It's incredible how many times I've had to explain myself. "Yes, I'm gay but no, I don't care all that much about fashion or musical theatre and no, I don't wave my hands all over the room. Those are stereotypes, that is one of many ways to be gay. There is no single way to be an engineer, there is also no single way to be gay."
this should be taught in elementary school. no joke this is a huge blind spot on all 8 and 9 year olds. not every parent even *thinks* to explain this reality to their children.
Seriously the talking points and information presented in this series is increasingly important in today’s day and age I think so many others would benefit from exposure to this show.
I couldn't name a singular CrashCourse series I love either. I love them all too! I can't even imagine the amount of time and effort that goes into the scripts, but that does not stop me from appreciating them every episode I watch ^^ Have a great day everyone!
I think another factor behind representation is the experience of writers in their chosen medium. For instance, if someone is a playwright and they want to write a gay character, chances are the people they’ve surrounded themselves with are also into theatre and some may be gay. Because of this, even gay characters based on real people can fulfill stereotypes (such as the gay theatre buff) because of the writer’s limited worldview.
A good reminder of why people lean on using stereotypes, and to always critique the creator. We all have agendas, if you go in with eyes open, you can choose what you want to take or leave from each piece of media. Where/who the money comes from can tell a lot about the agenda. Good to teach our kids how to critically evaluate media too! Doesn’t mean not curiously exploring other viewpoints, but to be aware of how certain messages trigger us, your mind on media, and to be aware of them so not sleepwalking through experience.
Wesley Whiteside I can’t speak to the gay stereotype in particular, but Jay’s explanation that stereotypes allow us not to have to think, and assume all folks in a particular group are the same was what I was addressing.
I love this. As a design student, it feels super relevant to everything I am learning and doing right now. I really appreciate your discussion of the need for more empathy driven representations of diverse peoples and cultures. Will the series get more in-depth into visual rhetoric and semiotic theory?
I would imagine it's taken as assumed from his earlier definition of the media he was talking about, which I believe this fits the definition of. At some point, assurances of bias might come across as a hollow confidence building technique. Kind of like how that "Spirit Science" guy is always like, "Now I'm just presenting ideas, I want you to do the research yourself, but isn't it funny how the moon is hollow and rings like a bell because it's filled with a hidden artificial structure and Martians invaded Atlantis?"
Larry Douglas I wondered if that was the case. But money is a new issue, and I think it makes sense. Not just for self awareness, but also to fill in the blanks. Even if it’s just a one liner to help demonstrate the point.
Benjamin McGrath- You know, in that light, and after watching the whole thing I don't think it would have been out of place. He also ran into things like racial issues even bordering on editorializing. I would have liked to see some sources referenced to back up some of those claims (Not that anything he said is patently false from my understanding, but on no one's word)
I really appreciate this episode, in particular that the depiction of gays in the media is addressed specifically. As a gay male who was a teen when Will & Grace was at its height, I was really put off by the show because I couldn't identify with the characters, and it's not the only example, just the most vivid one. While I enjoy watching a play or musical from time to time, I've never been one for showtunes; I like rock, jazz, classical, and even a little bit of heavy metal. I may have a good eye for color and be able to help friends pick out clothes, but I don't dress like it--I'm more interested comfort and budget. I'm not skinny, I don't have short carefully trimmed hair, and at the time I wasn't clean-shaven. (I've also never liked light beer, but we'll skip over the underage drinking part.) I've heard people praise the show, but it left me with more feelings of alienation: in the early 2000s there were still plenty of negative things going around about gay people, but I didn't see any gay people like me in the media, even the supposedly "positive" examples, who were often reduced to punchlines anyway. Even a couple of years later in college near Philadelphia, I found it hard to fit in with the actual gay community, and I can't help thinking that popular media portrayals of gay stereotypes, no matter how "positive" were reinforced so much that they were internalized by the gay community, whether as ways of identifying each other or as ways of being a "good gay." There were no examples of an overweight, long-haired rock & roll type of gay guy in the media, and nobody knew what to do with me. (At least it's a bit better now.) Things like this have given me more appreciation for characters who are well-rounded, where such a piece of identity is a trait rather than the defining feature of the character. It's also opened me up to looking more critically at how other groups are portrayed in the media, especially in comedy: is someone's identity part of their character, or is it just a punchline?
This isn't about a gay character, but a gay person who I guess does not fit the stereotypical gay mold. His name is Mark Oshiro, and he watches and reads various media and analyzes them. He has also written a book. Anyway, in his analyses, he's shared some of his experiences, some of them tied with being gay. Your comment about being a gay person into heavy metal and not being a "good gay" reminded me of him. He has a channel on RUclips (Mark Oshiro). I watch him read some of my favorite books on it.
I understand your point of view, but I have never felt such. From all the sows, cartoons, movies, album covers I have seen trough out the years I do not recall to identify with any of the characters I've seen (ok, maybe Manowar cover from Kings of Metal). I remember enjoying the stories and thinking about whatever joke or message there was being transmitted, or if just time consuming entertainment. Remember playing with the He-man sword and superman cape, and perhaps thinking that Hank Moody was suspiciously copying some of my habits. As such and for what I can think off, humans are so diverse in form, biography, and values, that it is impossible to re-create or generalize any single human. I do think the writers of Will & Grace, tried to make some jokes - not very good ones- tried to place some characters so the type of jokes could be performed, choosing a target, a message and a medium (in that order being the medium the actors). After the show aired up, the people recognized themselves on that character, as, I think, is much easier to be told/shown how to do/act (not just biologically, but society formats people to act that way), than to take the risks, or the work to research, think, criticize so to create their own path. So I think those kind of labels to one self, are not created by the media, but by the persons who are, in my view, not able to find their own path and subject themselves to a label, to be part of a minority (actively look for it).
