Political Economy is an important approach towards Engstrom’s research because it provides a motive as to why corporations like The Knot propose specific ideas for individuals. As Enstrom argues, “The Knot creates an image of perfection that one can achieve through the purchasing of the corrects items”.[5] With this hegemonic ideal promoted on individuals, this in turn, discredits wedding styles that counter the ‘assumed’ wedding formula. Going against this wedding formula would create losses for benefactors of The Knot. This perfect wedding ideal imposed on individuals also links back to the previous paragraph, where a wedding is tied to achieving a status of a higher social class just for the night, an illusion in itself.[6] Thus, a political economy approach shows more evidentiary support to direct a motive for promoting hegemony in wedding media. 

            The main take-away from this article is that the wedding industry is on the surface very shallow and only seems to focus on material possessions, but it is far more complex than that. Following Engstrom’s political economy approach I was able to see the hegemonic ideals enforced on society and how synergistic corporations, like The Knot, do this. The media ties to the books, which ties to the television show, and then loop back around to the blog, and so on. This cycle reinforces hegemonic ideals that in order for women to be fulfilled, they must follow a formula in which they spend a certain amount to achieve a fantasy of material spectacle. This belief is only instilled in women, as weddings are in the female sphere. Men are able to hold value through their education, their career, and achievements in the public sphere. Even modern women who have successful corporate careers are expected to ‘have it all’ with a perfect wedding, while this sentiment does not apply the same to men. 

[1] Erika Engstrom, “Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media,” Journal of Communication Inquiry 32, no. 1 (Janurary 2008): 60-82. [2] Engstrom, "Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media", 60-82. [3] Engstrom, "Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media", 60-82. [4] Engstrom, "Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media", 60-82. [5] Engstrom, "Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media", 60-82. [6] Engstrom, "Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media", 60-82.

            Ross writes, “Of the clouds and shadows that hung-over Clinton in the press, the darkest, perhaps, was the prospect of boredom.”[1]

            What Ross means by this is no matter how much Trump’s rhetoric was polarizing and discriminatory, his image was still glamorized in the media. This in comparison to Clinton who was running a classic political campaign as past Secretary of the State was not as appealing to consumers according to the culture industry. This appeal is what Ross rationalizes, “The mechanism by which people support a political program ‘largely incompatible with their own rational self-interest,’”[2] The power of mass culture as the Frankfurt School argues is its distracting quality and its push to hegemonic ideals.[3] Ross’s argument relates to the Frankfurt School because his argument is embedded in Adorno and his beliefs. Ross just further implements the arguments of the Frankfurt School and their argument of mass culture by providing a current example of it. 

[1] Alex Ross, “The Frankfurt School Knew Trump was Coming,” The New Yorker, December 5, 2016, https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-frankfurt-school-knew-trump-was-coming. [2] Ross, "The Frankfurt School Knew Trump was Coming." [3] Brett Mills & David M. Barlow, "The Frankfurt School," in Reading Media Theory: Thinkers, Approaches & Context. (Abingdon & New: Routleddge, 2013), 84-102.

Another recent example of fan activism is the boycotting of the release of the live-action Mulan movie on Disney plus and other streaming services. This activism was warranted for different reasons. The first being that the representation on screen did not reflect the representation behind the scenes.[3] Representation of people of color is currently shifting in the media space and is becoming part of the dominant code in recent times. The new live-action film garnered positive attention at first for this reason. However, while the film represented Chinese people on screen there was no influence by people of color behind the camera. The movie was written and directed by white people and many fans felt Mulan did not deserve to be put up on a pedestal for their inclusion of people of color. The film also lost support by fans after leading actress Liu Yifei shared a statement supporting the government of China against the Honk Kong protests.[4] Months of civil unrest in Hong Kong last year were against the implementation of extradition from Hong Kong to mainland China.[5]  The actress being outspoken in her support to the Hong Kong police created a loss for the film with an initial boycott. This grew when fans saw in the credits the use of actual Chinese locations in the movie, specifically the Xinjiang province, where the government is currently oppressing the Uyghur population.[6] The use of internment camps is an example of a current day genocide in which this marginalized population is being tortured and are being forcibly sterilized because of their belief system. This boycott by many fans resulted in the movie making $64.4 million while their budget was $200 million creating a 68% deficit for Disney.

