What Is Society?

What Holds Society Together? Types of Societies

Social Interaction and Society

Theories About Analyzing Social Interaction

Interaction in Cyberspace Chapter Summary

classroom on your campus.

Students sit, and some are taking notes, others, listening; a few, perhaps, ste e DiFIg. The class period ends and students stand, gathering thei r books, bachpac ks, bags, and other gear. As they stand, many whip out their eel I phones, place them to their ears, and quic kly push buttons that connect them

to a friend As the students exit the room, many are engaged in social interaction—chatting with their friends some by phone, others by text messaging (“te xting ’), some by talking face-to face Few, if any, of them re dlize that their behavior is at that moment i n+Iuence d by society—a soc iety whose influence extends i nto their immediate social relations hips, even when the contours of that society—its soC idi structure—are li kely invisi b Ie to them.

These same students might DI ug a music player into thei r ears as they move on to thei r next class, possi bly tuning in to the latest sounds while tuning out the sounds of the environment around them.

Some will return to their residences and perhaps text

message friends, download some mus c, or connect with friends ’ on Facebook Surround ing al I of this behavior are social changes that are taki ng place i n society, i nc luding changes in technology, i n global commun icatio n, and in how people now interact with each other. How we make sense of these

changes reo uires an u nderst and ing of the connection

between soc fety and social interaction. I n this way, a soc iologic al perspective can help you see the

relationship between individuals and the larger society

o’ which they are a Dart.

learning objectives

Define society and identify ways in which society is held together
Identify the types of societies
Understand social interaction as a “game” within society
Learn what theories are used to analyze social interaction and know how they differ
Discover in what ways cyberspace interaction has changed society

WHAT IS SOCIETY?

In Chapter 2, we studied culture as one force that holds society together. Culture is the general way of Me, including norms, customs, beliefs, and language. Human society is a system of social interaction that includes both culture and social orgariization. Within a society, members have a common culture, even though there may also be great diversity within it. Members of a society think of themselves as distinct from other soci- eties, maintain tie6 of social interaction, and have a high degree of interdependence. The interaction they have, whether based on harmony or conflict, is one element of society. Within society, social interaction is behav- ior between two or more people that is given meaning by them. Social interaction is how people relate to each other and form a social bond.

Social interaction is the foundation of society, but society is mote than a collection of individual social actions. Emile Durkheim, the classical sociological

The introduction of new technolo8’es is transforming the nature of human communication. As more young people become adept with these tools, what will the future bring?

IOO > C HA P T E R 5

theorist, describea socfiety as set generii—a Latin phrase meaning “a thing in itself, of its own particular l0nd.” To sociologists, seeing society sul generic means that society is more than just the sum of its parts. Durkheim saw society as an organism, something comprising different parts that work together to create a unique whole. Just as a human body is not just a collection of organs but is alive as a whole organism with relationships between its organs, society is not only a simple collection ofindividu- als, groups, or insfitufions but is a whole entity that con- sists of all these elements and their interrelationships. Durkheim’s point—cenoalto sociological analysis—

is that society is much more than the sum o/the individu- als in it. Society takes on a life of its own. It is patterned by humans and their interactions, but it is something that endures and takes on shape and structure beyond the immediacy of any given group of people. This is a basic idea that guides sociological thinking.

You can think otit this way: Imagine how a photog- rapher views a landscape. The landscape is not just the sum of its individual parts—mountains, pastures, trees, or clouds—although each part contributes to the whole. The power and beauty of the landscape is that all its parts relate to each other, some in harmony and some

in contrast, to create a panoramic view. The photo- ‘ grapher who tries to capture this landscape will likely

use a wide-angle lens. This method of photography captures the breadth and comprehensive scope of what the photographer sees. Similarly, sociologists try to pic- ture society as a whole, not only by seeing its individual parts but also by recognizing the relatedness of these parts and their vast complexity.

Macro- and Microanalysis

Sociologists use different lenses to see the different parts of society. Some views are more macroscopic— that is, sociologists try to comprehend the whole of society, how it 1s organized, and how It changes. This is called macroanalysis, a sociological approach that takes the broadest view of society by studying large pat- terns of social interaction that are vast, complex, and highly differentiated. You might do this by looHng at a whole society or comparing different total societies to each other. For example, as we opened this chapter, you saw that large-scale changes in technology influ- ence even the most immediate social interaction that we have with other people. Thus, whereas only a tew years ago it would not have been imaginable to create a network of friends in cyberspace, today it is a common pracñce, especially for young people.

Other views are more microscopic—that is, the focus is on the smallest, most immediately visible parts ot social Me, such as specific people interacñng with each other. This is called microanalysis. In this approach, sociologists study patterns of social interactions that are relatively small, less complex, and less differentiated— the microlevel of society. Again, thinidng of how this

chapter opened, you might want to study how people engage in “testing” each other on a one-to-one basis. How are they similar or different, on the basis of age, or gender, or social class, or race? For example, do peo- ple text (that is, interact) with each other within racial groups more than between racial groups? Observing this would be an example of microanalysis.

Thus a sociologist who studies social interaction via texting or on the Internet would be engaging in microanalysis but might interpret what is found in the context of macrolevel processes (sUch as race relations in society). lust as a photographer might use a wide- angle lens to photograph a landscape or a telephoto lens for a closer view, sociologists use both macro- and microanalyses to reveal different dimensions of society.

In this chapter, we continue our study of sociology by starting with the macrolevel of social life (by smdy- ing total social structures), then continuing through the microlevel (by smdying groups and face-to-face interaction). The idea is to help you see how large-scale dimensions of society shape even the most immediate forms of social interaction.

Sociologists use the term social organization to describe the order established in social groups at any level. Specifically, social organization brings regularity and predictability to human behavior; social organi- zation is present at every level of interaction, from the whole society to the smallest groups.

Social Institutions

Societies are identified by their culmral characteristics and the social instimtions that compose each society. A social institution (or simply an institution) is an estab- lished and organized system of social behavior with a recognized purpose. The term refers to the broad sys- tems that organise specific fonctions in society. Unlike individual behavior, social instituöons carinot be directly observed, but their impact and structure can still be seen. Foi example, the family is an instituöon that provides for the care of the young and the transmission of culture. Religion is an insötution that organises sacred beliefs. Education is the insfitution through which people leam the information and slñlls needed to live in the society.

The concept of the sociai institution is important to sociological thinking. You can think of social insötu- tions as the enduring consequences of social behavior, but what fascinates sociologists is how social institu- tions take on a Me of their own. For example, you were likely born in a hospital, which itself is part of the health care insôtution. The simple act of birth, which you might think of as an individual experience, is shaped by the structure of this social institution. Thus, you pere likely delivered by a doctor, accompanied by nutses and, per- haps, a midwife—each ofwhom exists in a specific sociäl relationship to the health care insÖtution. Each of thèse people is in an irstimtionof role. Moreover, this SOCIHI instituöon also shaped the pracüces surrounding your

birth. Thus, you might have been initially removed from your mother and examined bya doctor, whlch is very dif- ferent from the institutional practices in other societies. The major institutions in society include the family, education, work and the economy, the political institu- tion (or state), religion, and health care, as well as the mass media, organized sports, and the military. These are all complex structures that exist to meet certain needs that are necessary for society to exist. Function- alist theorists have traditionally identified these needs (iiinctions) as follows (Parsons 1951a; Aberle et al. 1950).

The socialization ofnew members of the society. This is primarily accomplished by the family, but in- volves other instimtions as well, such as education.
Ttie production and distribution of goods and ser- The economy is generally the institution that performs this set of tasks, but this may also involve the family as ari institution—especially in societies where production takes place within households.
Replacement of society’s members. nll societies must have a means of replacing members who die, move or migrate away, or otherwise leave the soci- ety. Families are typically organized to do this.
The maintenance of stability and Certain institutions within a society (such as the govern- ment, the police force, and the military) contribute toward the stability and continuance of the society. Providing the members with an ultimate sense of purpose. Societies accomplish this task by creating national anthems, for instance, and by encourag- ing patriotism in addition to providing basic values and moral codes through institutions such as reli- gion, the family, and education.

In contrast to functionalist theory, conflict theory further notes that because conflict is inherent in most societies, the social institutions of society do not pro vide for all its members equally. Some members are provided for better than others, thus demonstrat- ing that institutions affect people by granting more power to some social groups than to others. Using the example ot the health care institution given previously, some groups have considerably less power within the institution than do others. Thus nurses are generally subordinate to doctors and doctors to hospital admin- istrators. And beyond these specific actors within the health care institutions, different social groups in soci- ety have more or less power within social institutions. Therefore, racial and ethnic minorities in general have poorer access to health care than others; the poor have less access, as do those of lower social class status. (For more information, see Chapter 14 on health care.)

Social Structure

Sociologists use the term social strucmre to refer to the organized pattern of social relationships and social insfi- buttons that together compose society. Social structures

S 0 CIAL ST RUCTURE AND S0 CIAL INTERACTION -: 4OI

Birth, though a natural process, occurs within soc al nstitut›ons— nst tutions that vary in diPerent societies, depending un the social organization of society Here you see how birth in the United States, which is mainly defined as a medical event, contrasts w th a health assistant attending n birth in rural Mexico

are not immediatelyvisible to untrained observers; nev- ertheless, they are present, and they affect all dimen- sions of human experience in society. Social structural analysis is a way of looking at society in which the soci- ologist analyzes the patterns in social life that reflect and produce social behavior.

Social class distinctions are an example of a social structure. Class shapes the access that different groups have to the resources of society, and it shapes many interactions people have with each other. People may form cliques with those who share similar class stand- ing, or they may identify with certain values associated with a given class. Class then forms a social structure— one that shapes and guides human behavior at all levels, rio matter how overtly visible or invisible this structure is to someone at a given time.

The philosopher Marilyn Frye aptly uses the met- aphor of a birdcage to describe the concept of social structure (Frye I983). She notes that if you look closely at only one wire in a cage, you cannot see the other wires. You might then wonder why die bird within does not fly away. Only when you step back and see the whole cage instead of a single wire do you understand why the bird does not escape. Social structure, like the birdcage, confines people; their motion and mobility are restricted; their lives are shaped by social structure. Just as the birdcage is a network of wires, so is society a network of social structures, both micro and macro.

WHAT HOLDS SO CIETY TOGETHER?

What holds societies together? We ask this question throughout this chapter. This central question in sociology was first addressed by Emile Durkheim, the French sociologist writing in the late 1800s and early

1O2 CHAPTERS

1900s. He argued that people in society had a collective consciousness, defined as the body of beliefs com mon to a community or society that give people a sense of belonging and a feeling of moral obligation to its demands and values. According to Durkheim, collective consciousness gives groups social solidar- ity because members of a group feel they are part of one society.

Where does the collective consciousness come from? Durkheim argued that it stems from people’s par- ticipation in common activities, such as work, family, education, and religion—in short, society’s institutions.

Mechanical and Organic Solidarity

According to Durkheim, there are two types of social solidarity: mechanical and organic. Mechanical soli- darity arises when individuals play similar—rather than different—roles within the society. Individuals in societies marked by mechanical solidarity share the same values and hold the same things sacred. This par- ticular kind of cohesiveness is weakened when a soci- ety becomes more complex. Contemporary examples of mechanical solidarity are rare because most societ- ies of the world have been absorbed in the global trend for greater complexity and interrelatedness. Before European conquest, Native American groups were bound together by at least a partial mechanical soli- darity. Indeed, many Native American groups are now trying to regain the vestige of mechanical solidarity on which their cultural heritage tests, but they ate finding that the superimposition of White institutions on Native American life interferes with the adoption of traditional ways of thinking and being, which prevents mechanical solidarity from gaining its original strength even though this view is not intended to treat all Native American tribes or groups the same.

In contrast, organic (or contractual) solidarity occurs when people play a great variety of roles, and unity is based on role differentiation, not similarity. The United States and other indiistrial societies are built on organic solidarity, and each is cohesive because of the differentiation within each. Roles are no longer neces- sarily similar, but they are necessarily interlinked—the performance of multiple roles is necessary for the exe- cution of society’s complex and integrated hinctions.

Durkheim described this state as the division of labor, defined as the relatedness of diffetetit tasks that develop in complex societies. The labor force within the

c oriteray or all iJ. S. e conomy, tor exarnple, is ^ ix*.d ^

according to the kinds of work people do. Within any division of labor, tasks become distinct from one another, but they are still woven into a whole.

The division of labor is a central concept in soci- ology because it represents how the different pieces of society fit together. The division of labor in most contemporary societies is often marked by distinc- tions such as age, gender, race, and social class. In other words, if you look at who does what in society, you will see that women and men tend to do different things; this is the gender division of labor. Similarly, old and young to some extent do different things; this is a division of labor by age. This is crosscut by the racial division of labor, the pattern whereby those in different racial-ethnic groups tend to do differ- ent work—or are often forced to do different work— in society. At the same time, the division of labor is also marked by class distinctions, with some groups providing work that is highly valued and rewarded and others doing work that is devalued and poorly rewarded. As you will see throughout this book, gender, race, and class intersect and overlap in the division of labor in society.

Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft

Different societies are held together by different forms of solidarity. Some societies are characterized by what the German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies called gemeinschafl, a German word that means “community”; other societies are characterized as gesellschaft, which literally means ”society” (Tönnies 1963/1887). Each învolves a type of solidarity or cohesiveness. Those societies that are gemeinschafts (communities) are characterized by a sense of “we” feeling, a very moderate division of labor, strong per- sonal ties, strong family relationships, and a sense of personal loyalty. The sense of solidarity between members of the gemeinschaft society arises from per- sonal ties; small, relatively simple social institutions; and a collective sense of loyalty to the whole society. People tend to be well integrated into the whole, and social cohesion cornes from deeply shäred values and beliefs (often, sacred values). Social control need not be imposed exter nally because control cornes from

the internal sense of belonging that members share. You might think of a small community church as an example.

In contrast, in societies marked by gesellschaft, an increasing importance is placed on the secondary rela- tionships people have—that is, less intimate and more instrumental relationships such as work roles instead of family or community roles. Gesellschaft is character- ized by less prominence of personal ties, a somewhat diminished role of the nuclear family, and a lessened sense of personal loyalty to the total society. The soli- darity and cohesion remain, and it can be very cohesive, r”‘I the Koi:est ‘n e rn•s irorri •n elar grated divizi

of labor (thus, organic solidarity), greater flexibility in social roles, and the insoumental ties that people have to one another.

Social solidarity under gesellschaft is weaker than in the gemeinschaft society, however. Gesellschaft is more likely than gemeinschaft to be torn by class conflict because class distinctions are less prominent, though still present, in the gemeinschaft. Racial-ethnic conflict is more likely within gesellschafi societies because the gemeinschaft tends to be ethnically and racially very homogeneous; it is often characterized by only one racial or ethnic group. This means that con flict between gemeinschaft societies, such as ethnically based wars, can be very high because both groups have a strong internal sense of group identity that may be intolerant of others.

In sum, complexity and differentiation are what make the gesellschaft cohesive, whereas similarity and unity cohere the gemeinschaft society. In a single soci- ety, such as the United States, you can conceptualize the whole society as gesellschaft, with some internal groups marked by gemeinschaft. Our national motto seems to embody this idea: e pluribus unum (unity within diversity), although clearly this idealistic motto has only been partly realized.

TYPES OF SOCIETIES

In addition to comparing how different societies are bound together, sociologists are interested in how social organization evolves in different societies. Sim- ple things such as the size of a society can also shape its social organization, as do the different roles that men and women engage in as they produce goods, care for the old and young, and pass on societal tradi- tions. Societies also differ according to their resource base—whether they are predominantly agricultural or indusoial, for example, and whether they are sparsely or densely populated.