On the one hand, I'm very happy that a CC video that mentions race is a thing that affects society isn't vote-bombed like CC Sociology. On the other hand, the comments are still full of angry people, and the fact that this show is hosted by a guy instead of a woman might have something to do with the numbers. Cue angry people responding to this post that points them out, invariably proving the argument I'm making with knee-jerk defensive responses...
8:46 - super powerful, there’s the main benefit of social media for humanity’s development - more cooperation across borders due to exposure to those from other groups
reeaallly appreciate the fact this subject was added to this channel. When I first saw this guy i was thinking "WTF? Where's Hank?!" but after watching all 6 episodes released, I like Jay Smooth a lot. Anxiously awaiting the next episode today...
Imho, while it's the responsibility of the consumers to analyze their media properly, I firmly believe it's also the job of content creators to be responsible for the media they create. Stereotypes will always exist regardless of your political leanings or values, but I think it'd be more helpful for the industry's creativity if such ideas were not constantly recycled or other ideas were explored. Ideally, content creators should be more worried about the message of their products rather than making money.
Social media has changed things, which is why the ruling elite are cracking down on independent voices on social media. Adpocalypse is an example of this.
Good show. But its not lost on me that THIS is media created by a "who, how, and for what reason" - and I don't think its a purely selfless effort to educate young people. I did enjoy it though!
People do all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons. If you try to reduce all media into binaries of good or evil you will always find evil. The way we see social interactions is invariably tied to egoistic or selfish tendencies, even when a stated purpose is as altruistic as you could imagine. Instead, I find it better to measure a work by the aggregate of good comparative to society as a whole. Still inescapable from my own biases, but no one could possibly do more anyway.
Awesome piece. You should talk about social values. Like what films can and cannot show or describe about society. Political and Non-political portrayals. Religion and secularism, and indecision between them.
Just purchased RUclips Red to watch BTS's show (the Asian boy band that was awarded Top Social Artist 2017) right before landing on this series of CrashCourse. Seems like I would learn a lot through watching both shows simultaneously.
Arguably the representation of subgroups in Hollywood are designed to benefit those subgroups, even if they are/were written by straight, white men. The stereotype of the quick-witted, fashion-loving, girl's best friend, gay man, for instance, was crafted to combat the decidedly dark and more sinister image of gay men in media before then. The change in the that public image allowed equal rights legislation to go forward. Often when the histories of such things are written, there is tendency (of academics in particular) to go after easy targets, condemning these simplistic stereotypes rather than contextualising their role in changing public discourse about minority groups. Often progressive changes are viewed in hindsight as inevitable; they are not.
True type casting and stereotypes happens to those labled Asians, Native Americans, men, women, old , and so on. It's just what people pay at the box office , and what works making the money. Shrugs
Atheists also have sinister look in media whatever stereotypes, and this includes animation like that of anime more often than not for example. I don't think that will change any time soon. Time for kekistan memes?
Careful. While it's true that you could argue a few of these homosexual stereotypes helped push a progressive message at the time, it is time ultimately that turns them into a negative stereotype as well. Beforehand, the romantic (in the literary sense) and tortured homosexual could also be argued to be a positive influence, since you could claim that some representation is better than no representation. That pitying gay men is better than fearing and hating them. At the end of the day, not all homosexuals are white and male and flamboyant. Just like all nerds aren't awkward and maladjusted and anti-social. The Huxtables did a lot for representing African Americans at the time, but thankfully as time has gone on we've seen more representation of African-Americans from all walks of life. And I do mean African-Americans literally, and not black people, since the longstanding effects of African-Americans in American media throughout the 80s and 90s seeded a view of black peoples as akin to African-Americans. In truth there are plenty of people in America with black skin who are nothing like the Huxtables. Even including the absolute best of intentions, and even media created by and for minorities who are stereotyped, the uncaring pressure of time and society can and will turn what would be a positive into a negative. And it's really no one's fault, just the quirks of people being people. And it isn't even just about minorities, but all peoples. The sad truth is that these sorts of things tend to hit minorities the hardest, so they require great care, and there's simply no easy way to accomplish that other than keeping your head up on these topics when you can.
It’s not as much that stereotypes become negative with time as it is that they just replace the old stereotype with a new one, leaving massive groups of people still with a singular representation. All the good and bad stereotypes are true to some degree, as every group has some of everything, but if that group is not represented more en masse throughout media as a whole to show the diversity of personalities, these individual stereotypes inevitably have to become problematic as the entire group keeps being seen as this one thing instead of as fully developed human beings by people who don’t have as much experience with the group. Those people can then rise to, or wield en masse, the power to inflict changes on the group based on 1-dimensional ideas of them, and thus, the stereotype has a negative influence, even when it shines what seemed like a positive, but ultimately exclusive light on the group.
Watching the video sped up by 1.5 seems more natural than watching it at the normal speed. Did they slow down the audio? Or is Jay just that Smoooothhhh
Jack is a stereotype, but Will isn't. And Will is the best friend and a main character. I feel like Jack is almost making the same point but in a meta way. Will is the the character that is implied more gay characters should be like.
Speaking of media, I just watch the weirdest ad before this video, featuring clay Spider-Man putting mini red and pink Spider-Men to sleep and then hulk, jack and Elsa were in a race without anything said???????
