Morley, "At Home with Television"


Please post your DQs for Morley's "At Home with Television" below, using the following as a guide:

For Morley, in the face of postmodern and transnational discourses that celebrate "mobility" and the dissolution of national borders, it remains important to think about how "home" is constructed.

1. How has "mobility" been constructed in these discourses? What kinds of mobility get celebrated and what kinds get ignored? How is access to different kinds of mobility organized?

2. Why is it important to look at this question of "home" and the particular geographies?

3. What are modes of exclusion produced through constructions of "home" and "homeland"?

4. What is the role of media in this process? What does TV teach audiences about "home"?

5. How are media access and diversity related in this essay with respect to the "mobile" users of internet and mobile technology versus those who "stay home with television"?

6. Why does all this matter, for Morley? What do you think? How does this relate to the American context?


In the reading At Home with television, talking about the effects that National broadcasting Morley had stated, " can link the peripheral to the center, turn previously exclusive social events into mass experiences, and above all, penetrate the domestic sphere by linking the national puiblic into the private lives of citizens." With Twitter and Facebook being so prevelant in our society do you think that there is any negative impicatins to being so immersed in these social events in our everyday lives? What effect do they have on the creation of public spheres?

I thought the discussions of about controlling media in the homes of family was very relevant to research I have seen in the past. Morley uses the term "micro-regulation" of foreign media in spaces of children. But I was wondering, how is regulating foreign media a larger concern than the media produced within the US?

How is that newcomers, foreigners, or people who come from a different homeland with "homeland ties" in the U.S threatening to electronic media? What does Heimat exactly mean?

Morley discusses the mobility of humans and I think that because of technology, people are likely to change their "home" location. Technology has provided an accessible way to reach distant family members, wherein early settlers didn't move farther than down the street from their relatives, or the families moved together.
Has television persuaded people to relocate because different, desirable places in the world are broadcast? I know that pictures of cacti in Arizona or the beaches of California are more appealing as winter drags on in Minnesota. But I'm held back here because of my family. Case in point, advanced technology allows me to stay in touch with them and experience a warm breeze and a palm tree.

David Morely discusses the question of whether or not immigrants can withdraw from their own cultural space or assimilate into a host culture. I wonder if migrants are caught between two worlds of culture or like Morely states, "constructing various forms of hybrid identities that enable them to participare simaltaneously in both."

I'm having trouble grasping this article, looking at your guy's questions is helping me a little. Is the article basically saying that technology is allowing immigrants to be part of their new culture while still being part of their homeland's culture? Apologies if this is completely off

I am also having trouble understanding the article. Is he saying that for those foreigners that are using technology they have a better connections to their homeland than those that don't? It seems like technology is good but also bad?

This article brings up a very interesting topic. We have talked a lot about media in this class so far, however, we have yet to talk much about the various mediums we use, and where and when we use them. I think that people who stay at home to watch TV gain a different experience then that of the "mobile users." I believe the mobile users get a much more diverse amount of media but are they misled by the media more because of their ability to access media constantly?

This article is a little hard for me to understand as well, but from what I could understand was how immigrants and immigration shifts what exactly home is. In the article it makes a clear picture to how the culture in many places can be relayed through television, so how does that isolate immigrants from immersing themselves into their 'new home' culture. Does it play into how they view their home/does television make way to create a new home for the immigrants?

I feel like this may be an essay where our relatively homogeneous culture in America is greatly different from that of Europe. Where languages are different in a matter of miles over there compared to great distances in America, it is easier to intermingle and literally stay connected with family at home with radio and television because the signals aren't far at all. Maybe we could all understand this or connect a bit easier if we lived in the south or in a European country like the author or the people he writes about.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by zimme313 published on April 15, 2013 9:54 AM.

Grewal, "Traveling Barbie: Indian Transnationality and New Consumer Subjects" was the previous entry in this blog.

Blog post Week 11 is the next entry in this blog.

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