Thousands of years ago, societies were small, sparsely populated, and technologically limited. In the competition for scarce resources, larger and more technologicaPy advanced societies dominated smaller ones. Today, we have arrived at a global society with highly evolved degrees of social differentiation and

S 0 CIAL STRUCTURE AND S0 CIAL I NTE RACTI ON 403

inequality, notably along class, gender, racial, and ethnic lines (Nolan and Lenski 2008).

Sociologists distinguish six types of societies based on the complexity of their social structure, the amount of overall cultural accumulation, and the level of their technology. They are /oroging, pastoral, horti- cultural, agricuffuroJ (these four are called preindus- trial societies), and then industrial and postiridustrial societies (see Table 5.1). Each type of society can still be found on Earth, although all but the most isolated societies are rapidly moving toward the industrial and postindustrial stages of development.

These different societies vary in the basis for their organization and the complexity of their division of labor. Some, such as foraging societies, are subsistence economies, where men and women hunt and gather food but accumulate very little. Others, such as pasto- ral societies and homcultural societies, develop a more elaborate division of labor as the social roles that are needed for raising livestock and farming become more numerous. With the development of agricultural soci- eties, production becomes more large scale and strong patterns of social dNerentiation develop, sometimes taking the form of a caste system or even slavery.

The key driving force that disdnguishes these dif- ferent societies from each other is the development of technology. All societies use technology to help fill human needs, and the form of technology differs for the different types of society.

Preindustrial Societies

A preindustrial society is one that directly uses, modi- fies, and/or tills the land as a major means of survival. There are four kinds of preindustrial sociedes, listed here by degree of technological development: forag- ing (or hunting-gathering) societies, pastoral societies, horticultural societies, and agricultural societies (see Table 5.1).

In foraging [hunting-gathering) societies, the tech- nology enables the hunting of animals and gathering of vegetation. The technology does not permit the refrig- eration or processing of food, hence these individuals must search continuously for plants and game. Because hunting and gathering are activities that require large amounts of land, most foraging societies are nomadic; that is, they constantly travel as they deplete the plant supply or follow the migrations of animals. The central

. ‹…3 Types of Societies

Economic Base

Social Organization

Examples

Preindustrial Foraging

Societies societies

Pastora/

societies

Horticultural societies

Agricultural societies

Industrial Societies

Postindustrial Societies

404 C H A P T E R 5

Economic sustenance dependent on hunting and foraging

Nomadic societies, with substantial dependence on domesticated animals for economic production

Society marked by relatively permanent settlement and production of domesticated crops

Livelihood dependent on elaborate and large-scale patterns of agriculture and increased use of technology in agricultural production

Economic system based on the development of elaborate machinery and a factory system; economy based on cash and wages

Information-based societies in which technology plays a vital role in social organization

Gender is important basis for social organization, although division of labor is not rigid; little accumulation of wealth

Complex social system with an elite upper class and greater gender

role differentiation than in foraging societies

Accumulation of wealth and elaboration of the division of labor, with different occupational roles (farmers, traders, crafts people, and so on)

Caste system develops that differentiates the elite and agricultural laborers; may include system of slavery

Highly differentiated labor force with a complex division of labor and large formal organizations

Education increasingly important to tfie division of labor

Pygmies of Central Africa

Bedouins of Afr:’ca and Middle East

Ancient Aztecs of Mexico; Inca Empire of Peru

American South, pre—Civil War

Nineteenth and most of twentieth-century United States and WeSteFn Europe

Contemporary United States, Japan, and others

institution is the family, which serves as the means of distributing food, training children, and protecting its members. There is usually role differentiation on the basis ot gender, although the specific form of the gender division of labor varies in different societies. The Pygmies of Central Africa are an example of a for- aging society.

In pastoral societies, technology is based on the domestication of animals. Such societies tend to develop in desert areas that are too arid to provide rich vegetation. The pastoral society is nomadic, necessi- tated by the endless search for fresh grazing grounds for the herds of their domesticated animals. The animals are used as sources of hard work that enable the cre- ation of a material surplus. Unlike a foraging society, this surplus frees some individuals from the tasks of hunting and gathering and allows them to create crafts, make pottery, cut hair, build tents, and apply tattoos. The surplus generates a more complex and differen- tiated social system with an elite or upper class and more role differentiation on the basis of gender. The nomadic Bedouins of Africa and the Middle East are pastoral societies.

In horticultural societies, hand tools are used to cultivate the land, such as the hoe and the digging stick. The individuals in horticultural societies prac- tice ancestor worship and conceive of a deity or deities (God or gods) as a creator. This distinguishes them from foraging societies that generally employ the notion of numerous spirits to explain the unknowable. Horticul tural societies recultivate the land each year and tend to establish relatively permanent settlements and villages. Role differentiation is extensive, resulting in different and interdependent occupational roles such as farmer, trader, and craftsperson. The ancient Aztecs of Mexico and the Incas of Peru represent examples of horticul tural societies.

The agricultural societ y is exemplified by the pre— Civil War American South, a society of slavery. Such societies have a large and complex economic system that is based on large-scale farming. Such societies rely on technologies such as use of the wheel and use of metals. Farms tend to be considerably larger than the cultivated land in horticultural societies. Large and permanent settlements characterize agri- cultural societies, which also exhibit dramatic social inequalities. A rigid caste system develops, separat- ing the peasants, or slaves, from the controlling elite caste, which is then freed from manual work allow- ing time for art, literature, and philosophy, activities of which they can then claim the lower castes are incapable. The American pre -Civil War South and its system of slavery is a good example of an agricultural Society. In fact, some argue that the present SUf.viv- ing system of sharecropping in the American South and Southwest is a slave-like agricultural society (Bell 1992).

Different types of societies produce different kinds of souial reIat‹onshTps. Some way involve more direct nnd personal

produce rriore fragmented and impersonal r.Iationships tcalled gesellschafts)

Industrial Societies

An industrial society is one that uses machines and other advanced technologies to produce and distribute goods and services. The Industrial Revolution began over 250 years ago when the steam engine was invented in England, delivering previously unattainable amounts of mechanical power for the performance of work. Steam engines powered locomotives, factories, and dynamos and transtormed societies as the Industrial Revolution spread. The growth of science led to advances in farm- ing techniques such as crop rotation, harvesting, and ginning cotton, as Well as industrial-scale projects such as dams tor generating hydroelectric power. Joining these advances were developments in medicine, new

S 0 CIAL STRUCT119E AND S0 CIAL I NTERACTI 0 N 105

g America‘s Diversi Ulation Density

ractF›nder www.census.gov

Population Density and Soctal Interaction

People per square

mlle by county

3000 0 tc 66940 0

300 0 to 2999 9

J 60 0 to 299 0

Z9 6 to 159 9

0 0 to 0.9

0 4 00 Miles 0 100 Miles

techniques to prolong and improve life, and the emer- gence of birth control to limit population growth.

Unlike agricultural societies, industrial societies rel)’ on a highly differentiated labor force and the inten sive use of capital and technology. Large formal orga- nizations are common. The task of holding society together, falling on institutions such as religion in prein dustrial societies, now falls more on the institutions that have a high division of labor, such as the economy and work, government, politics, and large bureaucracies.

Within industrial societies, the forms of gender inequality that we see in contemporary U.S. society tend to develop. With the advent of industrialization, soci- eties move to a cash based economy, with labor per- formed in factories and mills paid on a wage basis and household labor remaining unpaid. This introduced what is knowri as the family-iuage econom y, in which families become dependent on wages to support them- selves, but work within the family (housework, child care, and other forms of household work) is unpaid and therefore increasingly devalued (Tilly and Scott 1978). In addition, even though women (and young children) worked in factories and mills from the first inception

106 C H A P T E R 5

of industrialization, the tami1y-wage economy is based on the idea that men are die primary breadwinners. A system of inequality in men’s and women s wages was introduced—an economic system that even today con- tinues to produce a wage gap between men and women. Industrial societies tend to be highly productive economically, with a large working class of industrial laborers. People become increasingly urbanized as they move from farmlands to urban centers or other areas where factories are located. Immigration is common in industrial societies, particularly because industries are forming where there is a high demand for more,

cheap labor.

Industrialization has brought many benefits to U.S. society—a highly productive and efficient economic sys- tem, expansion of internafional markets, extraordinary availability of consumer products, and for many, a good worl0ng wage. Industrialization has, at the same time, also produced some of the moct serious social problems that our nation faces: industrial pollution, an overdepen- dence on consumer goods, wage inequality and job dislo cation for millions, and problems of crime and crowding in urban areas (see Map 5.1 on population density).

Postindustrial Societies

In the contemporary era, a new type of society is emerg- ing. Whereas most twentieth-century societies can be characterized in terms of their generation of material goods, postirdustrial society depends economically on the production and distribution of services, infor- mation, and knowledge. Postindustrial societies are information-based societies in which technology plays a vital role in the social organization. The United States is fast becoming a postindustrial society, and lapan may be even further along. Many of the workers provide ser- vices such as administration, education, legal services, scientific research, and banking, or they engage in the development, management, and distribution of infor- mation, particularly in the areas of computer use and design. Central to the economy of the postindustrial society are the highly advanced technologies of com- puters, robotics, and genetic engineering. Multinational corporations globally link the economies of postindus- trial societies.

The transition to a postindustrial society has a strong influence on the character of social institutions. Educational institutions acquire paramount impor- tance in the postindustrial society, and science takes an especially prominent place. For some, the transition to a postindustrial society means more discretionary income for leisure activities—tourism, entertainment, and relaxation industries (spas, massage centers, and exercise) become more prominent—at least for people in certain classes and in the absence of severe eco- nomic recession, which has recently plagued not oniy the United States but lapan, Germany, France, Greece, and other technologically advanced countries as well. As with the United States in the last several years, the transition to postindustrialism has meant permanent joblessness for many. For others, it has meant the need to hold down more than one job simply to make ends meet.

SOCIAL INTERACTION

AND SOCIETY

You can see by now that society is an entity that exists above and beyond individuals. Also, different societies are marked by different forms of social organization. Although societies differ, emerge, and change, they are also highly predictable. Your society shapes virmally every aspect of your life from the structure of its social institutions to the more immediate ways that you inter- llCt with people. It is to that level—the microlevel of society—that we now turn.

Groups

At the microlevel, society is made up of many different Social groups. At any given moment, each of us is amem- ber of many groups simultaneously, and we are subject

to their influence: faintly, friendship groups, athletic teams, work groups, racial and ethnic groups, and so on. Groups impinge on every aspect of our lives and are a major determinant of our attitudes and values regard ing everything from personal issues such as sexual atti- tudes and family values to major social issues such as the death penalty and physician-assisted suicide.

To sociologists, a group is a collection of individu als who

interact and communicate with each other;
share goals and norms; and,
have a subjective awareness of themselves as “we,” that is, as a distinct social unit.

To be a group, the social unit in question must pos- sess all three of these characteristics. We will examine the namre and behavior of groups in greater detail in Chapter 6.

In sociological terms, not all collections of people are groups. People may be lumped together into social categories based on one or more shared characteris- tics, such as teenagers (an age category), truck drivers (an occupational category), and even those who have lost their life savings and pensions as a result of crimi- nal Ponzi investment schemes, such as occurred in the fall of 2008, when many unknowingly invested money with the now-infamous criminal Bernard Madoff (more about him, similar others, and Ponzi investment schemes in Chapter 7).

Social categories can become social groups, depending on the amount of “we” feeling the group has. Only when there is this sense of common identity, as defined in the previous characteristics of groups, is a collection of people an actual group. For example, all people nationwide watching TV programs at B o’clock Wednesday evening form a distinct social unit, an audit ence. But they are not a group because they do not inter- act with one another, nor do they possess an awareness of themselves as “we.” However, if many viewers were to come together for a convention where they could interact arid develop a “we” feeling, such as do fans of the long-running book and movie series about Harry Potter, they would constitute a group.

We now know that people do not need to be face- to-face to constitute a group. Online communities, for example, are people who interact with each other regu- larly, share a common identity, and think of themselves

as being a distinct social unit. On the Internet commu “ nity Facebook, for example, you may have a group of “friends,’ some of whom you know personally and oth-

ers whom you oniy know oriline. But these friends, as they are known on Facebook, make up a social group that might interact on a regular, indeed, daily basis— possibly even across great distances.

Groups also need not be small or “close-up” and personal. Formal organizations are highly struc- tured social groupings that form to pursue a set of goals. Bureaucracies such as business corporations

S0 CIAL STRU CTURE AND S 0 CIAL I NTERACTI ON – 407

iCipàI governnJept_S or associations sucé as the Teacher AsSO à on (PTA) are examples of for- ariizatioJjs. A deeper analysis of bureaucracies

ormaJ organizations appears in Chapter 6

Statue

Within groups, people occupy different statuses. Status lS äfI established position in a social structure that carries with it a degree of social rank or value. A status is a rank in society. for example, the position “vice presi- dent of the United States” is a status, one that carries rel- atively high prestige. “High school teach.er” is sue**.er status; it carries less prestige than vice president of the United States,“ but more presÖge than, say, “cabdriver. Statuses occur within institutions and also within groups. “High school teacher” is a stams within the edu- cation institution. Other statuses in the same institution are “student,’ ”principal,’ and “school superintendent.” Within a given group, people may occupy different sta tuses that can be dependent on a variety of factors, such as age or seniori9 within the group.

Typically, a person occupies many statuses simul- taneously. The combination o:t statuses composer a status set, which is the complete set of Stdtuses occu- pied by a person at a given time (a term originally intro- duced by sociological theorist Robert Merton |1968}). A person may occupy different statuses in different inctimtions. Simultaneously, a person may be a bank president (in the economic institution), voter (in the political institution), church member (in the religious institution), and treasurer of the PTA (in the education institution). Each status may be associated with a differ- ent level of prestige.

Soinetimes the multiple statuses of an individual conflict with one another. Status inconsistency exists where the statuses occupied bya person bringwith them significantly different amounts of prestige and thus dif- fering expectations. For example, someone trained as a lawyer, but working ac a cabdriver, experiences status inconsistency. Some recent immigrants from Vietnam and Ilorea have experienced status inconsistency. Many refugees who had been in high status occupa tions in their home country, such as teachers, doctors, and lawyers, could find work in the United States only as grocers or technicians—jobs of relatively lower sta- tus than the jobs they left behind. A relatively large body of research in sociology has deinonstrated that status inconsistency—in addition to low stams itself—can lead to stresc and depression (Taylor et al. 2013; Thoits 2009; Taylor and Hornung 1979; Lenski 1954).

Achieved statuses are those attained by virtue of individual effort. Most occupational statuses—police officer, pharmacist, or boat builder—are achieved sta- tuses. In contrast, ascribed statuses ate those occupied from the moment a person is born. Your biological sex is an ascribed status. Yet, even ascribed statuses are not exempt from the process of social construction.

108 C H A P T E It 5

for most individuals, race iS aft ascribed stams fixed at bill, although an individual with one light-skinned African American parent and one White parent may

appear to be \1 IO afid may go through tite as a wnite person. Within the Àfrican American community, this is called passing, although this term is used somewhat

less often now than it was several years ago. Ascribed status may not be rigidly defined, as for individuals who define themselves as 6iraciof or muftirocinf (see also Chapter 10). F-inally, ascribed statuses can arise through means beyond an individual’s control, Such as severe disability or chronic illness.

