In the foreword to his book Amusing Ourselves to Death Neil Postman differentiates between George Orwell’s and Aldous Huxley’s prophesies for the future. Postman devotes the remainder of his book to demonstrating how Huxley, not Orwell, is right. The following excerpt from Postman’s foreword illustrates how he views these contrasting perspectives:

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.”

Postman argues that the media and its ability to amuse us has played an enormous role in our becoming a bibliophobic, information-gluttonous culture for whom truth is as interesting as reruns of Flipper. If Postman is correct, how can we square off with this nearly ubiquitous force? Increase our media literacy.

Years ago I met with a group of teens in a focus group. Part of our conversation included a discussion about the media. One of the teens admonished, “Nothing makes teens angrier than when they realize something is controlling them. If you want teens to resist the power of the media, help them see the ways the media controls them!” He had a point. Teens despise control; recognize how the media controls them and teens might be less likely to fall prey to the media’s persuasion. This is part of the picture, but I think we can build on it.

Media literacy is similar to reading literacy: to be more literate we must grasp the languages to such a degree that we’re able to comprehend the meaning implicit in their message. We must pay close attention not only to what they say, but how they deliver their message. A person is more literate in regard to reading when she is able to not merely read the words, but can grasp the craft of writing, language, plot development, and context. Media literacy is more than hearing and understanding the message from the media. We can broaden our media literacy, as we do with reading literacy, by examining the modes by which media communicate their message.

Grab a magazine and flip to an advertisement. What is the message of the advertisement? Now consider how the ad delivers its message. What tactics does the ad employ to endear you to the product? Where in the magazine does the ad appear and why would that matter? Consider what you would see if you could broaden the frames of the photography in the ad. What are they not showing in the ad and why? What don’t they include in this pseudo-reality that we know to be true about real reality? We can develop similar questions for other media that can help us expand our media literacy.

The media’s power to warp reality is alarming. Yet the task of developing media literacy is not anti-media: It is a quest to understand what the media does to us and its potential to erode our autonomy as free-thinking individuals grounded in reality. A camera, for example, cannot capture reality. “Not only can the camera lie; it always lies,” goes Malcolm Muggeridge’s famous saying. Yet we can readily confuse the images for what is real and true.

What are we to do? We gain independence from the media and regain a footing in reality when we work to comprehend the media languages and how they communicate their messages. We then not only understand media messages, more importantly, we recognize how the media communicates.

Boosting our media literacy is a worthy and difficult task. For more reading on this topic, consider reading more of Neil Postman’s work. Propaganda and The Technological Society, by Jacques Ellul, also address this topic with remarkable clarity.

Tags: analytic thinking, educational reform, media literacy