Page 263 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2

| Med a L teracy: Creat ng Better C t zens or Better Consumers?

culture created by commercial industries has now become the culture in which
we all grow up, rather than something that stands outside, or on the margins, of
culture itself.
A third strategic debate in the media literacy movement is about whether
media education can best operate within traditional school settings. While
schools do represent the most organized and widespread method of formal
education in industrialized nations, critics argue that the central mission of
schools is to reproduce the status quo and reinforce existing social hierarchies.
Scholars like Henry Giroux point out that learning does not take place only
in schools but that the media themselves offer powerful stories, information,
arguments, and images that teach us about the world and our place in it. Fur-
thermore, since media affect us all, media literacy should not be considered an
educational project that is only meaningful to children. Those who suggest that
media literacy is needed for adults as well as children therefore argue that it
must be developed both inside and outside of traditional educational settings.
Finally, media literacy proponents also differ on whether media literacy is
most effective when it is taught as a stand-alone, self-contained subject area or
whether it should be integrated throughout the curriculum. Some educators
suggest that media are so pervasive, and have such a powerful impact on our
understanding of the world, that the topic must be addressed in fields such as
history, civics, science, literature, and so on. Others, however, suggest that media
deserve focused critical attention all on their own. These educators worry that a
purely integrative approach runs the risk of avoiding important questions about
the media themselves while marginalizing key issues related to media and the
role they play in shaping our identities and our societies.

mEDia EDuCaTion goaLs

The first of the debates about media education goals revolves around the ques-
tion of whether media literacy should adopt a so-called protectionist stance. In
other words, should it be about protecting people, primarily children, from the
negative influence of mass media in promoting violence, irresponsible sexual
behavior, unhealthy eating habits, sexist and racist stereotypes, and the like? Or
does this sort of approach run the risk of alienating students who do take real
pleasure in the media that they use on a daily basis?
Another central question about the goals of media literacy is whether media
education should have an explicit political agenda. Some in the media literacy
movement claim that it is possible, indeed desirable, for media education to be
nonideological—focused on developing autonomous critical thinking among
students without embracing a particular point of view. Others, however, argue
that there is simply no such thing as purely autonomous thinking and that all of
our understandings of the world are embedded within unstated ideological as-
sumptions. These educators believe it is impossible to address the role of the media
in society without acknowledging social inequality and hierarchies of power.
A third debate, which at its core is about the goals of media education, is
about the role of corporate funding of media literacy projects and curricula.