Technology is moving at such speed that has never been seen
before. We live in the Digital Age. Computers are relied on far more than
ever before. They are in our offices, our libraries, our homes, our gyms,
our cars and our microwaves. We depend on new technology to structure
our day. We see examples of it everywhere – web site advertising is now
commonplace. It is the internet that seems to be at the forefront of the
digital age – offering unlimited, uncensored and unmediated information
to all with access. It is seen by many as a positive invention as it has
provided valuable information to people who would not normally be able
to get it. Recent cases include people who’s lives have been saved
by browsing for cures to their illnesses. The internet or “world
wide web” is here to stay.

This dissertation will look at one aspect of this largely new phenomena
– Internet Music.

“Every day, hundreds of thousands of music fans across the globe
are accessing music by their favourite bands, and thanks to sites like
Napster – which offers fast, free access to MP3 files to be stored on
your computer or burned on to CD discs – they can tap into this virtual
jukebox for the price of a phone call.”
Ben Marshall, NME, 15th January 2000

The MP3 file is the means by which one may compress music to a memory
saving size to download and then play back on the computer. Such files
are widely available for free as the internet allows people to upload
their entire music collection to their web server and other people can
then download it to their computers. This has been a case for much uproar
in the music industry who see such behaviour as being totally destructive
to the music business. I will look at this notion in this dissertation
and try to come to the conclusion as to whether or not the MP3 will herald
the death of the music industry or the birth of free artistic expression.

During the course of writing this dissertation I undertook a vast amount
of research. Due to the nature of MP3 being a fairly new phenomena I was
not able to call upon too much published theoretical material. However,
there has been plenty of reports both in the printed press and the internet.
I have referred to these as they are much more cutting edge and relevant
to now – the time of writing. It would seem that technology would not
wait for me to finish this work and there have been many developments
even at the stage of writing up my research. For this reason, many of
the stories referred to may have had significant developments between
the time of writing and the time of reading. I have included the results
of my own extensive research. I gave questionnaires to a quota of one
hundred people, from which my results have been collated and presented
in graphical form. I also interviewed ten separate people in depth to
find out more individual opinion on the subject of MP3. All of my data
is referred to at the relevant parts of this dissertation.

What is mp3?

“You, the consumer will be able to obtain every single
piece of music ever recorded for absolutely nothing.”
Ben Marshall, NME, January 15th 2000

Before looking at the implications of MP3 let us look at what MP3 actually
is. Basically, MP3 is a computer file which contains music or films. It
is interesting because it can compress data so that a file which would
normally be 40MB becomes only 3MB. This compression means that whole albums
can be downloaded from the internet at once. There are a few debates around
as to the legal implications of MP3. To get the facts about MP3 defined
for this essay I will refer to Michael Robertson (1998), writing for MP3.com
who outlines a few defining factors of MP3.

MP3 is not illegal, it is simply an audio compression format.

“MP3 is an audio compression file format and by itself is not illegal
or legal, but like many technologies it can be implemented for both legal
and illegal uses. It is similar to zip compression common to most PC users.
Zip files can be used to distribute copyrighted materials illegally or
for legitimate purposes. Some persons use MP3 to distribute unlicensed
music, but many use the technology for completely legal applications.”

A legal MP3 file would be a recording of uncopyrighted music such as
one’s own band or musical doodlings. Most classical music is also
free from copyright, unless the individual performances are copyrighted.

MP3 is the standard for high quality music and will soon be on every
PC.

“MP3 is an open standard, meaning no one organisation controls
it. On the Internet, open standards win and this is why even without any
significant corporate backing, MP3 is already the de facto standard. There
are more MP3 listeners, software programs, and hardware devices than any
other CD quality audio format in the world. Microsoft has built MP3 support
into Windows98 SP1. Macromedia Shockwave uses MP3. Newest version of RealPlayer
will support MP3. Microsoft NetShow also supports MP3.”*

Because nobody controls MP3 it can be used everywhere. This leads to
the modern equivalent of home taping. MP3’s are not copy-protected
so anybody can duplicate the files. They are also not restricted, for
example Microsoft’s Liquid Audio (not MP3) enables users to download
music files that can be listened to for a limited time, when they expire
they no longer work.

MP3 gives artists and labels freedom to market and sell their music anyway
they wish.

“Artists and labels can employ MP3 technology in the best way to
suit their individual needs. Give away one song to sell a CD, distribute
low quality versions of songs, sell individual songs for digital delivery,
prepend an audio commercial to songs, there are limitless possibilities
for artists to explore.”

This view is supported by many unsigned bands who use providers such
as Peoplesound, MP3.com and Napster to distribute their own music. Signed
artists such as David Bowie, Asian Dub Foundation, Prince, Chuck D and
The Beastie Boys are all in favour of MP3 for this reason. They have the
control now that they never had with their record labels – they control
the means of production and distribution.

Hundreds of companies are building businesses around MP3.

“A large number of software, hardware and content companies are
building thriving businesses around MP3.”

It should be noted that there are many illegal MP3 companies who deal
in MP3 CDs at computer fairs. These companies buy existing commercial
CDs and copy them, in MP3 form to other CDs so that up to nine albums
can fit on a single CD. These CDs vastly undercut the legal copies and
sell from between £3 and £10 an album.

Thousands of artists are distributing content in mp3 today.

“There are many thousands of artists already distributing their
content in MP3 format today. Thousands sell MP3 files and thousands are
using MP3 to market their work as on the MP3.com website.”

MP3 is the most cost effective and easy way for artists to explore online
music.

“It costs nothing to begin playing MP3s (simply download a free
player from MP3.com). With a modern PC, anyone can construct MP3 files
from audio CDs with a literally a few clicks of a mouse.”

MP3 can be as secure as any current audio format.

“MP3 is simply a file compression method which can also include
any advanced technology to regulate the use of MP3 files. Technologies
such as digital watermarking, preventing digital broadcasts from being
saved, restricting the playback of an audio file to one computer are all
possible and in use in MP3 applications today.”

Because nobody owns the rights to MP3, regardless of the fact that it
is possible to make the files secure there will always be unsecure files
available on the net. People will not necessarily want to download a limited
version of an MP3 file that offers unlimited use.

The music industry is not losing billions to MP3.

“Press releases have quoted losses in the billions to MP3 piracy.
If CD sales are lost due to piracy, many are sure to be made up by exposing
people to more music who then buy CDs from bands they would not have ever
heard otherwise. In reality, it’s an impossible number to measure. The
true impact of MP3 has yet to be felt on any grand scale.”

Artists and labels can make money employing MP3 technology on the net.

“Given the world audience the internet provides, smaller music
niches can be successfully identified and courted. Bands can touch a multi-million
person audience at little to no cost using areas like the MP3.com, mailing
lists and other online tools.”

MP3 users should respect copyrights.

“MP3 makes it a breeze to create digital reproductions of audio
works, but that does not nullify the copyrights of the author. Audio lovers
should always get author or copyright holder’s permission before distributing
content in MP3 format.”

This point is obviously MP3.com’s disclaimer for the implications
of all of the previous points. The fact that many people are enjoying
the fruits of MP3 can be attributed to its anarchic two fingers up at
the recording industry.

So MP3, it would appear, is here to stay. America certainly seems to
have been enjoying the technology for some time. The internet seems to
have a way of hyping up things, especially when it thinks it is destroying
commercial areas. I undertook some research here in England to find out
exactly how much people know about MP3 and whether they think it really
is the future of music.

What the people think

I carried out some research to find out what people’s
opinions are about mp3. My survey was with one hundred people from different
class, gender, sex and ethnicity. The aim of my research was to discover
what people actually think and know about MP3. Whilst the research may
not be wholly representative of the population it serves the purpose of
this dissertation adequately – particularly when the percentage gives
an overall bias in either way. The results of my research are detailed
here. The results are represented in percentages.

[stats chart here]

Of the people surveyed 67% had heard of the MP3 and 67% also knew what
MP3 actually is. Only 43% of the survey owned a personal computer and
of that 43% only 25% had internet access. Nobody in the survey owned a
MP3 player but 50% would consider buying one. 33% would spend no more
than £30 on a player whilst 50% said £50 and the remaining
17% said they would be prepared to spend £70. Nobody in the survey
would spend any more than this.

Question (advantages) Yes No
Music is easily accessed from the internet 71% 29%
Saves on time trying to find what you want from a record shop 43% 57%
Saves money as MP3s can be free 86% 14%
Better because one can create ones own selection of tracks for a CD 100%
0%
Saves money because purchaser doesn’t have to pay for packaging,
p&p etc 86% 14%
They cut out the middle man doing away with greedy record executives 71%
29%

Question (disadvantages)
It takes ages to download MP3s from the internet 71% 29%
Takes ages to find what you want on the internet 71% 29%
The legal MP3s are only from unsigned bands 57% 43%
The traditional LP or album is lost as MP3 tracks are selected individually
43% 57%
MP3s have no packaging – there is no tangible item 71% 29%
Because the internet is not regulated the products are do not come under
quality control 100% 0%

10. Are there any other issues you would like to raise regarding MP3?

Question ten is an open-ended question which I included to try and discover
any points that my questionnaire may not have covered. Whilst many left
this space blank one particularly important issue was raised:

“Although personal MP3 players are ok – I am waiting for the release
of in car MP3 players which would offer not only great versatility for
reading audio CDs but if one were to use MP3s for one’s own music
collection, this would do away with multi-audio CD systems – 200+ tracks
per cd.” (answer from one questionnaire).

The point above raises an important question. At present, the personal
MP3 players are basically mini-computers and cannot hold much more than
sixty minutes of quality audio. However, it is possible to buy (on the
black market) CDs full of MP3s that can be read by personal computers
if the have the relevant software (all included on the MP3 CD!).

I went to Bletchley computer fair and for £5 bought one CD containing
no less than six albums: “Standing On The Shoulder of Giants”
– Oasis, “The Beach Soundtrack”, “The Who love at the
BBC” – The Who, the new Death in Vegas album, The Brits double album
and John Lennon’s “Imagine”. The six albums all together
would have cost me £77.94 to buy from the shops, yet I managed to
get them all for a fiver! The traders were also offering five such MP3
CDs for £20 – a five pound saving. So for £20 one could have
the complete back catalogues of Queen, The Rolling Stones, The Beatles,
The Who and Madness. The Madness CD even came with lyrics to all 160 of
the songs on the CD. This prompted me into thinking that I could do away
with ever buying CDs from shops again, all I would need to do would be
to wait for the monthly computer fair and take £20 to get 1000 songs
from the latest releases. I counted three separate stalls dealing in illegal
MP3 CDs of all the latest chart CDs as well as classic albums. Each CD
came with a copy of WinAmp (MP3 playing software) and scans of the front
and back covers of the jewel case for the buyer to print out. In my plastic
bag I later found a price list and mail order form to buy by mail at no
extra cost.

When I got home I promptly copied the encoded new Oasis album onto a
regular CD to play in my Hi-Fi. Whilst it was copying I printed out the
front and back covers to give me an authentic looking CD. Total cost of
new Oasis album = £1.54 (£0.83 (£5.00/6) + £0.46
(blank CD) + £0.25 (ink)) This made me a saving of £11.45
as at the time the equivalent legitimate CD was £12.99 in most supermarkets.
Of course this was all for research purposes! If music companies provided
music legitimately in MP3 form on a CD it would indeed be possible for
in-car CD players with MP3 facilities to flourish. Instead of buying a
Jam box-set full of CDs from HMV one could get it all on one CD to easily
listen to with constant CD changing. If MP3 technology is going to take
off there could be catastrophic consequences for the recording industry.
In the next chapter I will look at these implications.

mp3 & The Future of the Recording Industry

“…the means to hurt big record companies are
now at almost everyone’s disposal.”
Steve Lamac, BBC Radio One

If music is to made available for free on the internet it could be said
that time could very well be called on the music industry as we know it.
Free MP3s of favourite bands would certainly be preferable to spending
up to £16.00 on a CD in Britain. If everybody in the country were
to buy a PC and download the music they want for free from web sites such
as Napster large companies such as EMI/Time Warner would need to act quickly
to ensure they retain their business. In this chapter I will look at the
implications for the music industry by looking at recent examples from
the media.

Writing for NME’s January 15th edition, Ben Marshall looks at the
implications of MP3 technology. He outlines some important points regarding
the time when cassettes first threatened the music industry. Twenty years
ago, Malcolm McClaren, the manager of The Sex Pistols had a plan to destroy
the music industry. He created a band called Bow Wow Wow whose first single
was called ‘C30,C60,C90 Go!’. The song encouraged people to
copy albums to tape and give them to their friends. The single was also
only released in cassette form. Marshall calls this “brutal, simplistic
nihilism” and suggests that the new MP3 ‘revolution’
takes McClaren’s anarchy to a new level. Marshall explains that
home taping did not kill the music industry but maybe MP3 will. “..the
means to hurt big record companies are now at almost anyone’s disposal.”
He says that every song ever recorded will soon be available for free
on the internet. On the minus side, he argues that commercial music will
no longer be produced. If the record companies are destroyed there will
be no funding for album advances. The excellent sound quality people have
become accustomed to from extravagant recording studios will be lost because
there will not be any funding.

The most notorious case of late is the ongoing battle between Napster
and the music industry. Napster (www.napster.com) is a program the enables
users to share their record collections online for free. People who download
the program from www.napster.com can create a virtual record collection
on their harddrive, consisting of Mp3s they have made from their CDs.
These Mp3s are then stored in a directory on their own computer (not Napsters).
When online other users of Napster can view and download entire collections.

Napster has come under fire from many within the music industry for infringing
copyright law. Both Metallica and Dr Dre are suing Napster for making
their records available for free online. Their argument is that they should
not be done out of their due royalties by the thieving internet users.
Napster argue that because no files are actually stored on their server,
they can not be to blame if users decide to share their music collections
illegally. Speaking in an interview with online magazine ZDNet (www.zdnet.com)
Napster’s founder Shawn Fenning says that his aim was not to promote
illegal copying of music but to allow users to communicate with each other
and share their own files. However, the RIAA say that Napster must shoulder
the blame due to the fact that the illegal sharing of music would not
be possible without the Napster program.

NME’s online site (www.nme.com) has been keenly following the Napster
case. In a report on 23 May 2000 one writer explains that “rock
‘n’ roll is poised on the brink of civil war over MP3. Fans are taking
on the record labels and bands in the Internet revolution that is MP3
downloading.” It is explained that whilst Metallica may be able
to block Napster users who illegally download and share tracks, they cannot
prevent the same people re-registering under pseudonyms each time they
are blocked. NME suggest that the music industry is fighting a loosing
battle. Not all bands follow the policy of Metallica and Dr Dre in their
anti-free download stance. NME.com says that Blur, Courtney Love, Public
Enemy, Smashing Pumpkins, The Offspring and Limp Bizkit are all pro-Napster.
Public Enemy’s Chuck D spoke at a Congressional Committee in Washington
in defence of Napster on 24th May 2000. He said that sites such as Napster
were vital to unsigned bands in getting their music heard. Of the existing
recording industry he is quoted in ZDNet (www.zdnet.com) saying “This
system needs to be eradicated and we must start from scratch.”

