If you were to reflect on the various times you
have turned to media for entertainment could you recall times in which your
mood dictated or affected your media choice? Did you intentionally choose a
comedy to turn your bad day around, or avoid movies about love and
relationships during a bad break up? If so, were you aware of the fact that your media choice
depended on your current mood and what kind of mood you were hoping to achieve
or was it just a subconscious factor?
Different from the uses and gratifications
theory we discussed last class, the mood management theory does not expect
audiences to readily identify and report how they use particular media to change
their moods. Mood management theorists “argue that people do not have to be
consciously aware of their content attributes. We don’t need to use them to
consciously select content. Instead, we can be guided by our feelings about
content- our vague expectations about what will make us feel better as opposed to a well thought out rational strategy guiding our
selection” (Baran and Davis, 272). What sometimes appears to be a habitual or a
seemingly meaningless choice in media consumption can potentially be the result
of subconscious and psychological workings in which one turns to the media to
moderate his/her mood.
According to Baran and Davis, “the core
prediction of mood management theory claims that individuals seek out media
content that they expect to improve their mood. Mood optimization in this sense
relates to levels of arousal- plausibly, individuals are likely to avoid
unpleasant degrees of arousal, namely boredom and stress By selecting media
content, media users can regulate their own mood with regard to arousal levels”
(Baran and Davis, 271) It makes sense that people would strive to improve their
mood through their media choices however, how does one then explain those who
choose to watch sappy love movies at the peak of a bad break up with a
significant other, or those who intentionally listen to sad or melancholy music
when already in a down mood? I definitely see the logic behind such a theory
and I do think that it makes some good points but I have also witnessed the
opposite role, or affect of media in that it can be used to reinforce an
already present mood, not help to change or regulate it.
Whether used to reinforce a mood or, as the
theory suggests to regulate and improve a mood, how is the media/audience
relationship dictated? Are there in fact subconscious effects at play in which
people are not aware of what the media does to them or is it possible that
when people make their choices
they do it knowingly and with a particular expectation of what the outcome will
be? Are we as audiences, ignorant to the power of media and not fully aware of
all its complexity as some mood management theorists state? Baran and Davis
stated that mood management theorists can be contrasted to uses and gratifications
theorists but I wonder if it could instead, be said that the two theories are
somehow related. Maybe people use media to manage their mood and depending on
their media choice that will either be successful or unsuccessful.
Just as people turn to certain media for mood
regulation, perhaps, the notion of fandom can be explained by people’s desire
to ease some void in their own reality. According to Jodi Jenson, “they seek
contact with famous people in order to compensate for their own inadequate
lives. Because modern life is alienated and atomized, fans develop loyalties to
celebrities and sports teams to bask in reflected glory, and attend rock
concerts and sports events to feel an illusory sense of community”(Jenson,
349). Fans associate with certain celebrities and sports teams to have that
feeling of companionship and to essentially improve their mood and the way they
feel about themselves. Enjoying a game and being fond of someone’s talent and
work is completely acceptable but what sometimes happens is people take those
feelings and those emotions and that line between reality and fantasy becomes
very blurred. Take for example, and incident I read about on CNN. According to
the article, “Egyptian soldiers clashed with thousands of angry
soccer fans in a Mediterranean coastal city over the suspension of their club
following a deadly riot last month, witnesses said Saturday. A medical official
said a teenager was killed and 68 people injured. The Feb. 1 melee following a
match in the city of Port Said in which at least 73 people died was the world's
worst soccer-related disaster in 15 years” (CNN). I think people have every
right to support their team or celebrity of choice but to take it such an
extreme is unfathomable to me. It is hard to understand how such a disconnect
from reality can occur but fandom of that intensity and extremity is obsessive
and even psychotic. How is it that some people are capable of
seeing and establishing that distinct line between reality and fantasy but
others are not? In cases of extreme fandom which is to blame, is it the media that does this to
people or do people take what they see in the media and shape it to their own
misperceptions and beliefs?
Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass
Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Boston, MA:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Egypt Soccer Fans, Troops Clash; 1 Killed." CNN.com.
Associated Press. 24 03
2012. Web. 25 Mar. 2012. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/soccer/03/24/egypt.fans.ap/index.html
Jensen, Joli. "Fandom as Pathology: The
Consequences of Characterization." McQuail's Reader in Mass
Communication Theory. Ed. Denis McQuail. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications,
2002. 359.