What is the biggest reason that there is poor representation of minorities in media? Also social media has helped break the cycle of sameness and poor representation of minorities by lifting diverse voices true or false
The core motivation is making money - obviously. If a company putting hundreds of millions of dollars into a production is expected to inject nuance in representation of peoples it causes risks of negative reception. That's why you have stereotypical short-hands that go the least controversial route. It's an issue by design that's what we get.
And even those represented stereotypes are there just because there is money to be earned, if the people who see themselves represented by a impossible attempt of stereotypical generalization where not such a broad audience, there would not even exist the attempt.
So you mentioned Adorno and Horkheimer, are you going to mention Siegfried Kracauer's thesis of how the sameness of media and the idyllic Weimar Republic films lead to the rise of Nazism? Otherwise, I wonder if this series will also touch on Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's book _Manufacturing Consent?_
Supply and demand? I think besides wealthy there are some things that leave more power to all sorts that decide with money. Advertising , symbolism, and propaganda sure influences money. Though there is more to how money works per culture, place, government, education system, and entertainment from media. Some things are given censorship or banned. Not all translation of language is easy. Such as at times there isn't even words that translate exactly, but one can only get close in such communication. With money it does make some difference in what people see most, and even when money has media on it in creation by money. Yep all the words on pictures and money most just really pay no attention much , but pay attention to what worth it represents whatever currency.
I disagree with that point of the video having the wrong title and wrong focus. The video is about how money and funding impact the production media and it's purpose. He very much explained that money is in part connected to the issues of representation in media. Which being this is media literacy he'll have to cover more indepth at some point, but thats me digressing. The entirety of the video is focused on how money impacts media, lack of representation is one of those ways. I think its more that you focused on that one aspect of the video because it grinds your gears for some reason or another. Possibly your own political beliefs and biases impacting the way you viewed this piece of media. But that's just an assumption of mine and I can very much be wrong, so if I am I'm sorry for that. Have a nice day,
Did you know most of the funds for the big movies comes from lower budget horror and such films that consistently gross 10 to 100 times the cost to make them... that would be something the video could have covered that it didn't. Likewise they could have cover whom does put up the funds and how such loans are most often done. Big budget vs small budget funding and out of pocket pet projects. How the funding is determined for the advertising for the film and so on... Nearly nothing in this video covered the real Media and Money... as a test just what in the video could you use to secure funding for a film or TV show or what not? It was more then 50% about what races or identity group was getting what.
It's called "Crash Course: media literacy" not "Crash Course: How to make a film or TV show or what not". So yeah, I think that's why it has it's focus on media literacy
There movies have reach far beyond Nigeria. It is true that the largest of their market is the continent of Africa they have also found a audience in the USA and in other countries in the America's. So it isn't just a Nigerian thing. In fact the only reason I make note that the films are made in Nigeria is because it is like saying Hollywood or Bollywood. You would be surprised are the scale of movie making in other places in the world as well as within our own country. Again there are community or group interested movie and tv industry that are independent of Hollywood and New York TV or what most would consider "Mainstream media". They are growing in size and reach and now in movie theaters you can find showings of their works. My local Regal Movie Theater presents Bollywood, Chinese, and Japanese made movies.
the info here is almost obsolete particularly regarding the dominance of certain cultures and stereotypes. most new movies released now have have left leaning agenda whether it's appropriate, blended well with story, or was jarringly shoehorned just because. absolutely annoying and it's now unquitous in almost every medium including videogames. tv networks like CW only create tv series radically saturated with pop liberalism, netflix originals as well- dedicated episodes to racism and gun control; and the 50 percent of the characters are gay: there would always be a gay or trans reveal coming out of the closet. the dialogue are manufactured in a way like a third wave feminist protest (blatant in your face example of this is episode 4 of " the witcher") that said, i'm still learning how to curate the shows i'll attempt to watch. as of now, at the top of my list to avoid are netflix originals and CW. note: i am not against pop liberal agenda like feminism or LGBTQ+ representation in shows but when it's forced and it is so obvious its purpose is to promote am agenda, it breaka from the immersion. and it's so goddamn preachy. feminist shows i like that are well made are frozen, star wars, moana,
I think showing those gay characters and simply pointing out their similarities would have made the point well enough. You can say 'We can achieve much broader representation going forward' without painting those characters as lazy, completely two-dimensional stereotypes. It's a little obtuse and disrespectful to the people who they represent.
yes I'm in agreement that there needs to be much greater range in representation for gay men. I just feel it's not helpful to clumsily conflate characters like Kurt Hummel and Jack Macfarland and dismiss them like this, when they actually have a couple of shared traits but pretty much polar opposite personalities.
my point is that there is some degree of nuance and human complexity, even in these broad, comedic characters. Most of them. We still need a greater range of LGBT representation, as I said.
Maybe you HAVE that greater range, and you don't realize it because the characters AREN'T those stereotypes that make them easily identifiable. This host could be gay, and I wouldn't know it. The same could be true of many other characters portrayed in other programs. There are dramas on the air now that don't focus on the subject, but have multiple LGBT main characters. I learned from Torchwood that about 80% of Great Britain is gay.
well, obviously I would realise it, as long as the writers clearly state through dialogue that the character is gay. Otherwise, it does not count as representation - like Dumbledore in Harry Potter. Torchwood certainly did not have stereotypical gay characters, so Torchwood contributes to a greater range of representation. Nonetheless, across the board, we can do better. Also, the host of this series is not a fictional character in a TV show.