Perhaps Chuck D’s vision is naïve. When I downloaded the Napster
program I was certainly not doing it to listen to the new unsigned bands
that people like Anthony Wilson were interested in. I, like many others
was interested in getting hold of albums that I would be paying nearly
twenty pounds for in the shops. If the internet is to be a breeding ground
for new exciting unsigned acts that Peoplesound (www.peoplesound.co.uk)
would like to suggest then it would seem that for maximum publicity the
bands concerned would be fighting with all the other unsigned bands on
the net to get their music heard. The end result may mean that nobody
actually gets their new music heard because there is a wealth of competition
out there. When offered with thousands of bands with the description “OASIS
soundalikes” or one original Oasis album for free it could be suggested
that the majority of people would opt for the original, safe bet.

One way record companies could survive is to allow companies such as
Napster to charge a monthly fee for downloading all music. The fee could
be then split proportionately amongst the record companies. A recent survey
in the States revealed that 73 per cent of college students use Napster
at least once a month. But 58.5 per cent of them said that they would
be happy to pay a monthly fee of $15 dollars – around £10 – for
the service. Another study found that 60 per cent of people using college
computers were using them to download music.

Many artists are in favour of using the internet to distribute their
music and could be seen as being more forward thinking than their record
companies. Courtney Love, singer of grunge group Hole spoke out in support
of Napster at the Digital Hollywood conference at Los Angeles saying:

“Stealing our copyright provisions in the dead of night when no-one
is looking is piracy. It’s not piracy when kids swap music over the Internet
using Napster. There were one billion downloads last year but music sales
are way up, so how is Napster hurting the music industry? It’s not. The
only people who are scared of Napster are the people who have filler on
their albums and are scared that if people hear more than one single they’re
not going to buy the album."

Hole are currently in dispute with their record label, according to NME.com.
Geffen Records claim that the band owe them five more albums. Hole could
make their music available in MP3 form online, to get away from the legal
problems of swapping to another label.

"I want to work with people who believe in music and art and passion.
I’m leaving the major label system. It’s a radical time for musicians,
a really revolutionary time, and I believe revolutions are a lot more
fun than cash, which by the way, we don’t have at major labels anyway,
so we might as well get with it and get in the game."
Courtney Love, (Quoted on nme.com)

The Beastie Boys are another group who are in favour of using the internet
to give away free music. The band were one of the first to see the high
potential in internet marketing. In 1999 the band made available tracks
on their web-site:

“…before fans downloaded the band’s songs they must
first submit their email addresses. The band has thus collected more than
10,000 addresses – a valuable marketing tool.”
The Guardian, January 22nd 1999

This can be seen as a positive step for the Beastie Boys. They seem to
have a head for online business and are still helping with their record
company’s profits. However, many artists would love to see the back
of the record company full stop. The people they had once relied on to
distribute may now be redundant, now the MP3 technology is here.

"I don’t know that much about it, but if it destroys record companies,
then it’s good. Whatever gives bands the most artistic freedom and the
chance to make more money out of the fruits of their labour than the record
company does is alright by me. Because right now, record companies are
worse than the fucking Mafia."
Bobby Gillespie, Primal Scream (in NME, April 2000)

Ani Das of Asian Dub Foundation is supportive of Gillespie’s attitude.
He says in The Guardian (January 22nd 1999) that “The real reason
that a band needed a record company is for distribution. That’s
the only thing the musicians didn’t have access to.”

MP3 could also mean a great change to the way in which classical music
is distributed. Clive Gillinson, manager of the London Symphony Orchestra
explains in The Guardian (January 22nd 1999) that his musicians will be
able to copyright their own performances and sell them online to their
audience.

It can be argued that the internet offers a high potential for the distribution
of music whether illegally or legally. Briefly turning away from illegal
MP3s, there has long been an argument that internet companies undercut
the high street retailers by around 25% because one deals directly with
the wholesaler and the middleman is cut-out. Legitimate internet companies
such as Amazon (www.amazon.com) and The Jungle (www.jungle.com) offer
cut price CDs. I managed to buy The Very Best Of Ian Dury and The Blockheads
from Yalplay (www.yalplay.co.uk) for considerably less than my nearest
HMV. Then there is Let’sBuyIt.com where the price of goods decreases
with the amount of people ordering. All of these companies, along with
MP3 providers can certainly be seen to herald the end of the music industry
as it is today.

The record industry, however, is not completely defenceless. NME ran
a MP3 feature in the January 15th edition explaining that “The more
techno-savvy record companies are threatening to withdraw their advertising
from search engines like Yahoo and Alta Vista.” Of course revenue
can always be found elsewhere and there will always be the illegal search
engines to search. Jeremy Ford, Editor of .Net Magazine thinks that if
the record company is to survive it should really play on it’s trump
card – the notion of the artefact.

“(record companies) should simply encourage the notion of the artefact
– the thing you can hold – and lower their prices. Home taping didn’t
kill music and neither will MP3s, provided record companies realise that
pop is much more than just music. Why do they think we posters on our
walls? More than ever we live in a designer age. People want stuff they
can show off. You can’t show off an MP3, it doesn’t fucking
exist. Not in any material sense.”
Jeremy Ford, Media Editor of .Net Magazine.

Holding the above point I will now look at what exactly this could mean
for us, the consumers. As consumers of music we will loose the CD, the
Sleeve, the artwork, the photos, the lyrics, the jewel case. “What
is an mp3 file? It’s a song. That’s it, just a song. The whole
thing is about songs, individual, naked, unpackaged, singular, pieces
of lyric, melody and rhythm.” – Antony Wilson (Head of Factory Records,
The Guardian, Thursday May 6 1999). As Wilson says, all an MP3s are is
raw song. No packaging, no jewel case, no sleeve notes, no artwork, no
physical object. Online stores such as amazon and Jungle still deal in
the CD as it is presented in the shops. There are screen shots of the
cover artwork nearly always accompanying a few customer reviews and album
track listing and audio samples. This is not so for MP3s. Bands do not
need to waste resources on commissioning somebody to create some artwork
or packaging. There is no need to put the music on a CD – the PC takes
on this role. The PC provides the reusable hardware. So the future of
the music industry could almost certainly lead to the loss of all the
things that record and marketing companies deal in – the image of the
artefact. On the other hand, postmodernists such as Baudrillard (1993)
say that western society is highly concerned with the image. If people
are so concerned with what things look like, how will MP3 take off? MP3
is, after all, just a file.

People actually like collecting the physical artefact – The CD or LP.
People have music collections they like to show off. The notion of being
in control of the music is very important. CDs are like fashion statements.
CD collections can tell people a lot about the owner. In the next couple
of chapters I will look at why people enjoy the notion of the artefact
and the music collection and how the music collection helps with forming
identity.

mp3 and the death of the artefact

If MP3s come in to wide use the physical artefact will disappear.
What one will be left with is the guts of the product – the music itself.
Baudrillard (1993) would say that MP3 will never ever take off because
we are obsessed with what things look like. What does an MP3 look like?
People a less warming towards MP3 because they can not see it.

I asked people in my interviews about the aesthetics of the CD against
the MP3 file. Many were in agreement that the CD is more appealing because
there is an actual object to touch and hold:

“…with a CD you actually know you’ve got something
for your money, MP3 files are just things on your computer. My computer
got a virus last year and everything got wiped. I had some MP3s on my
hard-drive which I obviously don’t have any more – with a CD you
know it’s not going to get wiped.”
Emma Kent, 21, Bournemouth University Student

“My computer has got shit speakers, the music that comes out of
it sounds really crap – There’s this annoying buzz as well. You
can take CDs around to your mates houses or put them in your car. You
can’t do that with MP3s unless you’ve got an MP3 player but
they’re crap ‘cos you can’t just swap over music like
with CDs, you’ve got to go back to the mothership (the PC) to get
new music.”
Adam Cooke, 23, Nuneaton Designer

“I like CD packaging! When I buy a CD I buy into the whole deal
– I like to get the music, band photos and lyrics. It’s really annoying
when you buy a CD and the packaging’s cack. I don’t mind getting
MP3’s for free but I wouldn’t pay money for them. I think
they’re just another fad like mindiscs were. If you could buy a
CD with the full monty packaging you’d go for it over this bland
computer file.”
Austin Early, 21, Manchester University Student

These people obviously prefer the CD to the MP3. Only one person really
fought for the MP3 saying:

“Why would you really care about the standard CD if you could get
200 tracks in MP3 form on a CD? If they start putting out CDs of MP3s
out I’ll certainly be buying. It’d do away with having to
constantly change your CDs over. I buy a lot of singles but It’s
well annoying to have to change them over three tracks later. I really
like the idea of getting tracks off the internet and them copying (burning)
them to CD in their MP3 form to listen to later. They’d probably
be cheaper too with all the unnecessary packaging done away with.”
David Rose, 39, Unemployed

This person is the ideal candidate for MP3 as he seems to subscribe to
the idea that the image is not important, it is the music that one is
buying. He is not typical of the people I interviewed but if I had managed
to interview many more people the view may have been different. Through
my research it certainly seems clear that people buy into the whole product
when buying a CD. When I asked one person what makes him buy a CD? He
said “I buy CDs if they’ve got a good cover”. He was
unique in his answer and can be used to illustrate the postmodern theories
of Jean Baudrillard.

Kellner (1989, p68) in his analysis of Baudrillard’s work says
that “The proliferation of signs and information in the media obliterates
meaning through neutralising and dissolving all content, a process which
leads to both a collapse of meaning and the distraction of distinction
between media and reality.” Kellner was writing in 1989, when Mp3
would not have been much more than a dream to most people. Like Baudrillard
and numerous other postmodernist writers, Kellner believes that society
today has become encompassed by a mass of empty signs all fighting for
our attention but with no real meaning. The notion of image being all
is very important to them. They see the world being dominated by false
and empty ideology, marketing products which have really no use to anybody.
Mp3 technology throws a spanner in the works of such theorists. Kellner’s
belief can not be applied to Mp3 as the files are all content, no empty
signifiers. As stated earlier Mp3s have no packaging, no jewel case, they
are the bare bones, the actual song.

Boorstin (1978) says that people are happy and safe in their Postmodern
world:

“We risk being the first people in history to have been able to
make their illusions so vivid, so persuasive, so “realistic”
that they can live in them. We are the most illusioned people on earth.
Yet we dare not become disillusioned because our illusions are the very
house in which we live; they are our news, our heroes, our adventure,
our forms of art, our very experience.” – Boorstin (1978, p.240).

Boorstin believes that the world we have created around us is the world
in which we are comfortable. Image is important and it helps us form our
identity. For this reason it can be suggested that the majority of people
will not be accepting of the Mp3 because it has no image. Questions of
how one would market Mp3 files can be raised. Mp3s cannot be sold in shops
unless retailers employ the black market techniques I discussed earlier.
If shops were to sell CDs of Mp3s it would become rather expensive for
the consumer as it would make little sense to put one album on a CD when
nine could fit. I would suggest that stores like HMV and Virgin would
become obsolete as people could order Mp3s online and download them through
the computer for a fraction of the price of the CD which pays the retailer,
the distributor, the publisher and the artist. The main problem with this
idea is how one would actually market Mp3 files.

Mp3 being what it is could not be easily marketed in the traditional
sense. Everything in effect would need to become virtual. We can already
see on advertising on the internet. All of the search engines carry advertising
as well as all of the online magazines and even personal sites. The internet
is a virtual world but is not just a direct copy of the ‘real’
world. The internet is simulacra – the original is somewhat missing. The
internet is not moderated (yet). The internet completely destroys time/space
barriers and conventions and is symbolic of the Postmodern culture employed
in the works of Baudrillard and Lee. It is an immediate culture, a ‘now’
culture whereby everybody must have what they want immediately. There
is no waiting for anything because there is always another site offering
more of the same. The internet opens up the floodgates for competition.
Anybody can use the internet to set up a virtual business (I have: www.guyweb.co.uk).
But how would one become informed and excited about the latest release
by their favourite band? I would suggest that I would not actually be
as hard as one might think. Fans could deal directly with the web sites
of their favourite artists a la Public Enemy. New music could be delivered
as soon as it is recorded without waiting for a record company to give
it a release date. The question may not be how does one market the music
but when will the old style marketing techniques be done away with?

It seems that marketing is not exactly a problem. Magazines will still
exist, be they virtual or actual. The bands will still exist and increasingly
cheap technology will enable them to put out their own music on the internet.
Advertising companies will use all the media including the internet to
advertise their bands. Potential audiences will be easily reached through
digital television and the internet. With the wealth of internet companies
out there, the actual price of advertising on the net will be driven down
as everybody fights for a piece of the action. Most importantly music
will survive and there will be a much greater range of music for people
to choose from.

Of course this assumption largely ignores the fact the many people do
actually rely on the fact that there is a physical essence to the music
that they collect. Take DJs for example – they mix records for a living,
the ‘scratching’ and mixing techniques are the soul of styles
such as hip-hop and these records exist because of record companies. They
are made available en-masse to played in clubs all over the world. What
will happen to the DJ when the artefact has been killed? I would suggest
that DJs will survive. Everybody can be a DJ now with programmes such
as the Judge Jules embraced ‘Music’ and ‘Music 2000’.
For under £40 people can gain access to thousands upon thousands
of samples and a sixty-four track mixing console! People can then create
their own house/rap/techno/handbag/garage tunes. The digital sampler has
aided modern music for over a decade and every sound under the sun has
been sampled. DJs will survive because everything they once did by hand
on the ‘decks’ can be replicated by computer technology. The
question is ‘authenticity’. Do people really subscribe to
the idea that all their creativity can be uniformly categorised and collected
into rigid zeros and one’s? Defining one’s reality through
the sensation of touch could be seen as fundamental to one’s existence.
Music has always been synonymous with feeling. It is an expressive art-form
that defies the logic of the computer.

“Digital graphics and audio-compression routines amount to little
more than tricks. Like those magic eye 3D pictures that require viewers
to un-focus their eyes in order to perceive the illusion, today’s
digital trickery demands that we blur our senses to experience the simulation.
MP3 is not a simple digital sound format, but something known as a psycho-acoustic
algorithm. Rather than reproducing music as accurately as possible given
it’s space constraints, a psycho-algorithm attempts to fool the
brain into hearing what is not there.

By eliminating the real overtones associated with different instruments
and the environments in which they are being played, then replacing them
with a set of similar frequencies, MP3 files save a lot of space. The
algorithm imitates some of the qualities of good sound production, even
though it can’t actually achieve it. Ultimately our brain must use
the sonic clues it receives to imagine the real musical event. We fill
in the blank spots.