[1] Emma Kelly, “Stop Dismissing the K-pop Fandom’s Political Power,” Bitch Media, June 11, 2020, https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/k-pop-fandom-political-force. [2] Brett Mills & David M. Barlow, "The Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies," in Reading Media Theory: Thinkers, Approaches & Context. (Abingdon & New: Routleddge, 2013), 225-259. [3] "Mulan (2020) Cast and production information," IMDB, accessed October 13, 2020 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4566758/. [4] "Mulan: Why Disney's latest reboot is facing boycott calls" BBC News,  September 4, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-54024810. [5] "Mulan: Why Disney's latest reboot is facing boycott calls" BBC News,  September 4, 2020. [6] "Disney criticised for filming in China's Xinjang province," BBC News, September 7, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-54064654.

[1] John Storey, “6 Structuralism and post-structuralism,” in Cultural Theory and Popular Culture 8^th Edition (Abingdon & New York: Routledge, 2018), 116-131.

            The media text that illustrates the first Ouellette and Hay quote is TLC’s show What Not to Wear, who feature Stacy London and Clinton Kelly. The show often features a woman who has been nominated by their friends or family. The style experts give a background of the participant and their life and the main issues with their clothing, then they surprise the participants and go through a week-long process in which they can buy a new wardrobe for $5,000 but must follow the rules of the style experts. The show exemplifies the quote above as it provides the audience a tutorial as to how to dress properly and “what not to wear” with explanations by style experts as to why specific clothing is not appropriate for people. Throughout the episode the participant is transformed and is generally shown to have an increased confidence and while they are hesitant by the end of the process, they are happier than they were before. This further instills to the audience that in order to be empowered and be confident in yourself that you must dress the way the proper way and by following the rules of the show, the responsibility is on the individual. 

            Social media is an example of governmentality as behaviors that do not receive approval through general consensus are labelled as ‘cancelled’ by different communities. The issue with governmentality on social media is that individuals can be cancelled for minor offenses, but still face the same consequences or even more outlash than someone who has committed a major offence. An example of this is when users on the app TikTok ‘cancel’ specific influencers with large followings when they have gone against the social norms. This can include serious issues such as, when influencers have inappropriate behavior towards minors or saying the n-word when the influencer is not black. However, this cancellation can also extend to influencers for vomiting when trying to eat snails and wanting to achieve a 100 million follower milestone. [3] These ‘cancellations’ of these influencers for their incorrect behavior is an example of governmentality because the social media platforms in which these users grew a large following do not participate, the responsibility to self-govern is instilled in the other users who try to de-platform these problematic influencers. While it is important to de-platform individuals for their toxic behavior in grooming minors, especially on an app dominated with a younger demographic, this sentiment should not be equated to minor offences, if they can even be categorized as that. 

[1]   Laurie Oullete & James Hay, “Makeover television, governmentality and the good citizen,” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 22:4, 471-484. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304310801982930.  [2] Ouellette & Hay, "Makeover television, govnernmentality and the good citizen," 474. [3] Ellissa Bain, “Why are the D’amelio’s ‘cancelled’? Charli and Dixie under fire following dinner party video!” HITC, November 19, 2020, https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/11/19/damelios-cancelled/. 

            The second most important concept of this week is popular feminism. In this situation, the complexities of feminism are commodified to a digestible version for the general public and women can be exploited and empowered simultaneously.[4] Women are exploited by popular feminism catering to the ‘aesthetic’ of being a feminist by creating merchandise for feminism and being a ‘girl boss’ with badges, stickers, mugs, etc. At the same time, these women are empowered because are to be confident in themselves and these products signify taking a stance in regard to human rights as woman. This is important because often misogyny is disguised through popular feminism as women are expected to hold more responsibilities in the workforce while still performing femininity in their standards of beauty and the wage gap being present.

            These two concepts help us understand the representation of gender in media culture, as the male gaze is the traditional way in which women are portrayed in media yet in the past couple decades there has been a shift in a digestible empowerment. Some portrayals of women also take on a postfeminist viewpoint in which the equality for women in the public sphere has already been achieved and is shown through the use of successful women in their profession. An example of this being, Scandal and Sex and the City. In both of these cases, leading women are empowered in their careers, yet they still are complicit in the patriarchal ideals of finding love and fulfillment in a man and conform to female standards of beauty. A more recent example of this being the Netflix show, Emily in Paris, in which a white, thin, beautiful Lily Collins plays a successful marketing executive Emily Cooper who finds newfound recognition as a social media influencer. However, her issues are still tied to the hegemonic ideas of the patriarchy as her female boss being highly competitive with Emily with men and professionally, and Emily ultimately falling in love with her friend’s boyfriend. Here the influence of the male gaze seep into popular feminism and the representation of women in media. 

