Page 306 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2

Nat onal sm and the Med a |

aMerican idol
Though based on the British Pop Idol, American Idol (FOX, 2002–) has been thoroughly
Americanized. The reality competition program’s promise to take a “nobody” on a ride from
obscurity to fame and fortune attempts to enact and perform the American dream, whereby
“anyone can make it.” In the early stages, auditions are held in various cities, leading pro-
ducers and host Ryan Seacrest to suggest that the show includes “America’s best,” and that
it represents the nation. Then, when viewers’ votes are tabulated, Seacrest announces gran-
diosely that, “America has voted.” Seacrest is particularly fond of this phrase when counter-
ing the audience’s vote to the bluntly honest evaluations of judge Simon Cowell, who as a
Briton is made iconic of a dictatorial elite snobbery that is then contrasted to the supposed
democratic openness and supportiveness of American voters, the live studio audience, and
the two American judges. While the show launches a young performer’s career as a pop mu-
sician, then, it also fashions a powerful myth of the American dream, American democracy
and stated love of diversity, and foreign elitism.

1970s through media such as I Love Lucy, Jimi Hendrix albums, or Saturday
Night Fever, respectively. Similarly, our political system and America’s allegiance
to democracy and capitalism become embedded in certain media narratives,
whether overtly or subtly. All the while, the fires of national supremacy and
superiority are quite often stoked by romanticized retellings of moments in
history—as in U571, a film that rewrites the capture of the German enigma ma-
chine in World War II as an American, not British, accomplishment—and by
replaying moments of legitimate triumph, as in national sporting events. For
better or worse, few things are as capable of waving the flag as are the media.
As a result, numerous leaders have discovered ways to manipulate the media
directly, or via falsified information, in order to fashion the nation in their pre-
ferred image. From fear mongering to censorship, savvy and powerful leaders
can frame the agenda for media discussion, especially in journalism. Particularly
if the press is weak or acquiescent, political leaders can literally edit recent his-
tory for their own purposes, with the media becoming either a knowing or un-
witting accomplice. Indeed, in times of war or national crisis, leaders have often
called upon the media to do their “national duty” by putting the requirements
of nationalism and patriotism “before” journalistic ethics, as if a commitment
to journalistic ethics was not itself a patriotic act. Hence, for instance, following
the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, journalists were encouraged and/or
shamed into reporting favorably on the administration and its policies, lest they
appear “anti-American.” At times like this, one wonders if the media regards its
duties as those of journalistic vigilance, or of flag-waving.

ExCLusion anD inCLusion

The media also holds considerable power to determine who belongs in the
nation and who does not. Identity often works through “alterity,” meaning that we
all tend to identify ourselves by who and what we are not. Thus, as an instrument