This might succeed with electronic music, which exists in a vacuum with
no real world basis for comparison. But MP3 re-creations of recorded instruments
and voices do not impact on our body in the same way that the real recording
does. Our brain may be fooled into believing that it’s hearing an
accurate reproduction of sound, but our body resonates about as much as
it would with a cheap AM radio. It’s the disparity between what
we’re hearing and what we’re actually hearing that causes
the confusion and discomfort.

Hopefully, new digital techniques will be developed that spend the processing
power of our computers on reproduction instead of simulation. Until that
time, however, I’d prefer it if such media came with warning labels:
“Digital simulations employed.”
Douglas Rushkoff Guardian, June 1st 2000

If, as Rushkoff suggests, MP3 files do not have ‘soul’, maybe
it would be a good idea for the record companies to expose this fact to
save their means of production. So, not only does the MP3 cut out the
artefact, it removes most of the original sound and what one hears is
pure simulation. The argument against MP3 survival would play upon both
of these points. Music has always been more than just (simulated) music.
Advocators of MP3 ignore the fact that people actually like to have the
physical ‘artefact’ in their collections and define their
lives through such artefacts. As a counter argument to Baudrillard who
suggests that people are unthinking and accepting of the image that is
sold to them I suggest that people are only too well aware of this fact
but buy into the image knowingly and as a means of collectively identifying
oneself and ones group.
identity, socialisation and mp3

Throughout the age of recorded sound people have had music collections.
It all started with vinyl in the 1920s which was superseded in the 1980s
by digital Compact Discs. During the last eighty years other formats have
come and gone – the cassette, the DAT, the Minidisc, the laserdisc and
the ill-fated Eight track cartridge. All were a means of storing music
for playback at the will of the listener. I believe that music is collected
not only to be listened to but for reasons of status. Music is synonymous
with lifestyle, it soundtracks our lives and, as I will suggest, it shapes
our identity. We like to be associated with certain bands, scenes or class
through our music.

In my research I asked five people about their music tastes and their
identity. I began by asking whether they collected music. One person actively
collected vinyl whilst the other four regularly bought CDs from high street
outlets. I asked what their music collections say about them. Below are
some of my findings:

“I won’t by certain CDs if I think people will take the piss
if they see them. I get the latest garage tunes at the moment. It’s
the scene I’m really into – all my mates are too….I do like
a bit of everything…I’ve got pretty similar CDs in my collection
to my mates. Before we go out and stuff we’ll put on the latest
quality tune.”
Jo, 18, Studying A-Levels

“I suppose my CDs are a bit of a fashion accessory yeah. To tell
the truth I’ll sometimes buy CDs that I’ve never heard before
because NME or Select say they’re really good and really hype them.
I’ve got tonnes of CDs in my collection I’ve listened to maybe
only once. Sometimes my mates’ll come around a go ‘oh my god
you’ve got KLF’s album’ and stick it on or something.
I’ll pretend to have listened to it loads but I’ll only have
heard it perhaps once!”
Harry, 21, Nottingham Trent University

I asked Harry why he spent money on albums that he didn’t even
like:

“Yeah, weird isn’t it? I dunno, maybe my mates will say they’re
really good or loads of them have bought a copy, I think it’s part
of belonging to a group – you identify with people don’t you? I’m
into the indie scene and so are most of my mates. I’ve had some
really great nights out and I associate certain songs with those nights.
I’ve bought whole albums before just for one song. A recent example
of that is this Status Quo collection I got for £2.99! I bought
it for “Pictures Of Matchstick Men” – the rest is pretty crap,
but that track is quality. They always play it at the club I go to, along
with “Arnold Lane” and other psychedelic stuff. There’s
also this thing that one day I’ll actually listen to the albums.
They also make your collection look more eclectic, don’t they?”

From this evidence it would seem fair to say that music is more than just
songs. Music is a way of defining identity.

I asked some people to compare browsing the internet for music to browsing
a shop for music to try and discover whether actively seeking out records
was an important and enjoyable pastime or even a social event:

“Every Saturday me and a few mates would take a trip into town
to look at the CDs. I like looking in places like HMV or Virgin for rare
imports and stuff like that. The KLF album I mentioned earlier was an
American import – you know with a bonus CD in it. I like those little
gimmicks and stuff. I think it’s a male thing though ‘cos
my mate’s birds hate even going into HMV. If I’m out with
a girl we tend to not go in record shops but when I’m just with
my bloke mates we usually start with meeting at HMV, buy a few things
and then go down to McDonalds or to the pub to look at our purchases and
have a few beers. The internet is sodding boring for shopping. You can’t
go down the pub online and get a virtual-lager can you? I think shopping
is a social thing. Unless your a bit of a looser.”
Harry, Student, Nottingham Trent University

“I personally don’t find looking for music very interesting.
I find shopping as a whole good fun. People go out shopping during their
weekends to get out of the house. When you’re young you go out on
a Saturday and hang around shops because you can’t get into pubs.
I think if you can get a few quid off a CD online why not? I wouldn’t
bother for a couple of quid saving. I’d rather pay a few extra quid
for the social activity of shopping with real people.
Helen, Student, Coventry University

“I enjoy browsing the internet for stuff. You can get a much wider
variety than is available in the shops. You get specialist sites dedicated
to the music you actually want. There are no checkout queues either. Music
is usually cheaper online (or free). The internet is a godsend for people
who live out in the country and it takes ages to get to a good record
shop. I’m all for it.”
David, Unemployed

I have found differing opinions in my research. The idea of shopping
being a social activity certainly seems to reoccur. The idea that shopping
is a social activity would seem to have implications for not only the
distribution of music but for products as a whole. Maybe the reason that
so many people are against buying online is because the thing they are
buying can not be touched before it is purchased. Helen would rather go
into town to a shop to buy a product than save two pounds online. It would
certainly seem that the internet tries to simulate the actual world in
every aspect. One can see three dimensional models or simulations of the
things they might wish to buy or they may enter chat rooms for simulated
chat the options are limitless. What could be considered worrying is the
fact that the human’s relationship with the computer is entering
the realm of science fiction. If one were to do everything by computer,
soon our species might develop into pure brain. Limbs would be unnecessary.
One could be directly hooked up to a computer a la “The Matrix”
and live in a totally simulated world. The question remains – Why opt
for the simulation when the real is freely available? People like to shop
for things because it is a social thing. Shopping enables communication,
interaction and other social activity. Buying music is a form of social
interaction. Human beings are a social species that require interaction
with other people. Many people are sceptical of the new technological
world and are not so accepting because the binary world seems rather cold
and uninviting.

mp3 for all

The new technologies of the Internet and MP3 seem to sit
comfortably with the press and the computer-literate middle class but
what of the rest of the world, the people who cannot afford computers,
or use them or even type? There is a large cross section of the world’s
population who have never even seen a PC. To them this dissertation will
almost certainly have seemed useless to their lives so far. In this chapter
I will look at people without computers in the home to gauge their opinions
of the new technologies. In my research I selected five people who, by
their own admissions are typically working class. All five of the quota
said they did not really understand what MP3 was nor did they really care.
This is fair enough, I explained and asked if the government were to give
them a free PC would they be inclined to use it to download MP3s?

“I probably wouldn’t know where to start, mate. Nobody’s
going to give me a free PC anyway. If I could get free music on the internet
then I probably would get it. Why not? I like the idea of the computer
being like the old jukeboxes – selecting your music for you.”
Mike, 54

“Yeah, I would be well up for getting free music off the internet.
I think they charge way too much for CDs! Sixteen quid is taking the piss
really. I think music shops are really greedy, it costs about fifty pence
to make a CD apparently – total rip-off!”
Harry, 21

Microsoft are developing a PC which should be available containing all
the up-to-date new technology to enable internet access for a mere £150.
The units will be sealed so that they cannot be upgraded. This is why
they are so cheap. The idea being that when the computer becomes obsolete
it can be thrown away and another, newer model can be purchased. This
will be similar to the console revolution seen today in Sega Megadrive,
Nintendo 64 and Sony Playstation. It is computers like these that will
be the major breakthrough in catering for the digital have-nots. If PCs
can be made available for £150 there is no reason why most households
should not be able to afford one.

Just because people can not afford a computer it does not mean they do
not have access to one. One person I spoke to, Amit Verma, 21, said that
he doesn’t own a computer but often uses one in his local library:

“I use the internet at my town library. They’ve got loads
of PCs. Sometimes you’ve got to wait a bit to get on there, but
others you can go straight on. I’ve got my own email address with
hotmail that I can check on any computer anywhere in the world. I don’t
really need a PC when I can use the libraries one for free. The bonus
is that I’m using their phone line, their electricity and their
computers. The best thing is that these computers are much faster than
some of my friends computers because they’re constantly online -
you don’t have to dial up or anything. I haven’t downloaded
any music yet, but I imagine It’d be cheaper for me to do it this
way.”

The labour government would like everybody to have access to the internet
by the end of 2001. Certainly, there seems to be access at the moment.
Many people who do have means to get the internet, still have no desire
for it. This is particularly applicable to older generations. When I spoke
to my Nan she was enthusiastic for the possibilities of the internet but
wasn’t too keen on learning how to use it. The other side of the
coin is the seller of MP3 CDs at Bletchley computer fair. He must have
been in his early sixties but seemed very clued up about the whole thing.

“New computers have given everyone the opportunity to have a piece
of the action. I make loads more money here than I did at my last job.
I’ve got a computer and a CD burner. I think it’s time to
rebel against those greedy bastards who make too much money on CDs. I’d
give the artists royalties too if they weren’t so greedy themselves.”
Stall holder, Bletchley Computer Fair.

At the moment, people such as this stall holder, are a minority. The
people with computers in their homes in this country are outweighed by
those without. This may change within the next few years. PC World now
sells very good computers with internet access for as little as £300
and prices of electrical goods continue to fall. However, technology is
getting increasingly better and more advanced and the digital have’s
are growing with it. The digital have-nots have a lot to learn to catch
up with most areas of computing. The gap is getting increasingly larger
with each generation on machine. As far as MP3 goes, the technology is
available to all. If anyone can get a computer, anybody can get MP3 playing
software for free. The MP3 part of the computer industry will continue
to grow and more people will have the ability to get free music. People
do not necessarily need to know too much about computers to use MP3 software.
Maybe the recording industry really does need to start worrying.

mp3 – a hint of things to come?

There are works of science fiction such as Star Trek which
depict a universe of simulation. In Star Trek The Next Generation the
crew are able to order food which is then simulated into being by an elaborate
machine. There is also a holideck – a place where the crew can go a run
a program which is a simulation of other worlds. Music can be listened
to by merely asking the computer for it. This may be closer to the reality
of now. MP3 is a compression format. It does away with the Hi-Fi of old.
MP3 players have no moving parts and the portable ones are much smaller
than the average Walkman. The Hi-Fi can now be thrown away thus clearing
more space. Martyn J. Lee (1993) talks about how in the postmodern age,
there is a heavy emphasis on time/space compression. Examples include
the microwave which enables meals to be cooked in a fraction of the time.
Mini Hi-Fis which are good quality Hi-Fi s but are very small, thus conserving
space in the living room. Wash and Go shampoo is to enable one to do two
operations at once thus compressing time. All are examples of the postmodern
world. Lee is critical of time/space compression saying that it contributes
to a schizophrenic lifestyle. He says that too much happens at once. Like
Baudrillard (1993) he believes that compressing time and space is detrimental
to human existence. MP3 is another time/space compression example. The
MP3 file does not conform to real time existence. It is a pure binary
form that relies on advanced computations to run. Whilst not directly
affecting our lives at the moment, it could be seen as contributing to
the time/space compression of the planet. As everything is demanded to
be available quicker, faster and everywhere maybe people will not be prepared
to wait for anything. The speed of life will be so fast and western society
may become even more schizophrenic, as Baudrillard would suggest.

The fact that music could become mere simulation of music thanks to MP3
could have wider implications for social life as it is known today. Maybe
the vision portrayed by The Matrix is an accurate portrayal of what could
happen when even one’s perception of reality is manipulated by binary
coding. Music, Movies and conversation are all being assimilated by the
Net. The enticing world of the Internet attracts many many people everyday.
Time seems to stand still when browsing the net and space is compressed.
Maybe in a few years time we will be able to physically attach ourselves,
virtual reality style into the net (as in Existenz). If the internet becomes
a perfect simulation of our own world will we disown reality for hyperreality?
On the other hand, as the Internet continues to simulate our world, we
may become sick of simulations and opt for the much more interesting real
world.

Of course, this is another dissertation in itself. The immediate consequences
that this dissertation is concerned with are the future of the music industry.
Will the record industry continue?

Conclusion

With this dissertation I have hoped to illustrate what MP3
is and what it could mean for music production. There are two definite
arguments concerning the phenomena. I will attempt to weigh up both arguments
to come to a final conclusion as to how the music industry will survive.

There are many advantages of MP3s. MP3s cost less than CDs and can play
practically anywhere, in any climate. Unlike Walkmans and Discmans, MP3
players have no moving parts. MP3 music cannot be jogged like a CD, scratched
like a record or worn away like tape.

“The internet gives the consumer more clout and freedom than the
consumer has ever had in the history of buying and selling things.”

Richard Branson on the Tonight programme. (June 1st 2000)

MP3 is good because, like home taping, it enables people to make their
own compilations of music – something personal to them. MP3 puts people
back in charge of their music collections. They can order the tracks they
want to hear, when they want to hear them. This tack, far from destroying
the record industry could actually help it. EasyCD, which gave Beastie
Boys fans the opportunity to create their own DIY compilation albums,
increased sales of the groups traditional albums by 265%.

MP3s can be seen to offer a wealth of opportunity for unsigned bands who
have up to now been granted little exposure through lack of media coverage
or lack of interest from record companies. Bands and artists can upload
their music to the internet for all to download for free. For people who
artistic expression is paramount but making money from music is not important,
the internet is a great virtual gallery of work. For signed artists such
as Prince and Chuck D the internet is a means of freedom from the bondage
of the record company. Established artists can certainly continue to make
money by controlling the release and distribution of their own material.
The art in effect really does belong to the artist.

“In the 20th century it’s almost unimaginable that in the
19th to listen to Mozart properly you had to travel to Vienna on the right
day

Question – Whose role has been more influential in late 20th
century media: proprietors, journalists, ‘spin doctors’, or
consumers?

This essay will answer the question detailed above by looking at each
role individually and assessing the arguments for and against each of
them. It will draw from the works of Hartley (1989), Tunstall (1996) and
Neil (1996). Before beginning a definition for each role will be outlined:
The proprietor is the person who owns the medium, for example, Rupert
Murdoch is the most well known news proprietor. When referring to journalists,
this essay will also consider the power of the editor. Spin doctors are
MP’s publicity agents and consumers are the general public. This
essay will focus on print journalism for it’s primary referential
point. It should be stated at this point that the best way to understand
the power division in the British press is through actual journalists
and editors. For this reason this essay will be referring to the biography
of Andrew Neil: “Full Disclosure” throughout. Neil was the
editor of the Sunday times throughout the 1980s, a time when Thatcher
was in government and at the time when Rupert Murdoch was attempting to
buy the rights to Satellite broadcasting in Britain. The Sunday Times
is a Murdoch owned paper and from Neil’s account it is possible
to get a great insight into the power of the infamous media mogul.