°oorrie seemingly ascrioed statuses, such as gen-

der, can become achieved statuses. Gender, typically thought of as fixed at birth, is a social construct. You can be born female or male (this is your sex), but becom ing a woman or a man is the result of social behaviors associated with your ascribed status. In other words, gender is also achieved. People who cross-dress, have a sex change, or develop some characteristics associated with the other sex are good examples of how gender is achieved, but you do not have to see these excep tional behaviors to observe that. People “do” gender in everyday life. They put on appearances and behav- iors that are associated with their presumed gender (Andersen 201i; West and Fenstermaker 1995; West and Zimmerman 1987). If you doubt this, ask yourself what you did today to “achieve your gender status. Did you dress a certain way? Wear “manly’ cologne or deodorant? Splash on a “feminine” fragrance? And so on. These behaviors—all performed at the microlevel— reflect the macrolevel of your gender status.

-*’/‘ f*’ ’’i! ‘’.% sociziv’s tnvx es

MWfH: Gender is an oscribed stotus where one’s

get der identity is established at birth. SOCIOEOGICAE PzRCI°ECI’ : Although one s biological sex identity is an ascribed status, gender

is a social construct and thus is also an och ered status—that is, accompLshed through routine, everyday behavior, including DBtterns of dress, speech, touch, and other social behaviors. Sex is not the same as gender (Andersen 20a I). ‹

The line between achieved and ascribed status can be hard to draw. Social class, for example, is determined by occupation, education, and annual income—all of which are achieved statuses—yet one’s job, educa tion, and inc.ome are known to correlate strongly with the social class of one’s parents. Hence, one’s social class status is at least partly—though not perfectly— determined at birth. It is an achieved status that includes ari inseparable component of ascribed status as well.

Although people occupy many statuses at one time, it is usually the case that one status is dominant, called the master status, overriding all other features ot the

person’s identity. The master status may be imposed by others, or a person may define his or her own master status. A woman judge, for example, may carry the mas- ter status “woman” in the eyes of many. She is seen not just as a judge, but also as a woman judge, thus making gender a master stams (Webster and Hysom i998). A master status can completely supplant all other statuses in someone’s status set. Being in a wheelchair is another example of a master status. Consider, for example, the case of a person in a wheelchair who is at the same time a medical doctor, an author, and a painter. People will see the wheelchair, at least at first, as the most impor- tant, or sahent, part of identity, ignoring other statuses that define someone as a person. For a time, that person will be known as “that wheelchair guy” or “that wheel- chair doctors

* .¿ S OC IOLO G}CALLY

Make a list of terms that describe who you are v’hich of these ute ascribed statase>• and which are ac!ne red statuses? What do you think your .master status is in the eyes o+ others’ Does one s master status depend on who is defining you? What does this tell you about the Significance o’social udgments in determining who you a red

Roles

A role is the behavior others expect from a person associated with a particular status. Stamses are occu pied; roles are acted or “played.” The stams of police officer carries with it many expectations; this is the role of police officer. Police officers are expected to uphold the lay, pursue suspected criminals, assist victims of crimes, fi11 out forms for reports, and so on. Usually, people behave in their roles as others expect them to, but not always. When a police officer commits a crime, such as physically brutalizing someone, he or she has violated the role expectations. Role expectations may vary according to the role of the observer—whether the person observing the police officer is a member of a minority group, for example.

As we saw in Chapter 4, social learning theory predicts that we learn attitudes and behaviors in response to the positive reinforcement and encourage ment received from those around us. This is important in the formation of our own identity in society. “I am Linda, the skater,” or “I am lohn, the guitarist.” These identities are often obtained through role modeling, a process by which we imitate the behaiñor of another person we admire who is in a particular role. A ten- year-old girl or boy who greatly admires the teenage expert skateboarder next door will attempt, through role modeling, to closely imitate the tricks that neighbor performs on the skateboard. As a result, the formation of the child’s self-identity is significantly influenced.

and family. The parental role demands extensive time and commitment, and so does the role of worker. Time given to one role is time taken away from the other. Although the norms pertaining to workingwomen and workingmen are rapidly changing, it is still true that women are more oñen expected to uphold tradi- tional role expectations associated with their gender role and are more likely held responsible for minding the family when job and family conflict. The sociologist Arlie Hochschild captured the predicament of today’s women when she described the “second shift”: an employed mother spends time and energy all day on the job, orily to come home to the “second shift” of family and home responsibilities (Hochschild 2003, 1997, and Hochschild and Machung 1989).

Hochschild has found that some companies have instituted “family-friendly” policies, designed to reduce the conflicts generated by the “second shift’’ Ironically, however, in her smdy she found that few workers take advantage of programs such as more flexible hours, paid maternity leave, and job sharing—except for the on-site child care that actually allowed parents to work more!

Hochschild’s studies point to the coriflict between two social roles: family roles and work roles. Her research is also illustrative of a different sociological concept: role strain, a condition wherein a single role brings conflicting expectations. DNerent from role con- flict, which involves tensions between two roles, role strain involves conflicts within a single role. In Hochs- child’s study, the work role has not only the expectations traditionally associated with work but also the expecta- tion that one “love” one’s work and be as devoted to it as to one’s family. The result is role strain. The role of student also often involves role strain. For example, sm- dents are expected to be independent thinkers, yet they feel—quite correctly—that they are often required to simply repeat on an exam what a professor tells them. The tension between the two competing expectations is an example of role strain.

Everyday Social Interaction

You can also see the influence of society in everyday behavior, including such basics as how you talk, pat- terns of touch, and who you are attracted to. Although you might think of such things as “just coming natu rally” they are deeply patterned by society. The cultural context of social interaction really matters in our under- standing of what given behaviors mean. An action is defined as positive or negative by the cultural content because social behavior is that to which people give meaning. An action that is positive in one culture can be negative in another. For example, shaking the right hand in greeting is a positive action in the United States, but the same action in East India or certain Arab countries might be an insult. Social and cultural context matter. A kiss on the lips is a positive act in most culmres, yet

HO C H A P T E R 5

if a stranger kissed you on the lips, you would probably consider it a negative act, perhaps even repulsive.

Verbal and Nonverbal Communication. We saw in the culture chapter (Chapter 2) how patterns of social interaction are embedded in the language we use, and language is deeply influenced by culture and society. Furthermore, communication is not just what you say, but also how you say it and to whom. You can see the influence of society on how people speak, especially in diNerent contexts. Under some circumstances, a pause in speaking may communicate emphasis; for others, it may indicate uncertainty. Cultural differences across society make this obvious. Thus, during interac- tions between Japanese businessmen, long periods of silence often occur. Unlike U.S. citizens, who are experts in “small talk” and who try at all costs to avoid periods of silence in conversation, Japanese people do not need to talk all the time and regard periods of silence as desirable opportunities for collecting their thoughts (Worchel et al. 2000; Fukuda 1994). American business- people in their first meetings with Japanese executives often think, erroneously, that these silent interludes mean the Japanese are responding negatively to a pre sentation. Even though some find the Japanese mode of conversation highly uncomfortable, getting used to it is a key tool in successful negotiations.

Nonverbal communicalion is also a form of social

interaction and can be seen in various social patterns. A surprisingly large portion of our everyday communica- tion with others is nonverbal, although we are gener- ally orily conscious of a small fraction of the nonverbal “conversations” in which we take part. Consider all the nonverbal signals exchanged in a casual chat: body position, head nods, eye contact, facial expressions, touching, and so on. As noted just previously, the length of a silence period during a conversation is itself a type of nonverbal communication. Studies of nonverbal communication, like those of verbal communication, show that it is much influenced by social forces, includ- ing the relationships between diverse groups of people. The meanings of nonverbal communications depend heavily on race, ethnicity, social class, and gender, as we shall see.

For example, patterns of touch (called tactile com- munication) are strongly influenced by gender. Parents vary their touching behavior depending on whether the child is a boy or a girl. Boys tend to be touched more roughly; girls, more tenderly and protectively. Such pat- terns continue into adulthood, where women touch each other more often in everyday conversation than do men. Women are on the average more likely to touch and hug as an expression of emotional support, whereas men touch and hug more often to assert power or to express sexual interest (Baumeister and Bushman 2008; Worchel et al. 2000). Clearly, there are also instances where women touch to express sexual interest and/or dominance, but research shows that, in general, touch

is a supportive activity for women. For men, touch is often a dominance-asserting activity, except in athletic contexts where hugging and patting among men is a supportive activity (Worchel et al. 2000).

In observing patterns of touch, you can see where social stams influences the meaning of nonverbal behaviors. Professors, male or female, may pat a man or woman student on the back as a gesture of approval; students will rarely do this to a professor. Male pro- fessors touch smdents more often than do female professors, showing the additional effect of gender. Because such patterns of touching reflect power rela- tionships between women and men, they can also be offensive and may even involve sexual harassment (see Chapters 11 and 15).

You can also see the social meaning of interac- tion by observing how people use personal space. Proxemic communication refers to the amount of space between interacting individuals. Although people are generally unaware of how they use per- sonal space, usually the more friendly people feel toward each other, the closer they will stand. In casual conversation, friends stand closer to each other than do strangers. People who are sexually attracted to each other stand especially close, whether the sexual attraction is gay, lesbian, or heterosexual. According to anthropologist E. T. Hall (1966; Hall and Hall 1987), we all carry around us a proxemic bubble that repre- sents our personal, three-dimensional space. When people we do not know enter our proxemic bubble, we feel threatened and may take evasive action. Friends stand close; enemies tend to avoid interaction and keep far apart. According to Hall’s theory, we attempt to exclude from our private space those whom we do not know or do not like, even though we may not be fully aware that we are doing so.

se e Fon vOUR SELF

Riding in Elevators

try a simple Ride in an elevator and closely oDserve the behavior of everyone in the elevator with you. Write down in a notebook such things as how far away people stand from each other. Note the differences carefully, even in esti- mated inches. What do they look at? Do they tend to stand in the corners? Do they converse with strang- ers or the people they are with? If so, what do they talk about?
Now return to the same elevator and do something that breaks the usual norms of elevator behavior, such as standing too close to someone. (You will have to get up a lot of nerve to do this!) How did people react? What did they do? How did you feel?

How does this experiment show how social norms are maintained through informal norms of social control? •

Patterns of touch reflect diPerences in the power that is part of many social relationships.

The proxemic bubbles of different ethnic groups on average have different sizes. Hispanic people tend to stand much closer to each other than do White, middle- class Americans; their proxemic bubble is, on aver- age, smaller. Similarly, African Americans also tend to stand close to each other while conversing. Interaction distance is quite large between White, middle-class, British males—their average interaction distances can be as much as several feet.

Proxemic interactions also differ between men and women (Taylor et a1. 2013; Romain 1999; Tannen 1990). Women of the same race and culture tend to stand closer to each other in casual conversation than do men of the same race and culture. When a Middle Eastern man (who has a relatively small proxemic bubble) engages in conversation with a White, middle-class, U.S. man (who has a larger proxemic bubble), the Middle Eastern man tends to move toward the White American, who tends to back away. You can observe the negotiations of prox- emic space at cocktail parties or any other setting that involves casual social interaction.

In a society as diverse as the United States, under- standing how diversity shapes social interaction is an essential part of understanding human behavior. Igno- rance of the meanings that gesmres have in a society can get you in trouble. For example, some Mexicans and Mexican Americans may display the right hand held up, palm inward, all fingers extended, as an obscene ges-

ture meaning “screw you many times over’’ This pro- ‘ vocative gesture has no meaning at all in Anglo (White)

society. (However, giving someone “the finger“— middle finger extended (”flipping the bird”)—certainly does carry meaning in not onIyAngIo society but also in Latin society and many other societies as weII! It is a bit of nonverbal communication that is nearly universally recognized.)

S0 CIAL STRUCTURE AND S0 CIAL I NTERACTI 0 N < 141

Likewise, people who grow up in urban environ- ments learn to avoid eye contact on the streets. Staring at someone for only two or three seconds can be inter- preted as a hostile act, if done man to man (Anderson 1999, 1990). If a woman maintains mutual eye contact with a male stranger for more than two or three sec- onds, she may be assumed by the man to be sexually interested in him. In contrast, during sustained conver- sation with acquaintances, women maintain mutual eye contact longer than do men (Romain 1999).

Interpersonal Attraction

We have already asked, “What holds society together?” This was asked at the macroanalysis level—that is, the level of society. But what holds relationships together— or, for that matter, makec them fall apart? You will not be surprised to learn that formation of relationships has a strong social souctural component—that is, it is patterned by social forces and can to a great extent be predicted.

Humans have a powerful desire to be with other human beings; in other words, they have a strong need for aQiliation. We tend to spend about 7s percent of our time with other people when doing all sorts of activities—eating, watching television, smdying, doing hobbies, working, and so on (Cassidy and Shaver i999). People who lack all forms of human contact are very rare in the general population, and their isolation is usually rooted in psychotic or schizophrenic disor- ders. Extreme social isolation at an early age causes severe disruption of mental, emotional, and language development, as we saw in Chapter 4.

Konrad Lorenz, the animal behaviorist, shows that adUlt Graylag geese that have imprinted of him the moment they were hatched will follow him anywhere, as though he were their mother goose (from Tweed Roosevelt, personal communication)!

C HA P T I R 6

The affiliation tendency has been likened to imprinting, a phenomenon seen in newborn or newly hatched animals who attach themselves to the first living creature they encounter, even if it is of another species (Lorenz 1966). Studies of geese and squirrels show that once the young animal attaches itself to a human experimenter, the process is irreversible. The young animal prefers the company of the human to the company of its own species! A degree of imprint- ing may be discernible in human infant attachment, but researchers note that the process is more com- plex, more changeable, and more influenced by social factors in infants.

Somewhat similar to affiliation is interpersonal attraction, a nonspecific positive response toward another person. Attraction occurs in ordinary day-to- day interaction and varies from mild aMaction (such as thinking your grocer is a “nice person”) all the way to deep feelings of love. According to one view, aMactions fall on a continuum ranging from hate to soong dis- like to mild dislike to mild liking to strong liking to love. Another view is that attraction and love are two differ- ent continua, able to exist separately. In this view, you can actually like someone a whole lot, but not be in love. Conversely, you can feel passionate lose for someone, including strong sexual feelings and intense emotion, yet not really “like” the person. Have you ever been in love with someone you did not particularly like?

Can attraction be scientifically predicted? Can you identify with whom you are most likely to fall in love? The surprising answer to these questions is a loud, although somewhat qualified, “yes!’ Most of us have been raised to believe that love is impossible to mea- sure and certainly impossible to predict scientifically. We think of love, especially romantic love, as quick and mysterious—a lightning bolt. Couples report falling in love at first sight, thinking that they were “meant for each other” (McCollum 2002). Countless novels and stories support this view, but extensive research in soci- ology and social psychology suggests otherwise: In a probabilistic sense, love can be predicted beyond the level of pure chance. Let us take a look at some of these intriguing findings.

A strong determinant of your attraction to others is simply whether you live near them, work next to them, or have frequent contact with them. (This is a proxemic determinant.) You are more likely to form friendships with people from your own city than with people from a thousand miles away. One classic study even showed that you are more likely to be attracted to someone on your floor, your residence hall, or your apartment building than to someone even two floors down or two streets over (Festinger et al. 1950). Subsequent studies continue to show this effect (Baumeister and Bushman 2008). Such is the effect of proximity in the formation of human friendships.

Now, though the geiieral principle still holds, many people form relationships without being in close

F’omantic love. Ts idealized in thls society as something thaL ‘just happens.’ but research shows that interpersonal att action follows predictable patterns

proximity, such as in oriline dating. Smdies of Internet dating show that, even in this cyberworld, social norms still apply. Studies of Internet dating find, for example, that unlike other dating behavior, there is pressure to disclose more secrets about oneself in a shorter period of time on the Internet (Lawson and Leek 2006).