There seems to be two underlying arguments/perceptions here that I find false/bigoted. 1) There is somehow an issue that "straight white men" make the majority of decisions in media creation; as if some other group could do it without influencing culture with their own biasses. 2) Conservatives supposedly take issue with the existence of homosexual character portrayal in media, though for some reason not as much when the character(s) are tropes. Maybe, this was just a poorly edited video; ironically however this is the kind of "media bias" that leads consumers to believe producers/creators often purposely skew their products to gender unfair/narrow-minded/untrue points of view amongst their audience. Unintentionally though, I suppose you guys proved your own point regarding the immense responsibility of artists/directors to paint a more realistic and less ignorant portrayal of the world.
Regarding your first point, I don’t believe they were suggesting that only white men could possibly bring biases to the media they create, just that when the voices in power are homogenous their biases are almost taken as truth due to a lack of opposing viewpoints being heard.
>1) There is somehow an issue that "straight white men" make the majority of decisions in media creation; as if some other group could do it without influencing culture with their own biasses The point isn't that if some other group had that much power, they wouldn't be biased, the point is that no group should have that power.
@Ignis Domini: There is always a "majority demographic" making majority decisions in the creation of anything. How does one theoretically even make a piece of content with equal input from the infinitesimal sub-divisions of humans based on class, race, sex, social class, number of twitter followers, etc... As nice as utopia sounds, you can't force equality of outcome, only equality in opportunity of decision making, and even that is constrained by ones own means and talents. There can be, however, a deep joy in taking responsibility for oneself, and when willing [not under force or duress] and able, reaching out to help those in your family/local community.
I've never seen anyone argue that the media's promotion of untrue or narrow-minded beliefs is the result of an intentional desire on the part of producers or creators to have that effect. The point of videos like this is that regardless of whether or not these harmful effects are intended, they happen. It is therefore the responsibility of media consumers to mitigate these effects.
Honestly, a decade ago that wouldn't have been the case but unfortunately some aspects of conservatism have moved pretty far in the direction of ignoring this sort of thing, with the that it's impossible to accurately present the sociological and psychological impacts of media without seeming "PC".
To Stephanie Cassiopeia, I completely agree with your sentiment friend, but I feel these aspects of conservatism have always been there its just lost a lot of subtlety in recent years
Geek Ray that's entirely possible, but there are many segments of conservatism where this sort of thing wasn't controversial. Offhand, most fiscal conservatives wouldn't struggle with most of this, because you have to understand the sociology of media to understand advertising.
Geek Ray It seems like a relatively new obsession with parts of the right, maybe over the last 15 years or so. I personally think that the rise of the Internet has a big part in it. The Internet gives anyone with a computer (pretty much everyone now) the ability to say whatever they want about anything, with relative annonimity. I guarantee these people would never say anything close to what they spew online to anyone's face, because they don't want to face the consequences. In comes an effort to try and potentially limit what people can say, and these Internet loudmouths now feel threatened and lash out, calling it "political correctness", even when it really isn't. I honestly think it doesn't have to do with the right at all, but the fact that this particular crowd just tends to lean right, bringing that viewpoint closer that side. It seems a lot less about "PC culture" and more about the fact that they may start facing consequences for what they say, even in the formerly untamed Internet.
Generally happy for this course. But, ... Adorno, Horkheimer? In a position of authority on culture, ... really? Seriously... Next time bit of Marcus, Lukácz, Marx maybe? Please no!
It's incredible how many times I've had to explain myself. "Yes, I'm gay but no, I don't care all that much about fashion or musical theatre and no, I don't wave my hands all over the room. Those are stereotypes, that is one of many ways to be gay. There is no single way to be an engineer, there is also no single way to be gay."
Most people don't think you have to be that way though.
this should be taught in elementary school. no joke this is a huge blind spot on all 8 and 9 year olds. not every parent even *thinks* to explain this reality to their children.
actually my school teaches it in summer school for kids who are going to grade 6 lol
Seriously the talking points and information presented in this series is increasingly important in today’s day and age I think so many others would benefit from exposure to this show.
I couldn't name a singular CrashCourse series I love either. I love them all too! I can't even imagine the amount of time and effort that goes into the scripts, but that does not stop me from appreciating them every episode I watch ^^ Have a great day everyone!
I think another factor behind representation is the experience of writers in their chosen medium. For instance, if someone is a playwright and they want to write a gay character, chances are the people they’ve surrounded themselves with are also into theatre and some may be gay. Because of this, even gay characters based on real people can fulfill stereotypes (such as the gay theatre buff) because of the writer’s limited worldview.
Got my mind on my media and my media on my mind.
A good reminder of why people lean on using stereotypes, and to always critique the creator. We all have agendas, if you go in with eyes open, you can choose what you want to take or leave from each piece of media. Where/who the money comes from can tell a lot about the agenda. Good to teach our kids how to critically evaluate media too! Doesn’t mean not curiously exploring other viewpoints, but to be aware of how certain messages trigger us, your mind on media, and to be aware of them so not sleepwalking through experience.
What's the agenda behind the gay stereotype?
Wesley Whiteside I can’t speak to the gay stereotype in particular, but Jay’s explanation that stereotypes allow us not to have to think, and assume all folks in a particular group are the same was what I was addressing.
I love this. As a design student, it feels super relevant to everything I am learning and doing right now. I really appreciate your discussion of the need for more empathy driven representations of diverse peoples and cultures. Will the series get more in-depth into visual rhetoric and semiotic theory?
Definitely could of used a “RUclips is not immune” comment for self-awareness’ sake.
I would imagine it's taken as assumed from his earlier definition of the media he was talking about, which I believe this fits the definition of. At some point, assurances of bias might come across as a hollow confidence building technique. Kind of like how that "Spirit Science" guy is always like, "Now I'm just presenting ideas, I want you to do the research yourself, but isn't it funny how the moon is hollow and rings like a bell because it's filled with a hidden artificial structure and Martians invaded Atlantis?"