It can be argue that journalists have the most influence as they are
the people who find news stories and then write them. They also speak
directly to the audience using news stories, features and editorial.

“The biggest source of news in any radio or TV station should be
its reporting staff. Many local and television stations say their staff
should work and live an the same place. Their contact with everyday people
will bring them closer to stories.” Boyd (1991;13)

Boyd continues to say that the role of the investigative journalist is
to find something wrong with the world and expose it. The role of the
specialist journalist is to have expertise in certain fields. The influence
of the journalist can be seen in consumer television programmes such as
BBC’s Watchdog where companies often come into the studio to defend
their actions. In Roger Cooke’s ITV Cooke Report investigative journalism
would often put in fear into people of being exposed. Journalism can be
seen to have the power to change the world view. Boyd (1991; 29) likens
journalism to warfare:

“News editors are to broadcast Journalism what generals are to
warfare. They set objectives, weigh the resources, weigh the resources
and draw up a plan of campaign. Under their command are the officers and
troops on the ground…the plan of campaign is drawn up in the morning
conference. Producers and senior staff put their heads together with news
editor to map out the days coverage.” – Boyd (1991;29)

Boyd suggests that news is a strategically planned phenomena with definitive
aims and objectives. Even proprietors such as Rupert Murdoch realise the
potential power of influence in their staff. In his account, Tunstall
(1996;79) explains that editors are given money and a trial period. This
is further illustrated by Neil (1996), himself the former editor of The
Sunday Times during the Thatcher era. If the editor is successful he or
she will be given more money and become a “high -profile and enduring
figure in the industry”. Tunstall (1996) continues to say that successful
tend to last longer than most chief executives. The influence of the editor
is prominent in Tunstalls writing. He says (p80) that the Mogul wants
an editor who will last a decade or more: “It has become part of
the received wisdom of the industry that detailed editorial interference
is often the hallmark of the inept and unsuccessful newspaper owner or
top executive”.

Neil (1996; 58) talks of the influence of the journalist. At the beginning
of his time at the Sunday Times he was plagued by phone calls from one
journalist to be careful because there were “dark forces”
at work. His team at the Sunday Times were all against him because they
saw him as a threat. They wanted to continue with their own way of working
and put pressure on him to allow him them to do what they wanted. Further
more Neil (1996; 60) explains that he effectively had to bribe journalists
into departing from the paper. He says that the journalists were united
against him. He explains that he had to be guarded about what he said
before them as it was not unlikely for his comments to end up in a rival
paper “suitably distorted”. Journalists are portrayed by Neil
as being devious and underhand, yet Hartley (1989) explores the notion
that it is the journalists who relate to the people more than proprietors
or spin doctors. Hartley (1989; 110), speaking of television influence
says that “The only voices which are fully ‘naturalized’
are those of the news-readers, correspondents and (with certain exceptions)
the reporters on location.” He continues to remark that the ‘real’
voices allow ‘reality’ to appear through them. This would
suggest that journalists have the most influential role because they have
the power to influence through their identity as real people. However,
much of what journalist report, it is argued are through the craftily
managed publicity of the spin doctor.

Spin doctors can be seen to have the most influence because it is they
who manipulate the news to their political advantage. Politicians, according
to Tunstall (1996;21) have a knack to answering questions posed by journalists
– they don’t. Instead, they offer “the quickie soundbite”
– a process whereby the politician typically seeks to combine a few cautious
sentences which are a quotable phrase. One famous and memorable such occasion
was when Michael Howard was being interviewed on BBC Newsnight by Jeremy
Paxman. Howard continuously offered the same soundbite to Paxman’s
question. Two minutes went by with Paxman asking the same question which
merely require a yes or no answer, none of which were given. Tunstall
(1996;267) continues to explain that the government in general favour
secrecy but the cabinet, the core of politics, is “leaky”.
He poses the reason for this – “The Cabinet is leaky for the very
reason that it is a political body, full of professional politicians who
are also therefore professional publicists.” He talks of there being
a “market” whereby journalists acquire gossip and information
from the politicians. In return for this gossip, the politicians acquire
publicity for their causes, departments and for themselves as individual
politicians. During the last general election it is possible to see Tony
Blair as an excellent example of this. The short, sharp soundbite was
frequently slipped to the journalists to create ideas such as “new
labour” into the public consciousness. Often politicians supply
the angle for their story through the soundbite. These ‘spin doctors’
enable publicity for their party and therefore can be seen to have the
most influence.

Yet with all the publicity that spin doctors try to create, the media
mogul has the power to influence the spin doctor and government policy.
This is illustrated in Neil (1996) when he talks about the time when Margaret
Thatcher bypassed government policy regarding monopolisation and allowed
Murdoch to gain hold of British Satellite Broadcasting. Many suggest that
the reasoning for this was that she needed the support of the highly influential
News International Press during her upcoming general election. Proprietors
pull the strings of everybody beneath them. Proprietors own the newspapers
and as such can dictate the editorial content if they so wish. They can,
and do impose their views on the public. The argument can be taken away
from the Spin doctors for the fact that the British press are feared by
the government. “When the newspapers have been united, the government
have been unwilling to confront them.” (Tunstall, 1996;267). The
power of the British press is overwhelming. Even Americans fear the British
Press. It is therefore not surprising that during the run up to the general
election politicians will try to court the press barons. Tunstall (1996;413)
says that the reason the News Corporation got BSB was because Thatcher
wanted political favour from the top newspaper proprietor. Margaret Thatcher
knew the power of the press and was loyal to The Sun, Times and Telegraph
during her reign. Neil (1996) in talking of her memoirs expresses his
surprise that Thatcher does not mention her relationship with the press
during her reign. It could be seen, as Tunstall (1996;421) suggests that
the fate of the BBC as a public service broadcaster lies in the hands
on the national press. In terms of influence the media mogul press seen
to have the top card.

The media mogul can be seen to have a great deal of influence, since it
is they who are the proprietors and thus own the newspapers. Tunstall
(1996;19) talks of how Robert Maxwell “…devoted much of his
enormous energy to threatening, bullying and frightening the Mirror trade
unions into submission”. As a result of this practice 2,100 redundancies
were accepted. Neil (1996; 46) says that “I never had any illusions
about Rupert Murdoch. I never thought, as other editors had, that I was
going to be the one to change him. I knew he was an interventionist proprietor
who expected to get his way.”

Neil (1996; 72) further states that “..I had a proprietor who expected
me to take The Sunday Times in the policy direction I had indicated when
hired. I was prepared to be fired by Rupert for what I believed in; it
seemed crazy to risk Rupert’s wrath by following an editorial with
which we both disagreed…” Neil (1996; 47) further explains
that the government does have some control with regard to proprietor interference.
He explains that there are directors whose job is to ensure that this
is so. He says that Murdoch needed to get permission from them to dismiss
editors. However, it soon became apparent that Murdoch was quite capable
of getting around this minor obstruction seeing as he had hired the directors
too.

Unlike newspapers, television and radio stations have far less freedom
when it comes to broadcasting news. Both media are required by law to
be impartial. The BBC is governed by the royal charter and its fund come
from the license fee. Boyd (1988) talks of the government pulling the
“purse-strings”. The government is the nearest the BBC has
to a proprietor. Because the BBC does not have a proprietor as such it
is called a “public service” broadcaster. This does not mean
that its news content is free. During the period of the Falklands War
Margaret Thatcher is well documented to have been less than pleased with
BBC coverage. When a Argentine ship was sunk whilst sailing away from
the war zone, the BBC was quick to cover this, putting the current Prime
Minister in a bad light. This was inevitably rocking the political boat
and some, such an Neil (1996) suggest that this negative attitude of the
BBC lead to the Murdoch SKY TV monopolisation. The BBC is supposed to
be impartial – to show merely facts and not make judgement, yet when the
facts all point against the present government and future election results,
it becomes difficult to broadcast the absolute facts. It can not be forgotten
that during the Gulf War, the government imposed certain censorship on
the coverage broadcast. One reporter, Tony Dunn (1991) said that the MOD
would not let Falklands broadcasts go out until they had screened them
for content. Mark Urban, BBC Newsnight Journalist on The Late Show BBC2,
June 6th 1991 said “The greatest failure in reporting in The Gulf
War was the impossibility of showing the reality of what the airforces
were doing to Saddam Hussaine’s armed forces.” The reality
he discusses refers to the fact that the allied tapes were released and
sanitised so that the people being killed were obviously never shown.
Tracing the history back a little further, in 1988 the Home Secretary
banned transmission of the voices of spokesmen of the Ulster political
organisation, Sinn Fein. For this reason it can be said that the government
have the greatest influence in news.

Consumers can be seen to have the most influence as it is these people
that create the news stories. Without a population there would be no news
to report. Consumers also buy newspapers, if nobody made a purchase, a
newspaper would soon go out of business. Advertisers would withdraw their
revenue and media moguls would flounder. As Tunstall (1996; 215) explains,
people no longer have a loyalty to one particular paper. He says that
home delivery of papers has reduced in the 1990s. His findings would suggest
that consumers have the most influence on the news. The fact that newspapers
have more “light material” is due to the fact that it is this
material that attracts the readers. “The most popular items tend
to be things which are not really part of journalism as traditionally
understood – the television guide, the strip cartoons, and the stars (of
both horoscope and entertainment). Even the broadsheets have observably
changed their traditional image in favour of more supplements and colourful
design. The consumer is all important according to Hartley (1989; 130)
who says that newspapers bring people to advertisers. Most of the daily
newspaper’s revenue come from advertisers trying to sell products
to consumers. If the consumer is not buying the paper the advertisers
will leave the paper. This has lead to the closure of National papers
such as Today and The Daily Herald.

In conclusion, this essay has looked at the roles of journalist, editor,
spin doctor, proprietor and consumer. Issues for and against each role
as being the most influential have been raised. The journalist can be
seen as being the most important as it is his or her job to seek out the
news story and to give it an angle. The editor can be seen as being the
most influential as it I he or she who decides what is to be published
in the paper or broadcast as news. The spin doctor can be seen as the
most influential as he or she is the person that provides the journalist
with information and propaganda and therefore gives the journalist the
story. The consumer can be seen as being the most influential as without
the consumer there is no story, no news and thus no media. The proprietor
can be seen as being the most influential because he (and it is always
a he) owns the media. Newspapers are owned by incredibly rich people who
pay the wages of everyone beneath them. ITV rents franchises from the
ITC and only the BBC has no proprietor. The BBC does have a pecking order
and John Birt can be seen as the equivalent of a proprietor. From the
evidence collected during the course of this essay it is easy to see that
it really is the proprietor who is the most influential in terms of newspaper
news. Ruper Murdoch has been courted by Prime Ministers in the run up
to general elections so as to sway they paper’s bias. Even the government
understands that newspaper support could have a radical effect on the
way the people vote for them. In terms of broadcast media it has been
illustrated that the ITC has the greatest control and influence over independent
television. Advertisers dictate whether certain programmes will be show.
Advertising is the largest form of revenue for independent television.
Without it, there would be no football and premier sport action on ITV.
The consumers have absolute influence over the continuation of the BBC.
If everybody were to reject the license fee, the BBC would cease as a
public service broadcaster. The government controls the license fee, however
covert this operation may appear. The BBC can not rock the political boat
however much the facts state that the government is corrupt.

As far as news is concerned from the evidence found during this essay
consumers are the most influential. If there are no consumers there is
no news. News is about people. News cannot exist without people. People
doing things influences the news story. This is a fact. Proprietors can
however manipulate the lives of people to create news stories. The newspaper
is an instrument of propaganda for its proprietor. This essay has shown
how proprietors have regularly taken charge of their newspapers editorial
columns. These views help shape the consumers’ opinions and thus
it can be seen that the media even has control of consumer.

Words: 2807

Bibliography

Boyd, (1988) “Journalistic Technique“ Focal Press
Tunstall, Jeremy (1996) “Newspaper Power” Oxford University
Press
Neil, Andrew (1996) “Full Disclosure” Pan
Hartley, John (1989) “Understanding News” Routledge

Question: To what extent does the assessment of television as
a ‘window on the world’ remain relevant? Discuss with reference
to at least two genres.

This essay will answer the question detailed above by asking whether
TV can ever be considered as a window on the world? To imply that television
is a window on the world is to say that looking at a television set is
the same as looking out of a house in a window, except people can choose
anybody’s window in the world to look out of. There are two essential
arguments to the question. The first says yes, television is a window
on the world because it allows people to see other parts of the world
where they would perhaps never visit in their own lifetime. It is a window
on the world because it portrays life as it is through news, soaps and
documentary. The second argument says that television is not a window
on the world because television programmes are constructed. The process
of making a television programme involves more than placing a camera in
from of some action and filming. There is directing, editing, scheduling
and ratings to consider. For this reason television must be carefully
constructed to appeal to an audience. The essay asks whether the notion
of television as a window on the world remains relevant? This essay will
argue that the notion was ever relevant. With the rise of people such
as The Frunkfurt School, Glasgow University Media Group and the Birmingham
School, television and the media have been studied with some depth since
the seventies. Marxist theory from the likes of Adorno Chomsky suggest
that television is merely a means to replicate dominant ideology and ensure
the status quo in society. Postmodernist writers such as Baudrillard (1993),
Harvey (1991) and Lee (1993) suggest that it is becoming harder to tell
whether television is a window on the world because the boundaries between
reality and fiction are getting increasingly blurred. For them it is almost
as if the “simulacra”, the simulated and non-real has become
more real than the real. In a few generations time, television will be
the reality. In the past the BBC claimed to be an unbiased organisation,
merely reporting facts and informing, educating and then entertaining.
Many, such as Lord Reith, would claim that television was a ‘window
on the world’ when it was created. This essay will discover the
extent that it can be considered as one today. It will look at three main
genres: Television news, soaps and documentaries. By using the work of
the theorists mentioned above it will outline why the genres argue for
and against television as a window on the world.

The first issue that this essay will analyse is the idea that television
news is a ‘window on the world’. Television news is traditionally
about facts. In Britain television news is supposed to broadcast information
about current events in a non-bias fashion. As Hartley, (1989 p82) points
out unlike the British Press, television is required by law not to report
in favour of one point of view or another. The press must merely watch
and report, as an observer.

The BBC news guide states the following: “The BBC has no editorial
opinions of its own. It has an obligation not to take sides; a duty to
reflect all main views on a given issue.” – BBC News Guide. In Boyd,
(1993) p157. The BBC is a ‘public service broadcaster’, it
gets its revenue from the license fee which is paid by the public. It
has an obligation to provide for all of it’s main viewing groups.
It would consider itself a ‘window on the world’.