Our attraction to another person is also greatly affected simply by how frequently we see that per- son or even his or her photograph. When watching a movie, have you ever noticed that the central character seems more attractive at the end of the movie than at the beginning? This is particularly true if you already find the person very attractive when the movie begins. Have you ever noticed that the fabulous-looking person sitting next to you in class looks better every day? You may be experiencing mere exposure effect: The more you see someone in person—or even in a photograph—the more you like him or her. In studies where people are repeatedly shown photographs of the same face, the more often a person sees a particular face, then other things being constant, the more he or she likes that per- son (Moreland and Beach 1992).

There are two qualifications to the effect. First, overexposure can result when a photograph is seen too often. The viewer becomes saturated and ceases to like the pictured person more with each exposure. Second, the initial response of the viewer can determine how much liking will increase. If someone starts out liking a particular person, seeing that person frequently will increase the liking for that person; however, if one starts out disliking the picmred person, tlie amount of dislike tends to remain about the same, regardless of how often one sees the person (Taylor et al. 2013).

We hear that “beauty is only skin deep.” Appar ently, that is deep enough. To a surprisingly large degree, the attractions we feel toward people of either gender are based on our perception of their physical attractiveness (Baumeister and Bushman 2008). A vast amount of research over the years has consistently shown the importance of attrac tiveness iii human interactions: Adults react more leniently to the bad behavior of an attractive child than to the same behavior of an unattractive child (Berscheid and Reis 1998). Teachers evaluate cute children of either gender as “smarter” than unat- tractive ciiil5ren with identical academic r.•cords (Worchel et a1. 2000). In studies of mock jury trials, attractive defendants, male or female, receive lighter jury-recommended sentences on average than do unattractive defendants convicted of the same crime (Gilbert et a1. 1998).

Of course, standards of attractiveness vary between cultures and between subculmres within the same society. What is highly attractive in one culture may be repulsive in another. In the United States, there is a maxim that you can never be too thin—a major cause of eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, especially among White women (Hesse-Biber 2007). The maxim is oppressive for women in U.S. society, yet it is clearly highly culturally relative, even within

U.S. culture. What is considered “overweight” or “fat” is indeed a social construction (Atkins 2011). Among many African Americans, “chubbiness” (itself a social construction) in women is considered attractive. Such women are called “healthy” and “phatt” or “thick,” which means the same as “stac1‹ed” or curvaceous.

Similar cultural norms often apply in certain

U.S. Hispanic populations. The skinny woman is not considered attractive. Nonetheless, studies show that anorexia and bulimia are now increasing among women of color, showing how cultural norms can change—even though Black women, in general, are more satisfied with their body image than White women (Atkins 2011; Lovejoy 2001; Fitzgibbon and StoIIey 2002; see also Chapter 14).

Studies of dating patterns among college students show that the more attractive one is, the more likely one will be asked on a date. This applies to gay and lesbian dating as well as to heterosexual dating (Berscheid and Reiss 1998). However, one very important exception can be added to this finding: Physical attractiveness predicts only the early stages of a relationship. When one measures relationships that last a while, other factors come into play, principally religion, political attitudes, social class background, educational aspira- tions, and race. Perceived physical attractiveness may predict who is attracted to whom initially, but other variables are better predictors of how long a relation- ship will last.

So, do “opposites attract”? Not according to the research. We have all heard that people are attracted to

S 0 CIAL STRU CTURE AND S 0 CIAL I NTBRAC TI0 N < 413

their “opposite” in personality, social status, background, and other characteristics. Many of us grow up believ- ing this to be true. However, if the research tells us one thing about interpersonal attraction, it is that with only a few exceptions we are attracted to people who are similar or euen identical to us in socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, religion, perceived personal- ity traits, and general attitudes and opinions (Taylor et al. 2013; Baumeister and Bushman 2008; Brehm et aI. 2002). “Dominant” people tend to be attracted to other dominant people, not to “submissive” people. “Verbally aggressive” people tend to be attracted to others who are also verbally aggressive and not to someone who is verbally withdrawn or verbally shy. Couples tend to have similar opinions about political issues of great importance to them, such as attitudes about abortion, crime, animal rights, gun violence, and whom to vote for as president. Overall, couples tend to exhibit strong cultural or subcultural similar- ity, not diNerence.

There are exceptions, of course. We sometimes fall in love with the exotic—the culturally or socially different. Novels and movies return endlessly to the story of the rich young woman who falls in love with a rough-and-ready biker, but such a pairing is by far the exception and not the rule. That rich young womdn is far more likely to fall in love with a rich young man. When it comes to long-term relationships, including both friends and lowers (whether heterosexual, lesbian, gay, or bisexual), humans vastly prefer a great degree of similarity, even though, if asked, they might deny it. In fact, the less similar a heterosexual relationship is with respect to race, social class, age, and educational aspirations (how far in school the person wants to go), then the quicker the relationship is likely to break up (Silverthorne and Quinsey 2000; Worchel et al. 2000; Berscheid and Reis 1998).

‘ 7 .?’.1- “’, Theories of Social Interaction

The Social Construction

e 0 r ‘ i i! !•, SOC IE T¥’S WITH S

N• Love is oureiy an emotional experience that you cannot predict or control ‘

SOCIOE OGICA gERSPEC’T’IVE: Whom you fall in

love with can be predicted beyond chance by such factors is Droximity, how often you see the person (frequency, or mere exposure effect), how physically attractive you perceive the oerson to be, and whether you are similar (not different) to her or him in social class, race/ethnicity, religion, age, educational aspirations, and general attitUdeS, including political attitudes and beliefs. ‘.

Many young romantic relationships, regrettably, come to an end. On campus, relationships tend to break up most often during gaps in the school calendar, such as winter and spring breaks. Summers are especially brutal on relationships formed during the academic year. Break- ups are seldom mutual. Almost always, orily one member of the pair wants to break off the relationship, whereas the other wants to keep it going. The sad truth means that the next time you hear that a breakup was “mutual,’ you will know this is probably a lie or self-deception.

THEORIES ABOUT ANALYZING

SOCIAL INTERACTION

Groups, statuses, and roles form a web of social inter- action. Sociologists have developed different ways of concepmalizing and understanding social interaction. Functionalist theory, discussed in Chapter 1, is one such concept. Here we detail four others: the sociai construction of reality, ethnomethodology, impression management, social exchange and game theory (refer to Table 5.2). The first three theories come directly from the symbolic interaction perspective.

Social Exchange

interprets

SO Cir’IQ 0:fi:

Anazes roco/

rnterocdon on

Cengage I earning

of Peality

Organized around the subjective meaning that people give to social behavior

Based on the meaning people give to, or attribute to, actions in society

Ethnomethodology

Held together through the consensus that people share around social norms; you can discover these norms by violating them

A series of encounters in which people manage their impressions in front of others

Dramaturey

A stage on which actors play their social roles and give impression to those in their “audience”

Enactment of social roles played before a social audience

Theory

A series of interactions that are based on estimates of rewards and punishments

A rational balancing act involving perceived costs and benefits of a given behavior

Game Theory

A system in which people strategize “winning” and “losing” in their interactions with each other

Calculated risks to balance rewards and punishments

114 CHAPTER 5

The Social Construction of Reality

What holds society together? This is a basic question for sociologists, one that, as we have seen, has long guided sociological thinking. Sociologists note that society cannot hold together without something that is shared—a shared social reality.

Some sociological theorists have argued convinc- ingly that there is little actual reality beyond that pro- duced by the process of social interaction itself. This is the principle of the social construction of reality, the idea that our perception of what is real is determined by the subjective meaning that we atoibute to an experi- ence, a principle central to symbolic interaction theory (Blumer 1969; Berger and Luckrnann 1967). Hence, there is no obJective “reality” in itself. Things do not have their own intrinsic meaning. We subjectively impose meaning on things.

Cluldren do this routinely—impose inherent mean- ing on things. Upon seeing a marble roll off a table, the child attributes causation (meaning) to the marble: The marble rolled off the table “because it wanted to.” Such perceptions carry into adulthood: The man walking down the street who accidentally walks smack into a telephone pole, at first thought glares at the pole, as though the pole somehow caused the accident! He inadvertently attributes causation and meaning to an inanimate object—the telephone pole (Heider 1958).

Considerable evidence exists that people do just that; they force meaning on something when doing so allows them to see or perceive what they want to perceive—even if that perception seems to someone else to be contrary to actual fact. They then come to believe that what they perceived is indeed “fact.” A classic and convincing study of this is Hastorf and Canton’s (1954) study of Princeton and Dartmouth smdents who watched a film of a game of basketball between the two schools. Both sets of students watched the same film. The students were instructed to watch carefully for rule infractions b) each team. The results were that the Princeton students reported twice as many rule iiifractions involving the Dartmouth team as the Dartmouth students saw. The Dartmouth students saw about twice as many rule infractions by Princeton as the Princeton students saw! Remember that they all saw exactly the same game—the same “facts!’ We see the “facts” we want to see, as a result of the social con- strucfion of reality. Subsequent research has strongly supported the Hastorf and Canoil findings (Taylor et al. 2013; Baumeister and Bushman 2008; Ross 1977; Jones

and Nisbett 1972).

As we saw in Chapter 1, our perceptions of real- ity are determined by what is called the definition of the situation: We observe the context in which we find ourselves and then adjust our attitudes and perceptions accordingly. Socioto gical theorist W. 1.

Thomas embodies this idea in his well-known dictum that situations doned as real are real in their conse- quences (Thomas 1966/1931). The Princeton and Dartmouth students saw different “realities” depend ing on what college they were attending, and the consequences (the perceived rule infractions) were very real to them.

The definition of the situation is a principle that can also affect a “facmal” event such as whether ari emergency room patient is perceived to be dead by the doctors. In his insightful research in the emergency room of a hospital, Sudnow (I 967) found that patients who arrived at the emergency room with no discern- ible heartbeat or breathing were treated differently by the attending hysician depending on the patient’s age. A person his or her early twenties or younger was not immediately pronounced “dead on arrival” (DOA). Instead, the physicians spent a lot of time lis- tening for and testing for a heartbeat, stimulating the heart, examining the patient’s eyes, giving oxygen, and administering other stimulation to revive the patient. If the doctor obtained no lifelike responses, the patient was pronounced dead. Older patients, however, were on the average less likely to receive such extensive procedures. The older person was examined less thoroughly and often was pronounced dead on the spot with only a brief stethoscopic examination of the heart. In such instances, how the physicians defined the situation—how they socially constructed the real- ity of death—was certainly real in its consequence for the patient!

Ethnomethodology

Our interactions are guided by rules that we follow. Sometimes these rules are nonobvious and subtle. These rules are the norms of social interaction. Again, what holds society together? Society cannot hold together without norms, but what rules do we follow? How do we know what these rules or norms are? An approach in sociology called ethnomethodology is a clever technique for finding out.

Ethnomethodology (Garfinkel 1967), after ethno for “people” and methodology for “mode of study,’ is a technique for studying human interaction by deliberately disrupting social norms and obsernirig hoin indiuiduals attempt to restore normalc y. The idea is that to study such norms, one must first break them, because the subsequent behavior of the people involved will reveal just what the norms were in the first place. In the “See For Yourself” elevator example you were aske d to perform previously (see page 111), an application of ethnomethodology would be stand- ing too close to someone on the elevator (this is the norm violation) and observing what that person does as a result (which would be the norm-restoration behavior).

SO CTAL STRUT TURE AND S 0 C UL INTERACT10 N 715

Ethnomethodology is based on the premise that human interaction takes place within a consensus, and interaction is not possible without this consensus. The consensus is part ofwhat holds society together. Accord- ing to Garfinkel, this consensus will be revealed by people’s background expectancies, namely, the norms for behavior that they carry with them into situations of interaction. It is presumed that these expectancies are to a great degree shared, and thus studying norms by deliberately violating them will reveal the norms that most people bring with them into interaction. The eth- nomethodologist argues that you cannot simply walk up to someone and ask what norms the person has and uses, because most people will not be able to articulate them. We are not wholly conscious of what norms we use even though they are shared. Ethnomethodology is designed to “uncover” those norms.

The recently aired CNN TV program called “What Would You Do?” employs what is in etfect ethnomethod- ology, though in a nonsystematic and relatively uncon- trolled way. For example, in one episode, a father is seen in a restaurant very loudly scolding his own small child for accidentally dropping a few crumbs on the floor. The extremely loud scolding represents a norm violation in this context. The father is in alliance with the TV produc ers. The point is to see what the observing people in the restaurant do, namely, engage in what the ethnometh odologist would call norm-restorafion behavior. They found that many people looked but did not intervene. A few did intervene, such as by asking the father why he was so loud, saying that his punishment was too severe.

Ethnomethodologists in actual research often use ingenious procedures for uncovering norms by think- ing up clever ways to interrupt “normal” interaction. In a clever study, sociology professor William Gamson had one of his students go into a grocery store where jelly beans, normally priced at that time at 49 cents per pound, were on sale for 35 cents. The student engaged the saleswoman in conversation about the various candies and then asked for a pound of jelly beans. The saleswoman then wrapped them and asked for 35 cents. The rest of the conversation went like this:

Atudent: Oh, only 35 cents for all those nice jelly beans? There are so many of them. I think I will pay $1 tor them.

Salesuiomori• Yes, there are a lot, and today they are on sale for only 35 cents.

Student: I kriow they are on sale, but I want to pay $1 for them. I just love jelly beans, and they are worth a lot to me.

Salesuioman: Well, uh, no, you see, they are selling for 35 cents today, and you wanted a pound, and they are 35 cents a pound.

Students (voice rising) I am perfectly capable of seeing that they are on sale at 35 cents a pound. Jhat has nothing to do with it. It is just that I personally feel that they are worth more, and 1want to pay more for them.

116 * C H A P T E R 5

Saleswoman: {becoming quite angry) What is the mat- ter with you? Are you crazy or something? Everything in this store is priced more than What it is worth. Those jelly beans probably cost the store only a nickel. Now do you want them or should I put them back?

At this point, the student became quite embar- rassed, paid the 35 cents, and hurriedly left (Gamson and Modigliani i974).

The point here is that the saleswoman approached the situation with a presumed normative consensus, a consensus that became revealed by its deliberate violation by the student. The puzzled saleswoman took measures to attempt to normalize the interaction, even to/once it to be normal (see Table 5.2).

Impression Management

and Dramatur

Another way of analyzmg social interaction is to study impression manogement, a term coined by symbolic interaction theorist Erving Goffman (1959). Impres- sion management is a process by which people control how others perceive them. A student handing in a term paper late may wish to give the instructor the impres- sion that it was not the student’s fault but was because of uncontrollable circumstances (“my computer hard drive crashed’’ “my dog ate the last hard copy,’ and so on). The impression that one wishes to “give off” (to use Goldman’s phrase) is that “I am usually a very diligent person, but today—just today—1 have been betrayed by circumstances/’

Impression management can be seen as a type of con game. We willfully attempt to maniPulate olé.ers’ impressions of us. Goffman regarded everyday inter- action as a series of attempts to con the other. In fact, trying in parions ways to con the other is, according to Goldman, at the very center of much social interaction and social organisation in society: Social interacüon is just a big con game!

