Her In” in 1976 and two hits with Olivia Newton-John from
Grease, 1978);
to washed-up Hollywood star
(the mid-1980s); to comeback star (Look Who’s Talking, 1989),
cult star (Pulp Fiction, 1994), romantic
leading man (Phenomenon,
1996), and top box-office action star (Broken Arrow, 1996; Face/Off, 1997);
to yet another
film star led astray
by
his own hubris (Battlefield Earth, 2000); and to risk-taking
throwback in Hairspray (2007), where Travolta plays a woman in a genre he is most known for, the
musical.
More recent examples include Miley Cyrus, Miranda Cosgrove, Selena Gomez, and Justin Bieber, all
youth stars who, with varying personal or professional success, tried to shift their public image to be
viewed as adult celebrities.
Consider the different ways we think about people who garner the most media attention, from the
conventional, recognizable, stable, and comforting to the innovative, unfamiliar, unstable, and
challenging:
• How have people with mass mediated careers changed to improve their public image? When did they
change, and what was the change in response to?
• Are there other public figures who make a successful career out of maintaining the same image or
meaning for long periods of their public life?
• How important is it for public figures to change or maintain their image to succeed in different public
arenas (e.g., the movies, television, sports, politics)? Is there a recipe for success?
• Is it easier to think of these public figures and their meanings in terms of a high-low cultural
hierarchy or as part of a cultural map of varying dimensions?
DEVELOPING A CRITICAL APPROACH
[Taught as a means to introduce the critical process in Chapter 1]
Your textbook suggests that developing a critical view is a process involving five overlapping stages:
1. Description: Observing the phenomenon and making notes of those observations
2. Analysis: Mapping patterns that play out in the phenomenon
3. Interpretation: Answering “So what?” or “What does that mean?”
4. Evaluation: Arriving at a judgment based on previous steps, not just taste
5. Engagement: Taking some kind of action
Let’s start with a nonmedia example. Imagine that you’ve never seen a deck of cards before. As I flip
over the cards, describe what messages are present. Are there patterns appearing? What do they mean?
[Here I use a document camera to help students see the cards.]
Because you know the nature of a deck of cards, it’s easy to recognize patterns and meanings. You
may not know the totality of a medium, but making it more challenging may help students figure out the
context of the messages presented.
Any questions? The process guides one to build a case rather than default to individual tastes.
Let’s turn to a media example while also taking advantage of having a peer’s guidance through the
process.
Match a student with a peer. One student stands with his or her back to the screen while the other
student describes the image. Then the student with his or her back to the screen turns around to see how
good a description was offered.
Repeat the process by changing roles. Introduce a second image. Have students turn around to see
how good a description was offered.
Collectively discuss the patterns of meaning here. What do they mean? How would you evaluate that?
—Developed by Matthew Smith, Wittenberg University
TELEVISION—QUALITY OR TRASH?
This Critical Process exercise analyzes the quality of television programming and what characteristics
determine that quality. In small groups or as a class, write the headings Quality and Trash on the board
or on a sheet of paper. As a group, agree on several television shows that serve as examples of quality
programs and trashy programs. In another column, if necessary, place any programs that are in dispute