[1] Alison Harvey, “Representing Gender,” in Feminist Media Studies, (Wiley, 2019), 58-83. [2] Harvey, “Representing Gender,” 58-83.  [3] Brett Mills & David M. Barlow, "The Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies," in Reading Media Theory: Thinkers, Approaches & Context. (Abingdon & New: Routleddge, 2013), 225-259. [4] Sarah Banet-Weiser, "Popular misognyny: a zeitgeist," Culture Digitally, January 21, 2015, https://culturedigitally.org/2015/01/popular-misogyny-a-zeitgeist/.

            The two most compelling arguments I felt from this documentary were the critical lens developed by individuals who are part of marginalized communities, and why trans representation leads to less death. The first argument is that media is catered to men and thus when you don’t follow that perspective you develop a critical lens to consume media because images on your screen are not your life. This ties back to Harvey and the idea of the passive male gaze individuals are expected to view media from.[4] Much like women, trans people also have stereotypes enforced on them, that they are sexual perverted, or they are psychopathic serial killers.[5] From Disclosure’s first argument, Harvey argues the same, “The oppositional gaze reminds us that audiences can develop strategies resistance and derive pleasure from the act of undermining dominant messages, by engaging with them and therefore resisting their power.”[6] The second argument Disclosure poses is why trans representation leads to less disproportionate towards trans people. As we see throughout the film, most of the representation of trans women in film is done by cis men. This promotes the narrative that trans women are not women and are just cis men with really good hair and makeup. When you see trans actors, like Laverne Cox, who looks just as glamorous off-screen as she does on-screen it combats this greater narrative. This argument relates to Harvey’s concept of symbolic annihilation. Just as the representation of women is often limited within stereotypes or is generally missing in media, this symbolic annihilation is amplified even more so towards trans people.[7]

[1] Disclosure, directed by Sam Feder (2020: Bow & Arrow/Netflix, 2020) https://www.netflix.com/watch/81284247?trackId=13752289&tctx=0%2C0%2C1063259b1c770aa3e319db23235e84b9cd3f899a%3A86cf472bafdbdb9b380633dfa80222debb7ef2bc%2C1063259b1c770aa3e319db23235e84b9cd3f899a%3A86cf472bafdbdb9b380633dfa80222debb7ef2bc%2C%2C.[2] Disclosure, Feder, 2020 Netflix. [3] Disclosure, Feder, 2020 Netflix.[4] Alison Harvey, “Representing Gender,” in Feminist Media Studies, (Wiley, 2019), 58-83. [5] Disclosure, Feder, 2020 Netflix.[6] Harvey, “Representing Gender,” 58-83. [7] Harvey, “Representing Gender,” 58-83. 

            “The contemporary crises of identity in the West, especially as experienced by white youth, are eased when the “primitive” is recouped via a focus on diversity and pluralism which suggests the Other can provide life-sustaining alternatives.”[3] This quote stood out to me the most because of my journey to viewing my white privilege in society. As an immigrant from Venezuela who grew up in Alberta, I always felt the need to distance myself from white Canadians arguing that I actually have culture. The homogeneity of white Albertans doesn’t value culture in the same way that I do, yet I also benefit by blending in. Going to a predominantly white high school in Calgary amplified the need to differentiate myself. However, I emphasize Latino people can be a variety of shades and just because I have a slight tan doesn’t define me as a person of color and I will never be oppressed in the same way. As a white- passing immigrant, I’m not told to go back to my country for speaking Spanish in public, if anything people find it an ‘exotic side’ of my identity. This treatment is not extended to people of color, my dad who is brown and has a thicker accent is often assumed that he is an immigrant, from the Middle East, while my blonde white mother who also has an accent is assumed to be from Quebec or France. The double standard as to whose culture is valued is quickly noticeable from this experience. 