Perhaps this cynical view is not true of all social interaction, but we do present different “selves” to others in different settings. The settings are, in effect, different stages on which we act as we relate to oth- ers, For this reason, Goldman’s theoiy is sometimes called the dramaturgy model of social interaction, a way of analyzing interaction that assumes the partici pants are actors on a stage in the drama of everyday social life. People present different faces (give off dif- ferent impressions) on different stages (in different situations or different roles) with different others. To your mother, you may present yourself as the duti- ful, obedient daughter, which may not be how you present yourself to a friend. Perhaps you think act- ing like a diligent student makes you seem a jerk, so you hide from your friends that you are really inter- ested in a class or enjoy your homework. Analyzing

Doing Hair, Doing Class

Research Question: Sociologist Debra bringing the latest fashion and technique Gimlin was curious about a common site to clients Beauticians are also expected for social interaction-hair salons. She to engage in some “emotion work’ —that noticed that the interaction that occurs is, they are expected to nurtu‹ e clients

in hair salons is often marked by diPeF- and be interested in their lives; often ences Tn the social class status of clients they are put in the position of sacrifc- and stylists. Her research question was: ing their pro*essiona! exDertise to meet How do women attempt to cultivate clients’ wishes

the cultural Ideals of beauty, and in According to GimlTn, because stylists particular, how is this achieved through typically have lower class status than the interaction between hair stylists and their clients, this introduces an ele- their clients* ment into the relationship that stylists

though they never see them outside the salon, also reduces status differences

Conclusions and Implications: Gimlin concludes that beauty ideals are shaped in this society by an awareness of social location and cultural distinctions. As she says, “Beauty is one too women use as they make claims to particular social statuses (1996: 525).

Questions to Consider

the next time you get your hair cut, you might observe the social interaction around you and ask how class, gender,

Research Nethod: She did her research by spending more than TOO hours ob- serving social interaction in a hair salon She watched the interaction betwee n clients and stylists and conducted interviews with the owner, the staff, and twenty women customers. During the course o’ her fieldwork, she recorded her observations of the conversations and interaction in the salon, frequently asking questions of patrons and staff The patrons were mostly middle and upper-middle class; the stylists, working class. All the stylTSts were White, as were

Research Results: “Beauty work’ as Gim!in calls it. involves the stylist bridging the gao between those who seek beauty and those who define it; her (or his) role is to be the expert in beauty culture,

negotiate carefully in their routine social interaction Hairdressers emphasize their special knowledge of beauty and taste as awayofreducngthestatusdiKerences between themselves and their clients.

In this way, they manage the impres- sions their clients are thought to have They also try to nullify the existing class hierarchy by conceiving an alternative hierarchy, not one based on education, income, or occupation but only on the ability to style hair competently. Thus stylists describe clients as perhaps “having a ton of money,“ but unable to do their hair or know what !oohS best on them Stylists become confidantes with clients, who often tell them highly oersonal information about their lives- another attempt at impression manage- ment. Appearing to create personal relationships with their clients, even

and race shape interaction in the salon

Or barbershop that you use. Try to get someone in class to collaborate with you so that you can compare observations

in different salon settings. In doing so, you will be studying how gender, race, and class shape social interaction in everyday life.

1 Would you expect the same dynamic in a salon where men are the stylists›

Do Gimlin‘s findings hold in settings where the customers and stylists are not White or where they are all working class*
In your opt nion, would Gi mlin’s find- Tngs hold ‹n an African American men’s barbersfiop?

So une Gi m lin, D ebra 1996. ”Pame la’s Place

Bower and Negotiatio n in the Hai r Sal o n.”

Z eriöer ö Society 0 (Octo her): 505-526.

impression management reveals that we try to con the other into perceiving us as we want to be perceived. The box “Doing Sociological Research: Doing Hair, Doing Class” shows how impression management can be involved in many settings, including the everyday world of the hair salon.

A study by Albas and Albas (1988) demon slrates just how pervasive impression management

*8 in social interaction. The Albases studied how college smdents interacte d with one another when the instructor returned graded papers during class. SOme students got good grades (“aces“), others got poor grades (“b ombers”), but both employed a vari- ety of devices (cons) to maintain or give off a favor- Able impression. For example, the aces wante d to

show off their grades, but they did not want to appear to be braggarts, so they casually or “accidentally” let others see their papers, such as by dropping them on the floor, face up. In contrast, the bombers hid or covered their papers to hide their poor grades, said they “didn’t care” what they got, or simply lie d about their grades.

One thing that GoNman’s theory makes clear is that social interaction is a very perilous undertaking. Have you ever been embarrassed? Of course you have; we all have. Think of a really big embarrassment that you experienced. Goffman defines embarrassment as a spontaneous reaction to a sudden or transitory challenge to our identity: We attempt to restore a prior perception of our “self” by others. Perhaps you were

S0 CIAL STRUCTURE AND S0 CIAL I NTE RAC T10 N ‹ 417

The Congress and Game Theory

giyen interchange constitute a zero sum game, or a non-zero sum game* A

Yembe s ofthe U. S. Congress often binehydebatevsues—suchashe in- tense budgetdebatesin both the House andthe Senate +iedateyfolo ing theelectonofPcesidectobaiaatthe end of 2O 2. Sociolog ists flare noted

that such debates inevitably involve game-like trade-offs between members of Congress A sociologist might thus use some form of social exchange theo- ry, or game theory, to analyze such acri monious verbal exchanges. Does such a

zero-sum game would be exemplified by, say, the Republican Soeaker of the House promising to deliver 15 votes ’for” issue X if his opponent” (say, the Democratic Minor ity Leader) agreed to “g›ye up” 15 votes

giving a talk before a class and then suddenly forgot the rest of the talk. Or perhaps you recently bent over and split your pants. Or perhaps you are a man and barged accidentally into a women’s bathroom. All these actions will result in embarrassment, causing you to “lose face.”

You will then attempt to restore face (“save face”), that is, eliminate the conditions causing the embarrass- ment. You thus will attempt to con others into perceiving you as they might have before the embarrassing inci- dent. One way to do this is to shift blame from the self to some other, for example, claiming in the first example that the teacher did not give you time to adequately memorize the talk; or in the second example, claim- ing that you will never buy that particular, obviously inferior brand of pants again; or in the third example, claiming that the sign saying “Women’s Room” was not clearly visible. All these represent deliberate manipu- lations (cons) to save face on your part—to restore the other’s prior perception of you.

Social Exchange and Game Theory

Another way of analyzing social interaction is through the social exchange model (see Table 5.2). The socinf exchange model of social interaction holds that our interactions are determined by the rewards or pun ishments that we receive trom others (Cook and Gervasi 2006; Wright 2000). A fundamental principle of exchange theory is that an interaction that elic- its approval from another (a type of reward) is more likely to be repeated than an interaction that incites disapproval (a type of punishment). According to the exchange principle, one can predict whether a given interaction is likely to be repeated or continued by cal- culating the degree of reward or punishment inspired by the interaction.

Rewards can take many forms. They can include tangible gains such as gifts, recognition, and money, or subtle everyday rewards such as smiles, nods, and pats on the back. Similarly, punishments come in many varieties, from extremes such as public humiliation, beating, banishment, or execution, to gestures as subtle as a raised eyebrow or a frown. for example, if you ask

118 C HA P T E R 5

someone out for a date and the person says yes, you have gained a reward, and you are likely to repeat the interaction. You are likely to ask the person out again, or to ask someone else out. If you ask someone out, and he or she glares at you and says, “No find of way!,” then you have elicited a punishment that will probably cause you to shy away from repeating this type of interaction with that person.

Social exchange theory has grown partly out of game theory, a mathematic and economic theory that predicts that human interaction has the charac- teristics of a “game,’ namely, strategies, winners and losers, rewards and punishments, and profits and costs (Stevens 2011; Kuhn and Nasar 2002; Wright 2000). Simply asking someone out for a date indeed has a gamelike aspect to it, and you will probably use some kind of strategy to “win” (have the other agree to go out with you) and “get rewarded” (have a pleasant or fun time) at minimal “cost” to you (you don’t want to spend a large amount of money on the date or you do not want to get into an unpleasant argument on the date). The interesting thing about game theory is that it sees human interaction as just that: a game.

II in a given interchange between persons A and B the amount ot reward to person A is exactly equal to the amount of loss to person B, then it is called a zero- sum game (reward plus loss will equal zero). A simple example would be person A receiving a $1,000 gift from person B—the rewatd to person A is the same amount as the loss to person B. To take another example, the game of poker is a zero-sum game: Person A’s winnings exactly equal B’s losses. This applies even if there are more than one “person Bs’”

If on the other hand the amounts of reward and punishment for persons A and B are unequal, then it is a non-zero sum game (amount of reward plus amount of loss zero). If you, a male, ask a woman out for a date and she accepts, this is reward for you. But if she rejects your offer, this is punishment for you and either a neutral or even a reward for her! Hence what you get (punishment) and what she gets (neutrality or reward) do not sum to zero—unless of course she attains a hefty amount of glee from rejecting you, in which case it would then indeed be zero sum! Otherwise, it is

.ytiaialoaical research

The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game

ru n an experiment to exam i ne thèse diPerent potential outcomes°

” Research Nethod: *rte ’prisoner’s

dilemma” Ts a classic “trade-oP” game in the study of social interactio D eerent varieties of it are often used in sociological studies of social interaction The dilemma arises in a story about two criminals, whom we wlll ca}f Bart and Mach They are arrested on suspicion of having commit- ted armed robbery. ”hey are found by the

outComes One possibility is that neither con•Ius!ons and Implications: What confesses to the crime. This represents a ‹»-›.fe situations represent situations cooperative alternative for each person. j,‹ « risoner’s dilemma. What They cooperate with each other Bid about arguments with your brother or

reject the deaJs offered by the oolice If sister when you were growing up? Here is this happens, both will get only a light a good one What if both you and a *riend

“’ “ sentence dave cheHted on a fjDal exam8 5Lould

Another possibility is that one person you ‘ tell on” him or her to the instructor? w1Jl confess (the competitive alternatives Should your friend tejl g

police to be carrying concealed weapons, but they do not have enough evidence to link them to the robbery. Accordingly, the police ouestion tfiem seporote/y. Both men are invited to confess to the crime and hence betray each other.

Research Question: What happens to either of hem de ends upon how each reacts. How do real people react if put in thus prisoner’s dilemma situation?

Research Results: this is a hypothetical

while the other will not (the cooperative alternative). If Bart confesses and

Mack does not, then the police will let Bart go free as a reward for testimony against Mack, who will get a long prison sentence. The outcomes are reversed if Bart does not confess and back does

*rte last possible res b0Û confess. In this case, both receive moderate prison terms *he “dtjemma” TS thus whether to confess and betray your partner or hold out (not confess)

Questions to Consider

]. Do you think that the resufts would be the same, or different, if both

o’f the su bjects in the prisonei“s di- lemma expert ment were of opposite gender instead of the same gender° Speculate about it

What if tfiey were of tfie same gender but of different races—one Black, one White? Soecu late.

Source: Baumeister Roy F, and Brad 1. Bushman.

2OO8 Social 9sychology anä Human Nature

exercise with different ootential

and cooperate with him. How m ight you Belmont, CA Thompson/Wadsworth

non-zero sum. We thus see that the “game of love” is indeed a game, whether zero-sum or non-zero sum.

INTERACTION IN CYBERSPACE

When people interact and communicate with one another by means of personal computers—through some virtue community SUch as email, Twitter, Face- book, Linkedln, and the like or other computer-to computer interactions—then they a(e engaging in cyberspace interaction (or virtual interaction).

The character of cyberspace interaction is chang- ing rapidly as new technologies emerge. Not long ago, nonverbal interaction was absent in cyberspace as peo- ple could not “see” what others were like. But with the introduction of video-based cyberspace, such as photos on Facebook and MySpace, and Skype, people can now display still and moving images of themselves. These images provide new opportunities, as we noted previ ously, for what sociologists wouid call the presentation of self and impression management. Sometimes this comes with embarrassing consequences. Th e young col lege smdent who displays a seminude or nude photo of herself or WmseK, projecting a sexual presentation of sett, may be horrified if one of the parents or a poten- fial employer visits the Facebook site! Furthermore, the photo could be intercepted by a disgruntled boyfriend, reproduced, and made to “go viral” (seen by hundreds or

thousands ot people). Cyberspace interaction is becom- ing increasingly common among all age, gender, and race groups, although clear patterns are also present in who is engaged in this form of social interaction and how people use it (Hargittai 2008; see “fable 5.3). Women, for example, used te lag behind men in Internet usage but have now caught up. Internet usage is also related to race (Whites have the most usage but not by a large margin); age (youngest use it most); annual earnings (those with highest earnings use it most); education (more educa- ‘tion means more usage); and location of residence being urban, suburban, or rural(rural residents use it the least). Although women and men are roughly the same over-

all in Internet usage (see Table 5.3), gender differences can

still be found in the ape of usage. Women are more likely to use email to write to friends and family, share news, plan events, and forward jokes. And women are more likely to report that email nurtures their relationships. Men, on the other hand, use the Internet more to transact busi ness, and they look for a wider array of informadon than women do. Men are also more likely to use the Internet for hobbies, including such things as sports fantasy leagues, dowriloading music, and listening to radio. Men more than women in the age 18 to 24 tange tend to use social networking sites to make new friends and to fliri, whereas women in this age range are somewhat more likely to use it to stay in touch with hiends that they akeady have (Pew Internet and American Life Project 2012).

S0 CIAL STRU CTURE AN D S0 CIAL I NTERACTI 0 N : 1y 9

: ,. 4? ñ.:- Demographics of Internet Users

Following is the percentage of each group who use the Internet according to a 2O1Z survey.

Total Adults

It is too early to know the implications ot these cyberspace interactions. Some thiril‹ it will make social life more alienating, with people developing weaker social Skills and less ability for successful face-to face interaction. Some studies have noted that people can develop extremely close and in-depth relationships

Men Women

Race/Ethnicity White, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic

Hispanic (English-speaking)

Age

Less than $3O,OOO per year

$3O,OOO to $49,999

$50,000 to 574,999

$75,000+

Educational Attainment Less than high scfiooT High School

Some college

College*

Source: The Pew Internet and American life Project. August-September, 2O12. http://pewinternet.com/

8J%

83%

74%

73%

68%

86%

95%

97%

47%

72%

90%

96%

as a result of their interaction in cyberspace (Hargittai 2008). The Internet also creates more opportunity for people to misrepresent themselves or even create com- pletely false—or even stolen—identities. But studies find that computer-mediated interactions also follow some of the same patterns that are found in face-to-face interaction. People still “manage“ identities in front of a presumed audience; they project images of self to oth- ers that are consistent with the identity they have cre- ated for themselves, and they form social networks that become the source for evolving identities, just as people do in traditional forms of social interaction.

18-Z9	95%
30-49	89%
50—64	77%
65+
Household Income

In this respect, cyberspace interaction is an appli- cation of Goffman’s principle of impression manage ment. The person can put forward a totally different and wholly created self, or identity. One can “give off,“ in Goffman’s terms, any impression one wishes and, at the same time, know that one’s true self is protected by anonymity. This gives the individual quite a large and free range of roles and identities from which to choose, As predicted by symbolic interaction theory, of which Goffman’s is onevariety, the reality ofihe situation grows out of the interaction process itself. This is a central point of symbolic interaction theory and is central to socio logical analysis generally: Interaction creates reality.

Cyberspace interaction has thus resulted in new forms of social interaction in society—in fact, a newsocial order containing both deviants and conformists. These new forms of social interaction have their own rules and norms, their own language, their own sets of beliefs, and practices or rituals—in short, all the elements of culture, as defined in Chapter 2. For sociologists, cyberspace also provides an intriguing new venue in which to study the connection between society and social interaction.

U 1 1 J3 t: SiL 1 1III ?’:J

What is society?

Societ) is a system of social interaction that includes both culture and social organization. Sociew includes societ institutions, or established organized social behavior, and exists for a recognized purpose; social structure is the patterned relationships within a society.

