Author: admin

“How can we influence social change, if culture and race were portrayed differently in the media?”

Questions are easy to come up with, however, certain questions are so simple that the answer is complex and the outcomes numerous. This question seems soft, simple and yet has no definite answer, when it comes down to it. Berger defines a Beautiful Question as “… [an] ambitious yet actionable question that can begin to shift the way we perceive or think about something…” This question fulfills all these requirements as certain parts of the media; new-stations, movies, shows, etc., will take time to change. As discussed by Professor Hayes’ rotation, and professor Paul’s rotation, stereotypes and prejudice are often integrated into society, and take time and effort to change the parts people see.

There is no question that the “Gatekeepers” of our society shape how the everyday American sees the world. So, it seems logical that refereeing to the entire human race as divided amongst itself both mirrors and reinforces the fact that the U.S. makes humans and their skin-color a controversial subject. For example, Professor Hayes’ rotation had us discuss how pop-culture influences our perceptions of what is deemed exceptionable in the media. From street gangs and Natalie Wood playing a Puerto Rican incarnation of Juliet, to how the sensation Hamilton has changed perceptions of history and the Founding Fathers, pop-culture shapes our views of everyday life. Diverse cultures have historically struggled with representation in the media, from having being underrepresented as a whole, to being passed over from partaking in the media.

In Professor Paul’s rotation, we had a discussion about microaggressions and stereotypes being ingrained in civilization. Reactions to different practices and beliefs are dependent on how we are exposed to those differences in our everyday lives. The media is a big part of the thinking that leads to the dividing and damaging reaction we have to difference.

The term “race” for instance, is supposed to refer to a separate and unique species of organism. Using the word “race” in place of “ethnicity” when talking about people, gives the public the impression that skin-color is indeed a divide that allows people to distance themselves from others. Additionally, the ethnocentric recounting of history is a divide that tells us it is okay to remember deeds of large global giants, rather than focus on the cultures and lively hoods that were damaged, erased, and oppressed, to get where we are today.

This distance, this distinct divide, is the foundation for racists and superiority thinking in general, as “racial differences” are little more than culture and pigmentation. By starting small, perhaps with small time TV shows and local and liberal leaning news stations, using other terms for “race” such as “group,” “ethnicity” and “culture,” maybe the small, slow shifts needed to make the move. Next schools when talking about biology and history can implement the more diverse retelling of historical context and cultures, and why in the context of human relations it is important to hear more than one voice. Tolerance and acceptance of people can begin by highlighting “differences” and make them obsolete through accurate representations of people and the social, cultural, and political environments in which they live. 

My understanding of my own leadership capacity has morphed into a better understanding of my drawbacks and strengths. Going into my first Leadership 101 class, I had a very clear idea about how I would choose to lead: I prefer to think logically, realistically, and think about what would be better for the group as a whole. Initially I went in thinking I would develop a strong sense of  camaraderie with everyone I would work with, that I would not be afraid to speak my mind, for fear of rocking the boat, and that I would make frequent contributions reminiscent of back seat driving. While this all proved to be true in a way, I was challenged and met with a little more resistance then I was used to. I was met with a class of people who admittedly, had very similar ideas to me, but had different takes on what that meant. I also had the privilege to talk to and work with others who were different enough to challenge my own ways of thinking and planning. I do believe I went in knowing how I prefered to lead, and how I preferred to work with others, but I also believe I came in knowing that my style of leading was in need of some experience.

Before my classes in college, I was often someone people could turn to; I was in the top 10% of my class, I was willing to speak-up, present and make speeches, and there was always something I could add to make things work. Projects, assignments, jokes, a conversation, I always looked to bring more, and in this class I found there were ways to recieve. My peers thought like me, we had similar trains of thought and conclusions, but there were also many twists and tunnels that always made sure we stood out from one another. In class we could be given something, anything, and be told to read, analyze, and discuss. I felt like the discussion would be mediocre at best, imagine my delight when someone would point out a heart-wrenching quote about animal cruelty and make me think about it in terms of people, or when a someone on a different occasion pointed out in an Op-ed that the writer was passive and looking for attention. Conversation pieces that I couldn’t fathom coming up.

Additionally, I found that working in a group the way I tend to might not always work. In a class where everyone is expected to be a leader, there are about to be some issues and complications because everyone is taught to lead their groups into battle. I prefer to either lead by steering the group into what i believe is the right way for us to move, or to be the head of the whole operation because I’m a big sister and some of my best friends from high school were underclassmen who didn’t want to work half the time. It’s different, as class groups taught me that I needed to present myself as an equal, no herder, and no boss. In order to make a turn in a group affair, of to even make a compromise, I needed to be strong and flexible in order to make things work. This class had taught me manything about how my leadership skills need to evolve and hopefully this is still the edge of an iceberg.