[1] Bell Hooks, "Eating the Other: Desries and resistance" in Black Looks: Race and Representation. (Boston: South End Press, 1992), 21-39.  [2] Hooks, "Eating the Other," 21-39 [3] Hooks, "Eating the Other," 21-39

            The biggest take-away from this week’s content is that in order for activism in regard to BLM to become more effective online, social media platforms and search engines need to restructure the way information is presented to users.[6] From Noble’s article the key question is placed, “Since we are so reliant on search engines for providing trusted information shouldn’t we question the ways in which ‘information’ is offered up to the highest bidder that can buy the search term and portray it in any way they want?”[7] While in Noble’s article she focuses on the search engines and how they misrepresent women of color, the same argument can be extended to the algorithms that cater information to users on social media platforms. I credit these social media companies and their algorithms with polarizing users because of the trusting nature users have to information they consume. If people are only presented one viewpoint of a bipartisan issue, like a pandemic that discredits social distancing, masks and vaccines, these users will have a harder time following a government mandate. This is because social media is a form of an echo chamber in which similar viewpoints are the only ones presented and perspective to the general consensus is lost. 

[1] Sarah Jackson, Moya Bailey, and Brooke Foucault Welles, "From #Ferguson to #FalconHeights: The Networked Case for Black Lives," in #Hashtag Activism: Networks of Race and Gender Justice. (The MIT Press: Cambridge, 2020), 123-152. [2] Michael Barbaro and Kevin Roose "How Facebook is Undermining ‘Black Lives Matter,'" June 22, 2020, in The Daily, produced by The New York Times, podcast, Mp3 audio, 0:28:50, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/podcasts/the-daily/facebook-twitter-black-lives-matter-trump.html." [3] Barbaro and Roose, "How Facebook is Undermining ‘Black Lives Matter,’" 0:28:50. [4] Jackson, et al., "From #Ferguson to #FalconHeights: The Networked Case for Black Lives," 123-152. [5] Jackson, et al., "From #Ferguson to #FalconHeights: The Networked Case for Black," 123-152. [6] Barbaro and Roose, "How Facebook is Undermining ‘Black Lives Matter'," 0:28:50. [7] Safiya Noble, "Missed Connections: What Search Engines Say About Women" Bitch Media, Spring 2012, 36-41. 

            I believe the concept of hegemony while something I was generally familiar with from a previous class, Adorno and Horkheimer’s argument of the culture industry and the authentic and inauthentic culture changed the way I perceived media. Horkheimer and Adorno argue, “Culture today is infecting everything with sameness… Each branch of culture is unanimous within itself and all are unanimous together.” [3] After going through this reading, it reminded me how much social media has changed, and how a free platform is not free when the influencers you look towards for inspiration are constantly bombarding you with sponsored posts. Influencers and bloggers no matter what their branding is can be categorized even to the same items. The Instagram page, shitbloggerspost, exemplifies how the same products and aesthetic are posted by multiple bloggers that range from tens of thousands to a million followers on Instagram. All these influencers grew large following for different reasons, yet our culture is infiltrated with so much hegemony and need to conform that they all inadvertently curate the same products, all to profit off the users who follow them. 

            I would argue that Harvey’s, Representing Gender, holds the greatest importance in the course because it explains many concepts in relation to representing women in media. These concepts include tokenism, othering, stereo/countertypes, importance of representation, symbolic annihilation, the male gaze, feminine beauty, and post-feminism.[4] I based a lot of my semiotic analysis on this reading and although it is a longer read it defines and explains so many concepts and as a man it made me even more aware than I already was of the privilege I have. I also believe this reading holds greater significance because it easily ties back to critical media studies and its focus on media and its relation to society and power. Core concepts like hegemony, governmentality, cultural studies, semiotics, discursive frameworks and critical race theory can all also be related back to this reading because of the depth it carries and extends into real life. After finishing this course, I will approach media differently by adopting a more critical lens as to why certain people and products are curated and promoted towards me and what that says about me and the values I hold. In this time, social media can be very polarizing with the pandemic because of the lack of contact people have with the outside world at the moment. This lack of contact I believe can create a false perception of reality. Thus, I will be more aware of who I am following, and ask myself do they represent the world around me or have just I curated a feed of conventionally attractive thin white people and fallen prey to the hegemonic ideals of society?

[1] Erika Engstrom, “Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media,” Journal of Communication Inquiry 32, no. 1 (Janurary 2008): 60-82. [2] Engstrom, “Political Economy and Cultural Hegemony in Wedding Media,” 60-82. [3] Brett Mills & David M. Barlow, "The Frankfurt School," in Reading Media Theory: Thinkers, Approaches & Context. (Abingdon & New: Routleddge, 2013), 84-102. [4] Alison Harvey, “Representing Gender,” in Feminist Media Studies, (Wiley, 2019), 58-83.