Feminist Theory

As a sophomore in college, I was planning to stay in Chicago for a summer journalism internship. I was short on funds so I decided to apply for the Chicago chapter of the Association for Women Journalists summer scholarship.

I asked one of my mentors/professors to write me a recommendation letter, which she was happy to do, but with a small warning. She wanted me to know that she hadn't ever put much stock in organizations that are for subgroups of the profession. "We're all journalists," she said. "Regardless of our gender or our race."

This was a woman who was in the newsroom being her tough, hard-nosed journalist self while the men around her doubted her right and/or ability to be there.

In all of the newsrooms I've been in since then, either visiting or working, I've never felt that anyone doubted my right to be there because I was a woman. I've never had a man talk down to me in an interview because I'm just a little girl reporter. I know our society is not "post-gender" but it just does not make any sense to me that my gender would ever hold me back. However, the numbers don't lie so in the Alternet article, I agree that women benefit from the feminist media because it promotes their interests. Hopefully, there will be a time when the numbers are more equally and people aren't just getting old, white, uppermiddleclass men's view of the news.


In other related news, there has been controversy at the Loyola Phoenix about a shout-out done by the Sports Section (run by two males), but read by the copy editors, managing editor and the editor-in-chief (six females) before it went to press.

The offensive statement written by Raf Onak read: "Rihanna should have known that Brown doesn't take any crap from anyone: Is ya man, on the flow? If he ain't let me know. Let me see if you can run it, run it, girl indeed I can run it, run it. Obviously he's a man who likes to be in charge."

The apology also written by Onak read: "In response to 12.11.09's Shout-Out to Chris Brown, I apologize to my fellow students, professors and administrators who were offended and disappointed by the crude comments. The decision to ridicule domestic violence was inappropriate and ill-considered. I did not intend to condone or reward the event that occurred. Neither I, nor the Loyola Phoenix as a newspaper, justifies domestic abuse in any way, shape or form. The Shout-Out to Brown was intended to be a joke and was not aimed to hurt anyone. We apologize to those who were dismayed in the process and appreciate the letters of concern."

Personally, I don't have the responsibility of reading the sports section before it goes to press. The editor-in-chief and managing editor were not aware of the Chris Brown/Rihanna domestic abuse situation, therefore, they read it and didn't think twice about it. I conveyed to them my deep disappointment in them and in Onak for writing such an absurdly offensive "joke" in the Phoenix that represents the student body and that the whole staff pours so much energy into just to see our reputation harmed by his carelessness.

The Women Studies and Gender Studies department are holding a forum to further discuss the issue of domestic abuse in the media. It is important that these women have brought this important topic to the forefront of the university's attention. However, I believe the Phoenix as part of the media has a greater responsibility to take a role in the dialogue that is continuing on campus. It is important to acknowledge the role we play in creating dialogue about women and gender issues such as this.

text messaging

"We consider that a society has a network of communications systems, we can see that there are key junctures or nodal points where significant information is stored, and from where it is transmitted to other parts of the system ... individuals or groups who control access to those points wield great power."

Information is such an important commodity that the control of information comes into play in any power struggle situation.

"The organized church comes immediately to mind, as does insider trading."

These two organizations being compared is very interesting to him because the control of information, depending on what the information is and who is controlling it, can have vastly different impacts.

These theories about information and power get my passion for journalism fired up (even though it's been kind of depressing to love journalism so much these days). Journalism is about effectively and fairly delivering information. It bothers me so much when people criticize the media about not supplying accurate information when really that should be the mission of all journalists. Journalists are not part of the establishment or at least I think they shouldn't be. It isn't the journalists versus the public. It is us versus them, the people versus the establishment, but journalists are part of the people!

One example of this in the media is the John Mayer song, "Waiting on the World to Change," where he sings
"When you trust your television
What you get is what you got
Cuz when they own the information ooohhh,
They can bend it all they want."

Well, while you're waiting, Mr. Mayer, and criticizing the media. They're out there trying to change the world by supplying the public with the information they deserve.

On a short note about the text messaging article, I think communicate skills will be maintained even though people text so much. I honestly believe that article blows it all a little out of proportion, but I do worry about the literacy issue and young adults thinking it's acceptable to write like they text-talk. However, I found this very interesting article from Technology Review, which argues that you used to be able to be semi-literate and still function socially, but now with technology you need to be fully literate to be able to communicate online so technology actually creates more motivation for literacy.

Finally, though with technology and social life there are so many different ways to connect with people. However, it's not always communication that you want ... like break-ups on text messages. I thought Drew Barrymore's quote from the end of this trailer for the movie, He's Just Not That Into You sums up how technology can be a really downer.

Video Games and Violence

Though this YouTube video was obviously made by kids and it kind of freaks me out, I think it is a huge stretch to assume that if a kid plays violent video games he or she will be more aggressive, violent, and might end up as a sociopath.

A recent article by Michael Ubaldi is cleverly entitled Care and Feeding of Your Scapegoat. I agree with Ubaldi's argument that we want to find someone or something to blame for the decline of society so we don't have to look at ourselves and ask what we're doing wrong. Instead, we want to say that the reason for the Columbine school shootings is obviously: those kids listened to Marilyn Manson, were obsessed with Hitler and played violent video games. But Ubaldi cites a study by Christopher Ferguson, professor at the Behavioral, Applied Sciences and Criminal Justice Department of Texas A&M University. Ferguson's research had similar findings to Dmitri Williams of the University of Illinois-Urbana/Champaign. Ferguson argues that "the Columbine murderers, shooters aren't warped video game addicts, nor do they give significant attention to the hobby, but instead are by all appearances plain, old sociopaths." This may seem obvious, yet it is not often enough discussed about the behavioral issues children already have regardless of the amount of video games they play.

My generation has become extremely desensitized to violence. Guns on T.V. don't even phase me, neither do bombs, murders, rapes, or any of the other unpleasant things that are on every television program and the nightly news. Maybe this speaks to my parent's laisezz-faire attitude to raising children, but I don't remember not being able to watch any movies when I was younger even if they had violence in them. They even let me want X-files, which gave me nightmares. (The music still freaks me out to this day and I hate it.) Regardless of my personal experiences, my generation has been constantly surrounded by media our entire lives. You can keep it on the Disney Channel 24/7, but even in Sleeping Beauty Prince Charming slays the dragon by stabbing it directly in the heart.



For young children, there are many more positive media experiences for them to have (or better yet they could go outside and play). It doesn't make sense to expose them to violence regardless of its effects. I guess it is my lack of game playing experience that leaves me unable to rationalize why playing violent video games could possibly be fun.