Larry Douglas I wondered if that was the case. But money is a new issue, and I think it makes sense. Not just for self awareness, but also to fill in the blanks. Even if it’s just a one liner to help demonstrate the point.
Benjamin McGrath- You know, in that light, and after watching the whole thing I don't think it would have been out of place. He also ran into things like racial issues even bordering on editorializing. I would have liked to see some sources referenced to back up some of those claims (Not that anything he said is patently false from my understanding, but on no one's word)
Would of thought people could of known how to use the English language. Of you tried taking English classes? I of not as have yet.
What do you want? A phonetic pronunciation guide or something?
I really appreciate this episode, in particular that the depiction of gays in the media is addressed specifically. As a gay male who was a teen when Will & Grace was at its height, I was really put off by the show because I couldn't identify with the characters, and it's not the only example, just the most vivid one. While I enjoy watching a play or musical from time to time, I've never been one for showtunes; I like rock, jazz, classical, and even a little bit of heavy metal. I may have a good eye for color and be able to help friends pick out clothes, but I don't dress like it--I'm more interested comfort and budget. I'm not skinny, I don't have short carefully trimmed hair, and at the time I wasn't clean-shaven. (I've also never liked light beer, but we'll skip over the underage drinking part.) I've heard people praise the show, but it left me with more feelings of alienation: in the early 2000s there were still plenty of negative things going around about gay people, but I didn't see any gay people like me in the media, even the supposedly "positive" examples, who were often reduced to punchlines anyway.
Even a couple of years later in college near Philadelphia, I found it hard to fit in with the actual gay community, and I can't help thinking that popular media portrayals of gay stereotypes, no matter how "positive" were reinforced so much that they were internalized by the gay community, whether as ways of identifying each other or as ways of being a "good gay." There were no examples of an overweight, long-haired rock & roll type of gay guy in the media, and nobody knew what to do with me. (At least it's a bit better now.)
Things like this have given me more appreciation for characters who are well-rounded, where such a piece of identity is a trait rather than the defining feature of the character. It's also opened me up to looking more critically at how other groups are portrayed in the media, especially in comedy: is someone's identity part of their character, or is it just a punchline?
This isn't about a gay character, but a gay person who I guess does not fit the stereotypical gay mold. His name is Mark Oshiro, and he watches and reads various media and analyzes them. He has also written a book. Anyway, in his analyses, he's shared some of his experiences, some of them tied with being gay. Your comment about being a gay person into heavy metal and not being a "good gay" reminded me of him. He has a channel on RUclips (Mark Oshiro). I watch him read some of my favorite books on it.
+
☝🏾
I understand your point of view, but I have never felt such.
From all the sows, cartoons, movies, album covers I have seen trough out the years I do not recall to identify with any of the characters I've seen (ok, maybe Manowar cover from Kings of Metal).
I remember enjoying the stories and thinking about whatever joke or message there was being transmitted, or if just time consuming entertainment. Remember playing with the He-man sword and superman cape, and perhaps thinking that Hank Moody was suspiciously copying some of my habits.
As such and for what I can think off, humans are so diverse in form, biography, and values, that it is impossible to re-create or generalize any single human.
I do think the writers of Will & Grace, tried to make some jokes - not very good ones- tried to place some characters so the type of jokes could be performed, choosing a target, a message and a medium (in that order being the medium the actors). After the show aired up, the people recognized themselves on that character, as, I think, is much easier to be told/shown how to do/act (not just biologically, but society formats people to act that way), than to take the risks, or the work to research, think, criticize so to create their own path.
So I think those kind of labels to one self, are not created by the media, but by the persons who are, in my view, not able to find their own path and subject themselves to a label, to be part of a minority (actively look for it).
+
On the one hand, I'm very happy that a CC video that mentions race is a thing that affects society isn't vote-bombed like CC Sociology.
On the other hand, the comments are still full of angry people, and the fact that this show is hosted by a guy instead of a woman might have something to do with the numbers.
Cue angry people responding to this post that points them out, invariably proving the argument I'm making with knee-jerk defensive responses...
Sorry for late answer but white man isn't majority when it comes to world population.We are answering why you are want to smash us.
8:46 - super powerful, there’s the main benefit of social media for humanity’s development - more cooperation across borders due to exposure to those from other groups
I just love Jay Smooth so much.
I like how he’s literally and figuratively smooth.
He will be medial for many people.
Oh wow. CrashCourse never fails to amaze me. You guys are making a media literacy course! Perfect timing for it. In this day and age we live in.
i absolutely love this show, this series is so informative and tackles so many current issues that i really believe it should be compulsory in schools
reeaallly appreciate the fact this subject was added to this channel. When I first saw this guy i was thinking "WTF? Where's Hank?!" but after watching all 6 episodes released, I like Jay Smooth a lot. Anxiously awaiting the next episode today...
Imho, while it's the responsibility of the consumers to analyze their media properly, I firmly believe it's also the job of content creators to be responsible for the media they create. Stereotypes will always exist regardless of your political leanings or values, but I think it'd be more helpful for the industry's creativity if such ideas were not constantly recycled or other ideas were explored. Ideally, content creators should be more worried about the message of their products rather than making money.
Can't believe this was already #5. Loving this series!
Can't even tell you how much I like this series so far. Good watch and thank you.
I love the 'we're the exception' mug!
Social media has changed things, which is why the ruling elite are cracking down on independent voices on social media. Adpocalypse is an example of this.
I love the discussion of representation here! It's such an important thing to talk about and be aware of.