Hi Lindsay! I agree with your post in the fact that some levels of fandom can be completely psychotic. When you asked about if moods dictate or affect my media choice, I would again agree with you. For instance, take a girl who just broke up with her boyfriend. She may be more willing to watch “A Walk To Remember” or “The Notebook” more than “Iron Man” because she watches something she craves to have. Some women, not all, like to mope in their depression after breakups. Maybe instead of movies it can be from reading novels. “The mood of the romance’s opening pages…is nearly always set by the heroine’s emotional isolation and her profound sense of loss” says Radway (312). Hearing about someone else’s sense of loss makes the reader not feel completely isolated herself. They can relate to the characters. It “creates a similar sense of depletion in the reader” (Radway 312). I have intentionally chosen a comedy movie when my day is not going good, and I have chosen a scary movie when I was with a group of friends just so we would be scared. Sometimes, we aren’t aware of what our moods are until we finish the movie or television show. I was missing home and decided to watch “Up” (ha ha), and did not realize how much it reminded me of all my nieces and nephews until after the movie was over. Therefore, I believe it is both a subconscious factor in choosing media as well as conscious.
ReplyDeleteLike you stated above, “individuals seek out media content that they expect to improve their mood” (Baran, Davis 271). It brings me to some of our MSS450 class when I came across a blog from a man who gave his wife the Twilight books and she became so obsessed she would not have sex with him until Bella and Edward had sex. She thought it would not only improve their mood, but their relationship too. The Twilight series, now the Hunger Games, are great examples of how the audiences’ mood is dictated. It all revolves around fandom. There are different levels of fandom, the loner and the frenzied crowd member (Jensen Fandom as Pathology). She states, “…the obsessed loner, who (under the influence of the media) has entered into an intense fantasy relationship with a celebrity figure” (Jensen 344). It was as though this woman who read Twilight was involved with Bella and Edward and respected them to the point that she wanted to be like them. The obsessed loner feels isolated and the “frenzied crowd member, suffers from a disease of contagion”(Jensen 345). Like your example earlier about the crowd violence, crowd members can be completely overwhelmed when their team wins, a rock star comes on stage, or a celebrity appears.
You came to the conclusion that people have “every right to support their team or celebrity of choice but to take it such an extreme is unfathomable to me.” Throughout it all, I believe that there are different levels of fandom. Some people have issues within themselves to draw that distinct line between reality and fantasy. Every person is different and we all interpret things different, from text messages to media messages. Overall, I believe that people take the media too seriously to create fantasy relationships. On the contrary, the media is so extremely vital in today’s society that we are outsiders if we do not have the coolest social media or the latest piece of technology. Media does influence everyone in a way, from fashion to how we talk…but people need to take a step back and remember that they do not need to live their life by following others. If everyone wants to be an individual, why should they care what the media says?
Baran, Stanley J., and Dennis K. Davis. Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Jensen, Joli. "Fandom as Pathology: The Consequences of Characterization." McQuail's Reader in Mass Communication Theory. Ed. Denis McQuail. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2002. 359.
Radway, J. McQuail's Reader in Mass Communication Theory: "Reading the Romance." London: Sage, 2002. Print.
“we can be guided by our feelings about content- our vague expectations about what will make us feel better as opposed to a well thought out rational strategy guiding our selection” (Baran and Davis, 272)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Baran and Davis statement about emotions having an impact on media content that I choose to use. For me, music is the medium that I use to adjust my mood. I also choose content that correlates with my mood. For example when I am in a bad or angry mood sometimes I choose music with an angry tone. I don’t always try and adjust my mood by choosing happy music that will put me in a better mood; but there are definitely times when I do listen to music to put me in a better mood. There are also times when I pick a specific genre of music to prepare for various activities. For example when I am getting ready for a lacrosse game I have a particular playlist that I listen to, in order to get in the right mind set to compete. I also have a particular playlist for long car rides. I find that Jam bands like Phish help me pass the time while driving. The songs tend to be longer and the elaborate jamming makes the time go by much faster. Music is definitely my media content of choice for mood adjustment.
There are some aspects of Mood Media theory that I disagree with. I agree that in some cases I use media to improve my mood; but there are also times that I choose media similar to my own emotional state. Occasionally I get the same level of “arousal” by listening to music with the same emotional sound as my mood. I agree with Lindsey’s critique of the Mood Media Theory. People don’t always try to improve their mood, “how does one then explain those who choose to watch sappy love movies at the peak of a bad break up” (Lindsay Walker blog post)
“They seek contact with famous people in order to compensate for their own inadequate lives. Because modern life is alienated and atomized, fans develop loyalties to celebrities and sports teams to bask in reflected glory, and attend rock concerts and sports events to feel an illusory sense of community”(Jenson, 349) This quote by Jenson explains fandom in a way that relates to my own experience. I definitely am a fan of athletes that are doing what I wish I could. I am a huge professional surfing fan. I follow particular surfers to “compensate for [my] own inadequate lives [life].” (Jenson) I use social media like Instagram to see the life I wish I was living from the professional surfers prospective. I attend Phish concerts to be apart of a community of fans that I feel comfortable with. I use the music to improve my mood and increase arousal and I attend the concerts to be apart of a community of people who feel the same way that I do. There is no better feeling then being surrounded and interacting with people that love the music in the same way that I do. It is a euphoric feeling that I have become addicted to. I have been counting down the day’s to the 2012 Phish summer tour, and I cant wait to feel that sense of euphoria again!
