MEDIA AND IDEOLOGY

Today the word "ideology" is associated with rigid political beliefs or with
social movements espousing radical ideas about reform and revolution. When
someone is referred to as "being too ideological" it only means that he/she
subscribes to some political ideology and is unyielding to other beliefs.
It is said that the word first made its appearance during the French
Revolution (1787- 1799) when it was introduced by Antoine Destutt de Tracy
as an encompassing concept for what he called "the science of ideas."
Karl Marx believed that ideologies were systems of thought perpetuated
by the ruling classes to preserve an existing social order that only serves the
interests of the ruling classes. For instance, the ruling class can perpetuate
religiosity through the church institutions which they support. In turn, this
practice is seen as perpetuating an ideology that sustains fatalism and an
abiding belief in the supernatural.
But ideology really is more expansive than the above definitions. It
actually means a more coherent system of concepts and beliefs held by an
individual or a group. Most of one's ideological beliefs touch on the dynamics of
power.
In this chapter, we assert that media is a purveyor of ideology. We want
to learn how to unpack the ideology of media and information texts. That
means, ideology becomes the system of meaning that defines and explains the
world to its audiences. The active process of unpacking media and information
texts means seeing through the values, attitudes, lifestyles, points-of-view, and
even worldviews.
Let us look at how theories see media and ideology. Invariably, all of
these view the reading and creation of meaning. The extent of contestation over
meaning is what characterizes the spectrum that these theories present.
On one side of the spectrum, the theories describe how media texts
dominate its audiences and users. For Marxists, the discussion of ideology is
always attached to the idea of false consciousness. Ideology is a powerful
mechanism that exerts control over the people, specifically the oppressed
classes who are forced to accept the ideology of the ruling class. The use of the
word "false" is actually to state that what they receive is not the ideology of
their own class but the ideology of the powerful classes in society.
The Marxist analysis asserts that media is an instrument of the ruling
classes. It is a purveyor of ideas that represent the interests of the ruling elite
and the powerful media institutions are actually equated to be the
representative of the ruling elite. There have been some revisions to the idea of
classical Marxism that talks about false consciousness. Antonio Gramsci
(1977) favored the idea of hegemony over the idea of false consciousness, and
posited it as the intersection of power, culture, and ideology. In other words,
the ruling classes willfully combine persuasion and power to enforce its
ideology over the masses. Persuasion enforces consent and it is media's
cultural leadership that enforces this, as they produce and reproduce ways of
thinking. Think of a more subtle process where tools and techniques for
attracting and convincing audiences and users are invoked. By deploying
common sense, media constructs a world that implicity says this is the norm,
the acceptable, and the socially appropriate.
Stuart Hall, sociologist and cultural theorist, offers a very compelling
analysis of how media media institutions exercise the hegemony we are now
trying to understand. He says messages do not reflect the world as it is, rather
they represent it. It is tied to the idea of construction as we discussed in an
earlier chapter where there is the active work of selecting, structuring, shaping,
and infusing new meaning, As Barker (2004, 177) asserts:
"...representations are not innocent reflections of the real but are cultural
constructions, they could be otherwise than they appear to us. Here
representation is intrinsically bound up with questions of power through the
process of selection and organization that must inevitably be a part of the
formation of representations."

Ideological State Apparatus

Gramsci and Althusser negated Marx's view that social and political
institutions including the state and their interactions, as well as the ideas,
values, and beliefs of a society, are solely determined by the economic
structures and activities of society. They both argue that the superstructure of
society enjoys a degree of autonomy from its economic base and the
relationship between ideas and economic and class interests is not always
linear. The cultural institutions like media, religion, and the cultural system,
and structures in charge of imparting ideology, operate independent of the
economic structure and this is the reason they enjoy popular acceptance.
Althusser proceeded further by theorizing how the media and other
ideological state apparatuses work to reproduce the dominant ideology. He was
interested in understanding the means by which the ruling class ruled as well
as how the dominant ideology shaped people's perceptions of the world.
For Althusser, the media manufacture an imaginary picture of the real
conditions of capitalism for their audiences and in the process hide the true
nature of their exploitation. For instance, take a look at our narrative fiction,
particularly the soap operas, and see how most of the protagonists are
stakeholders of huge companies involved in businesses and even
conglomerates. The boardroom scenes are a typical in almost all local soap
operas-there are feuding camps conniving against the protagonist who could be
heir which is apparent to the leadership of the company. Regular audiences of
teleserye become too engrossed with the travails of the protagonist and turn
oblivious to the other implications of the scene, such as how profit rules over
the motivations of both protagonists and antagonists, which is enough to
implicate collusion and conspiracy with the villains of the narrative. The
frequency of such representations of board meetings make it an acceptable
practice and conceal the true nature of capitalist interactions in an
environment governed by desires for profit and power.
Althusser dismisses the claims of Marx about false consciousness.
Instead, he sees consciousness as something that structures people's lived
experiences. The ideological state apparatus, previously labeled as
superstructure in classical Marxist theory, is now the ideological state
apparatus. Coercion passes through repressive state apparatuses (e.g., the
army and the police) to maintain the power of the ruling class but it is the
ideological state apparatuses that are more resilient in the exercise of their
functions to ensure that power remains in the hands of the ruling class.
The way that media behaves as part of the ideological state apparatus is
through their messages on how they produce particular forms of consciousness
on how people should act, behave, and think because of dominant
representations of groups and behaviors in media. Media normalize practices,
behaviors, and representations in a variety of ways.
Aside from the boardroom representation in soap operas, what are the
ways in which the ruling class ideology is portrayed in media?