This guy is just really engaging for some reason. The man knows his art. Meta media.
Drew I think the opposite. For some reason I zone out with this guy.
Good show. But its not lost on me that THIS is media created by a "who, how, and for what reason" - and I don't think its a purely selfless effort to educate young people. I did enjoy it though!
Nah, they´re probably trying to educate old fogies like me as well.
People do all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons. If you try to reduce all media into binaries of good or evil you will always find evil. The way we see social interactions is invariably tied to egoistic or selfish tendencies, even when a stated purpose is as altruistic as you could imagine. Instead, I find it better to measure a work by the aggregate of good comparative to society as a whole. Still inescapable from my own biases, but no one could possibly do more anyway.
Awesome piece. You should talk about social values. Like what films can and cannot show or describe about society. Political and Non-political portrayals. Religion and secularism, and indecision between them.
I guess like show social agents attitudes towards the religiosphere and secular society.
Really really awesome piece.
Just purchased RUclips Red to watch BTS's show (the Asian boy band that was awarded Top Social Artist 2017) right before landing on this series of CrashCourse. Seems like I would learn a lot through watching both shows simultaneously.
Arguably the representation of subgroups in Hollywood are designed to benefit those subgroups, even if they are/were written by straight, white men. The stereotype of the quick-witted, fashion-loving, girl's best friend, gay man, for instance, was crafted to combat the decidedly dark and more sinister image of gay men in media before then. The change in the that public image allowed equal rights legislation to go forward. Often when the histories of such things are written, there is tendency (of academics in particular) to go after easy targets, condemning these simplistic stereotypes rather than contextualising their role in changing public discourse about minority groups. Often progressive changes are viewed in hindsight as inevitable; they are not.
True type casting and stereotypes happens to those labled Asians, Native Americans, men, women, old , and so on. It's just what people pay at the box office , and what works making the money.
Shrugs
Atheists also have sinister look in media whatever stereotypes, and this includes animation like that of anime more often than not for example. I don't think that will change any time soon.
Time for kekistan memes?
Careful. While it's true that you could argue a few of these homosexual stereotypes helped push a progressive message at the time, it is time ultimately that turns them into a negative stereotype as well. Beforehand, the romantic (in the literary sense) and tortured homosexual could also be argued to be a positive influence, since you could claim that some representation is better than no representation. That pitying gay men is better than fearing and hating them.
At the end of the day, not all homosexuals are white and male and flamboyant. Just like all nerds aren't awkward and maladjusted and anti-social. The Huxtables did a lot for representing African Americans at the time, but thankfully as time has gone on we've seen more representation of African-Americans from all walks of life. And I do mean African-Americans literally, and not black people, since the longstanding effects of African-Americans in American media throughout the 80s and 90s seeded a view of black peoples as akin to African-Americans. In truth there are plenty of people in America with black skin who are nothing like the Huxtables.
Even including the absolute best of intentions, and even media created by and for minorities who are stereotyped, the uncaring pressure of time and society can and will turn what would be a positive into a negative. And it's really no one's fault, just the quirks of people being people. And it isn't even just about minorities, but all peoples. The sad truth is that these sorts of things tend to hit minorities the hardest, so they require great care, and there's simply no easy way to accomplish that other than keeping your head up on these topics when you can.
It’s not as much that stereotypes become negative with time as it is that they just replace the old stereotype with a new one, leaving massive groups of people still with a singular representation. All the good and bad stereotypes are true to some degree, as every group has some of everything, but if that group is not represented more en masse throughout media as a whole to show the diversity of personalities, these individual stereotypes inevitably have to become problematic as the entire group keeps being seen as this one thing instead of as fully developed human beings by people who don’t have as much experience with the group. Those people can then rise to, or wield en masse, the power to inflict changes on the group based on 1-dimensional ideas of them, and thus, the stereotype has a negative influence, even when it shines what seemed like a positive, but ultimately exclusive light on the group.
Watched while on my couch eating cereal - good shout Mr Smooth, good shout...
I love this series and this host.
Watching the video sped up by 1.5 seems more natural than watching it at the normal speed. Did they slow down the audio? Or is Jay just that Smoooothhhh
good job rising the awareness guys! kudos to you
Loving this series!
Please do multiple part videos on Stuart Hall and representation. I need all that to be explained before my exam *send help*
"all blacks can play the bass"
A "Crash Course" branded dish soap - now THAT would be cool
Never knew Adorno was purple; explains a lot.
Interesting, but not that much about money, more like stereotypes and stuff
I really wish I was a big shot director.
This was a great video! Thanks for creating it!
John Green should write the next hit in Hollywood
Jack is a stereotype, but Will isn't. And Will is the best friend and a main character. I feel like Jack is almost making the same point but in a meta way. Will is the the character that is implied more gay characters should be like.
Why doesn’t he do the end voice over?
This guy reminds me of Neil deGrasse Tyson for some reason.
CrashCourse gotta CrashCourse, yay.
I wonder if anyone in the Fox's commissioning office was sent this video today...
In Modern Family, who the hell is Cameron's major female character BFF?
ekpennock He gets on very well with Gloria (Sofia Vergara).
elizabeth banks' character
Way to go J smooth!
Speaking of media, I just watch the weirdest ad before this video, featuring clay Spider-Man putting mini red and pink Spider-Men to sleep and then hulk, jack and Elsa were in a race without anything said???????
Is that a zoetrope in the background?
But, but.. i'm dashing! ... sometimes...
LOL-dear god whats with the crazy colors on the pics of some of the people you talked about?
Just awesome.