In Lindsay’s blog, she asked a very interesting question, “In cases of extreme fandom which is to blame, is it the media that does this to people or do people take what they see in the media and shape it to their own misperceptions and beliefs?” There is a very thin line between being a fan and being an obsessive fan. Joli Jenson describes fans the McQuail Reader as, “…being irrational, out of control, and prey to a number of external forces” (Jenson 345). This can be especially true when talking about sports fans. Fans, in general, can become so involved in a media event that they lose sight that it is just a game or just a scripted television show. However, there have been many stories lately that have sports fans beating up other sports fans because they were simply cheering for the opposite team. So going back to Lindsay’s question, when it comes to extreme fandom, it is most likely that the people, not the media, that shape their own beliefs about a show or sport into unhealthy levels. Another example of this is forums, where people interact with other fans and talk about television characters as if they are real. Some people rely on those forums as a way to escape from the stresses of their everyday life, but some people feel like they are in the show and every decision the producers make effects them.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason why people can be considered “extreme fans” is when they get involved in a show for a romantic reason. The reason why many people love movies is because there will be this romance that people can dream to have, and fantasize about it. Like most fandom, people are looking for an escape from their normal, ordinary life style. Romantic novels and movies are what really applies to older women and how they can become so obsessed with a character. For example, the “Twi-moms” loved Edward and Jacob and became so obsessed with the movie series that some of them lost touch with reality. Janice Radway describes this romantic obsession in McQuail’s Reader by writing that, “The romance inadvertently tells its reader, then, that she will receive the kind of care she desires only if she can find a man who is already tender and nurturant” (Radway 316). People want to dream of the perfect relationship where men could care for them and protect them as well. This is why romance is always so escalated in movies.
Media is an escape from people’s everyday life. However, the more extreme the fan really depends on the mental state of that fan. Everyone consumes some sort media, so it cannot be the media’s fault that some people become obsessive to a level where it is not healthy. The forums on each show are just there as structure and are just there as a way for fans to communicate with each other. It is not the forums’ fault that people get too involved and become so obsessed with a show that they believe they are actually in the show, or the show is their real life. Fans cannot blame the media for their behavior because media is everyone and not everyone acts obsessed by doing some crazy things.
Lindsey regarding your analysis of the mood management theory, I was lured to the questions asking if we think we chose media based on our mood, or if we think our choices are made out of habit. According to Baran and Davis on page 272 of Mass Communications Theory, mood management theorists propose we are guided by our feelings and unconsciously chose media to fulfill expectations. I immediately relate to this idea to reasons why I chose to turn on music, television, and video games. To single out music specifically, it is obvious I chose many songs based on whether I am happy, stressed or feeling any kind of distinct emotion but the thought of why doesn’t ever enter my mind. Strong emotions such as excitement or sadness are usually triggered by events so the person is automatically thinking about it. However a lot of the time we are not recognizing emotional states that continuously guide our media selection.
ReplyDeleteI would like to go into Lindsey’s quote, “Something appearing to be a habitual or seemingly meaningless choice in media consumption can potentially be the result of subconscious workings.” I firmly believe there is a strong correlation between subconscious media selection and habit. When someone routinely listens to the same artist when their angry or watches the same show every Tuesday night, the decision making process is fueled by obtaining certain emotional states. Some may listen to the exact same love song whenever an indicator of an ex-partner is triggered but it is with the objective of reaching that ideal state of mind each time. I also feel it’s worth discussing media selection affected by conscious feelings. We utilize ample media expecting and planning for a certain mood to be obtained. An example I can think of is when you play a certain song, movie to arouse past memories. Expressed nostalgia is the desired emotional reaction in this case. Basically our feelings influence all of our media choices; we just don’t recognize them in many situations.
It is interesting to observe how the intervention of media in between fans and those who they praise can be so positive or turn into a dangerous act of obsession. The first thought I have when thinking about a passionate fan is Mark David Chapman, the man who murdered John Lennon. According to Denis McQuail Chapman is considered an obsessed loner, and he would have never developed such an unhealthy fascination if it wasn’t for Lennon’s life being broadcasted through the media. Lindsey mentions that “Fans associate with certain celebrities and sports teams to have that feeling of companionship and to essentially improve their mood.” Those in the entertainment business are fully aware of this connection. It’s great to see athletes raise awareness of a respected person who passed away or promoting a specific cause such as aiding someone who is terminally sick. One instance I can remember specifically is when a boy was diagnosed with cancer, one professional football coach actually let him chose the first play of the game in his bed. The team followed through with that play on the upcoming Sunday. Overall, I find it remarkable how intense fanhood can enable media personalities to positively reach out to people or it can have a completely adverse effect, endangering others.