What holds society together*

.According to theorist Emile Durkheim, society with all its complex social organisation and culmre, is held

120 C HA P T E R 5

together, depending on overall type, by mechanical solidarity (based on individual similarity) and organic solidarity (based on a division o/ labor among dissimi- lar individuals). Two other forms of social organization also contribute to the cohesion of a society: gemeiii – schrtJ (“comiriunity,“ characterized by cohesion based on friendships and loyalties) and gesellschaft (“societys,’ characterized by cohesion based on complexity and diRerentiation).

What are the types of societies?

Societies across the globe vary in type, as determined mainly by the complexic, of their social structures, their division Df labor, and their technologies. From least to most complex, they arefornging pastoral, horticulniral, agricultural (these four constitute preindustrial societ- ies), industrial, and postindustrial societies.

What are the forms of social interaction in society? All forms of social interaction in society are shaped by the structure of its social institutions. A group is a collection of individuals who interact and commu- nicate with each other, share goals and norms, and have a subJective awareness of themselves as a dis- tinct social unit. Stairs is a hierarchical position in a structure; a role is the expected behavior associated with a particular status. A role is the behavior others expect from a person associated with a particular sta- tus. Patterns of social interaction influence nonver- bal interaction as well as patterns of attraction and

‘ affiliation.

What theories are there about social interaction? Social interaction takes place in society- within the context of social structure and social institutions. Social interaction is analyzed in several ways, includ- ing the socinl construction of reality (we impose meaning and reality on our interactions with others); ethnomethodology (deliberate interruption of interac- tion to observe how a return to “normal” interaction is accomplished); impression management (a person “gives off” a particular impression to “con” the other and achieve certain goals, as in ryberspyce. interac- tion); and social exchange and game theor y (one engages in gamelike reward and punishment interac- tions to achieve one’s goals).

How is technology changing social interaction? Increasingly, people engage with each other through c yherspace interaction. Social norms develop in cyber- space as they do in face-to face interaction, but a person in cyberspace can also manipulate the impression fliat he or she gives oN, thus creating a new “virtual” self.

Key Terms

achieved status 108

ascribed status 108 collective

consciousness JO2 cyberspace

interaction 119 division of labor 103 ethnomethodology il5 game theory 118 gemeinschaft JO3 gesellschaft 101

group 107

impression

management 116

impr nting 112

macroanalysis 100

master status 108

mechanical solidarity 102 microanalysis TOO nonverbal

communication 110 non-zero sum game 118

organic solidarity 103

postindustrial society 107

preindustrial society 104 proxemic

communication 111

role 109

role conflict 109

role modeling 109

role set 109

role strain 110

social institution 101

social interaction 1OO social organization 101 social structure 1O1 society 1OO

status 1O8

status inconsistency JO8 status set 1O8

tactile

communication 110

zero-sum game 118

S 0 CIAL STRUCTURE AND SO IAL I NTERACTI 0 U * 121

Dfi8$

Edflh

düo posted to YouTube, she said, “More often than not I went home

… I think it might have been easier knowing l wasn’t the only one @öng at home in my bedroom crfüng.” Lauzon is a transgender activist Q’ her thirties not There was no gay—straight alliance or LGBT desbian, jy, bisexual, transgender) support group at her school. There wasn’t even

;9ouTube, Twitter, or an online community she could join as a teen, back before the Internet was widely available.

She posted a video about het own crappy high school esperience as part of the It Gets Better Project. The thousands of It Gets Better videos tar- get LGBT teens for whom suïcide tisk is twice as high as for snaight teens (Russell 4r Joyner, 200t). The message is slmple: For many LGBT people, high school is the worst part of a life that will get better. Lauzon’s message to young people stniggling with depression and bultying is supportive but blunc “Ending your life now is nevec the answer. If I would have done it when I was 13 yeacs old, when 1 was bullied in school, l would have never gotten to expe- rience the amazing life that 1 have now.” Anthropologist Mary Gray has found that online communities are particularly important for LGBT young people fiving in niral areas, for whom local role models might be lacLing (2009).

But if online support is so critical for LGBT youth, why did the It Gcts Better campaign take so long to emerge? Some might argue that the delzy—and clearly Lauzon’s high school experience decades ago shows that

Go Online

Out There Feds Like You

Find Community

The It bets Better project overs IC BT teen s rote moans and

support that IN+ey m ght not otherwise have zn rea1 life at see

} ears, prohibitions against homosexuals in the mili- tary, against gay marriage, and against adoption of children by homosexual parents have beeti struck do’wn in many places. But wait a second. Weren’t some of these legal challenges successful in part because there have been more positive depictions of gays and lesbians in the medial If Lauzon watched the television shows Martin E future or Roszar» when she was young, she would have seen the firs (fictional) gay marriages. The movie Bye Doy’i C. garnered an Oscar win for Hilary Swam who plnyec Brandon Teena, a transgender character based o

a man whose murder motivated lawmakers to pa hate crime legislation.

What Lsuzon’s participation in the It Gets Bet0 campaign demonstrates is the porou sometime leading, sometimes following—relationship betwe culture and media, Media and culture have al been closely related, drawing on one another

meaning in contexts where there are shifting power differences between ducers and consumers. In this chapter, we will explore iheit relationship. producers, consumers, advertisers, or some complicated Gz rute of a[l t determine what we read, heat, and see in the media-saturated environ In this chapter we first take a look at culmre to explain whar this som slipper} term has meant for social scientists. Then we look at how c and the media Intersect to shape values, behefs, and practices in contem

Definitions of Culture

Culnire is a vague term that we use to rationalize many behaviors and all sorts of peoples and patterns. We talk about a cutture of pover Uruted States (see Cha9ter 10). We hear about corporate cultures cultures, culture wars, the clash of cultures, culture shock, and even

Cftagte¥ 3: Culture and Nedia

obal scal Culmre is casually used as shorthand for many meanin@ÜfolTi innate biological tendencies to social institu-

ing in between.

Human-Naure

iy that cultute is the sum of the social categories and concepte we addition to our órliefs, behaviors (except the instinctual ones), and other words, culture is everything but nature.

: sentence captures exactly how culture has been defined through in opposition to nature. The word w/lars derives from the LaÓn verb culiivate or iill’3, suggesting the refinement of crops to meet human le still use r«ú«re as a verb in a similar sense, as when we culture bacte- ietri dish.) The more comrnon meaning of mfú‹re as a noun developed e same kirid of human control and domination over natute. We could

t culture began when humans started nc 8 •’ the architects of nature üng crops rather than hunting and gathering, hence the terms ‹r@r»Are iú»rr (gtowing fish and other aquadc organisms for human consump- ‘ating back centuries, the term Herr has referred to the distincàon i what is natural—what comes dírectíy from the earth and follows the

›f physicwand that is modified or created by humans and follows (or

) the laws of the state. Thar said, culture is both the technology by which s have come to dorrünate namre and the belie£ systems, ideologies, and

bolic representacions that constitute human existence.

In the fifteenth century, when European nations organized expeditions to

nd commerce and establish colonies in North America, Afzica, and Asta, Western peoples confronted nou-Western natives. The beliefs and behaviors of these peoples served as a foil to European cultura. Today, we recognize that cujtcte is aÏways éÍaúve. de cannot taÏk sbour cu]Mre Trhout Yeference to the global world, but the defiiutions, practices, and concept that we use in this chapter largely emanate £rom a Western viewpoint. It may also be easier to identify cultural elements when they are different from our own. The challenge in this chapter will be to take what we see as natural and view it as a product of culture. We’ll also explore the media and the role they play in the birth and dissem icâon of culmce.

Culture = (Superior} Man — (Inferior) Man

A8 coloniali6m led to increased interaction with non-Westerners, Europeans came to recognize that much of what they took for granted as natural was not. Alternative ways of living existed, as manifested in a variety of living

Definitions ot Culture

Cuttuze a set o/ belieJs, tiad›ttons. and practices; the sum of the soc al categories and concegts we emb ace iv aóditíon to beïiefs, behaviors ’excep‘ ”–*”–“ “’ ‘

an4 pract ces, everythtng but the natural enyiionment

The artist’s job, in contrast, is to re9reieiit the ideal within the realm of real. In fact, there’s a long history’ of artists attempting to represent the İd female in sculpture and painting, bi4t in reality no woman could ever exist flawless object, content to be gazed upon. jean Auguste Dominique Ingres’. Grande Odaüsgue has an unreahstically long spine, allowing her to ap smooth, supple, and gracefully elegant as she shows us her backside but her face to meet the viewer’s gaze with a hint of a smile. In this concepsoi art—and this understanding of cultur there is a single, best example of element in the world, from the ideal woman to the ìdeal form of governn to the ideal ciózen, which humanity ought to emulate. Furthermore, we see the ideal woman (and meal and family and governmental structure) is a nod on, chariging from one place to another and across time periods, Ca ideal be discovered, as Plato believed, or is it constructed*

Material versus Nonmaterial Cultur

Wonmateziat cuïłare va’u< , betîe/s, behaviors, ąîtd *ociêt

Today, we tend to think that everything ìs a component of culture. is a way of ljfe created by humans, whatever is not natural, Jg can culture into norunaterial culture, which includes values, behefs, beha?

78 Ghaptei $: Culture and Media

inguage, Meaning, and Concepts

construed as highly disrespectful. Have you ever taken public transpormtion during rush hour? Do the passengers waiting to board generally rriose aside to let people off the train first? In Moscow, nobod}• steps aside; in Japan, people matt so long that they pre.ctically miss the train! In England, pants are called “trousers,” women’s underwear “pants,” suspenders “braces,” and garter belts

“suspenders.” You can imagine the confusion that would ensue if an American businessman told his English client he needed to find a shop where he could bu)’ new pants and suspenders because his luggage had been lost. The English- man would either assume the American was a cross-dresser or send him to a lingerie shop to buy something special for his wife. Even your sociology class ’ probably has a different culture—language, meanings, symbols—from a biol- ogy or dance class.

Another way to thjnk about culture is that it is a may of organizing our experience. Take our symbols, foc example. What does n red light mean? It could mean that an alarm is sounding. tt could mean that sociething is X-rated (the “red-light” district in Amsterdam, for instance). It could mean “stop.” There is nothing inherent about the meaning of the red hght. It is embedded within our larger culture and therefore is part of a web of meanings. You can- not change one without affecting the others.

Culture even includes our language. According to the Sapir-Whorf thesis in linguistics, the language we speak direcdy influences (and reflects) the way we think about and experience the world. On a more concrete level, if you speak another language, you understand how certain meanings can become lost in uanslation—you can’i always say ezacdy what you want. Many English words here been adopted ot}tez languages, often ąs s[sng, such os óeufi artd /e we nd in French. Some stsunch tzadióonałists ze opposed to such bq -‘ rowing because they regard ir as a threat to their culture. How many word do we have for college* How central does that make higher education to o society? Many words describe the srate of b’eing intoxicated. What does tha say about our culture?

Concepts such as race, gender, class, and inequality are part of our cu1 as well. If you try to explain the American undersmnding of racial differed’ to someone from another country, you might feel frustrated, because it

not resonate with him or her. That’s because meanings are etribed’ ded. ,

wider sense of cuiturai understanding; you cannot just estract concepts f ” theit c‹intext and assume that their meanings will retain a like of their of some cases, when oppostng concepts come into contact, one will neckń usurp the othet. Por example, when Europeans first encountered them, N( Americans believed that owning land was similar to the way Americans . feel about owning air—a resource that was very difficult to put a price on‘

80 CŁaptet 3: Culiure and Media

‘el

ited

:nng on their concepts of: ownership, Europeans thus began the process of isplacing native peoples from their homelands and attacking them when

ded

esis

Ash

rds hat

lay

Ideology

. toilets in the first-class cabin if you have a coach-class ticket. Why no t? tt’s not as if the lavatories in first class are thar much better. What’s the big deal? We subscribe to an ideology that the purchase of an airline ticket at the coach, business, or first-class fare brings with it certain service expectations-that an expensive £irst-class ticket entitles a passenger to priority access to the lava- tory, more leg room, and greater amenities, such as warm face towels. The ideology is embedded within an entire sedes of suppositions, and if you cast aside some of them, they will no longer hold together as a whole. IN everyone flying coach started to hang out in first class, chatting with the flight atten- dants and using the first-class toilets, the system of class strati£cation (in air planes at least) would break down. People would not be willing to pay extra for a iirst-class ticket; more airlines might go bankrupt, and the industry itself would erode.

Even science and religion, which may seem like polar opposites, are both ideological frameworks. People once believed that the sun circled acound the earth, and then, in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, along came Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo, and this system of beliefs was turned inside

Material versus Nonmaterial Culture

ideology a system o£ concepts and relationships, an understandir+g of cause and effect.

r •-••<- – . •.-

Cutura1 zealirism takirtg into account the d*fferences

across cututes without gassfng judgmezl or assigritng vąlue.

More receritly, the 2000 presidential clecdon had the potential to shatter the ideology of democracy—that is, the behcf that the candidate who zeceives the most votes ascends to power. The winner of the popular vote, Al Gors was in fact defeated by George W Bush, wŁo accumulated the requisite num- ber of Electoral College votes after the Supreme Court interceded on the mat- : ter of voter irregulaóties in Florida, the tie-breaker state. The concept of the: Electoral College ęoon becarrie a hot topic od debate, but the final electioit iesult did not prompt riots in die streec. As it turned out, the eritire ideology of Amencan democracy did not crurnble.

Of course, on occasion ideologies do shatter. The fall of the former Sovi Union, for example, marlred not just s tnnsition in government but the sha tering of a particular brand of Commurfist ideology. Similaily, when aparthei was abolished in South Afiica, more than just a few laws changed; a total reo ganization of ideas, beliefs, and social telations followed. Often, ideologi change comes more slowly. The fight ton women’s rights, including equal pa ” oogolng even todar but womcn won the right to vote way bac/c in 1920.

SudyngCuhue

The scholarly smdy of culture began in the £eld of anthropology in the U States. Franz Boas founded ilie first PhD program in anthropology •t Cop bra University in the early i 930s and developed the concept of cultural r ity. Ruth Benedict, following Boas, hef teacher and mentor, coined thd”‘ literal relati in her book Pattie of Gore (1534). Cultural relativism.’ taifing into account the differences across cultures without passing jod, or assigriing value. For example, in the United States you are expected someone in the eye when you talk to him or her, but in China this is con rude, and you generally divert your gaze as a sign of respect. Neither ’

is iriherendy right or wrong. By employing the concept of culniral rna we can understand difference for the sake of increasing our knowledg the world. Cultural relativism is also impormnt for businesses th’ at ci

a global scale. •

82 Oliaptet 3: Culture and Media

alic meanings they attach ro it, just as Geertz learned such things Jnese by using cockfiglits as the center of his analysis. jyprprelation of CulMrei (1973), perhaps his most famous book, te, “Culture is a system of inherited conceptions expressed in sym

» by means of which people communicate, perpetuate, and develop pledge about and attr tudes toward life” (p. 89). He was trying to get a monolithic detuition of culture. So for some, culture is watching

jjt small, hard ball into a field and run around a diamond; for others,

.wn in the dust beside a ring and watching Evo roosters brawl. stime isn’t inherently better than the other. They’re both interesting in o’ri right, and by understanding the sigriificance of these events for the people, we can better understand their lives.

iculture

;tSf

For example, man} music genres have affiliated subcultures: hip-hop, hard core, punk, Christian rock. High-school cliques may verge on subcultures—the jocks, the band kids, the geeks—although these groups don’t really go against the dominant society, because ath1eticisrr+, musical talent, and intelligence are fairly conventional values. But what about the group of kids who dress in black

ear heavy eyeliner? Maybe teachers simply see them as moody teenagers with a penchant for dark fashion and extreme makeup just seeking to annoy the adults in their life, but perhaps their style of self-presentation means more to them.