Media as Purveyor of Dominant Ideology

In the previous section, we introduced the idea of media texts as carrier
of ideological messages, specifically those that favor the ruling class. Today,
there seems to be a debate: there are those who argue that media promote the
interests of the ruling classes, the most powerful segments of society, thereby
carrying the dominant ideology; on the other hand, there are those who assert
that media texts can also contain the messages that challenge existing
worldviews other than that of the powerful classes. It is a matter of how the
media texts were created.
Take the case of soap operas as we discussed in the previous section.
While some have viewed it as displaying the rich and lavish lifestyles of the
ruling classes, others see its emancipatory potential, especially recently that
the lives of the oppressed and dispossessed are represented, they who face off
with the powerful and chart an alternative course for what could have
otherwise been marginalized lives.
We propose to think of media texts as sites where no one single reading
should be considered as definitive. The context of the viewer plays a significant
part in how he or she formulate and articulate the meanings that he or she
makes of the media texts. It is also dependent on the media infrastructures
that undergird the creation, production, and dissemination of media texts.
Some ideological perspectives are packaged more attractively, and are
disseminated using effective channels and thus gain more mileage and
prominence. Other ideological perspectives lag behind because their packaging
lack the mileage or that the dissemination is limited or the resources expended
for effective dissemination are also limited. In effect, these ideological messages
are lurking and designated to stay in the margins until such time that they are
discovered. Media remain to be a site of negotiation and contestation.
One thing is clear: all sectors of society are engaged in the promotion of
certain ideological viewpoints. Big businesses, religious organizations, civil
society organizations, activists, scientists, and artists-all of them seek to
further the promotion of the ideological views they hold and seek media as a
platform to disseminate it.
Let us try to contextualize this in the local setting. For instance, in the
realm of the family, the culture wars manifest themselves on how the
reproductive health bill, otherwise known as Republic Act 10354, was played
out in the public sphere with two competing ideas-one that favored its
legislation, mostly women's groups and civil society organizations pushing for
reform; and second, the pro-life movement which the Catholic Church has
routinely taught that family planning is against the teachings of the Church.
Both took the battle to the media to inform the public about their positions,
hoping to generate support.
Ideology in Stereotyping
Stereotyping is an overarching belief about the characteristics of a
certain group in society. Members of a group are attributed certain
characteristics. Most of the time these characteristics are widely held as true
and is an oversimplified image of a group or a person belonging to a certain
group.
It was a journalist in the United States, Walter Lippman, who first used
the term "stereotype" in 1922. He referred to stereotypes as "pictures in our
heads" which we use to organize our perceptions of the world and those people
in our world. It is actually a very assistive device in building expectations of
others, how they should behave, and how groups actually represent itself in a
bigger society.
Stereotypes are forms of characterization that are also memorable and
widely patronized by many. The Visayan house helper, for instance, is a
recognizable type in movies and television. Most of the time the house helper is
a woman, talks with the characteristic inflection, and is presented as someone
sloppy and clumsy with her work. The production and reproduction of the
stereotypes has important implications, both for the Visayans and for house
helpers as an occupation. Some media scholars argue that these stereotyping
practices stigmatize marginalized groups. There is an enormous possibility that
it will negatively typify the Visayan as household helper-making her act as a
clumsy, unthinking workhorse around the house and will degrade a work that
has significantly contributed to the smooth functioning of the household.
Stereotyping then is never neutral or value-free. In most cases, forms of
stereotyping in the media reinforce the marginalized status of certain sectors,
and impose a double marginalization on those whose freedoms and dignity are
traditionally degraded because of poverty and exclusion. Some stereotypes are
attacked because they do not really convey the glaring realities faced by a
particular group of people. When media present the followers of the Islamic
faith as "terrorists," they are missing out on how the Islamic faith preaches
peace and cultural acceptance, and that the majority of Muslims are
themselves caught in the crossfire and are also desirous of peace.
However, stereotypes are not always negative. In fact, some are rather
positive representations worthy of emulation (e.g., the stereotype that Ilokanos
are really hardworking and diligent people or the notion that nerds are
naturally studious and diligent with their studies). However, current practices
point us to the reality that more often than mot, the media help perpetuate the
ascription of negative traits because it generates drama, Comedy, or simply
spectacle. Stereotyping can become too rigid and constraining, limiting the
roles, responsibilities, and potentials individuals can play in their everyday
lives.