Boyd (1993) explains that the BBC news carries no editorial and merely
presents fact: “Our job is to present fact and truth with clarity,
dispassion and neutrality, however inconvenient or dismaying much of that
information may be.” – A distinguished editor of BBC news, 1987
in Holland, 1997. The government provides the BBC with its charter and
steps in when it thinks that the corporation is being bias over certain
issues. The BBC does not carry commercial advertising and therefore does
not have to answer to sponsors. ITV has is governed by the Independent
Television Authority (ITC) which steps in when issues of unfair portrayal
or liable are seen to take place. Independent British Television is not
allowed to carry editorial bias either. All British television must present
the facts and not judge.

On the other hand, many disagree that television is unbiased and therefore
not a ‘window on the world’: “The very selection of
news involves bias, there is some bias in every programme about public
policy; the selection of the policy to be discussed and those to discuss
it means bias.” – News at Ten newscaster Sir Alister Burnet. (Richard
Spriggs memorial lecture, 1970). – Boyd (1993) p157. Burnet here is illustrating
the point that it is a futile exercise to try to be a ‘window on
the world’ as there will always be some bias. It can be seen as
impossible to represent everybody’s point of view without leaning
toward one of them. “People who defend pure journalism are operating
in a world that’s unrealistic.” – News consultant Steve Meacham,
Guardian, 22nd July 1985. The point is that the world is bias, every person
on the planet holds prejudices of some sort and in this case television
news can be seen more as a mirror than a window, reflecting back the national
consensus. As Cockburn elaborates: “the first law of Journalism
– to confirm existing prejudice rather than to contradict it.” -
Alexander Cockburn in Boyd (1993)

The greatest example of news not being a window on the world can be found
at the time of war. In two examples, The Gulf War and the earlier Falklands
war, this essay will illustrate how television news can not be seen as
a window on the world during war -time. Mark Urban, BBC News Night journalist
during the Gulf War explains that it was impossible to show on television
what the airforces were doing to Saddamn Hussaine’s armed forces:

“The allied tapes were released…were sanitized so that the
people obviously being killed were never shown, and the Iraqi restrictions
ensured that only civilians who were killed by accident were ever shown
by western reporters.” – Mark Urban, BBC News night on the Late
Show, BBC2 June 6th, 1991.

“Myths inevitably supplanted reality; and papers such as the Sun
exulted in tales of Desert Rats, Battle of Britain type tornado pilots,
carrying on the tradition of the Dambusters in their low flying bravery…”
(Walsh, 1995,p5). He continues to suggest that Myths are more important
than economic and political facts and that during the Gulf War, even televised
news was fuelled with such myths, as no camera footage of the ground war
was ever broadcast. He says that Tony Benn still talks of 200.000 Iraqi
deaths, Laurence Freedman and Efrain Karsh suggest 35,000 whilst John
Simpson says the figure is more likely to be 30,000. However, at the time
of the war there was no reporting of this. There still has never been
a single photo of the ground war ever released publicly. If television
news is supposed to be a window on the world, it appears that the blinds
were down on this occasion.

Similarly, In Boyd (1993), Tony Dunn says that the MoD would not let
Falklands broadcasts go out until they had screened them for content.
During the Falklands, Boyd explains the MoD were very much against anti-British
footage being broadcast and as a result a large quantity never was. “In
1982 some TV film took as long as 23 days to get back to London, and the
average delay for the whole war, from filming to transmission, was seventeen
days.” (Harris, 1983). Harris continues to explain that when the
coverage was eventually broadcast, after Argentine surrender, it included
some harrowing shots of badly burned faces and blown off limbs. The worst
material was never shown. Whenever material came back from the Falklands
the MoD was informed.

When HMS Sheffield was sunk by an Argentine Missile it took 3 weeks for
footage to be broadcast. The window on the world became somewhat delayed.
Harris (1983) explains that when the Argentine ship The Belgrano was sunk
by the British, the footage was not shown at all. Sir Frank Cooper elaborated
on why this might be:

“We did not produce the full truth and the full story and, you,
as a politician, know as well as anyone else that on many occasions the
news is handled by everybody in politics in a way which rebounds to their
advantage. I regard that as something for politicians to decide but where
lives are a t stake, as they were in this case, I believe it was right
to do as we did and I have never lost a moment’s sleep on it.“
Sir Frank Cooper (Harris, 1983, p70)

Harris (1983) says that the unique circumstances of the Falklands war
gave the authorities complete control over news of the fighting. Information,
especially pictures, came out in a thin trickle. The British government
is seen by Boyd (1993) to hold the strings of the BBC. They provide it
with its charter and therefore have the power to control its content.
Most of the time they leave the BBC to itself, but in times of war, they
often take control of footage. This arguably suggests that television
news is not an accurate ‘window on the world’.

Turning now towards ideology to locate the reasoning on why television
news is not an accurate window on the world this essay will examine some
Marxist theories.

Holland (1997) talks of the Glasgow University Media Groups (GUMG) criticism
of television news. In the 1970s they launched a powerful attack on what
they saw as the “smug self-satisfaction of television news”.
They criticised it for its conservativism and its easy acceptance of the
status quo. Along with the Birmingham School, GUMG accused television
of “bias against dissenting political views, working class understandings
and the perspective of women and minority groups.” (Holland, 1997,p182)
GUMG’s 1976 book “Bad News” analysed coverage of certain
industrial disputes to see what media was perceived to favour. Research
showed that apparently neutral media actually concealed attitudes and
opinions. It can therefore be argued that television news can not be seen
as a window on the world as it is seen by the public to favour certain
groups of people. A window does not share this bias.

This essay has looked at news as a possible reason for maintaining that
television is a window on the world. It has concluded that it can not
be seen as such, since there is blatant existence of footage doctoring.
It turns now towards the television soap. The television soap is said
to mirror the reality of the real world. It raises contemporary issues
which many have stated help have helped them out of similar occasions.

“One of the most popular images of a daytime soap opera viewer
is some one who can’t tell the difference between reality and fiction”
(Allen, 1995, p182). He uses the example that some viewers send wedding
presents to soap couples who get married and attack soap villains when
they see them on the street. For these types of viewer, the television
truly is a window on the world. Althusser would suggest that most people
do not behave in this way because they know the wider reality of television.
Examples can be seen in Allen’s (1995) work on soaps. In his study
he writes that non viewers think soaps “lack plausibility”
and that they are unfaithful to people’s ideas of reality. “The
extravagance, the unlikeliness, the hyperbole departs from the limits
of common sense.”

Postmodernist theorists would suggest that television soaps can be seen
as a window on the world as they resemble the fragmented reality of real
life:

“Soaps are populated with “real” people in a knowable
landscape, people and places we are familiar with. Familiar in te sense
that we have seen them in soap operas before and familiar in that they
have aspects that are not too dissimilar to people and places we know
about from real life texts, such as news stories or a friends account.”
(Allen, p184).

Marxists would argue that this idea that television soaps are more real
because they are like television and currant affairs stories is dangerous.
Dangerous in the way that has been discussed earlier in this essay. If
it is to be accepted that television news is hardly a window on the world
then it cannot be true for soaps either.

Lee (1993) talks of time/space compression. This is evident in Soap operas
where many dilemmas and occasions happen often with incredible frequency.
Allen (1995) postulates on the fact that television soaps can not accurately
represent reality as there are large periods of dullness and inactivity
in real life. However, it could be argue that just because on person’s
life is dull and unexciting, it does not mean that this is representative
of everybody in the country. Eastenders, Brookside all have aspects of
people’s real lives within them at some point and for this reason
they can be seen as a window on the world.

“Soaps are here and now. They conform to real life seasons and
holidays and often refer to contemporary social issues like aids, sexual
harassment and homelessness. They will sometimes adapt recent news stories.”
(Allen, p184).

Marxists such as Gramsci, Althusser and Chomsky would see soaps as another
means to represent the hegemony and ideological state apparatus in society.
The idea that the soap could be a ‘window on the world’ is
preposterous to them. Television soaps for marxists merely fuel capitalism
to keep the proles down. They would say that contemporary issues are represented
but always with outcomes which do not rock the political boat.

The Marxist age is today not what it once was. Today is the realm of
the postmodern, where people are aware of their own domination but are
more accepting and cynical than before.
People such as Abercrombie (1996) suggest that it is harder to see whether
television is a window on the world or not. He talks about the fact that
as a society, people live less in reality but more in the images of representations
of reality. He say people live in an image saturated society. He uses
the example taken from Fiske’s research (1991) who says that in
one hours television a western person is likely to see more images than
a member of a non-industrial society is likely to see in a lifetime. Abercrombie
agrees with the likes of Jean Baudrillard (1993) saying “We live
in a postmodern age where there is no difference between the image and
other orders of experience.”

Baudrillard (1983) claims that television creates a “simulated
culture”. The “window on the world”, the television
set has created a “hyper-reality”. A notion that Featherstone
(1991) in Abercrombie (1996) elaborates on: “A world in which the
piling up of signs, images and simulations through consumerism and television
result in a destabilised, aestheticized hallucination of reality.”
For Baudrillard (1993), culture has become “free floating”.
It is everywhere. It is “actively mediating and aestheticizing the
social fabric and social relaitonships.”

Kellner (1991) agrees with this and also puts forward another notion:
That it is hard to tell whether television informs the masses or masses
inform television. Maybe television is a window on the world more than
ever because western society is living and breathing television.

To suggest that television is a window on the world is to suggest that
it is entirely passive. McQueen (1988) argues that television is active
in creating false needs..

“Television creates false needs. In capitalism these ‘true
needs’ are hidden by the ‘false needs’ of consumerism.
Real freedom – to participate in a genuinely democratic society as a free
thinking, creative individual – is replaced by a series of choices between
products and lifestyles offered by the market and political parties all
representing the interests of the dominant class.”

It can be seen that television soaps create false needs too. Glamorous
lifestyles or gritty realism portrayed in soaps can be seen to create
false needs in people to become more like these people. Rather than being
a “window” Television can be seen as being a bourgeois ideal
to maintain the status quo in society:

“The color film demolishes the genial old tavern to a greater extent
than bombs ever could…No homeland can survive being processed by
the films which celebrate it, and which thereby turn the unique character
on which it thrives into an interchangeable sameness.” (Adorno,
1991, quoted by Strinati, 1995).

McQueen (1988, p242) uses some Marxist ideas to explain why the notion
of a window on the world is irrelevant. He says that Althusser talks of
Ideological State Apparatus’ but unlike the Frankfurt School, suggests
that the masses are not unthinking and will challenge the ideologies.
Chomsky says the role of the media is to reduce the subordinate population’s
ability to think – reducing the group to apathy. Gramsci talks of “hegemony”
to understand the media. The media represent dominant forms and ideas.
The Bourgeoise retain power and ideology due to the subordinate groups
acceptance of the ideology. This results in hegemonic consensus and therefore
the idea of “common sense” comes about. In return for proletariat
support, the Bourgeois give wage increases and benefits. Gramsci’s
ideas seem to serve the interests of the ruling class. Hall says that
television creates moral panics to keep social order. When political consensus
breaks down scapegoats are found to take the blame. If this is the case
then, far from soaps being a window on the world, they are merely tools
of the government to replicate the hegemony and status quo.

Turning to the documentary and recent “docu-soaps” this essay
will try to find some form of television which can today be seen as a
“window on the world”. The so called “docusoap”
can be found in programmes such as “Airport” , “Ibiza
Uncovered”, “Neighbours from Hell” etc. These are often
broadcast as a ‘slice of real life’. The documentary team
follow around certain people over a series of programmes to be a ‘fly
on the wall’ of their lives. This type of programme really began
with the BBC 7up documentary in the 60s. Today, many would argue, the
docu-soap is far from resembling real-life.

Kilborn and Izod (1997,p184) argue that whilst documentaries might “engage
with the real world” they still have a narrative structure. They
are ruled by the notion of linear time. The documentary can never be one
camera recording for half an hour at a time as this would look out of
place on the television screen. The fact is that the television channels
are constantly fighting a ratings war and are aware of the audiences ability
to change channel. For this reason documentaries and docu-soaps must subscribe
to sensationalism of television soaps. The documentaries must have observable
‘events’ which propel the programme into new areas of meaning.
Kilborn and Izod continue by outlining the fact that in today’s
world there is a blurring of boundaries or reality and fiction. They outline
some techniques to keep the viewer’s attention: “eye catching
shots, expressive music and flamboyant cutting patterns…dominant
narration can be imitated from fiction films to enhance the impression
of truthfulness.” They continue to talk of documentaries today.
They (p239) explain that the relationship between programme maker and
audience has developed to the point where audiences are now far more knowing
and sophisticated in relation to television. They also suggest that television
documentary makers are less inclined to patronise their audience by taking
the pious BBC style documentary of the past. Rather than trying to educate
the audience, film makers are more inclined to talk to their viewers in
a language they understand. There is an acknowledgement that the audience,
far from being Gramsci’s unthinking mass, are sceptical of programmes
more in line with Althusser’s notions. Documentaries now cater for
the sceptical viewer, often taking his or her side. The problem with this
idea is that the documentary, typically a factual work, becomes more like
fiction, but the ideology remains placed within the real world. It could
be seen that this kind of programme is the most real-life like, not by
content, but by relating to real people’s scepticism and cynical
outlook.

In conclusion this essay has addressed the question “To what extent
does television as a window on the world remain relevant” by looking
at the genres of television news, soap and documentary. Using relevant
theory it has seen that news is not a ‘window on the world’
in times of war. The examples of the Gulf and Falklands wars were covered.
With reference to soaps, Marxist theory in the form of Althusser and his
notion of the Ideological State Apparatus was discussed. The window on
the world in soaps was found on some levels, yet, still, the idea that
the people are merely actors and not real life people comes into play
suggesting that soaps are more of a mirror than a window. Kilborn and
Izod close with the following notion “As with and piece of creative
or critical work, the final arbiters are always going to be the audience
or readers at whom the work is directed.” (p239) From this point
of view it is possible to conclude that television is not a window on
the world. It is also possible to conclude that whilst indeed television
is not a window on the world, neither is it the organised controlling
of the masses as some Marxists would like to suggest. There is a notion
of the public being unthinking and accepting of television yet this does
not tally when watching documentaries of ‘real people’. In
such documentaries the subjects appear to ‘play up’ (Kilborn
and Izod, 1997) to the camera and are only too aware of the medium. When
looking at early documentary such as 7up the subjects behave far differently
to people in today’s docusoaps. In this postmodern age television
is the new God and as Baudrillard (1993) suggests – it is harder to know
whether television informs the masses or masses inform the television.
The blurring of boundaries is certain. For the purposes of this essay
a postmodernist conclusion will not suffice. Therefore on the evidence
gained the essay agrees that the assessment of television as a window
on the world does not remain relevant today, if indeed it ever did.