Goth culture has its roots in the United Kingdom of the 1980s. It emerged as an offshoot of post-punk music. Typified by a distinctive style of dress— namely, black clothing with a Victorian flair—and a general affinity for gothic and death rock, goth culture has evolved over the last three decades, Cth many internal subdivisions. Some goths are more clrawn to magical or religious aspects of the subculture, whereas others focus mainly on the music. Even the term goth has different meanings to people within the subculture: Some see it as derogatory; some appropriate it for their own personal mearñng. An internal struggle has grown over who has the right to claim and define tHe label.

What makes today’s goths a subculture? They are not just a random group of people in black lis herring to music (classical musicians usually wear black

Mate ri a1 versus Norrmate rial Culture

Subculture the clistinct cultural values and behavioral patterns of a particular group in society, a group united

by sets o1 concepts, values, symbols, and shared meaning specific to the members of that 9iou9 distinctive enough to d stir gal ish it from otfitezs within the same cub lure or

Cultural Effects: Give and Take

Reflection Theory

äl1 by the

choices we make? No. Most people now understand that an interactive process exists between culnire and social structure. Most would agree that culture has an impact on society and is not just a unidirectional phenomenon.

Ztedia

Me‹tia any formats. platforms, or vehicles tfiat carry present.

. ..« … « > ‹»

Among the most pervasive and visible forms of culture in modern societies are those produced by the mass media. We might define media as any formats or vehicles that carry, present, or communicate information. This definition would, of course, include newspapers, periodicals, magazines, books, pam- phlets, and posters. But it would also include wax tablets, sky writing, web pages, and the children’s game of telephone. We’li flisr discuss the history of the media and then tackle theory and empirical studies.

From the Town drier to the Facebook Wall: A Brief History

When we talk about the media, we’re generally talking about the mass media. The first form of mass media was the book. Before the invention of the print- ing press, the media did exist—the town crier brought news, and royal mes- sengezz uavHeb by horseback, every now and then hopping off to read a scroll—but they did not exacdy reach the masses. People passed along most information by word of mouth. After the 1440s, when Johannes Gutenbei developed movable type for the printing press, text could be printed mu more easily Books and periodicals were produced and circulated at m greater rates and began to reach mass audiences. Since that time the t media arid uoiJ medls have become virtually synonymous.

90 Chagte¥ 3: Culture aztd Media

he innovations didn’t stop there, however. In the t 880s along came mother invention: the moving picture or silent film. Its quality was not the best

.r fitst, but it improved over time. In the 1920s sound was added to films. For many, this represented an irrrprovement over the radio, which had come along out the same time as the silent film. Television was invented in the i930s, though this technolog}’ didn’t make its way into most American homes Wti1 after U’oild War II. During the postwar period, new forms of media tech- nolog’ quickly hit the market, and the demand for media exploded: glossy magazines; color televisions; blockbuster movies; Betarriax videos, then VHS videos, then DVDsi vinyl records, then eight-track tapes, then cassette tapes, then CDs—and once the Internet came along, the sky was the limit! In 2013, 70 percent of the American population had broadband at home, with access flustered among the younger, wealthier, and better educated (Zickuhr &

Smith, 2013).

You’re well aw’are of all the forms the media come in, but let’s stop for a minute and contemplate the impact certain forms, such as television, have had on society. Again, televisions didn’t become household items in the United States until after World War II. From 1950, the year President Harry S. Truman ftrst sent military advisors to South Viemarri, to t 964, when Congress approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution calling for isctory by any means nec essary, the share of American households with television sets increased from

Media 91

9 to 92 percen r. During the Vietnam Uar, the American public witnessed mili tary conflict in a way they netter had before, and these images helped fuel the antiwar movement. Likewise, television played a large role in the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. I t was one thing to hear of discrimination secondhand, but quire another to sit ‘ith your family in the living room and watch images of police setting attack dogs on peaceful protesters and turning fire hoses on little African American girls dressed up in their Sunday best,

Hegemony: The Mother of All Media Terms

£feqemony a condi iron by which a dominant group uses its power to elicit the volunitary ‘consent’ of ttie masses

I l

not have to explicidy work to inculcate that set of principles into its citize Rather, private institutions, such as families, do most of the heavy lifting in regard. Ever wonder why children receive an allowance for taking out the m and doing other household chores? Gramsci might argue that djs is the . capitalist free-market ideology is insulled in the individual within the pti realm of the family.

The concept of hegemony is important for understanding the impact the media. It also raises questions about the tension between struck agency. Are people molded by the culture in which they live, or do they 8C participate in shaping the world around them? As we discussed earli6t chapter, it’s not an either/or question. Below v e’ll talk about some of* debates between structure and agency with regard to the media, look at S examples of hegemony in practice, and discuss the possibilities for coUtlt tural resistance.

9Z Chap ter 3: Culture and Meaia

dia Life Cycle

iø ø yødia-satura red society, but one of the most exciting aspects of the media İS that it allows us ro explore the tensions and contradic- ated when large social forces conflict with individual idenuty and free ïe see how people create media, how the media shape the culture in people ńve, how the media reflect the culture in which they exist, and ividuals and gto’aps use the media as their own means to shape, rede-

, and change culture.

do the adventures in a dairy tale o£ten begin once a mother dies? Are

:ks more often portrayed as professionals or criminals in television sitcoms? ow often ate Asians the lead characters in mainstream fìlmsP Who generally uates conversańon, men ot women, in U.S. (or Mexican) soap operas? These quesńons are all examples of textual analysis, analysis of the content of media its various forms, one of the important strands of study to materialize in the

ke of Gramsci’s work.

DurÍng the 1960s and 1970s, academic z nsãies focused almost solely on texts—television talk shows, newspapers, magazine pages. Finally, scholars reef ognizeö the importance of finding out how people read and interpret, and are affected by bese texts: Audience studies wete born. The held of psychology has expended a lot of time investigating clsims about the effects of televi- sion on children, and the debate continues. Sociologists have explored the way women read romance novels or how teenage girls interpret images of super- thin models in magazines. For example, in Reedïżg /ée Romatice: Women, P‹itriarcłzf,

«d fØ»ñr U/ermo (1987), Janice Radway argues that women exhibit a great deaÎ of individual agency when reading romance novels, which helps them cope with their daily hves in a patriarchal society by providing both escapes fr rri the drudgery of everyday life and alternative scripts to their readers. We are not just passive receptors of media; as readers or viewers, we es9erìence texts through the lens of our own critical, interpteove, and analytical processes.

Back to the Beginning: Cultural Production

The media don’t just spontaneously spring into being. They aren’t orgarùc; they’re produced, You may have heard the expression “History is written by the winners.” Well before something becomes history, it has to happen in the pres- ent. Who decides what’s news? How are decisions made xbout the content of television shows? To write his classic Deciding What s I•fews (l 979a), Herbert

Media Effects

LON ß—T E II’t

THE BACE AND sENDEP9OL!TlCá

’when not required by the plot or for proper chatactenzation.’

Meta+ads of crime (e.g.. safe-cracking,

” arson, smuggling) were not to be exglfcitly

presented.

References to ’sex perversion’ (such as tromosexualityl and venereal disease were forbtdden, as were depictions of

“ fien /’m“good, /’m ve/ good. ” ” ” ” ” ”” bul wAen T”m óad 7in óerTw.“ —ACTRE SS DE WEST

‘’: ‘ The moyie inQustry’s Production Gode enu-

merateü th ee “general pnncip1es“’

* ’ ‘* 2. No p›cture stall be produced that will

– lowe the moral standards of those wbo

see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thTown to the side of exime, wrongóotng. evii, or sin.

Colect stanaatds of subject only to the

reputiements of drama and entertainment.

sball be presented.

Law, natura] or humarL stall not be

nar shalt sympathy be created for its violation.

Specific zestzictions were spelted out as

‘particular appltcations” of these p inciples:

Nudity and suggestive dances were

Tne language section banned various words and phrases considered to be
Rur6er scenes bud to be fitrned in a way that would not inspire imitation in real and brutal killings could riot be shown in detail. . ’Revenge in modern times‘ was not to be justified.
the sanctity of maYriage and the home

had to be upheld. “Pictures sfall not infer -”* tl at low forms of sex relationship are the , accepted or common thing.” Adulte gnd illicit sex, altoough recognized as sometim necessary to the plot, could not be explicit justified; they were never to be presented an attractive optton. ‘’

PortzayaTs of intermciat relationships were *

forbidden.

“Scenes of passion” were not to be introduced when not essential lo the plót “Excessive and tustful kissing” was to be avoided, along with any otbe physical

interaction that might “stimJ late the low,

and baser element.” “. ‘

The flag of the United States was to bé ‘ treated as were the peop! ‘’ history’ of other nations. ‘‘

, , . . .. .., , ’””’ ”’ ’

r v”

. ‘ .’ ’ ‘ ” – ‘ ” *“ “!’* ” -* ‘•‹

” ”” ” .” : ’’” ””. . ” :’ *

comrriit violent crimes*” And the response wilt be, “That is not my intention at all. I use violence as a metaphor.” Scientific research hasn’t yet ruled dehrñtlvelj’ one way or the other or this conuoversial subject, bur man)’ beheve that the media occasionally have short-term, unintended effects.

Finally, section D of die illustration represents the long-term, unintended effects of the media. many people, not just cultural conservatives, argue that we have been desensitized to violence, sexuai imager j, and oder content that some people consider inappropriate for mass audiences. In the film industry; for example, the Production Code, also known as the Harm Code, was a set of standards created in 1930 (although it wasn’r officiallj enforced until 1934) to protect the moral fabric of society. The guidelines were fairly strict, and they were a testament to the mainstream ideologies of the time (see the box on pages 96-97). Slow.ly, however, the power of the code began to erode because of the ›minence of telemsion, foreign films, arid the fact that being condemned as immoral didn’t prevent a Um from becorriing a success. In ] 9G7 thy 5c›d2 was abandoned for the movie rating system. Over time, we have grown accus- tomed to seeing sexually explicit material In films, on television, and on the Internet. Those who lament this desensi6zation seek to reinstimte controls over media content.

Mommy, Where Do te e pes

home From?

Racism in the Media

On December 22, 1941, two weeks efter the ]apanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Time magazine ran an article titled “How to Tell Your Friends from the Japs.” There were annotated photographs to help readers idenñfy characteristics thai would distinguish, for instance, friendly Chinese from the ]apanese, American enemies during World War II. The magazine offered the following rules or iliumb, although it admitted that they mere “not always reliable”:

Some Chinese are tall (average: S 5 in.), Virtually all ]apanese are short (a erage: 5 ft. 2-’Zz in.).
japanese are likely to be stockier and broadet-hipped than short Chines

japanese xcept for wrestlers—are seldom fat; they often dry up and * grow lean as they the Chinese often put on weight, particulñl/ „ if they are prosperous (in China, with its frequent famines, being fit iS esteemed as a sign of being a solid citizen). ›i
Chinese, not as hairy as japanese, seldom grow an impressive mull

98 Chapter $’ Culture and Media

Sexism in the Media

lid

other focus of feminist media critiques has been images of violence nst women. jean IObourne has become one of the most popular lecturers ollege arid university campuses across America. In 1979 she released a film ed U/log Ui lofty: Ndrrm/i»g i Image o/ Pomsn, in which she examines the

/s in which women are maimed, sliced, raped, and otheruñse deformed in vertising images. One classic example is a photo that shows the image of a

.man’s body in a garbage can, with only her legs and a fantastic pair of high els on her feet visible. The message is clear: These shoes are, literally, to die

Kilbourne’s point is clear, too: Such images help sustain a kind of symbolic olence against women. In this critique, advertising does not just reflect the derlying culture that produced it but also creates desires and narratives that

enter women’s (and mens) hves with causal force.

Of course, there’s always room for innovation. Some girls (with the help of their parents) have responded by creating their owri magazines that focus on topics other than makeup, clothing, and boys, as mainstream teenage maga- zines do. for example, New doo» G/r/i is written and edited by girls aged 8 to 13 and contains no advertisements. Likewise, magazines exist for adult women that have more pro-woman messages; Mr. magazine was founded in 1971 dur-

Some advertisers have responded to feminist critiques of the media Cth new approaches. In 2005 Dove. a manufacmrer of skin-care products, launched a new seties of ads backed by a social awareness program called rhe Campaign for Real Beauty. Instead of models, the ads featured “real” women complete with freckles, frizz}• hair, wrinkles, and cellulite. The images were intentionally meant to offer a contrast to the images we’re accustomed to seeing. And, as Dover advertisers have said, “firming the thighs of a size 2 supermodel is no challenge” (Triester, 2005). The latest version of Dove’s Real Beauty campaign shows side by-side sketches of tire same woman as drawn by a sketch artist. The first image is drawn based on the woman’s description of herself and

Mom my. Wher e Do Stereotypes Come From? 101

oł the Media

iple, Apple’s iTunes app store is the dominant player in the sales of

S Apple demands to review every app to ensure that the is not something that they “believe is over the line,” which they go on in is something developers i• >osv when they cross it. This type e policy tends to promote a “chilling effect” whereby developers—

j g where this mystical “liae” is—choose to avoid and content they tnight be at all objectionable. Receiving Apples approval is important use once developers have made an app for Apples iOS platform, they ot sell it .nywhere but the iTunes store. Is Apple protecting its shoppers ir+g the app developers through a combination of monopoly power and owy threats? As corporate control of the media becomes more and more ized (owned by fewer and fewer groups), the concern is that the range opinions available will decrease and that corporate censorship (the act of

9pressing information that may reflect negatively on certain companies and/or ir affiliates) will further compromise the already-tarnished integrity of the

tream media.

The Internet, to some extent, has balanced out communications monopo- as s. It’s much easier to put up a website expressing alternative views than it is to ‘roadcasr a television or radic› program suggesting the same, The MIT Center

or Fumre Civic media, led by Ethan Zuckerman, works to leverage the Inter- net fot the promotion of local acfivism. One of the MIT projects—VGAZA or Virtual Gaza—allowed Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to document crises and share local stories glohally while under embargo. But not even the Internet is beyond the realm of pohtical economy. Srrialler sites, for example, cannot afford ro have sponsored links on Google’s search pages.

Consumer Culture

America is often described as a consumer culture, and rightly so. In my inter- her’ with sociologist Allison rugh, she pointed out that “corporate marketing to cluldren is a 22 billion dollar industry.” She then added, “Children 8 to 11 ask for beoveen W’o and four toys [for Christmas], and they receive eleven on aver- age!” (Conley, 2011a). Sales on mxjor patriotic holidays (Veterans Day, Memo- rial Day, Presidents’ Day) thrive as a tesult of the notion that it is our duty as American citizens to be good shoppers. As Sharon Zukin points out in her book on shopping culture, Point of Pyrcñai•.- How’ Xboppi’ng Changed American Cul- ture (2003), 24 hours after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, h4ayot Rudy Giuliani urged New Yorkers to take the day off and go shopping. It’s the tie that binds our society; everyones got to shop. iialls are our modern day marketplaces—they are where teenagers hang out, where elderly suburbanites get their exercise, and where Europeans come as tourists to see what Ameri- can culture is all about. The term ru»rrrrfm, however, refers to more than

Political Economy ot the Media

Coneumezism fhe steady acqois t on of material possessions. o/ten with fhe belief that happiness

aod MU\ment can tints be achieved

just buying merchandise; it refers to the belief thxt happiness and fulfilment can be achieved through the acquisidon of matenA possessions. Versace, j. Crew, and realtors in certain hip neighborhoods are not just peddling shoes, jeans, and apart- ments. They are also selling a self-image,

a lifestyle, and a sense of belonging and i*? self-wonh. The media, and advertising in particular, play a large role in the creation

and maintenance of consumerism.