Lindsay proposes an interesting argument, and I have to agree with her claim that uses and gratifications correlates with the mood management theory. Although this isn't always the case, I do think that these two aspects of of media theory are synonymous with one another more often than not. I think this idea is most apparent with specific movie genres. Music is a mood enhancer at times, but I think it is too universal to be considered an essential part of mood management theory. In one of my favorite movies, Almost Famous, aspiring journalist William Miller asks his rock idol Russell Hammond, "Do you have to be depressed to write a sad song? Do you have to be in love to write a love song? Is a song better when it really happened to you?" The answer is yes most likely, but it can also be no. I think music can definitely enhance a mood, but it doesn't have to be exclusive to your mood or experiences when you listen to it. I didn't live through the Vietnam War, but I can still appreciate Bob Dylan's protest songs.
ReplyDeleteMovie genres, however, serve a more specific purpose. As cliche as it sounds, I do think that romance films encapsulate the correlation between uses and gratifications and mood management theory. Radway says, "Given the nature of the female personality as a self-in-relation, the inability of men to function as completely adequate relational partners, and the reciprocal demands made upon women by the very children they rely on to satisfy their unmet needs, it is understandable that many women derive pleasure and encouragement from repetitive indulgence in romance fantasies" (313). She presents a pretty harsh generalization about men--that they are inadequate partners--but she also presents an important theme of escapism. Romance films provide women with a romantic fantasy that they long for, and use to escape from their everyday lives. However, women can get romantic satisfaction from films other than stereotypical films such as "The Notebook." Even films like "Almost Famous" present unique love stories that women can appreciate. I think women use romantic films to hone in on their fantasy, while at the same time allowing them to affect their mood. This particular fantasy, and act of escaping, can reinforce a happy relationship a female may be in,cushion them after a break-up, or give them hope for future relationships. For older women, who are married and have children, they most likely use these films to rehash their youth and past relationships, or to mull over "what could have been." Either way, romance films in particular simultaneously act as emotional crutches for women while defining a certain mood they are in at any given time.
With that said, I truly believe that female viewers of the romantic genre are more obsessive than fans of sports, musicians, etc., and can be given the stigma of being the "obsessed loner type" (344). This obviously isn't exclusive to all females, but I think the heartthrobs portrayed in films and the desperation some young (and old) women have to fulfill that fantasy can lead to detrimental behavior more often then heavy metal music can. The need to fulfill a romantic fantasy is more powerful and persuasive to young women than a song lyric is or a book series may be(that is, until you turn it into a film with Robert Pattinson as the star).
Jensen, Joli. "Fandom as Pathology: The Consequences of Characterization." McQuail's Reader in Mass Communication Theory. Ed. Denis McQuail. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2002. 359.
Radway, J. McQuail's Reader in Mass Communication Theory: "Reading the Romance." London: Sage, 2002. Print.
In my opinion, people have tendencies to consume media that’s reflective of their mood or personality. I can honestly say that I have in fact chosen a TV show or a movie in the past based on how I was feeling at that particular time. I think that more often than not, we consume media types based on our personalities, but every so often we choose to watch a sad movie because we’re feeling down and want to maintain that mood or we avoid a movie like that because we just had a bad experience with someone we care about. A bad day can sometimes be turned around with a humorous movie, or a song that we really enjoy listening to. According to Entertainment Theory by Baran and Davis, “If we’re in a “bad mood”, we turn on our iPod and listen to music. When we’re “stressing out” from studying, we can take a break and surf the net or turn on a televised comedy” (Baran and Davis 271). Here, Baran and Davis are discussing “subtheories” based on the various psychological processes. Mood management theory is being discussed, and it argues that “a predominant motivation for using entertainment media is to moderate or control our moods”.
ReplyDeleteWith mood management, it’s almost an unconscious effort at changing a mood. Like stated in the blog, it’s different from uses and gratifications because when we’re dealing with uses and gratifications, we’re consciously aware of what we’re looking to achieve by consuming a particular media source. “Mood management theorists argue that we don’t have to be consciously aware of these content attributes. We don’t need to use them consciously to select content” (Baran and Davis 272). I agree with the statement that says “what sometimes appears to be a habitual or seemingly meaningless choice in media consumption can potentially be the result of subconscious and psychological workings in which one turns to the media to moderate his or her mood”.
Fandom is another topic that relates to mood management theory in that people turn to various celebrities to perhaps compensate for their own voids. In her article, Jensen describes two types of fans – obsessive and hysterical. She goes onto say, “I suggest here that these two images of fans are based in an implicit critique of modern life. Fandom is seen as a psychological symptom of a presumed social dysfunction; the two fan types are based in an unacknowledged critique of modernity” (Jensen 343). She explains that fandom is way beyond any kind of conscious level of being a fan and that’s it’s a subconscious feeling. We’re not aware that we’ve reached a level of fandom, just as we are not aware that we tune into a particular show to compensate for our mood.