Guy Carberry, 3rd May 2000.
Words: 3,346

Bibliography

McQueen, David (1998) “A Media Student’s guide”, Arnold
Abercrombie, Nicholas (1996) “Television & Society”, Polity
Holland, Patricia (1997) “The Television Handbook”, Routledge
Walsh, Jeffery (1995) “The Gulf War Did Not Happen”, Arena
Harris, Robert (1983) “The Media, The Government & The Falklands
Crisis”, Faber & Faber
Kilborn & Izod (1997) “ An Introduction To Television Documentay”
Manchester Uni Press
Allen, Robert. C. (1995) “To be continued..Soap Operas Around the
World” Routledge
Baudrillard, Jean (1983) “Simulations”,
Baudrillard, Jean (1993) “Symbolic Exchange & Death”,
Lee, Martyn (1993) “Consumer Culture Reborn”, Routledge

References

Milner, Roger (1983) “Reith”, mainstream publishing
Harrison, Martin (1985) “TV News, Whose Bias?” Policy Press
Hartley, John (1989) “Understanding News” Routledge
Neil, Andrew (1996) “Full Disclosure”, Pan Books
Fiske, John (1987) Television Culture”, Methuen
Morrison, David E. (1992) “Television & The Gulf War”,
John Libby
Bonner, Paul (1998) “Independent Television In Britain”, Macmillan
Press
Harvey, David (1989) “The condition of postmodernity”,

Question: How far do you agree with Baudrillard’s claim
that the profusion and proliferation of media images today has undermined
critically the stability of contemporary mass communication to the extent
that communication has been reduced to an incoherent babble’?.

This essay will address the question detailed above by looking at a selection
of Marxist and Postmodernist works. Firstly it will address the central
idea that the proliferation of media images today has undermined the stability
of contemporary communication by analysing the theory presented by French
intellectual Jean Baudrillard. It will examine the central ideas raised
by Baudrillard (1983, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993), David Harvey (1989), Frederic
Jameson (1991), Barthes (1980), Lee (1991 & 1999) and Evans and Hall
(1999) all of whom suggest that it is the fault of television that this
babble has occurred. This essay will first look at the essence of what
Baudrillard claims is occurring and then address four central ideas for
further analysis. The central ideas to be examined are: 1. People are
more concerned with what things look like than the actual meanings behind
them, 2. People no longer seek knowledge, but instead favour escapism
from the wider reality of the world via their television sets, 3. It is
now hard to distinguish between the reality and the simulacra because
postmodernity by definition borrows and recycles dead forms, 4. People
today live in a three minute culture where texts are consumed rather than
read. Whilst addressing all five of these points a critique will also
be offered from a largely Marxist perspective drawing from the likes of
The Frankfurt School, Louis Althusser, Noam Chomsky, Antonio Gramsci and
Stuart Hall. Marxist argue against the postmodernist viewpoint suggesting
that the population are not unthinking and accepting as people such as
Baudrillard would like to have them believe.

Kellner (1989, p68) in his analysis of Baudrillard’s work says
that “The proliferation of signs and information in the media obliterates
meaning through neutralising and dissolving all content, a process which
leads to both a collapse of meaning and the distraction of distinction
between media and reality.” He continues to elaborate on this point
explaining that in a society “saturated with noise”, useful
information and meaning “implode into a meaningless noise, pure
effect without any content or meaning.” Baudrillard (1989) attributes
this to the media and the way that it apparently dissolves information
and implodes on itself. The effects of this, Baudrillard suggests, leads
to a homogenised audience with homogenised ideas and experience. This
in turn leads to the idea that audiences are so homogenised that it is
no longer possible to determine what effect the masses have on the media
and what effect the media has on the masses. He continues to suggest that
audiences have become unthinking, and only care about experiencing escapism
and have no interest in meaning. In his 1999 lecture, Martyn Lee explains
that Baudrillard believes that people no longer read television, they
merely graze the screens, taking what they want then hopping elsewhere
in search of escapist fulfilment elsewhere. Television programmes are
no longer read as texts and as such the idea of communication becoming
a ‘babble’ arises. Because people do not watch from start
to finish, only fragments of information in short bursts are ‘watched’
the meaning is never understood. People no longer care about meaning but
must feed their desire for more visual pornography. This essay will now
critically analyse each of Baudrillard’s main points to try to reach
a conclusion as to whether communication really has become mere babble.

The first point to address is that in the postmodernist era, people are
more concerned with what things look like than the actual meaning behind
them. Saussure was the originator of the concept of the signifier and
the signified. In Evans & Hall (1999, p138) it is explained that “The
signifier is the material dimension of the sign, for example the sound
of the word “cat” or the printed letters of the word “cat”
on a page. The signified is the conceptual dimension of a sign; in the
case of a cat: A certain species of animal.” Barthes (1980) is in
favour of saussures concept but fears that in the postmodern age it has
become hard to locate any signification with the signified. According
to Barthes (1980), every sign implies three relations. These are interior
and exterior (actual) and exterior (virtual). It is the interior relation
that is lost in Baudrillard’s modern world. The ‘interior’
relation it that which unites the signifier to the signified. The other
two exterior relations are still present as they unite the sign to other
signs. The world according to Baudrillard is heavy with signs and loose
on meaning. This is why he talks of communication being reduced to “babble”.
Postmodernists believe that the incoherence is down to the amount of signs
all competing for attention. Texts are not read from beginning to end
– they can not be, there is too much of everything else to miss. The irony
is that there really is nothing to miss because nothing really makes sense
out of context without a beginning or an end. The search for knowledge
has become futile. This can be seen when searching the internet for hours
and leaving with nothing. The internet is a prime example of a great deal
of empty signifiers all competing for attention. Barthes (1980) argues
that in the pre-postmodern age the sign was far more simple than it is
today. It was previously possible to simplify the sign for absolute definition.
Today it is far more difficult to do this. He says that “today the
symbol is much less a codified form of communication than an affective
instrument of participation. By this he is referring to the idea of style
and image. Lee (1993) agrees with this notion as does Baudrillard (1993)
who both say that signs are used for referring to one’s cultural
mobility rather than for any real, non-aesthetic reason. Barthes (1980)
says that there is a “crumbling of the symbolic conciousness”.
The commodity sign now has no reference to the labour or origin of it’s
production.

The argument against this idea comes in the form of Marxist critique.
The idea that people only care what things look like and are not concerned
about the labour involved is naïve and although the roots of a commodity
are hidden, people are still aware of the implications. For this reason,
third world plights are still heard and the normal society will still
get aid to places such as Mozambique and try to eliminate third world
debt.

The second argument concerns the idea that people no longer seek knowledge
but would rather remain unthinking and escape from the reality of the
world using their television sets.

The idea that society no longer cares about learning but would rather
fall into a world of escapism is rejected by Marxists because people are
not stupid. People still live in the real world as they are involved in
the reality of the working world. There will always be the space between
managers and the workers. The recent problem of BMW selling Rover can
be seen to support this idea. People are still interested in events of
the real world and do not believe everything they see on television.

The third idea is from Baudrillard (1983) who suggests that it is now
hard to distinguish between the real and the simulated. This view is shared
by Harvey (1989) and Jameson (1991) both of which talk about the notion
of postmodern architecture borrowing from dead styles. Talking about Baudrillard,
Conner (1989) explains that in the postmodern age “signs are no
longer required to have any verifiable contact with the world in which
they allegedly represent.” He explains that Baudrillard raises four
stages in which reality has become simulation: “Initially the sign
is ‘a reflection of a basic reality’ (this might be the stage
of scientific referential language which Jameson dates from the reifying
emergence of bourgeois knowledge).” This can also be seen in the
‘olden days’ when red meant “stop” and green meant
“go”. “In the second stage, the sign ‘masks and
perverts a basic reality (this might be the stage or theory of ideology
as the false consciousness which prevents people from seeing their true
alienation or exploitation)”. This falls in line with Marxist thought
discussed earlier in this essay – television being a tool for such a cause.
“In the third stage, the sign ‘masks the absence of a basic
reality’ (harder to think of examples for this one, though Baudrillard
instances the ideas of the iconoclasts, who feared and despised images
of the deity because the believed the images were testimony to the absence
of any deity)”. The internet can also be seen as an example of this.
The internet can not exist outside of it’s binary code in any form.
The two dimensional screen with flickering graphics mask the fact that
what is being looked at is entirely simulation. In the forth, terminal
stage, the sign ‘bears no relation to any reality whatsoever: it
is its own pure simulation’. Baudrillard (1983 p10) in Conner (1989).
This stage is where postmodern television programmes come into their own.
Programmes such as Reeves and Mortimer, Alan Partridge, Brass Eye and
Harry Hill have no relationship to the real world as such as they are
mere pastiche and parody of existing simulation – television programmes.
Programmes like these are post-irony, it would be hard for anybody without
knowledge of the cultural referants to make any sense of them whatsoever.

It is the fourth stage that Baudrillard (1989) claims that western society
is now within. In his famous example of Disneyland, Baudrillard suggests
that peoples traditional ideas of America are recreated in the synthetic
tourist attraction. Harvey (1989) thinks that Baudrillard’s are
over exaggerated for the most part but does agree with him on this point
“U.S. reality is now constructed as a giant screen: “the cinema
is everywhere, most of all in the city, incessant and marvellous film
and scenario.”” Harvey says places are dressed up to attract
tourists. He uses the example of the medieval castle: “…medieval
weekends (food, dress, but of course not the primitive heating arrangements).”
Continuing on this line of thought, Harvey (1989, p300) explains that
it is now possible to sample the world’s cuisine in exactly the
same form the world over. The simulations of Italian, Chinese, Mexican
and Indian food are everywhere. In England the national dish is the Indian.
The notion of the simulated being more real than real is evident when
people say that their favourite dish is the Vindaloo which is an Indian
dish invented by English people. Harvey (p300) also explains that the
world’s geographical complexity is portrayed nightly on the television
screen. People think they know what New York is like because they have
seen the place on television. The simulation becomes accepted as the real.
Harvey and Baudrillard both argue that the simulated has become more real
than the real, especially if one were to visit New York and discover that
the actual place was not as ‘real’ or ‘authentic’
as the simulation on the television screen. Jenks in Jameson (1991, p301)
argues that “Why, If one can live in different cultures, restrict
oneself to the present, the locale?” Boorstin (1978) says that this
may lead to problems:

“We risk being the first people in history to have been able to
make their illusions so vivid, so persuasive, so “realistic”
that they can live in them. We are the most illusioned people on earth.
Yet we dare not become disillusioned because our illusions are the very
house in which we live; they are our news, our heroes, our adventure,
our forms of art, our very experience.” – Boorstin (1978, p.240).

Jameson (1991) says that society is in danger of becoming a prisoner
of the past. He says the world of pastiche is a world in which “stylistic
innovation is no longer possible.” Writing about Jameson, Karran
(1998) says that “all that is left is to imitate dead styles, to
speak through the masks and speak with the voices and styles in the imaginary
museum.” He says that culture is now imprisoned by the past. This
suggests that society is lost and ambling around in the dark searching
for an identity. Hebdige in Evans & Hall (1999, p109) says that this
exercise of searching is futile: “….appearances can no longer
be said to mask, conceal, distort or falsify reality… reality is
nothing more than the never knowable sum of all appearance. For Baudrillard
‘reality’ flickers. It will not stay still. Tossed about like
rimbauds ‘drunken boat’ on a heaving sea of surfaces, we cease
to exist as rational cogitos capable of standing back and totalising on
the basis of our own experience.”

It can be argued that this point of view is not shared by all. People
who visit Disneyland do not necessarily think that all of America is like
the simulation provided by the tourist attraction. Indeed, Marxist theory
from people such as Chomsky would suggest that the public are not totally
accepting of the images shown to them on television. Credit is not always
given to the people who are critical of consumerism and capitalism. Baudrillard
(1991) suggests that people are unthinking and ruled by television. He
makes no mention of where he fits into the theory. If he has the power
to be critical of the media then surely others do too. In Kelner’s
later work this point is addressed. Baudrillard’s theory only seems
to work insofar as the masses remain unthinking, uncritical and accepting
of the McDonaldization of society, believing the simulacra to be the real.
For Baudrillard’s model to work, the masses would not never actively
and critically read texts, but passively consume everything they see as
fact.

This leads onto the final point: That texts are consumed rather than
read. Postmodernists argue that this is the case. Because society lives
in a three minute culture, the masses are more accepting of what they
see on television. When something comes on that they do not want to see,
they can change channel. The notion that people “graze” their
television sets has been argued by people such as Lee (1991). Boorstin
(1978) says that “We imagine ourselves masters of a plastic universe.
But a world we can shape to our will – or to our extravagant expectations
– is a shapeless world.” Chen & Taylor in Harvey (1991 p302)
explains the consequences for grazing empty signifiers in search of escapism.
They explain that by merely consuming texts, people risk becoming “split
personalities in which the primitive life is disturbed by the promise
of escape routes to another reality.” The ‘babble’ therefore
arises because society is becoming schizophrenic and directionless, inspired
only by the image of the latest commodity. Meaning is no longer understood
yet is desired but people are trapped by the constant barrage of signifiers
all pulling for people’s attention. One great example of this can
be seen in the internet. The internet promises a wealth of information
but is the embodiment of postmodern society – a platform for grazing for
information with hundreds of thousands of empty signifiers, all pulling
the grazer into different areas of promise, yet all lacking that vital
content and meaning.

The counter argument is that people do not simply sit in front of their
television sets and passively digest programmes. Instead, they challenge
and criticise what they see. People are now more sceptical of television
and it’s ideology. This could be why programmes such as the Ali
G show pull such high audiences. Programmes such as this challenge the
status quo and dominant ideology by addressing themes and ideas that appeal
to the reality of many people’s lives. The idea of winning and ‘ounce’
would never have got onto television a few decades ago.

In conclusion, it seems appropriate to address the main themes covered.
The first point discussed was the idea that people are more concerned
with what things look like than the actual meanings behind them, 2. People
no longer seek knowledge, but instead favour escapism from the wider reality
of the world via their television sets, 3. It is now hard to distinguish
between the reality and the simulacra because postmodernity by definition
borrows and recycles dead forms, 4. The diversity of media images and
large choice of television programmes mean that there is never a common
talking point unlike days previous when people would talk about their
similar viewing experiences, 5. People today live in a three minute culture
where texts are consumed rather than read. So, has the proliferation of
media images undermined the stability of mass communication? Postmodern
thinking certainly suggests that it has. Advertising and television can
be seen to be contributing to the ‘babble’. There is certainly
a profusion and proliferation of media images amongst the commercial world.
Advertisers sell the image, even Sprite do, despite what the advert might
say. This essay will offer the argument that it is the media that has
become lost in it’s abundance of empty signifiers. It is the producers
of these images that are babbling to each other. The notion that communication
of the masses has become a babble can be written off because everybody
is not unthinking and uncritical of what they see. People still understand
that they are exploited but are aware of the inevitability of this. As
such it should be remembered that the mass media is not a separate entity
from the rest of society, it is part of it. Normal people work for television,
only ideological state apparatus’ and government intervention prevent
proper communication from happening, not the wider society who are still
as intelligent and critical as ever, if not more. The question really
needs to be asked that where will communication go next? Will the internet
and the thousand plus digital channels coming to the UK lead to a incoherent
babble? The fact that the uptake on such television has been immensely
slow despite heavy publicity and offers speaks for itself – the public
are only too aware that there is too much rubbish on the television already.

