Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Not passive, empty vessels
- Michelle Phillipov (10 January 2006)
-
Impact of messages remains understudied
- Nicole A. Blair (1 February 2006)
|
|
|||
|
Michelle Phillipov, PhD candidate University of Adelaide, Australia 5005
Send response to journal:
|
In their recent content analysis of substance use in the reality television series The Osbournes, Blair et al express concern that the show’s treatment of alcohol, tobacco and other drug (ATOD) use may “encourage unhealthy behaviours” in its “highly impressionable young viewers” (1). Specifically, they suggest that because rejections of ATOD use are outnumbered by endorsements, the show may be sending contradictory or mixed messages to viewers about the risks of substance use. However, this study has several limitations which problematise the authors’ conclusions. Any mention or visual representation of alcohol, tobacco or other drugs is coded as either an ‘endorsement’ or a ‘rejection’, which means that ATOD representations are always dichotomous: not only is there no possibility of a representation being value-neutral, but there also is no way of ascertaining the degree of endorsement or rejection or the context in which endorsement or rejection is made. The significance of this limitation is perhaps best illustrated by the show’s representations of alcohol use. Many of the apparent ‘endorsements’ of alcohol are, in fact, relatively low-key and are often peripheral to the scenes in which they appear; for instance, the appearance of martini glasses and a cocktail shaker on the kitchen counter is coded as an ‘endorsement’. ‘Rejections’, on the other hand, are fewer in number but they tend to be more powerful and unequivocal; for instance, in one episode, Ozzy regrets a lifetime of substance abuse and warns his teenage children of the dangers of drink and drugs. The show may indeed contain a greater number of ‘endorsements’, but the degree of ‘endorsement’ and ‘rejection’ provides a much clearer indication of which kinds of representations are likely to be registered as more persuasive—obviously an important consideration in determining the show’s influence on audience behaviour. Also, because representations which did not explicitly detail the negative consequences of alcohol use were automatically coded as ‘endorsements’, it is impossible to distinguish between responsible and irresponsible representations of alcohol use. Without an understanding of the context in which such representations occur, images of adults consuming moderate amounts of alcohol (for example, a glass of wine or champagne) and teenage children discussing their fondness for binge drinking are equated as equally problematic endorsements of unhealthy behaviours. Media representations may have some effect on the values and beliefs of the audience, but ethnographic audience research has demonstrated that young viewers are not simply empty vessels, passively absorbing media messages. Such studies indicate that young people’s understanding of media representations is heavily context-dependent, which includes contexts of media consumption, wider community attitudes and values, as well as representations within individual television programmes (2-4). Only in this broader context can the meaning of ATOD use in The Osbournes be effectively theorised. (1) Blair NA, Yue SK, Singh R, Bernhardt JM. Depictions of substance use in reality television: a content analysis of The Osbournes. BMJ 2005;331:1517-9. (2) Bird SE. The audience in everyday life: living in a media world. New York: Routledge, 2003. (3) Moores S. Interpreting audiences: the ethnography of media consumption. London: Sage, 2000. (4) Philo G. Children and film/video/TV violence. In Message Received (Ed. Philo G). New York: Longman, 1999, pp35-53. Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Nicole A. Blair, Health Scientist Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy., NE, MS K-50, Atlanta, GA 30341
Send response to journal:
|
Our recently published content analysis of substance use portrayals in season one of the reality programme, The Osbournes, found that the show contained verbal and visual incidents that appeared in some cases to endorse and in others to reject alcohol, tobacco, and drug use. We concluded that viewers may receive mixed messages about these substances.1 The author of the rapid response “Not passive, empty vessels” suggested that this conclusion is inappropriate because, although the number of endorsements was greater than rejections, some of the incidents coded as endorsement were “relatively low-key” and “often peripheral to the scenes in which they appear;” citing as an example the appearance of a martini shaker and glasses in the background.2 However, if all incidents coded to the environment rather than an individual were removed (Table 2), the presence of messages that both endorse and reject substances would remain a central issue, and endorsements would still predominate.1 This study was an initial look into the content of a reality programme, and was not designed to look at the actual impact of messages on viewers. It did establish that a reality show has the potential to carry health-related content; it answered one question, but raised many more. It draws attention to the issue of substance use portrayals in reality television, highlights that there were mixed messages, and encourages more in-depth study of the implications. In concept, there is value in distinguishing between incidents occurring in the foreground and background; however, these may become hard to define at times, particularly in a genre of programming that doesn’t necessarily have a central plot or storyline. Also, because an image is in the background and not central to the storyline does not mean it should be discounted, because it can still feed into social norms.3, 4 We used a simple and consistent coding process to inventory the programme’s content. It is quite possible that not all media exposures are equal, but currently a method that would allow more complex coding of incidents has not been standardised. In the absence of such standardisation, the author’s suggestion that some incidents be removed from the content analysis because they are assumed to lack the influence of other incidents is debatable. However, this point does reinforce the need for further research to examine the impact of messages in reality television on the viewer. Do messages occurring in the foreground outweigh those that occur in the background, or are background incidents equally or more influential because of their impact on social norms? Are young viewers’ attitudes and behaviors likely to be more influenced by television celebrities or by “unknowns” whom they can relate to? In this case, is Ozzy’s degree of influence as a celebrity enhanced or diminished when he is engaged as a parent? And finally, how does what we know about participants’ lives outside of the show (e.g., from a magazine or the radio) influence how we interpret their behavior on the show? The first season of programming did contain many powerful moments in which Ozzy spoke frankly with his children (and thus the viewers) about his negative experiences with substance use. Again, this reinforces the need for research to look at how these noteworthy rejection messages compare to numerous messages endorsing or normalizing substance use. —Nicole A. Blair The findings and conclusions in this letter are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1) Blair NA, Yue SK, Singh R, Bernhardt JM. Depictions of substance use in reality teleivison: a content analysis of The Osbournes. BMJ 2005;331:1517-9. 2) Phillipov M. Not passive, empty vessels [letter]. BMJ 2006, January 10. 3) Brown JD, Witherspoon EM. The mass media and American adolescents’ health. J Adolesc Health 2002;31:153-70. 4) Strasburger VC. Adolescents and the media: medical and psychological impact. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995. Competing interests: None declared |
|||