To answer the question of people being able to distinguish between reality and fantasy, I believe that it ultimately comes down to the particular person and how well they deal with different aspects. Like stated by Jensen, people sometimes reach levels of fandom because they are looking to fill voids in their own lives. They need to feel a strong connection to a celebrity because they like to feel like they’re experiencing the same feelings and emotions as their idols. People who are able to distinguish between reality and fantasy are probably more conscious of what they do on a daily basis, and they don’t find the need to have an obsession with a celebrity of any kind. In addition, the same people who can establish the line between reality and fiction are mostly likely the same people who are conscious of the types of media they are consuming based on their moods.
Not only does the media entertain, but it can also serve other purposes, such as lifting and improving the moods of audiences. We hear all the time that if people are having a bad day, they will listen to a certain type of music, turn on the television, or even pop in a movie. However, we don’t necessarily seek it out all the time to improve our moods. We are drawn to certain types of media because of the way they make us feel. Some people may be obsessed with crime dramas such as Criminal Minds, whereas others might love Will Ferrel movies. When we are in certain moods, we are drawn to the media that makes us feel comfortable and what we enjoy. If someone is having a terrible day and is sad, but is an avid and obsessed Criminal Minds watcher, they may sit down for hours and watch people get killed, mysteries be solved, etc. Those themes are not necessarily something that someone would think to seek out to cure sadness, however, for some people, they do. It is extremely situational. Not everyone will seek out a comedy if they are upset, and not everyone will seek out a violent action film if they are angry. Thus, I totally understand Lindsey’s about people viewing sappy movies such as The Notebook during a bad breakup; however, these people may do this because they are drawn to the romance genre. Maybe their favorite movies are romance films, and they give them that satisfaction and help them to optimize their mood. For example, I know I could be having the worst day ever, but if I were to flip on the television only to see that Titanic was on, my mood would instantly improve. Now, how is one supposed to justify that one the greatest/most depressing disaster films of all time is a mood lifter? Sure it has this awesome love story and who doesn’t love 23-year-old Leonardo DiCaprio with his perfect hair, but in reality, it may be one of the most morbid and screwed up stories ever. I am fully aware that the ship will sink each and every single time I watch it, however, I still jump out of my skin with excitement when I know that it is on television, especially when I am in a bad mood, simply because I love that film. Therefore, I do agree with the mood management theory to a certain extent, especially in the sense that “individuals seek out media content that they expect to improve their mood” (Baran & Davis, 271) yet I do not believe that people seek out media that includes their optimal/ideal emotions in order to make them feel better. I disagree with the fact that this theory and the uses and gratifications theory are contrasted. They could almost be combined. If one is using the media for a mood lifter, wouldn’t that fall under the uses and gratifications theory? The whole concept is quite similar to Radway’s idea of escapism, which is mentioned in the uses and gratifications theory. Media can act as a type of therapy, therefore, we watch what we favor and enjoy in order to brighten our moods, even if it is something as disastrous and potentially depressing as Titanic.
ReplyDeleteNow, while moving forward, yet still continuing on with my love for Titanic, comes the idea of fandom. Let’s be real, Edward Cullen totally looks to Jack Dawson for advice on women. In 1997 when the film came out, screaming fans were everywhere. I would say that they could be compared to Twilight fans. I loved (and still love) this movie, and consider myself a fan, however, I do not agree at all with the extremist side of fandom, which can be seen as “excessive, bordering on deranged, behavior.” (Jensen, 343) I would have never attacked Leo if I saw him in real life. I would have simply appreciated his presence. As I understand that people sometimes use celebrities as an escape from modern life, I almost feel that a lot of fandom comes from jumping on the bandwagon, being bored, or needing something new to do. I think it is insane when a certain football team loses and their fans are depressed for days and cannot function or go on with their daily lives. It is absurd how dependent some people are on Hollywood and pop culture for self worth. However, I also do believe in the idea that a few people can ruin it for everyone. Let’s take Twilight for instance- tons of people love Twilight, but probably only a small percentage would consider themselves “Twihards.” Unfortunately, all of the crazy fans are getting all of that negative attention, making anyone who has seen Twilight even once look like a nutcase. Therefore, I do not really think that there is as huge of an extremist fanatic population as we think there is. So who is to blame for the behavior? It is a combination of real life and the media itself. Those who are crazy fans clearly need something more in their real lives, so they take what is in the media itself to fill a void. As Jensen mentioned, “the fan is defined as a response to the star system.” (Jensen, 343) Hollywood is not to blame. As in real life, audiences are responsible for their own actions.
ReplyDeleteAs Lindsay asks us if our mood affects what media choices we make, I can’t help but agree. If I am having a bad day and I see that Friends or The Big Bang Theory is on TBS, I know my bad mood can turn around with the touch on the remote. People like to feel like they are a part of something. This is why we relate to certain media texts when we are in certain moods, cheer for certain sports teams, and follow certain celebrities on Twitter. Whether you are cheering for the Yankees or are a Kim Kardashian fan, you will find something to follow that changes your mood.
