I believe the question centered around the interaction of media and technology with one another and society at large. Methods included research of existing scholarly work, interviews with experts (who would ostensibly be news producers or consumers or academics or...? How are you defining "expert?"), and surveys and interviews to gauge reactions to and perceptions of media. Clifford suggested a case study of a particular news source, which seems like it would narrow the research subject and allow for deeper analysis and more definite conclusions, especially if you were to make a comparative study with a news source in the US.
While I realize this was not explicitly your question, I think the subject of information mediation-- or the way in which information is packaged and sold to consumers-- and the resulting implications for society (especially democratic societies) is central to the theme of media and technology. On that note, at the Provost's lecture last night someone asked Professor Migdal "How is it possible to foster democracy and increase the availability of information when all our sources [i.e. FOX, CNN] package it with a particular slant and intend for us to percieve it in a particular way?" and he responded by saying that "My only hope for the communication of information is the internet--because the facts are accessible, alternative opinions are provided, etc, and hopefully people will be informed in the most balanced possible way before taking action." I think this is an interesting distinction between media and technology, and in this case it appears the role of technology is to reign in the bias of the media... On another note, the societal implications would be an interesting concept to pursue-- whether a certain media source does or not present a biased account of events (perhaps bias could be defined by an omittance of a certain fact or the use of partial adjectives) and whether or not your interviewees percieve this slant.
While I realize that most sources (especially those from the internet) will be available in English, I wonder from which stations most Amsterdam natives extract their information. In other words, if you want to interview people on which sources they watch most frequently, it might be hard for you to analyze these yourself (I would assume most television broadcasting and newspapers are in Dutch...) And there's the fact that readers will interact differently with a source in English than one in their native tongue. That may be another layer of support for a case study of an internet source-- and I was thinking that perhaps a good way to collect your human subject pool would be to take out an ad in this source, while you would obviously get an unrepresentative sample of the population you're targeting those readers you need and whose perceptions you can gauge.
I hope I didn't distort your research questions or intended plans, when you mentioned the word society this is the research design I imagined.
Tourists vs. Natives:
How do tourists and natives differ respectively and within their own communities? By observing appearances, languages, accents, behaviors, and interactions between an individual and other people and space; participating in both native and non-native activities (musuems, coffee shops, etc.); and conducting interviews with tourists and natives your group will determine the difference between natives and tourists in the context of Amsterdam arcades.
I'm thinking of a reading from SIS 202 concerning honor killings and vengenance murder. It was written by an anthropologist/sociologist discussing the role of the observer in observing and studying communities, and how it will never be possible for the researcher to understand or draw inferences from their work studying the natives without communing with the natives themselves, which will never be possible without actually BEING a native of that community. Therefore, while Flannery can communicate in Dutch and you will be mimicking the daily operations of natives, I wonder if it is possible to draw appropriate and empathetic conclusions from your observations. I will bring the volume for you two on Monday, it is difficult to articulate the concept but it challenges the conventional wisdom of impartial outsider observer and discusses the need to be participatory.
No comments:
Post a Comment