" is fatally flawed. A feature of critical criminology is that there is an emphasis on uncovering various structural features of society including economic, racial and gender inequality and discrimination, which are some of the major "root causes" of law breaking, along with discriminatory treatment of people who have been brought up within the justice system. Critical theories have often been described as radical in 'thrust', and the research agenda for these criminologists goes far beyond "getting facts"; rather it centres on uncovering and attacking social inequalities in society,
'Trait theory is better at describing than explaining personality' Discuss.
'Trait theory is better at describing than explaining personality.' Discuss Trait theory description of personality Trait theory describes personality as a hierarchy of distinguishing characteristics (traits) which underpin consistent desires, attitudes and behaviour and, when correlated, form broad, stable dispositional tendencies (factors/dimensions). Empirical advantages to trait theory descriptions Trait descriptions are good in terms of accessibility and generalisability because of their empirical derivation. The lexicographical methodology for deriving personality descriptors (separating different concepts and reducing complexity through correlating linked concepts) reflects intuitive assessment of personality. Trait theory descriptors attune with 'a categorisation of natural language trait terms'1 and provide a socially relevant nomenclature for personality. This relevance provides a lexical basis for the validity of trait descriptions. Just as West Greenland Eskimos have 49 ways of describing different types of snow2, the importance of differences in types of personality for the well being of individuals and social groups is similarly reflected in language. According to Galton (xxxx, cited in Pervin, 2001), 'the most important individual differences in human transactions will come to be encoded as single terms in some or all of the world's languages'.
Gatrell, V.A.C. (1980) 'Crime, Authority and the Policeman-State', reproduced from Muncie, J. et al. (ed) (1996) Criminological Perspectives (London: Sage) pp. 383-391 - Review.
Assignment 1 Report Gatrell, V.A.C. (1980) 'Crime, Authority and the Policeman-State', reproduced from Muncie, J. et al. (ed) (1996) Criminological Perspectives (London: Sage) pp. 383-391 Part A Gatrell in this article considers how attitudes towards crime and policies have been constructed, by whom and how. The writer discusses from when the ideas about disciplining occurred and how the definition of crime has changed its meaning as the society has evolved over the centuries. So the writer begins with the history of crime and moves to up to present. During and later 18th Century, there was growing assumption that lawlessness existed amongst the proletarian classes. They were seemed to threaten the consensual values, which the dominant social class was trying to construct around this time. Therefore the proletarian classes were seen inferior to them. This suggests the politicians were not exactly concerned with the breaking of law as crime, but protecting the considered better sector of the society. This was enforced by gaining control of the criminal justice system, the term referred to 'policeman-State'. The term 'Police-man State' refers to the power exercised by the state in the 19th Century. They used their authority to implement beuracratic control over the state to reinforce social discipline; the police were the agency of this. Gatrell points out in the context of
What are attitudes and their components? Discuss why attitudes are unreliable predictors of behaviour.
Psychology 1101 Assignment 2 - Research Essay What are attitudes and their components? Discuss why attitudes are unreliable predictors of behaviour. Lorna Plenderleith Abstract This essay discusses the nature of attitudes and their reliability when used to predict behaviour. Using various sources, an in depth look is taken at the problems defining attitude. The theories regarding the formation of attitudes are discussed, as well as the inherent problems in accurately measuring and reporting attitudes. The reliability of attitude to predict behaviour is questioned and found to be tenuous at best. In this essay I will firstly define attitudes and their components, looking at certain definitional problems with the term attitude, arising from the fact that describing an attitude will always involve interpretation. It follows that an attitude is an essentially subjective phenomenon, and hence any attempt to define an attitude as a theoretical predictor of behaviour will be unreliable. I will follow this with an analysis of how an attitude is formed, discussing several theories regarding this. I will then look at some of the methodological problems of attitude research in its various forms, concentrating on the particular technique of questionnaire, and how these forms of research are inadequate for use in the prediction of behaviour. Finally I will conclude that while
Marx Vs. Weber
Marx Vs. Weber During the nineteenth century, Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologist. Both their views on the rise of capitalism have various similarities and differences. They believe that capitalism is relatively new to the modern world. Their views differ on the rise of capitalism. Regardless of Marx and Weber's differences, both theorists agree that capitalism is a system of highly impersonal relations. Karl Marx was born on May 5, 1818 to the father of a Jewish lawyer. As a young student Marx often read works written by Hegel. From school, Marx wrote to his father of his feelings on Hegel. He had found a disliking for those Hegelians who sought to "draw atheistic and revolutionary conclusions from Hegel's philosophy" (Granat Encyclopedia, pg.153) In order to better understand the views of Marx we must look at the philosophy of Hegel. German philosophy in the nineteenth century was dominated by the ideas of Hegel. Hegel's philosophy was based on the concept of idealism. By looking at prior philosophers one will see that Hegel's philosophy was similar to that of Immanuel Kant. Kant was interested in the study of knowledge. Kant had argued that ideas or concepts are apriori. Apriori ideas are one which exists before one's knowledge of the world, which is ideas are not empirical. Hegel's philosophy was an expansion on the
What's so funny? A Study of Race and Stand-up Comedy on Cable TV
Michael Seyoum Hailu Sociology Senior Research Seminar Research Proposal October 15, 2004 What's so funny? A Study of Race and Stand-up Comedy on Cable TV A man walks into a bar... Most of us have likely heard a variation of a joke that starts with the above words, and ends with a punch line intended to make an audience of one or numbering in the hundreds or millions burst into fits of uncontrollable laughter. But do we all find the joke funny? Ruling out the very subjective nature of what we as individuals find humorous, do some jokes elicit belly-aching laughter from certain social groups while getting little or no response from others? Though laughter may be an almost universal act, the causes seem to be much less so. As a life long fan of stand up comedy, the questions that led to this paper have been ruminating in my head for several years. Comedy seems to come, if you'll pardon the cliché, in all shapes and sizes. From television sit-coms and late night shows, to satirical magazines and comedy recordings, there isn't a medium that hasn't been used to deliver the laughs to an expectant audience. In addition race, gender and socio-economic status seem to have a relationship with comedy that begs for scholarly analysis. Each of these social classifications would offer an interesting viewpoint from which to analyze both comedy and the classification itself. However