DeleteLindsay uses the quote from Joli Jensen chapter in the McQuail reader, that explains how fans might want to fill voids in their lives by investing their time in certain celebrities, shows, sports teams, etc.: “Because modern life is alienated and atomized, fans develop loyalties to celebrities and sports team to bask in reflected glory, and attend rock concerts and sports events to feel an illusory sense of community” (McQuail, 349). This sense of community Jensen mentions puts us in positive moods. We cheer on our favorite sports teams in front of the TV set or perched in our stadium seat, only to look around and see everyone else happy and cheering; doing the same thing that we are doing. We know the same cheers and root for the same players. This holds true also for our favorite television shows. We watch the lives of characters unfold every week and build certain relationships and feelings towards each character; whether or not we like them. We root for the character to end up with the opposite male/female character that they are pursuing. We laugh when they do something funny. Girls might style their clothes, hair, etc. after a character they think has great style. We want to live our lives a certain way and the media gives us the tunnel of options to fill those voids in our lives by watching or listening to the media that fits our mood.
“According to Knobloch-Westerwick, there are four types of media content attributes relevant to mood management. Excitatory potential involves the ability of content to arouse or calm emotion—to get us excited or to reduce stress. Absorption potential involves the ability of content to direct our thoughts away from things that induce a negative mood and toward other things that induce positive feelings. Semantic affinity concerns the degree to which entertaining content involves things similar to (mean the same as) the things that are inducing a bad mood. Hedonic valence refers specifically to the potential that content has to induce positive feelings” (Baran, Davis 271). This plethora of information is given to us for us to see that viewing certain media depending on our moods can be done in a variety of ways. We look sometimes to enhance the mood we are in or reverse the negative feelings we are experiencing by adding positive feelings. So, when we consume our media, are we looking to enhance or change our moods? When we have a bad day, would we rather just watch something sad that might just allow us to get a good cry in to relieve our angst? Or would we watch something to make us laugh to distract us from the negativity? Would we listen to happy or sad music in these scenarios? Well, it depends on the type of person you are and the type of media that works best for you depending on your mood at the time. People look to the media as escapes from reality. When I am having a rough day, I look to escape the negative energy. I flip through the channels until I find a show that I know will make me laugh out loud at least once while watching and stick to it. Suddenly, my mood is elevated. However, when a friend of mine is in a bad mood she will almost always try to find the sappiest love movie on television. She likes to cry out her feelings and then she feels better. Everyone is different and each individual likes to consume different medias for different reasons, and gets different emotions and feelings out of their consumption. Our mood reflects what media we take in and our media intake can be a reflection of our mood or what would change our mood from negative to positive.
DeleteHey Lindsay, I think you made some valid points when you stated that fans associate with celebrities or sports teams to feel better connected to something or to improve their own moods. I feel like media is a great way to escape from our own realities and enter new ones, whether it is film, music, television, or internet. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to escape from your own life now and then, but however I do think it starts becoming an issue when your escape becomes more of an obsession where you can’t separate your reality from your fantasies.
DeleteI don’t completely blame the media on people’s crazy obsessions with celebrities but the media doesn’t exactly help the situation. Thanks to social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter the celebrities who once seemed so far apart are closer and more connected with their fans on an almost personal level, well at least to the fans its personal. When someone like Justin Bieber tweets about hanging out in the studio or going to the gym it sounds so laid back and personal that you start to feel like he’s just another one of your friends. I think it’s that kind of closeness that stirs up so many Bieber fanatics, he makes sure that when he speaks to his fans it’s just like speaking to anybody else and that’s what gets him so many devoted fans. In the Mcquail reading, “Fandom as pathology: the consequences of characterization”, by Joli Jensen, the author quotes a security guard who stated; “‘It’s because of the emphasis on the personal lives of media figures, especially on television. And this has blurred the line between appropriate and inappropriate behavior’ ” (pg. 344). News media puts so much time and energy into finding out about the personal lives of public figures. The thing is, we can’t help but be interested and it’s probably because according to news media their personal lives seem way more interesting than our lives.
Lindsay said in the beginning of her blog that fans sometimes associate themselves with certain celebrities to improve their mood or feel a certain kind of companionship and I agree with that completely. Last year I was a huge fan of Ke$ha (and I still am even though she fell off the face of the earth) and aside from her crazy attitude and style I loved her music because it was so upbeat and carefree and at the time that matched my life completely. Ke$ha sung about getting drunk, partying, and maybe even the occasional hookup and I loved her for singing about that because I could relate and it made me happy. I could be in the worst mood ever and once I put in one of her songs I would have the biggest smile on my face within seconds. In the Mcquail reading by Jensen it states, “The inadequate fan is defined as someone who is making up for some inherent lack. He or she seeks identity, connection and meaning via celebrities and team loyalties.” (pg.348) I don’t agree with this statement because some fans might not feel a definite connection with the artist themselves they might just feel a connection with the music they’re singing or the character they’re playing in a show or a film.