OK, my brain hurts. That was rather clear, but I doubt I'll remember the complexity,
Kevin Reardon Replay button is your friend to the end, Kevin
Bro Spoiler alert for "Get Out"
anyone else thirsty for some lemon squeezy soda now?
What is the biggest reason that there is poor representation of minorities in media? Also social media has helped break the cycle of sameness and poor representation of minorities by lifting diverse voices true or false
The older you get the more you realize people aren't as "complex" as they wish they are.
07:40 absolutly right.
Dude! Slow doen with the spoilers!
"Media" is plural.
1st like love this show
Can you translate it into Arabic
ممكن أن يوحد ترجمه باللغة العربية
I don’t like it when my education is biased. Hard to avoid though. Good and important series otherwise.
This guy is f❤️❤️❤️ing smart
Im watching this educational video for free on the internet but i paid for internet access
Stanford from satc ❤
The core motivation is making money - obviously. If a company putting hundreds of millions of dollars into a production is expected to inject nuance in representation of peoples it causes risks of negative reception. That's why you have stereotypical short-hands that go the least controversial route. It's an issue by design that's what we get.
And even those represented stereotypes are there just because there is money to be earned, if the people who see themselves represented by a impossible attempt of stereotypical generalization where not such a broad audience, there would not even exist the attempt.
Stereotypes have always been more controversial than nuance. Where are you guys getting this information??????????
ah stained glass!
Turkish subtitle would be more beautiful
"straight white men"
Stereotyping while speaking against stereotypes.
It isn't a stereotype if it's true.
So you mentioned Adorno and Horkheimer, are you going to mention Siegfried Kracauer's thesis of how the sameness of media and the idyllic Weimar Republic films lead to the rise of Nazism?
Otherwise, I wonder if this series will also touch on Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's book _Manufacturing Consent?_
SPOILERS lol!
This video just reminded me that Jeff Bezos owns the Washing Post... scary world we live in
Supply and demand? I think besides wealthy there are some things that leave more power to all sorts that decide with money. Advertising , symbolism, and propaganda sure influences money. Though there is more to how money works per culture, place, government, education system, and entertainment from media.
Some things are given censorship or banned. Not all translation of language is easy. Such as at times there isn't even words that translate exactly, but one can only get close in such communication.
With money it does make some difference in what people see most, and even when money has media on it in creation by money. Yep all the words on pictures and money most just really pay no attention much , but pay attention to what worth it represents whatever currency.
💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜💜
This series seems to conflate media and content... like confusing plumbing with sewage.
I want Mr. Green
This seemed to be more about social justice then about money. Wrong title. Wrong focus.
I disagree with that point of the video having the wrong title and wrong focus. The video is about how money and funding impact the production media and it's purpose. He very much explained that money is in part connected to the issues of representation in media. Which being this is media literacy he'll have to cover more indepth at some point, but thats me digressing.
The entirety of the video is focused on how money impacts media, lack of representation is one of those ways. I think its more that you focused on that one aspect of the video because it grinds your gears for some reason or another. Possibly your own political beliefs and biases impacting the way you viewed this piece of media.
But that's just an assumption of mine and I can very much be wrong, so if I am I'm sorry for that. Have a nice day,
Did you know most of the funds for the big movies comes from lower budget horror and such films that consistently gross 10 to 100 times the cost to make them... that would be something the video could have covered that it didn't. Likewise they could have cover whom does put up the funds and how such loans are most often done. Big budget vs small budget funding and out of pocket pet projects. How the funding is determined for the advertising for the film and so on... Nearly nothing in this video covered the real Media and Money... as a test just what in the video could you use to secure funding for a film or TV show or what not? It was more then 50% about what races or identity group was getting what.
It's called "Crash Course: media literacy" not "Crash Course: How to make a film or TV show or what not". So yeah, I think that's why it has it's focus on media literacy
Who would call Nigerians making movies in Nigeria a minority group?
There movies have reach far beyond Nigeria. It is true that the largest of their market is the continent of Africa they have also found a audience in the USA and in other countries in the America's. So it isn't just a Nigerian thing. In fact the only reason I make note that the films are made in Nigeria is because it is like saying Hollywood or Bollywood. You would be surprised are the scale of movie making in other places in the world as well as within our own country. Again there are community or group interested movie and tv industry that are independent of Hollywood and New York TV or what most would consider "Mainstream media". They are growing in size and reach and now in movie theaters you can find showings of their works. My local Regal Movie Theater presents Bollywood, Chinese, and Japanese made movies.
Two words, inclusion rider.
If vanilla ice cream was the only kind we had, we would invent others.
What's an "inclusion rider"??
How would one flavor of ice cream create more flavors???
yikes things are bad
the info here is almost obsolete particularly regarding the dominance of certain cultures and stereotypes. most new movies released now have have left leaning agenda whether it's appropriate, blended well with story, or was jarringly shoehorned just because. absolutely annoying and it's now unquitous in almost every medium including videogames. tv networks like CW only create tv series radically saturated with pop liberalism, netflix originals as well- dedicated episodes to racism and gun control; and the 50 percent of the characters are gay: there would always be a gay or trans reveal coming out of the closet. the dialogue are manufactured in a way like a third wave feminist protest (blatant in your face example of this is episode 4 of " the witcher")
that said, i'm still learning how to curate the shows i'll attempt to watch. as of now, at the top of my list to avoid are netflix originals and CW.
note: i am not against pop liberal agenda like feminism or LGBTQ+ representation in shows but when it's forced and it is so obvious its purpose is to promote am agenda, it breaka from the immersion. and it's so goddamn preachy.
feminist shows i like that are well made are frozen, star wars, moana,
I think showing those gay characters and simply pointing out their similarities would have made the point well enough. You can say 'We can achieve much broader representation going forward' without painting those characters as lazy, completely two-dimensional stereotypes. It's a little obtuse and disrespectful to the people who they represent.
yes I'm in agreement that there needs to be much greater range in representation for gay men. I just feel it's not helpful to clumsily conflate characters like Kurt Hummel and Jack Macfarland and dismiss them like this, when they actually have a couple of shared traits but pretty much polar opposite personalities.
my point is that there is some degree of nuance and human complexity, even in these broad, comedic characters. Most of them. We still need a greater range of LGBT representation, as I said.
