February 13, 2007
Problems with the media
I am trying to figure out how a problematization might work in the domain of the media, without involving an over-attribution of influence at the level of meaning and ideology, to media productions as texts available for analysis.
I’ve thought to do this by making the object of problematization the professional practice of media workers, rather than the things that they produce. One can imagine a project that situates media professionals’ value-determination practices in the broader context of changing conceptions of (economic, social and ethical) value in ‘late-socialist’ China.
The question I’m trying to work out is: Where does one look for the relevant ‘serious speech acts’ when the object of problematization is itself a domain of action in which speech acts are made? – assuming the media is part of that apparatus which constitutes a speech act as serious (Rabinow & Dreyfus, Michel Foucault, 48).
Framed differently, the question is: What is there at stake in a problematization of media production practice? The operational metrics of value seem to be financial and bureaucratic; and the activity yields texts, which if one doesn’t want to fall into cultural studies, can only be seen as suggestions, some among the many of everyday noise.
So I don’t quite have a problem, but I’m working on having one. Maybe the media just isn’t “a context in which truth and falsity have serious social consequences” (ibid., 48). Or maybe it’s a matter of locating the problematization in the real (non-media) world, and looking at its relationship to media production practice… Any thoughts would be appreciated!
Hi Emily,
I’m not sure if you’ve got data yet or not, but if you do, you might start by thinking about the things that trouble these media workers. What conflicts come up for them in their work? What do their arguments sound like? This won’t necessarily get you to the problem, but it might help you think about where to look. I’m not so sure that its possible to know what the problem is before you’ve at least done some exploratory research. I think with all of the changes going on in the media, blogs, for example, there are likely new problems opening up as well. You’re right though, that the tricky thing in your project seems to be that the problems of true and false and the serious speech acts are about literal problems of speaking the truth and about the serious-ness of the speech act itself.
Thanks China. I don’t have any data at all yet, which is probably as you suggest, the real problem. I’m also beginning to think i’ve misused the terms - serious speech acts are necessary to a problematization, which has the longest duration of the three objects of analysis: problematization, assemblage, apparatus (Anthropos Today, 55-56). a problem might then be a particular situation within the broader context of a problematization. so even if the problem is media production practice, I should look for speech acts about economic, political, ethical value in the same places as someone with any other problem would. now to figure out where that is…