Jensen, Joli . Fandom as pathology: the consequences of characterization. London: SAGE Publications, 2002. 344-348. Print.
I find the whole concept of media dramatically influencing people's moods and not being able to perceive the difference between reality and fiction hilarious. I suppose that is just because I am a media studies student and can distinguish the difference and also understand the media source's intent to influence their consumers. In Lindsey's blog she asks, “In cases of extreme fandom which is to blame, is it the media that does this to people or do people take what they see in the media and shape it to their own misperceptions and beliefs?” I know this is an extremely fictional example, but the first thing I thought of was an old episode of Friends where Joey has a stalker who believes she is dating Joey’s fictional soap opera character Doctor Drake Ramoray.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/HVe69WJw8Qs
With this extreme case as well as my ability to distinguish the difference between reality and fiction, I believe it is not the media to blame but the consumers who constantly feed into the media. Fans might be viewed as dysfunctional and threatening in some extreme cases. In the Friends episode, Erica could pass for a normal average woman, yet her personality shows her to be psychotic. Jensen says fandom attracts average lower and middle classes because it is available and inexpensive (346). In Erica’s case, as Jensen suggests, “consequently the romance functions always as a utopian wish fulfillment fantasy through which women try to imagine themselves as they often are not in day to day existence, that is, as happy and content.” (319).
It bothers me when I hear about fans that cross the line into pathology and threatens the object of desire of their desire (Jensen 347). When celebrities have to hire body guards to do trivial activities makes me wonder where do people draw the line of being threatening, or even worse, do people even have that line?
To give those types of fans the benefit of the doubt, where does reality television come into play? Clearly reality TV is not 100% real, and producers admit playing a hand in establishing conflict with their stars.
http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2011/11/is-jersey-shore-fake-heres-new-evidence.html
In this clip from season four of the Jersey Shore, producers staged a fight for Snooki and Deena, which made some great television. Great television if this was a sitcom? Yes. Ethical if the show is marketed as a “reality show?” Debatable. Maybe the real Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi would not have thrown those handles of alcohol off the bar or cursed out the bartender, but what if people met up with Nicole at a bar, they have a right to believe she would actually behave that way, correct?
Celebrities are more exposed than ever. It is up to media consumers to remember they are real people just like us, just as much as it is up to the celebrities to keep themselves out of the spotlight every now and then.
To be honest, I never really thought about what kind of mood I was in when it came to picking what to watch on television. But Baran talks about how someone can subconsciously choose what to watch on television based on the mood they are in, and I think that is the case for me. He also says that “When we’re “stressing out” from studying, we can take a break and surf the net or turn on a televised comedy” (Baran, 271). I know for a fact that I do this often, especially when studying for a big test or writing a paper.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that some people use media to reinforce a mood they are in. Especially if someone has lost someone or something that is important to them, media is a way for them to evoke those memories that have been lost.
Shifting gears, just like people can be addicted to drugs or alcohol, some people can be addicted to sports and take fandom too far. Now I love sports, but I would never think about injuring someone just because they were not cheering for the same team I was. I think it is alright to heckle someone who is cheering for the other team, as long as it is all in good fun. But genuinely hating someone because they do not like the same team you do is ridiculous. There was an incident last year were a San Francisco Giants fan was nearly beaten to death by two Dodgers fans after a game. The fan suffered severe and I believe permanent head trauma. If you can believe this there was even an incident last year where an 8-year-old Jets fan was tackled by a Cleveland Browns fan outside of the Browns stadium! In these two separate incidents, I don’t think the media can be to blame. How can it possibly be the media’s fault that an 8-year-old was tackled by some lunatic? If you want to put the blame on something, alcohol probably played a role in the latter incident (I hope), but that is just speculation. The bottom line is that there are some crazy people out there, especially in sports. To many sports is a way of life, and if you go against their team in their eyes you are going against their way of life.
I also wanted to comment on the quote by Jenson that you mentioned in your blog, which was “they seek contact with famous people in order to compensate for their own inadequate lives. Because modern life is alienated and atomized, fans develop loyalties to celebrities and sports teams to bask in reflected glory, and attend rock concerts and sports events to feel an illusory sense of community”(Jenson, 349). Obviously Jenson is not much of a sports fan. However, I do see where Jenson is coming from. Even though I mostly enjoy watching sports because of the fact that I like competition, there are still times where I watch an athlete and wish I could be doing what they are for a living.
