MEDIA’S IMPACT ON FORMING OPINIONS

I am taking a few courses towards an advanced degree, and was required to study the impact that the media has on impacting our opinions about many issues in sport.

For sure, it got me thinking about this complicated topic and was very thought provoking to say the least.

I have included a few thoughts that I put together on the topic for an assignment. I trust that you find it compelling as I did.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There are many factors that influence our perceptions of reality in today’s society. We form opinions as we spend time in discussion with significant others such as family and friends, people around the work environment, people at church, and people in our neighborhoods. However, one of the most powerful influences in shaping our opinions and perceptions is the media. There are many different forms of media in today’s society: newspapers, radio, internet, and perhaps most significant of them all- television. Here, not only is the viewer exposed to a visual image of what is happening, but the image is often times accompanied by commentary of what is taking place. This powerful combination of seeing the facts for oneself, coupled with the ‘expert’ commentary, oftentimes makes the viewer susceptible to having his perceptions molded by other peoples’ opinions and viewpoints. Thus, the media is able to have a profound impact on each viewer’s perception of race and gender issues as attitudes and beliefs are ‘caught’ and ‘taught’ through the engrossing power of the media.
Media is able to have this influence over society’s collective perceptions because of the sheer amount of exposure people have to various media sources. Television and video on the internet are prevalent at every turn.
• On average, kids spend nearly 4 hours a day watching television, DVDs and videos (Roberts, 2005)
• 68% of 8- to 18-year-olds have a TV in their bedroom; 54% have a DVD/VCR player, 37% have cable/satellite TV, and 20% have premium channels (Roberts, 2005)
• In 63% of households, the TV is “usually” on during meals (Roberts, 2005)
• In 53% of households of 7th- to 12th-graders, there are no rules about TV watching. (Roberts, 2005)
People are saturated with viewpoints constantly, and therefore often do not watch with discretion or attention to detail. They accept what they see and hear as fact because they have been susceptible to the constant barrage of information, and are therefore more prone to accept the information presented, without thinking critically about the opinions or beliefs stated.
People’s perceptions in regards to an athlete’s race or gender are thus particularly susceptible to influence by the visual / audio media outlets. “Seeing is believing” as the old saying goes. This visual representation of fact is often coupled with an auditory explanation or interpretation of what is in fact happening. Often times, these ‘color commentators’ are under pressure to keep things lively, and in the attempt to fill air time with witty and provocative comments end up in the pressure of the moment, exposing the viewer to their own inner perceptions of reality that are often laced with stereotypical foundations. Since one ‘true’ visual account is thus paired with an auditory ‘opinion’, by association, the opinion is given equal credibility, and thus the viewer adopts the beliefs, attitudes, and opinions of the commentator, sometimes without giving it any thought of their own.
This is particularly worrisome since it has been shown recently that a commentator’s racial bias will frequently come out in the stress of the live coverage of an athletic contest. Many times, these opinions are inadvertent and display the generalizations and stereotypical beliefs of the presenter. These views are thus internalized, perhaps inadvertently, by the viewer. (Rada, Wulfemeyer, 2005).
Studies also indicate that frequently the content of what the media outlet chooses to broadcast affects perceptions. Social comparison theorists state that individuals use their own social environment to self-evaluate, (Festinger 1954). Since media is such a strong force in ones environment, this has been found to lead to “body image disturbance” amongst women after being exposed to images of very thin women in positive settings (Bergstrom, Neighbors, Malheim. 2009). By choosing to air images of these thin models, and holding them up in a positive light, the media has chosen to advance that ideal to the viewing public. In an of itself, this is not necessarily bad, but if this is the only or primary ideal expressed, then this view of the world becomes out of balance, often times fueling these feelings of body image disturbance. It is no wonder that attitudes and perceptions towards race and gender are greatly influenced by the media today. There has been much study on how the mass media creates and perpetuates gender role stereotypes. For example, even in the realm of advertising, it has been shown that women are often presented in passive roles as product users, while men were shown to be active roles as authorities on the product being sold and as independent agents. These presentations all affect social norms, images, and meaning. If women are consistently portrayed in the media as being passive and deferring, this affects our perceptions of the female athlete as being “outside the norm” when attitudes of aggression and initiative are displayed and encouraged. This often results in the competitive female athlete having to replace these necessary athletic postures with ones that become less enabling in the competitive arena of sports.
Viewing athletic contests on television is often a highly charged, emotional event and is a perfect environment for fostering biases among the audience. The rabid fan viewing the event is often pre-disposed towards biases in favor of the “home team”. It is during such moments that the viewer is even more susceptible to have other biases ‘creep in’ to their thinking. Here is where racial and gender stereotyping finds fertile soil to take root and spread. During the Women’s World Cup final of 1999, the United States was playing China in the final match of the competition. During the closing minutes of the match, the U.S. goalkeeper came off of her line in the attempt to intercept a corner kick taken by the Chinese. In the ensuing play, the U.S. goalkeeper collided with her own teammate, resulting in her removal from the playing field due to a mild concussion. The color commentator reported the event as, “One of the Chinese players punched Akers in the head! She punched her in the head!” Despite having to later retract the statement when the video was reviewed, the perception stuck. It is what the American fans wanted to believe happened, and was what a trusted commentator initially reported. Even when confronted with contradictory evidence, the account of the play stood in the minds of the American people. The Chinese were cheaters… no doubt about it! For weeks I recall how people would recollect the exciting events of that thrilling game. Often, the fan would state, “And could you believe it when the Chinese player punched Michelle Akers in the head!?” It is events like these that attest to the power that the media has in shaping public opinion. It is an emotional medium, appealing to almost all of our senses.
Consequently, it is my belief that those involved in the media should be cautioned (or warned) not to engage in manipulative reporting. They should be exposed to example of how this has been done in the past. The reporter needs to be able to report on the facts of the event while adhering to the journalistic objectivity of their task. This is an essential skill upon which all reporters and commentators should be evaluated. Comments need to be directed towards the athlete as a player instead of the athlete as a person. If commentators are unable to skillfully report in this fashion, they should be replaced. Similarly, the viewer needs to be aware of the need to partake in the excitement of the presentation with a discerning eye and mind. Recognizing that the opinions stated by the presenters are biased, and should not be accepted as fact, the viewer can guard himself against unwanted intrusions.
 
References:
Bergstrom, Rochelle L., Neighbors, Clayton, and Jeremy E. Malheim. “Media Comparisons and Threats to Body Image: Seking Evidence or Self-Affirmation”. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology 28, no. 2 (February 2009): 264-280. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 24, 2009).
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
Hargreaves, D., and M. Tiggemann. “The impact of television advertising on adolescent body image: Parallel processes for girls and boys.” Australian Journal of Psychology 55 (August 02, 2003): 45-45. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 24, 2009).
Kingsbury, John H., and John M. Tauer. “The ESPN Effect: How Slam Dunks Affect Individualism and Optimism for Athletic Success.” International Journal of Sport Communication 2, no. 1 (March 2009): 21-35. SPORTDiscus with Full Text, EBSCOhost (accessed March 24, 2009).
Monk-Turner, Elizabeth et al. “Gender Role Stereotyping in Advertisements on Three Radio Stations: Does Musical Genre Make a Difference?.” Journal of Gender Studies 16, no. 2 (July 2007): 173-182. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 24, 2009).
Rada, J. A., & Wulfemeyer, K. T. (2005). Color coded: racial descriptors in television coverage of intercollegiate sports. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(1), 65-85.
Roberts DF, Foehr UG, Rideout V. Generation M: media in the lives of 8-18 year-olds. Kaiser Family Foundation. March 2005.