Guy Carberry, 4th May

Words: 3023

Bibiography

Evans & Hall (1999) “Visual Culture: The Reader”, Sage
Walker & Chaplin (1997) “Visual Culture: An Introduction”,
Walker & Chaplin
Kaplan, (1993) “Postmodernism and It’s Discontents”,
Verso
Sontag, Susan (1980) “A Barthes Reader”, Noonday Press
Boorstin (1978) “The Image”, Atheneum
Baudrillard, Jean (1988) “The Ecstasy of Communication”, Semiotext
Baudrillard, Jean (1983) “Simulations”, Semiotext
Baudrillard, Jean (1993) “Symbolic Exchange & Death”,
Sage
Baudrillard, Jean (1986) “Seduction”, Sage
Kellner, Douglas (1989) “Jean Baudrillard: From Marxism to Postmodernism”,
Polity
Kellner, Douglas (1989) “Postmodernism/Jameson critique”,
Maisoneuve Press
Gaine, Mike (1991) “Baudrillard: ‘Critical & Fatal Theory’”
Routledge
Harvey, David (1989) “The Postmodern Condition” Blackwell
Lee, Martyn (1993) “Cultural Capital Reborn”, Routledge
Lee, Martyn (1999) Lecture: “Baudrillard
Connor, S (1989) “Postmodernist Culture”, Blackwell, Oxford

References

Williams, Raymond (1981) “Culture”, Fontana Press

Question – Does the concept of subculture still have relevance
for the study of popular music?

This essay will answer the question detailed above by explaining exactly
what subcultures are. It will then briefly cover some famous sub-cultures
of the last fifty years explaining how they relate to post-war life in
Britain and America. Following on, it will further analyse the origins
of subculture, discovering whether they are media constructs or merely
people imitating the image of their favourite band. The main crux of the
essay will deal with the subcultures of the twenty-first century. The
essay will ask the question “do subcultures still exist?”.
In the postmodern age where there are a great diversity of musical styles
and there is a huge hybridisation between these styles it would seem hard
to pigeon-hole people. It is no longer as easy as Paul Willis’ (1971)
study of the mods and rockers or indeed as Sarah Thornton’s (1996)
study of club cultures. It would seem that in the late 20th century and
now there are bands who do not have any noticeable subcultural following.
The question asks whether or not subcultures still have relevance to the
study of popular music. For the purpose of this essay it shall be assumed
that the study of popular music in question is the music of today – the
twenty-first century. The definition of subculture is a group of people
who identify with a certain genre of music. They dress similarly, often
as the bands they follow dress. They are identified primarily by their
clothing which signifies the type of music there are “into”.
According to Brake in Titley (1999), “Subcultures are meaning systems,
modes of expression or life styles developed by groups in subordinate
structural positions in response to dominant meaning systems, and which
reflect their attempt to solve structural contradictions rising from the
wider social context.”

Pop music has always been linked with subculture. Simon Frith (1983)
is famous for his study of the Sociology of rock music in his book “Sound
Effects”. Hebdige’s (1979) book “Hiding in the light”
concerned itself with the issues raised by punk rock whilst, more recently,
Sarah Thornton (1995) presented the world with “Club Cultures”.
Even as recently as 1996 there was evidence of subculture in Britain.
1995/1996 was the year of “Britpop”, a definite subculture
had evolved. Some were critical of the subculture because of nationalistic
tendencies and for taking music back to the sixties. Yet, “Britpop”
is probably the last studyable subcultural form. Before “Britpop”
the nineties had “ravers”, “indie kids”, “metallers”,
“grungers”. The eighties saw the emergence of “new-romantics”,
“goths”, whilst the seventies had “punk”, “disco”
and “prog-rock”. The seventies pro-rock band “The Grateful
Dead” had their own specific culture of fans called “The Dead
Heads”. In the sixties there were “mods” and “rockers”
whilst the fifties had “teddy boys” and “greasers”.
In the late nineties an extraordinary “revival” took place.
People began wearing the sixties “beatnick” clothing whilst
enjoying hard-core house music or heavy metal clothing whilst listening
to goa trance music. It seemed harder and harder to locate their musical
taste with their clothing. Before addressing whether the notion of subculture
is still relevant in the study of popular music it seems appropriate to
look at how subcultures originate.

Titley (1999) says that “A subculture forms when the larger culture
fails to meet the needs of a particular group of people. They offer different
patterns of living values and behaviour norms, but there is a dependence
on the larger culture for general goals and direction.” By this,
Titley is referring to the idea that subcutures tend to find fault in
the wider culture as a whole and form their own break-away group which
relates more exclusively to their own needs. He says that in youth sub-culture
people find that the needs of their own particular age group are met.
In regard to music, the “pop” subcultures find fault with
the “mainstreem” and thus create their own group that reflects
their own needs. Titley (1999) suggests that there are five main reasons
why subcultures form: 1. The deepening of the division of labour separated
the family from the process of modern production and administration. The
industrial revolution gave “youth” space, 2. With the industrial
revolution came an educational system which required youth to be in schools
for far longer than at previous times. Youth were thus separated from
the labour process for far longer. This could be seen to be leaving them
free to “analyse” the system from the outside. 3. As time
goes by medical techniques advance leading to a higher living population
and therefore more children. 4. People lead increasingly more diverse
lifestyles which draw parents away from their families for increasing
lengths of time. Due to this fact their children become estranged from
their parents resulting in subcultural practises. 5. In this final point,
Titley talks of socialisation in modern society being highly discontinuous
and inconsistent. This apparently results in individuals who are not fully
integrated in society. They need to complete their process of socialisation
and they do this within joining subcultures. From these points Titley
arrives at the conclusion that youth-subcultures are “a natural
part of the journey from childhood to adulthood”, “A class
struggle expressed through the use of style”, “A rebellion
against the dominant culture using shock tactics”, “A construction
of new identities based on individualisation”. Titley would suggest
that the study of subculture is extremely important in the study of popular
music today.

If Titley’s (1999) argument for subcultures is to be accepted it
would seem appropriate to analyse exactly what he is suggesting. The idea
that subcultures are a “rebellion against the dominant culture using
shock tactics” can indeed be seen today in bands such as “Slipnot”,
“Cradle Of Filth” and “Marylin Manson” whose fans
adhere to the strict music and dress code dictated by the genre of “new-metal”.
“Young people in creating subcultures are setting out to shock.
One of the key ways in which they shock is through the clothes they wear.”
(Titley, 1999). Indeed, “metal” is synomous with morbid themes
and connotations. Cradle of Filth were deemed to have gone a little too
far in 1996 when they peddled one T-shirt depicting a nun masturbating
and another with the text “fuck god”. The alienation that
Titley talks of can be applied here too. Heavy metal has been said to
be the realm of the middle class, with working class youth preferring
dance and nightclub music as it could be seen as illustrated in the work
by Sarah Thornton (1995). The “estrangement” these middle-class
youth may feel from their professional parents being away from home so
often is also often the theme in film. One recent example of this is in
Sam Menzie’s American Beauty (1999). Another of Titley’s points
is that the subcultural process is a natural part of the journey from
childhood to adulthood. If this is the case then it can be argued that
subculture still has relevance today in the study of music. This is assuming
that there still are subcultures. For subcultures to have relevance in
the study of popular music today they must still exist. There can be no
denying that subcultures have been incredibly useful in the past in the
study of popular music but what this essay will address next is whether
at the dawn of the third Millennium there are any prevailing subcultures
at all or whether, as with everything else in the Postmodern world they
have been assimilated into Baudrillard’s (1991) mass of signs and
empty signifiers.

Today’s world is extremely diverse. Lee (1993) talks of a cultural
overload. In his work on Time/Space compression, he talks about the fact
that commodities are combined. There are two in one shampoos, mini/midi
systems, microwaves and a whole host of other consumerables to help speed
up the day and save space. In the same manner, there are numerous conglomerations
of musical styles and genres. The music press have apparently never had
it so difficult to label a new fad and zeitgeist. Glancing through the
NME it is evident that there is a sense of waiting for “the next
big thing”. The argument could be put forward that it is the press
and media who like to be able to categorise genre and subculture to fit
within their own formats. They would like to suggest that there are constantly
new subcultures emerging as long as they can attribute a label to it.
With society becoming more and more fragmented it is harder to see and
label subcultural groups. For this reason the idea of studying pop music
itself can come into question. It could be asked how can one study what
one can not locate? On the other hand, it could be seen that there are
far more diverse, subcultural groups to study and make sense of. In the
past there were subcultures, who liked a particular type of music and
wore a particular type of clothing. Now people pick and choose what they
like and want to hear. It is more acceptable to like different genres
of music without being ousted by peers. Even the mainstream seems acceptable
to a certain extent. This can be seen to be of benefit, since the subcultural
groups of the past were always “closed off” to anything that
did not fit in with the strict rules of the subculture. Cohen (1971) in
his study of Mods and Rockers talks graphically of the rivalry between
the two subcultures. With an obvious tolerance to other styles it can
be argued that the diversity and amalgamation between different subcultures
is a much better thing. For this reason, to study sub-culture today is
to expose a society more in harmony than ever before.

Titley (1999) expands on the idea of subcultural diversification in his
essay “A New Approach to Youth Subcultural Theory”. He challenges
the ideas of the Centre for Cultural Studies in Birmingham who have presented
ideas about subcultural groups since the 1950s. He uses the idea that
it used to be possible to categorise everything in the world according
to rigid structural values. Today the story is far different. There is
far more diversity, variety and heterogeneity. He refers to the work of
McCracken (1998) and his book “Plenitude” in which the author
states that in the fifties “you were mainstream or James Dean. You
had to be one or the other.”.

It should not be forgotten that pop music is contained within ideology
itself. The lyrics in popular music refer to culture, real life and therefore
– Subculture. A music group is always aware of it’s fan base, its
subcultural following. Groups such as Blur, challenge their traditional
base by releasing the latest album “13” which is a well documented
reaction to their previous “britpop” output. By doing this
they risk the problem of loosing their original fan base and associated
subculture.

In conclusion, by looking at the points raised by this essay it is possible
to see that sub-cultures are still relevant today. This essay has revisited
sub-cultures from the past – drawing from the work of Stan Cohen and Dick
Hebdige. It has seen how sub-cultures of yesterday were important in defining
the zeitgeist of the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. It has also illustrated
how subcultures have always walked hand-in-hand with popular music since
the early days of rock ‘n’ roll. To suggest that the new millennium
can study popular music without genre-defining subcultures would seem
ludicrous. It may be the case that popular music scholars may be finding
themselves further and further removed from the subcultures as they become
older themselves. Frith lived in the age of “Rock Music” and
as such seems to reminisce about the good old days whilst not embracing
the new, fast moving technology of now. Hebdige reverts back to punk -
a definable era. It seems harder and harder to label subcultures now as
new ones are cropping up all the time. It is important to note that it
is the music press that largely create the name for the subculture. At
this time there are a wide variety of subcultures. In days past there
were far fewer, they were easy to label and easy to manage. In this new
millennium there is no equivalent to ‘punk’ or ‘mod’
or ‘romo’ movements. There is however a greater diversity
of subcultural groups, their names ever-changing. It maybe more important
to look at the term ‘youth’ subculture as a whole as subculture
definitely belongs to the realm of the young. The same theory can be applied
to the subcultures of now as those of the past. There are middle class
subcultures – Skaters who like new punk music, and typically working class
subcultures – Night Clubbers who like chart dance music, HipHoppers who
like hip hop music, Indie kids who like music NME says it is ok to like.
Subculture will always be important in locating popular music within the
structure of society. As society is fragmented, so is popular music. The
more diverse society becomes, the more diverse subcultural groups there
will be. It is easy to say that it is the music that counts, why bother
with the non-musical elements? This is to forget that even pop music exists
within ideology. Pop music too has its referents. Pop music refers to
society and people create music to fit the ideology. Subcultures will
live forever.

Word Count: 2394

Bibliography

Published Books:
Frith, Simon, 1983, “Sound Effects: Youth, Leisure, and the politics
of rock ‘n’ roll”, Constable
Blake, Andrew, 1999, “Living through Pop” Routledge
Cagle, Van M., 1995, “Reconstructing Pop/Subculture”, Sage

Internet Sites:
Tait, Gordon (Lecturer, School of Cultural & Policy Studies – Queensland),
2000, “Education Research and Youth Subculture Theory”,
Tittley, Mark, 2000, “A New Approach to Youth Subculture Theory”
(Essay), http://www.btc.co.za/model/subcult3.htm
Tittley, Mark, 2000, “Youth Subcultures and the Commitment Level
Model” (Essay), http://www.btc.co.za/model/subcult1.htm

Other Sources:
Dalton, Stephen, (2000), “Why Rock TV isn’t Rock ‘n’
Roll” (Feature Article), NME – 29th April 2000, IPC

References:
Thornton, Sarah, (1995), “Club Cultures: Music, Media & Subcultural
Capital”, Polity
Toynbee, Jason, (1993), “Policing Bohemia, pinning up grunge: the
music press and generic change in British pop and rock”(Essay),
Cambridge University Press

Question: According to Jean Baudrillard the postmodern age is
characterised by the triumph of the sign, which loses any reference to
reality and therefore becomes pure simulation. How might this statement
be used to illuminate formal and narrative concerns of films studied this
year?

This essay will answer the question above by using “The Matrix”
as its main focal point. During the course of the essay “Aliens”,
“Terminator 2” and “Blade Runner” will also be
used to represent some of the ideas surrounding the notion of simulation.
The essay will look at the postmodern writings of Jean Baudrillard and
in particular his ideas of the simulacrum and reality. Using these ideas
the essay will firstly examine the ways in which the simulated world can
be seen and secondly the way that the characters in the film can be seen
to be simulacra. The essay will then examine the ways in which the films
use these characters and landscapes to air their particular concerns in
both form and narrative.

Before looking at the films it is important to outline Jean Baudrillard’s
central ideas of the simulacra. He defines ‘simulacrum’ as
“Simulacrum: an image, the semblance of an image, make believe or
that which conceals the truth or the real” (1981:32-33) Baudrillard
(1981: 202) says that people now live in an age of hyper-reality and simulation
where the notion of the ‘real’ no longer exists as all there
is are simulations. He says that the world of today no longer resembles
reality because of the mass influx of signifiers which no longer represent
any signified. He uses the example of Disneyland (Kellner, 1989:82), saying
that the very fact that it is marketed as a simulated place is to conceal
the fact that the rest of the USA is also a mass simulation. Through the
postmodern architecture, food and art the whole of America has become
a ‘hyper-real’ place which is a simulated copy of other places.
He says that Disneyland is actually appears more real than America itself.