Any time I turn on the television I realize that the movie or show I choose is always based on my mood. Just like when my friends and I are sitting trying to pick a dvd out of my massive movie library I catch myself saying “I’m not in the mood to watch that movie”. Most of the time that is me just saying I do not want to watch some sappy love story or a comedy I have seen a billion times. Baran and Davis say that “…individuals seek out media content that they expect to improve their mood. Mood optimization in this sense relates to levels of arousal- plausibly, individuals are likely to avoid unpleasant degrees of arousal, namely boredom and stress By selecting media content, media users can regulate their own mood with regard to arousal levels” (271). Honestly, I have to agree with them. When I am upset with someone I find myself delving into the lives of manhattans elite or the complicated Scott brothers of Tree Hill, NC, because for that hour or so I invest in their problems and put aside my own. When I am feeling reckless or wanting an adventure I watch the Fast and the Furious movies or a superhero film so that I can excitement and power, rather than sitting on the couch eating ice cream feeling sorry for myself. I also realized that one thing Jenson said really resonated with me. “Because modern life is alienated and atomized, fans develop loyalties to celebrities and sports teams to bask in reflected glory, and attend rock concerts and sports events to feel an illusory sense of community”(Jenson, 349). When you look around the campus you see people representing this illusion or idea of community. You see the jets sweatshirts, the red sox hats and the radio head t-shirts. In this day and age we characterize ourselves with our hobbies. If you as me who I am I would say I am a hockey player, a college student and a semi terrible guitarist/singer; I may also say I am a blink-182 fan as well as a member of the Sidney Crosby fan club (not literally but figuratively). But this is exactly what Jenson is trying to show, that the activities and famous people we associate ourselves with characterize our lives. The craziness of fans makes me think of when the bruins beat out Canada last year in the Stanley cup. The Canadian fans went insane, destroying their town by blowing up cars and throwing things through shop windows. Their city was in ruins, and people were even being pepper sprayed by the police in hopes that they would calm down. It is this that I thought of while reading about the Egyptian soccer fan riot. I saw how incredibly insane sports fans can get, and it made me think also of a segment I saw on Rob Dyrdek’s Ridiculousness about a crying giants fan. He ragged on this guy so much for being a cry baby. The sports fan went insane when the giants lost to the eagles last year. I personally found it hilarious, I do not ever remember crying over a sports game that I did not play in. the only time I ever got really upset at a sports game was when we lost the FCIAC championship in high school. It was my senior year and my last chance at this title and I believe that is cry worthy. But crying over a game in which you have no control, no concrete part in, I mean come on!? These sports fans in our world are incredibly outrageous, just be careful, don’t be in a city where a big sports team has met their demise….it could be deadly.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-6Tn0Ie-AQ&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL3F7592985BD8B7E1
that video is the crying fan. YOURE WELCOME! :D
DeleteInteresting questions. Personally, my use of media depends on my mood. If I am watching television or a movie, I will almost always want to watch something funny or exciting over something sad or dull, regardless of my mood. But I find my use of music quite different depending on my mood. If I am not so cheerful on a particular day, I may listen to melancholy music rather than try and cheer myself up with happier tunes. In both cases I believe I make a conscious decision, because I use my mood to determine what I want to listen to or watch, rather than intake the media and realize my mood during or after consumption. And as mentioned earlier, I do not always seek to improve my mood when engaging in particular media, music for example. In the case of music, some songs are much better when the mood of the song matches the mood the individual is feeling, and even though the tune may not be improving one’s mood, it can still be enjoyed, on a different emotional level. This is not to say, that everyone has the same of affects from the media, and I am sure quite often that the media does play particular subconscious roles in determining what a user engages in. People, who seek media through subconscious paths, may have less control over their program choices if their choices are determined by their mood. Media can be an escape from certain moods, and everyday realities, which is why some people may take being a fan a bit above and beyond. “In a media addicted age, celebrities function as role models for fans who engage in ‘artificial social relations’ with them.”(343) Sometimes, ‘artificial social relations’ are the only social relations people have, which could explain the obsessive celebrity fanatics, or the mob like mentality of soccer fans, who’s social lives revolve around the sporting event and game day rituals. I would argue, that most people can distinguish reality from imaginary, and the illusions portrayed through the media can be exposed by the average Joe, who will not seek personal relations and connections to the celebrities on television. But of course, there are those people, who have poor relations with social groups, and depend on sports or celebrities to give them their social fix. “For these and similarly deprived groups, para-social interaction is an attempt by the socially excluded (and thus psychologically needy) to compensate for the absence of ‘authentic’ relationships in their lives.” (348) This helps to explain why fans can be so extreme, it’s really all they’ve got. ‘In cases of extreme fandom which is to blame, is it the media that does this to people or do people take what they see in the media and shape it to their own misperceptions and beliefs?’ I think it is a combination of both. Media can glamorize an individual or a group to such an extreme that it can be easy for a person to get caught up in that world, especially if they have little social interaction other than that connected to the media figure. Once they are influenced by the media, they may begin to twist the message or create an obsession that best fits their own misperceptions and beliefs.
ReplyDelete