Maybe you HAVE that greater range, and you don't realize it because the characters AREN'T those stereotypes that make them easily identifiable. This host could be gay, and I wouldn't know it. The same could be true of many other characters portrayed in other programs. There are dramas on the air now that don't focus on the subject, but have multiple LGBT main characters.
I learned from Torchwood that about 80% of Great Britain is gay.
well, obviously I would realise it, as long as the writers clearly state through dialogue that the character is gay. Otherwise, it does not count as representation - like Dumbledore in Harry Potter. Torchwood certainly did not have stereotypical gay characters, so Torchwood contributes to a greater range of representation. Nonetheless, across the board, we can do better. Also, the host of this series is not a fictional character in a TV show.
zombiegirl626 But as soon as you do that, you're going to have these stereotype accusations.
Hi XD
There seems to be two underlying arguments/perceptions here that I find false/bigoted. 1) There is somehow an issue that "straight white men" make the majority of decisions in media creation; as if some other group could do it without influencing culture with their own biasses. 2) Conservatives supposedly take issue with the existence of homosexual character portrayal in media, though for some reason not as much when the character(s) are tropes.
Maybe, this was just a poorly edited video; ironically however this is the kind of "media bias" that leads consumers to believe producers/creators often purposely skew their products to gender unfair/narrow-minded/untrue points of view amongst their audience. Unintentionally though, I suppose you guys proved your own point regarding the immense responsibility of artists/directors to paint a more realistic and less ignorant portrayal of the world.
Regarding your first point, I don’t believe they were suggesting that only white men could possibly bring biases to the media they create, just that when the voices in power are homogenous their biases are almost taken as truth due to a lack of opposing viewpoints being heard.
>1) There is somehow an issue that "straight white men" make the majority of decisions in media creation; as if some other group could do it without influencing culture with their own biasses
The point isn't that if some other group had that much power, they wouldn't be biased, the point is that no group should have that power.
@Ignis Domini: There is always a "majority demographic" making majority decisions in the creation of anything. How does one theoretically even make a piece of content with equal input from the infinitesimal sub-divisions of humans based on class, race, sex, social class, number of twitter followers, etc...
As nice as utopia sounds, you can't force equality of outcome, only equality in opportunity of decision making, and even that is constrained by ones own means and talents. There can be, however, a deep joy in taking responsibility for oneself, and when willing [not under force or duress] and able, reaching out to help those in your family/local community.
I've never seen anyone argue that the media's promotion of untrue or narrow-minded beliefs is the result of an intentional desire on the part of producers or creators to have that effect. The point of videos like this is that regardless of whether or not these harmful effects are intended, they happen. It is therefore the responsibility of media consumers to mitigate these effects.
it would be impossible for no group to have hat power, because well, they would themselves be a group. a groups can be made of practically anybody
Way too much of a PC intersectional slant in this vid for an otherwise good series
reality has a well known liberal bias
Honestly, a decade ago that wouldn't have been the case but unfortunately some aspects of conservatism have moved pretty far in the direction of ignoring this sort of thing, with the that it's impossible to accurately present the sociological and psychological impacts of media without seeming "PC".
To Stephanie Cassiopeia, I completely agree with your sentiment friend, but I feel these aspects of conservatism have always been there its just lost a lot of subtlety in recent years
Geek Ray that's entirely possible, but there are many segments of conservatism where this sort of thing wasn't controversial. Offhand, most fiscal conservatives wouldn't struggle with most of this, because you have to understand the sociology of media to understand advertising.
Geek Ray It seems like a relatively new obsession with parts of the right, maybe over the last 15 years or so. I personally think that the rise of the Internet has a big part in it. The Internet gives anyone with a computer (pretty much everyone now) the ability to say whatever they want about anything, with relative annonimity. I guarantee these people would never say anything close to what they spew online to anyone's face, because they don't want to face the consequences. In comes an effort to try and potentially limit what people can say, and these Internet loudmouths now feel threatened and lash out, calling it "political correctness", even when it really isn't.
I honestly think it doesn't have to do with the right at all, but the fact that this particular crowd just tends to lean right, bringing that viewpoint closer that side. It seems a lot less about "PC culture" and more about the fact that they may start facing consequences for what they say, even in the formerly untamed Internet.
Bro is he black or not fse
is this guy like a quarter black? He seems... black, but very diluted
Before 50 views 👍
3rd
3 rd
6th! I’m early!!
Disappointing. One more CC series took the predictable route of identity politics. Goodbye, educators. Hello, ideologues.
Where TF is John green?
Doing episodes on science history. Shrug
Generally happy for this course.
But, ... Adorno, Horkheimer? In a position of authority on culture, ... really? Seriously...
Next time bit of Marcus, Lukácz, Marx maybe?
Please no!
1st!
2nd
4:57 That's racist! And short sighed... and biased.
Stinky PooPoo
8th
Can you please not get into identity politics while doing these videos?
Amen!!! I told y'all to be weary of the white man
1st dislike baby!