Media Literacy: Pitfalls and a Definition

Media literacy is one of the “new literacies” we hear about so much these days -- like numeracy, oracy, technological literacy, and computer literacy. Increasingly, educators are using the term “media education,” referring to an approach that seeks to make students more knowledgeable about media and their importance in our culture. Students of media learn how to read and write media texts in a way roughly analogous to the way they learn to read and write printed texts.

In an essay entitled “Orthodoxy Is the Enemy” (Worsnop, 1989; republished in Worsnop, 1994a), I listed a number of basic misunderstandings about media education, which I termed orthodoxies:

• Orthodoxy 1: Media education as civil defense
  In this vision of media education, the media are seen as wicked influences on human behavior. Students must be taught to discard their misbegotten tastes and media habits in favor of more appropriate ones, such as those of the adults in the community. Media education is seen principally as prevention.



• Orthodoxy 2: Media education as ideological means test
  In this kind of media education, everything is subjected to political scrutiny to determine adherence to “correct” ideologies. Media that stray from the accepted ideology -- either to the left or to the right -- are condemned. Media education is seen principally as a course in convergent thinking.



• Orthodoxy 3: Media education as multiplication tables
  This vision of media education has the student doing little more than learning a set of definitions, rules, and names of equipment and techniques. It offers no place for creativity, critical thinking, or divergence of any kind. Media education is seen principally as memory work.



• Orthodoxy 4: Media Criticism 301
  This form of media education sees itself as a carbon copy of university courses in literary criticism. The media are viewed as equivalents of books, though they are usually judged inferior. Media education is seen principally as a course in theories of criticism.

Recently I wrote an assessment document, Media Literacy Through Critical Thinking (2000), where I list the five key concepts I think are central to any good course in media education:

1. Media texts are carefully wrapped packages (in media ed. talk, media are “constructions”).
2. Media construct versions of reality.
3. Media are interpreted through individual lenses.
4. Media are about money.
5. Media promote an agenda.

I make no claim of originality for any of these concepts. All can be easily traced back at least as far as 1985 (see Masterman, 1985). There are other versions of these concepts in such publications as the Media Literacy Resource Guide (Ontario Ministry of Education and Training, 1989), the British Film Institute curriculum documents (Bazalgette, 1989), and a multitude of other places. While expression of the concepts may vary, these sources are more remarkable for what they have in common than for how they differ. Most important, they all proclaim the importance of starting from a conceptual framework.

These five key concepts should, I believe, be incorporated into all media education. The orthodoxies are not to be considered forbidden territory -- in teaching the course, the teacher will occasionally take a “civil defense” stance, will undoubtedly take ideology into account on a regular basis, will find several occasions when students would benefit from definitions and discussion of terminology, and will find it necessary to teach some critical skills. But these forays into the orthodoxies will be in the context of a well-rounded media education course, rather than a doctrinaire exercise.

I would also add some conditions that I consider vital in a good media education classroom:

• The pedagogy should be learning oriented rather than instruction oriented, student centered rather than teacher centered.
• The classroom process should encourage exploration, inquiry, investigation, and discovery approaches to learning.
• Cooperative and collaborative styles of learning should be favored and encouraged.
• Colearning involving both teacher and students should often be pursued.
• Assessment practices and instruments should be open and public, authentic, valid, and reliable.

Back to menu

Reading Online, www.readingonline.org
Posted November 2000
© 2000 International Reading Association, Inc.   ISSN 1096-1232