Blog Post for Week 3

| 6 Comments

What I took away most from this week was the information from Hall's piece. I found it interesting how signs have particular meanings that producers attach to each sign or advertisement. I found the in class assignment we had on Wednesday to clear up what the Hall piece had to offer. After we went over the information about polysemy and what exactly the term meant, I found the examination of media texts to be a lot clearer. With the three different types of readings a media text can have. I find it fascinating now to look at different media texts and imagining what the general population with their dominant reading thinks of specific texts against what the audience with the oppositional readings may think. My question of the week is if the dominant readers will change in the years to come. I wonder if the dominant view on an issue such as gay marriage will change how media texts will change how couples are viewed or changed in the media. I found that Williamson's piece laid out how advertisements or other media texts display a certain amount of information in what is visible in the text, but the signified meaning is what the viewers see in the text that isn't laid out by the producers. I also find that the overt and latent meaning of media text can also be tied to how Hall's piece covered the polysemy of media texts. Both pieces furthered my knowledge of how people view media texts and how they feel about each piece that is available in the media.

6 Comments

Good post. I was a bit confused after reading halls piece. It wasn't until we had class discussion and worked through our own examples that I grasped the concepts more clearly. I am glad you brought up the dominant view and if it will ever change. My guess who be no, but then again a lot of things and the way people see things have changed so how can I say that it won't? At the same time I just feel like it would be hard to change that in our society. I like the example of gay marriage because I feel as though this is becoming the new norm. Just like in the show modern family, this is the modern family now. Its not so shocking to watch it on TV as it would have been years ago. Its normal for me to see it, and hear it referenced so much. For some people they do not see that as normal and are still bothered by it. And there are others who would probably like to see it in the media more.

Good post. I was a bit confused after reading halls piece. It wasn't until we had class discussion and worked through our own examples that I grasped the concepts more clearly. I am glad you brought up the dominant view and if it will ever change. My guess who be no, but then again a lot of things and the way people see things have changed so how can I say that it won't? At the same time I just feel like it would be hard to change that in our society. I like the example of gay marriage because I feel as though this is becoming the new norm. Just like in the show modern family, this is the modern family now. Its not so shocking to watch it on TV as it would have been years ago. Its normal for me to see it, and hear it referenced so much. For some people they do not see that as normal and are still bothered by it. And there are others who would probably like to see it in the media more.

Good post. I was a bit confused after reading halls piece. It wasn't until we had class discussion and worked through our own examples that I grasped the concepts more clearly. I am glad you brought up the dominant view and if it will ever change. My guess who be no, but then again a lot of things and the way people see things have changed so how can I say that it won't? At the same time I just feel like it would be hard to change that in our society. I like the example of gay marriage because I feel as though this is becoming the new norm. Just like in the show modern family, this is the modern family now. Its not so shocking to watch it on TV as it would have been years ago. Its normal for me to see it, and hear it referenced so much. For some people they do not see that as normal and are still bothered by it. And there are others who would probably like to see it in the media more.

Great post! I think that your question for the week is really interesting and am wondering the same things. It seems that advertisers in the last 20-30 years have used more signifiers and signified to engage the viewers more to interperate a meaning of their own. Everyone reads an ad differently and no matter what people may think I don't think the meaning of the ad will be the same for every person that views it. However as advertisers are constantly advancing in the way they show us products I do believe that there will be a for them to adapt to dominant readers and that this will change them in years to come. The reason I say this is because truly advertisers are looking for what the viewers and consumers want and if they don't give them this then they are not doing there job. I think that since for how many ads we see daily on TV, Youtube, Internet, etc. we will eventually get used to this and then advertisers can focus more on giving more attention to specific audiences such as dominant readers. Just a prediction of mine but liked engaging with your post! Good job!

Great post! I think that your question for the week is really interesting and am wondering the same things. It seems that advertisers in the last 20-30 years have used more signifiers and signified to engage the viewers more to interperate a meaning of their own. Everyone reads an ad differently and no matter what people may think I don't think the meaning of the ad will be the same for every person that views it. However as advertisers are constantly advancing in the way they show us products I do believe that there will be a for them to adapt to dominant readers and that this will change them in years to come. The reason I say this is because truly advertisers are looking for what the viewers and consumers want and if they don't give them this then they are not doing there job. I think that since for how many ads we see daily on TV, Youtube, Internet, etc. we will eventually get used to this and then advertisers can focus more on giving more attention to specific audiences such as dominant readers. Just a prediction of mine but liked engaging with your post! Good job!

Great post! I think that your question for the week is really interesting and am wondering the same things. It seems that advertisers in the last 20-30 years have used more signifiers and signified to engage the viewers more to interperate a meaning of their own. Everyone reads an ad differently and no matter what people may think I don't think the meaning of the ad will be the same for every person that views it. However as advertisers are constantly advancing in the way they show us products I do believe that there will be a for them to adapt to dominant readers and that this will change them in years to come. The reason I say this is because truly advertisers are looking for what the viewers and consumers want and if they don't give them this then they are not doing there job. I think that since for how many ads we see daily on TV, Youtube, Internet, etc. we will eventually get used to this and then advertisers can focus more on giving more attention to specific audiences such as dominant readers. Just a prediction of mine but liked engaging with your post! Good job!

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by MorgenS published on February 7, 2013 2:40 PM.

BLOG POST WEEK 3 was the previous entry in this blog.

Blog post week 3 is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.