Baudrillard (1991) is keen to suggest the idea that the simulacrum is
considered more real to people than reality itself. This is a key concept
in The Matrix. The world in which Neo, played by Keanu Reeves, lives is
discovered to be entire simulation to hide the reality that the world
is a breeding ground for human beings who are used as batteries to power
‘The Matrix’. The world that Neo lives in turns out to be
a simulation of the late 20th Century that has been and gone. Zizec (1999)
says The Matrix “functions as a ‘screen’ that separates
us from the real”. This narrative aspect of the film seems to refer
directly to Baudrillard’s notions around ‘hyper-reality’.
Baudrillard says that the huge proliferation of media images has contributed
to the loss of reality. These images hide the wider reality of the real
world – capitalist oppression. This is more of a Marxist view than a postmodern
one. People such as the Frankfurt school have suggested that the role
of the media is to hide the reality of the capitalist word and to maintain
the status quo. Baudrillard is suggesting that it is no longer possible
to distinguish between reality and simulation. This is where his ideas
of the hyper-real originate. Planting in Bordwell (1996:307) argues against
Baudrillard saying that whilst he agrees with Plato that images reveal
nothing and produce no knowledge, Baudrillard may be taking it a little
too far suggesting that reality does not exist. One of Baudrillard’s
(1993:61) ideas surrounding hyper-reality is the notion that the world
has become a binary construct of zeros and ones saying “Digitality
is among us. It haunts all the messages and signs of our society”.
The narrative of the Matrix certainly subscribes to this idea. The Matrix
in the film creates virtual-reality programmes as the life experiences
of the human beings enslaved by it. This idea can also be seen in Blade
Runner. The replicants are planted with artificial memories and given
doctored photographs of a past that never existed. Both The Matrix and
Blade Runner use the idea of the simulated world to a great extent. In
both films, the ‘real’ world is constructed to hide the wider
reality of reality itself.

The narrative of the Matrix owes a great deal to Baudrillard. In one
scene, Neo opens a book to obtain some illegal discs. The book is Jean
Baudrillard’s “Simulations” and it opens on the chapter
“On Nihilism. The book in the film is not a book, but a simulation
of a book and a means to hide illegal material. Rovira (1999) points out
that the chapter “On Nihilism” is not in the middle of the
book, but is the closing chapter. It can therefore be said that the very
book is simulacra as it not representative of the original. An even more
important direct reference to Baudrillard is in the scene where Morpheus
is first showing Neo the reality of the world via a simulated programme.
Using a simulation of an old-fashioned television, Morpheus shows Neo
a simulation of 20th century earth. He then shows Neo the world of now,
a devastated world, damaged by the nuclear attempt to block out the sun
from the computer that was taking over the world. Morpheus then says “Welcome
to the desert of the real”. The ‘Desert of the real’
is a direct quote from Baudrillard (1983:1). In his opening chapter in
Simulation and Simulacra Baudrillard says that the world today is a place
without origin. “The territory no longer precedes the map.”
In today’s world the map precedes the territory rather than the
other way around and this is the “desert of the real”. Reality
no longer exists, only the simulation, the map, remains. In The Matrix,
the map is the computer programme itself. The programme that imprisons
the mind of the people is the simulation of 20th century earth. The artificial
intelligence of the computer is the ruler of ‘The Matrix’,
creating the simulated world to keep human brains active so that they
can be used as an alternative power source instead of the sun. The humans
are kept alive by being fed dead humans. The few humans left outside of
The Matrix want to destroy it thus liberating humankind. They want to
do it at all costs, even though many will probably share the view of Cypher
that the simulated world is far more appealing than the post-nuclear world
destruction that is reality. The world can never be inhabited again in
the way that The Matrix programme allows them. Human Kind, even if liberated
is condemned to living beneath the ground, eating disgusting food and
dreaming of better days. This is central to Baudrillard’s writing
as the next paragraph will discuss.

Baudrillard in Kellner (1989:82) says that people do not want the reality
of the world, they would rather live in ignorance, as cypher would like
to do. The Matrix programme is Baudrillard’s ‘Hyper-Reality’,
a copy without an original. The thing that ‘The Matrix’ copies
was destroyed when people started messing about with nuclear warfare to
destroy the computers. Baudrillard in Kellner (1989:83) says people would
rather live in a hyper-reality than reality. He further says that even
if they did want to live in reality they could not as it does not exist
anymore. He says that the reality is a baron dessert if anything and simulacra
offers so much more. The hpyer-real world has all the signs that people
recognise and are secure with. The hyper-real world is media orientated.
Baudrillard (1993:69) says that the media rule the hyper-real world as
they create the illusions of the world through television, advertising
and promotion. People no longer need to visit other places as every day
they are shown what they are like. In the film, Morpheus is fighting against
the false reality created by The Matrix. He believes that the truth is
more important to ignore. Cypher would rather live in ignorance. Baudrillard
(1993:71) says that people like to live in ignorance because the wider
reality does not even exist. The ‘reality’ in the film also
does not exist. There is nothing but destruction. The reality is terrible.

Questions can be raised in what Morpheus is saying though. He is fighting
to liberate all of those ensnared by The Matrix so that they can live
true lives in the real world. However, earlier in the film he asks Neo
of how he defines ‘real’. He denounces the power of the senses,
basically saying that it is impossible to define ‘reality’.
Therefore he seems to be fighting a loosing battle. As even he can only
define reality through he basic sense then the real that he is fighting
for may also be a simulation – and a far less appetising one at that.
Baudrillard (1993:71) has a theory for this sort of thing. He says that
there is no reality, reality can not be defined any more. The ‘system’
absorbs everything. It takes all thinking and neutralises it. There can
no longer be any definition of reality. Zizec (1999) says that for Lacan,
“…the thing in itself is ultimately the gaze, not the perceived
object. So back to The Matrix: the Matrix itself is the Real that distorts
our perception of reality.” What is being suggested here is that
the real distorts people’s perception of reality. For this reason
Baudrillard’s idea that there is no longer any reality can stand
because everything is a distortion of reality and therefore reality can
never be seen. Everything is pure simulacra.

Baudrillard’s ideas of simulacra can be found in many science fiction
films. In Blade Runner, Terminator 2 and Aliens there are examples of
simulacrum. In Terminator 2, the cyborg played by Arnold Schwarzenegger
is a simulation of a human who has been sent back in time to save John
Conner from termination. In Aliens “Bishop” is a cyborg too,
who is again a simulation of a human being. In both films it is these
very simulacra that end up being more human than human. Collins and Radner
(1993:238) explain that Schwarzeneger’s cyborg ends up displaying
the characteristics of a father. John’s mother explains that the
robot has been more of a father figure to John than anybody else. Collins
and Radner (1993:241) explain that the simulacra of the Terminator leans
like a human being and eventually gives the ‘thumbs up’ gesture
to John. In Aliens it is Bishop who saves Ripley’s life at the end,
even though he has been ripped apart and his synthetic body is nearly
completely destroyed. In Blade Runner, Baudrillard is ever present. The
‘replicants’ are simulations of human beings who have been
constructed as an economical labour force to build inhabitable places
for humans. The simulacra in Blade Runner are in effect ‘more human
than human’ in their super-human strength and overwhelming desire
for survival. In The Matrix there are a few other simulacra that are observable.
Rovira (1999) suggests that Neo is a simulacra of Jesus Christ and there
are many similarities between the film and the bible. The hidden city
“Zion” is a simulacra of the biblical city. He also says that
the character names are simulacra of Greek Mythology.

Crosby (1999) looks at formal concerns of The Matrix, and in particular
– the theme of reflections in the film. The ‘image’ is everywhere
in the film. The image is reflected in mirrors, monitors, doorknobs and
sunglasses. The notion that people can do sub-human things like dodge
bullets is simulacra. This formal concern of The Matrix has no reference
to reality. No person in the ‘real world’ can dodge speeding
bullets with such ease and apathy. The idea that someone can also do Kung-Foo
as fast as Neo and Morpheus is also simulacrum – there is no territory
from which the copy exists. In Terminator 2, the T-1000 terminator can
morph because he is made from mercury-like matter. He can simulate any
shape or thing that he looks at. Using this method he is able to deceive
those he is hunting. The notion that any body in ‘real life’
could do this is also an example of simulacra. The scenery in Blade Runner
is a formal concern of the film. The landscapes are a postmodern ‘mishmash’
of styles all referring to a dead bygone age. They are all simulacra.

In The Matrix, Terminator 2, Blade Runner and Aliens there are all examples
of Baudrillard’s ‘simulacra’. The notion of what reality
actually is taken for granted. Planting in Bordwell (1996:307) says that
the truth of reality is ‘merely the latest media consensus.’
Reality therefore only exists as far as there is a consensus amongst people.
It is the power of argument that wins. If this is the case then it is
hard to tell if there is a reality at all. Massumi (1987) is critical
of Baudrillard saying:

“Baudrillard’s framework can only be the result of a nostalgia
for the old reality so intense that it has deformed his vision of everything
outside of it. He cannot clearly see that all the things that he says
have crumbled were simulacra all along: simulacra produced by analzable
procedures of simulations that were as real as real, or actually realer
than real, because they carried the real back to its principle of production
and in so doing prepared their own rebirth in a new regime of simulation.
He cannot see becoming, of either variety. He cannot see that the simulacrum
envelops a proliferating play of differences and galactic differences.”

(Massumi, 1987: internet essay)

The Matrix seems to side with Cypher at points and addresses this very
question in the scene where Cypher suggests to the AI’s that he
would rather be ignorant of the reality. The reality of the world in the
Matrix is that the world is dead, there is no sun, no food – the whole
human race could not survive outside in the ‘real world’.
Therefore for people to continue good, ‘normal lives’ they
would be better off staying ‘plugged in’ to the Matrix. Neo
says he would like to be in control of his own destiny, a view which would
be shared by many ‘plugged in’ when in fact they are not because
the programme controls all. The point is raised by Rovira (1999) that
on all levels there will be domination. Cypher is not the leader on the
ship, he is told what to do by Morheus, as they all are. Cypher merely
swaps one form of systematic dominance for another, more pleasant one.
For this reason the simulacrum of The Matrix can be seen to be the ‘good
guy’ whilst the reality is the enemy.

In conclusion the essays main objective was to look at some films and
show how they were relevant in the study of Baudrillard and his notion
of simulacra. The points raised were:
1. That The Matrix draws upon the work of Jean Baudrillard to inform the
narrative. It does this by creating a simulated world whereby people are
oblivious to the reality. It related the film to the ‘real world’
of today where, as Baudrillard suggests, all there is are simulacra. 2.
The idea that even though people are living in simulacra they have no
desire to leave it for the grim reality. Evidence for this was illustrated
by Cypher in the film wanting to be plugged back into the Matrix so that
he too could be oblivious. 3. Following on from the previous poin, the
essay then examined the fact that the simulated can seem more real than
the original. The simulated in The Matrix was comfortable and nice as
long as the status quo was accepted. The Matrix is the reality of the
late 20th Century. The essay then took the example of Blade Runner, where
it became hard to tell who was a replicant. The simulations in the film
were shown to be so real that the viewer never knows for sure whether
Deckard was a replicant or not. 4. The notion that The Matrix film is
itself a simulation of Biblical and Mythological pasts. Ideas, largely
found on the internet were discussed, especially with regard to Neo being
a simulation of Jesus Christ. 5. Baudrillard’s notion that nobody
can escape the simulated world as there is no reality left to escape to.
The essay has shown that movies embrace the notion that society is at
the end of history and that Baudrillard is one important theorist in which
to locate meaning in film. Brian Massumi (1987) says that Baudrillard
“sidesteps the question of whether simulation replaces a real that
did indeed exist, or if simulation is all there ever has been”.
He then uses the work of Guattari and Deleuze to suggest that “simulation
does not replace reality…but rather it appropriates reality…”
concluding that “Reality is nothing but a well-tempered harmony
of simulation.” If this really is the case, maybe someone should
tell Morpheus so that he could at least enjoy a more fruitful life even
if inside The Matrix. Even Morpheus suggests that one can only define
reality through their own senses and own perception. Yet as Agent Smith
says “..I believe that, as a species, human beings define their
reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that
your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from.” Morpheus can
thus be seen as the ultimate human, who totally defines his reality through
misery and this is why he prefers to live outside of the Matrix. Zizec
(1999) talks about the ‘real’ status of reality in The Matrix
being that human beings are the slaves of the programme. Yet It could
be argued that human beings can never escape slavery. As Lyotard (1991:8)
suggests people are even slaves to time itself and reality is only defined
by individual perception within the limits of their life on this planet.
This appears to be one large oversight by Baudrillard, who seems to think
that there ever was a reality.

Word Count: 2954

Bibliography
Harvey, David (1989) “The Condition Of Postmodernity”, Blackwell
Baudrillard, Jean (1990) “The Revenge Of The Crystal: Selected Writings
on the modern object and its destiny”, Pluto Press
Baudrillard, Jean (1993), “Symbolic Exchange & Death”,
Sage
Lyotard, Jean-Francois (1991) “The Inhuman”, Polity
Gaine, Mike (1991) “Critical & Fatal Theory”, Routledge
Kellner, Douglas (1991) “Jean Baudrillard: From Marxism to Postmodenrism
& Beyond”, Blackwell
Kellner, Douglas (1989) “Postmodernism: Jameson Critique”
Maisonneuve Press
Denzin, Norman. K. (1991) “Images of Postmodern Society: Social
Theory & Contemporary Criticism”, Sage
Bordwell and Carrol (1996) “Post Theory – Reconstructing Film Studies”,
Wisconsin Press
Hill, Gibson (1998) “The Oxford Guide To Film Studies”, Oxford
university Press
Collins, Radner (1993) “Film Theory Goes To The Movies” Routledge
Nelson, Carrie (1988) “Marxism & The Interpretation of culture”
University of Illinois Press

Internet Sources
Crosby, Mark (1999) “Reflections Upon The Matrix”
<http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy/files/crosby.htm>
Massumi, Brian (1987) “Realer Than Real: The Simulacrum according
to Deleuze and Guattari”
<http://www.anu.edu.au/HRC/first_and_last/works/realer.htm>
Zizek, Slavoj (1999) “The Matrix, or, The Two Sides Of Perversion”
(email) found at http://www.nettime.org

References
Jameson, Fredric (1993) “Postmodernism & The Cultural Logic
of Late Capitalism”, Verso
Currie, Gregorie (1995) “Image and Mind – Film Philosophy and Cognitive
Science”, Cambridge University Press
Donald, James (1989) “Fantasy & The Cinema” British Film
Institute
Wheale, Nigel (1995) “The Postmodern Arts” Routledge
Bertens, Hans (1995) “The Idea Of The Postmodern: A History”
Routledge