Advertising and Children

The rise of the consumer-citizen has met with increasing criticism, but how doe our society produce these consumer

citizens* The Canadian author and activi ‘

Naomi Klein published No Logo.- TaN»g km at the Brand Bellies N 2000; in thi book Klein analyzes the growth of advertising in schools. Pepsi and Co Cola now bargain for exclusive rights to sell their products witkin schools, brand-name fast foods are often sold in cafeterias The logos of compani that sponsor athletic fields are displayed prominendy. This has been commo place in many colleges and universities for some time now, but the increas’ presence of advertising in middle and high schools should also be noted. .

One striking example is Channel One, which has been airing in sch around the United States since 1990 (Rhode Island was the only state to re Channel One funding). In exchange for television sets, video equipment, satellite dishes, schools are required to show 12 minutes of prepackaged -‘ granuning every day. Although Channel One provides news and public af informañon, its programming also includes to minutes of commerciâi 12-minute segment. One analysis found that only 20 percent of air devoted to “recent political, economic, social, and cultural stories”; the r ing 80 percent of the prepackaged programming includes sports, weath other topics, as well as advertisements for Channel One itself. Studie found that Channel One cosr taxpayers JI.8 billion a year in lost schoo;t

of that amount, $300 million was lost to commercials alone (Molnar & S 1998). Meanwhile, Channel One charges advertisers almost $200,000 I 30-second segment. Channel One is disproportionately found in lowei-

schod disnicts that struggle with funding for books and technologji rti

disadvantaged students in these schools are exposed to more adver ’ and fewer academic lessons than their peers in systems that can afford this kind of sponsorship. ‘

104 Chagte¥ 3• Cuttu¥e auld Media -‘

Jo”

Culture Jams: Hey Calvin, How ’Bout Giving That Girl a Sandwich?

What’s in a Name?

iy kids E and Yo Xing Heyno Augustus Eisner Alexander Weiser so forgive me if I didn’t see what all the fuss was about when Kan}e Kim Kardashian named their daughter North (West). Afrer all, she

ies such as France or]apan, there is no U.S. law that constrains what oe our offspring; only names that would be considered abusive can ed. Names present a unique measure of culture: There are few rules, stitutions attempt to directly influence our choices, unlike almost her aspect of culture from food to firm to fashion. Thus, trends in

:e as close to a pure, unmediated, reflective mirror of societal culture

that light, one could say it was almost inevitable that West and Kar- n chose a unique name for their child. On the one hand, there’s a long

ced

elm)

Remember Moon Unit Zappa? Born in 1967, she was perhaps one rst notable celebrity offspring given a “weird” moniker. The 1960s was

ge of Aquarius, after all. Besides her own siblings, she was followed by

.italized “america,” the child of Abbie Hoffman; and Free, the span of ara Hershey and David Carradine, just to mention a few. Fast toward «o ieth Paltrow’s daughter, Apple Martin, and it should come as no surprise

The more interesting sociological phenomenon that North West embodies,

fler

black man, is the rise of unique black names, Atound the

e time celebrities started thinking up names that otherwise served as nouns, rbs, or adjectives, African Americans began to abandon long-standing nam- ag patterns. Until the civil rights movement, a typical black name might have ‘ecu Franklin or florence. But then black power happened. Blacks wanted to assert their individuality and break ties frotn the dominant society, so the proportion of unique names—those chat appear in birth records only once for

Until about 1960, the proportion of unique names for white Americans hovered around 20 percent for girls. For blacks ir had always been higher— around 30 percent. During the 1960s, the number of white girls with unique names started to inch up to about 25 percent, but for blacks, it literally sky- docketed, peaking around i 9T at more than 50 percent for girls and reaching almost 40 percent for boys in 1975 (hased on Illinois data). Harvard sociolo- gists Stanie} Lieberson and Kelly S. Mikelson, who examined this trend in a

107

1995 pap followed it only through the 1980s. But 1’d be * tp guess that the practice has contin- ned Tt a similar rate (Ligberson & Milrelson, 1995). p ght think Chat all this name coinage

would lead to gender COflfusion in kindergartens. rough I M pt advocating gender rigidity, there

is some evidence that gender-ambiguous names :’ c•» cause problems fOr boys. EconOmiSt David’ pÍgJio hound /áÜ “ /* nam4•d Sub” tend to get.

i•‹o gore trouble at SchOOl dfottfld sixtli grade,’

when QUb€f/ tS (2007)

got ¡t sms o»i thet even unique names are

band

ers o

’.’. them

’ %d ‹

gendedred.en Lieberson

and Milrelson gave

{¡$t ique names they found in time Illinois ‘ . ,

database to re•@Jdents, the vast majority idend-

fied the gender of the acnial child—for excl ‘

experienc° fO s this. Nobody mistaires Yo for

1’, nt_e. M•whilc, three other Es, who he

,host ay daughter’s name from my public’

rñü

Ags, nte to me. (SO ml3ch for uriique .. . ) T

of them were female, bringing the total to 75

Cert female. I ° 2 Sk I had 25 other kids:so,

test the gender of every letter in the .alp

could

bet. If you ink I’m crazy, move to Paris. :. ‘

N0u 0f

fl Chapter opened

th a descriptioÇ Of how sevez£ suicidas gave üs

” +’°nzy of YouTube videos and may have eben made it easier for Pre

follar ugh on his campaign prornise to dó

tell segre tjon policy in the U.S. military. Nós’

áP› yoll can see why )át uito s story is part of a discussion of cultur

medio. Bat the fact Mat YOuTube’s parent company, Google, ís making’

°ir all of the trafíic •’sociate^ “* “’ Ir G”s

Better Project speaks to th

dWentalnature Of media and M in our society. Remember that. Ó

the sociologist is to «ee as

psiructed What iS usually taken for gran:

8 *’ay, It Gets Bgtt« asruptedthe mesa gow; the campzign makes me ’

dtjcers out of pyple who are ty2lC 7 corisumers of the largely gay-*’

tepJeySi

and even vicóms of the thug-like beM

pe ,he ca crs just getting on the ceIebri@

consume6sm, it’s based on the notion that advertisements are basically props ganda. Culture jamming differs from appropriating advertisements for the say of art and sheer vandalism (where the sole goal is destrucdon of propertj§ although advertisers probably don’t care too much about this latter distinctiof Numerous anticonsumerist activist groups have sprung up, such s Adjvits,fi Cwadian magazine that specializes in spools of popular advecâsing can paigns. For example, it parodied a real Calvin Klein campaign (which advance the careerof Kate Moss and ushered in an age of ultra-thin, wniftike model with a presumably bulimia woman vomiting into a toilet. AdbusM also spc’ sore an annual Buy Nothing Day (held, with great irony, or the day aft, Thanksgiving, known in xetail as “Black Friday,” the busiest shopping days the year), which encounges people to do just that—buy nothing on this s cific day of the year, encouraging them to reclaim their buying power and fci

on the noncommercial aspects of the holiday, such as spending time Tt

Another Adbuiters spoof caricatured the legendary joe Camel the an cnorphi advertising icon of Camel cigarettes from t987 until 19.

when R. j. Reynolds, the tobacco firm that conjured up the character, vol tartly stopped using his image after receiving complaints from Congress various public-interest groups that its ads primarily targeted cMdren. (In l§ a Jc«rwe/ «J th in Medical Assuoati’nn smdy found that more five- six-year-old kids recognized joe Camel than Mickey Mouse or Fred F’lin

[P. M. Fischer ct al., 1991].) In the Xdhusiers zpoo¥,“]oe Chemo” is w down a hospital hallway with an IV, presumably dying of cancer caused smoking.

106 Chapter 3: Culture ana Medta

increase their own reputations? Or are they rneaningful ptoduc-

, reihaping and rerrüxing the messages and rrraterials available to

uce their new, noncommercial message?

ipter has presented some new ways of looking at culture: how we how it affects us, and what this means for understanding ourselves Id in hich we hve. Do you non have a new understanding of you now see your own culture through a critical lens? What have

ously taken for granted that you can now view as a product of our Can you now look at the media in a different ray? Don your critical cnp and put some of the stuff you’vc just learned into practice.

to 75

the atp

gave tlSC t Presid’ e to d° ^

pt g$gnted ées rneÔà Q y gay iHVïS?’

‹e behavi°’

109

Dfi8$
Edflh

ja Lauzon started frcshman year of high school as a boy, went home sterbreak, and came back as a girl. Other students did not understand— fiullied Lauzon almost every day. Recalling her high school experience in
düo posted to YouTube, she said, “More often than not I went home
g. … I think it might have been easier knowing l wasn’t the only one @öng at home in my bedroom crfüng.” Lauzon is a transgender activist Q’ her thirties not There was no gay—straight alliance or LGBT desbian, jy, bisexual, transgender) support group at her school. There wasn’t even
;9ouTube, Twitter, or an online community she could join as a teen, back before the Internet was widely available.
She posted a video about het own crappy high school esperience as part of the It Gets Better Project. The thousands of It Gets Better videos tar- get LGBT teens for whom suïcide tisk is twice as high as for snaight teens (Russell 4r Joyner, 200t). The message is slmple: For many LGBT people, high school is the worst part of a life that will get better. Lauzon’s message to young people stniggling with depression and bultying is supportive but blunc “Ending your life now is nevec the answer. If I would have done it when I was 13 yeacs old, when 1 was bullied in school, l would have never gotten to expe- rience the amazing life that 1 have now.” Anthropologist Mary Gray has found that online communities are particularly important for LGBT young people fiving in niral areas, for whom local role models might be lacLing (2009).
But if online support is so critical for LGBT youth, why did the It Gcts Better campaign take so long to emerge? Some might argue that the delzy—and clearly Lauzon’s high school experience decades ago shows that

Go Online

Out There Feds Like You

Find Community

The It bets Better project overs IC BT teen s rote moans and
support that IN+ey m ght not otherwise have zn rea1 life at see

I GBT bullying has been a problem £or a long cme—is evidence that media are merely a reflec- tion of larger cultural trends. Before it wouid have been possible to get gay, lesbian, uacsgender, and straight people to feel safe enough to publicly pro- claim their support for LGBT youth, broader social changes had to occur. Since Lauzon’s high school
} ears, prohibitions against homosexuals in the mili- tary, against gay marriage, and against adoption of children by homosexual parents have beeti struck do’wn in many places. But wait a second. Weren’t some of these legal challenges successful in part because there have been more positive depictions of gays and lesbians in the medial If Lauzon watched the television shows Martin E future or Roszar» when she was young, she would have seen the firs (fictional) gay marriages. The movie Bye Doy’i C. garnered an Oscar win for Hilary Swam who plnyec Brandon Teena, a transgender character based o
a man whose murder motivated lawmakers to pa hate crime legislation.
What Lsuzon’s participation in the It Gets Bet0 campaign demonstrates is the porou sometime leading, sometimes following—relationship betwe culture and media, Media and culture have al been closely related, drawing on one another

meaning in contexts where there are shifting power differences between ducers and consumers. In this chapter, we will explore iheit relationship. producers, consumers, advertisers, or some complicated Gz rute of a[l t determine what we read, heat, and see in the media-saturated environ In this chapter we first take a look at culmre to explain whar this som slipper} term has meant for social scientists. Then we look at how c and the media Intersect to shape values, behefs, and practices in contem

Definitions of Culture
Culnire is a vague term that we use to rationalize many behaviors and all sorts of peoples and patterns. We talk about a cutture of pover Uruted States (see Cha9ter 10). We hear about corporate cultures cultures, culture wars, the clash of cultures, culture shock, and even

Cftagte¥ 3: Culture and Nedia

obal scal Culmre is casually used as shorthand for many meanin@ÜfolTi innate biological tendencies to social institu-
ing in between.

Human-Naure

iy that cultute is the sum of the social categories and concepte we addition to our órliefs, behaviors (except the instinctual ones), and other words, culture is everything but nature.
: sentence captures exactly how culture has been defined through in opposition to nature. The word w/lars derives from the LaÓn verb culiivate or iill’3, suggesting the refinement of crops to meet human le still use r«ú«re as a verb in a similar sense, as when we culture bacte- ietri dish.) The more comrnon meaning of mfú‹re as a noun developed e same kirid of human control and domination over natute. We could
t culture began when humans started nc 8 •’ the architects of nature üng crops rather than hunting and gathering, hence the terms ‹r@r»Are iú»rr (gtowing fish and other aquadc organisms for human consump- ‘ating back centuries, the term Herr has referred to the distincàon i what is natural—what comes dírectíy from the earth and follows the
›f physicwand that is modified or created by humans and follows (or
) the laws of the state. Thar said, culture is both the technology by which s have come to dorrünate namre and the belie£ systems, ideologies, and
bolic representacions that constitute human existence.
In the fifteenth century, when European nations organized expeditions to
•nd commerce and establish colonies in North America, Afzica, and Asta, Western peoples confronted nou-Western natives. The beliefs and behaviors of these peoples served as a foil to European cultura. Today, we recognize that cujtcte is aÏways éÍaúve. de cannot taÏk sbour cu]Mre Trhout Yeference to the global world, but the defiiutions, practices, and concept that we use in this chapter largely emanate £rom a Western viewpoint. It may also be easier to identify cultural elements when they are different from our own. The challenge in this chapter will be to take what we see as natural and view it as a product of culture. We’ll also explore the media and the role they play in the birth and dissem icâon of culmce.

Culture = (Superior} Man — (Inferior) Man

Definitions ot Culture

Cuttuze a set o/ belieJs, tiad›ttons. and practices; the sum of the soc al categories and concegts we emb ace iv aóditíon to beïiefs, behaviors ’excep‘ ”–*”–“ “’ ‘
an4 pract ces, everythtng but the natural enyiionment

the real world. Plato argues that God is the ideal form of anything. A carpenter, for example, tries to construct a material embodiment of that ideal form. H starts with a vision, the divine vision of what a chair or table should look like and he works his hardest to bting that vision to friiiöon. Of course, it ca new ct óe perfect; it can never approximate the platonic ideal.
The artist’s job, in contrast, is to re9reieiit the ideal within the realm of real. In fact, there’s a long history’ of artists attempting to represent the İd female in sculpture and painting, bi4t in reality no woman could ever exist flawless object, content to be gazed upon. jean Auguste Dominique Ingres’. Grande Odaüsgue has an unreahstically long spine, allowing her to ap smooth, supple, and gracefully elegant as she shows us her backside but her face to meet the viewer’s gaze with a hint of a smile. In this concepsoi art—and this understanding of cultur there is a single, best example of element in the world, from the ideal woman to the ìdeal form of governn to the ideal ciózen, which humanity ought to emulate. Furthermore, we see the ideal woman (and meal and family and governmental structure) is a nod on, chariging from one place to another and across time periods, Ca ideal be discovered, as Plato believed, or is it constructed*

Material versus Nonmaterial Cultur

Wonmateziat cuïłare va’u< , betîe/s, behaviors, ąîtd *ociêt

Today, we tend to think that everything ìs a component of culture. is a way of ljfe created by humans, whatever is not natural, Jg can culture into norunaterial culture, which includes values, behefs, beha?

78 Ghaptei $: Culture and Media

inguage, Meaning, and Concepts

no one says “Io»ñ” when a stranger sneezes in the grocery store. In meeting someone for the first time, but holding packages in your right hand, have you instead extended your left in greeting* In Saudi Arabia, this action would be
construed as highly disrespectful. Have you ever taken public transpormtion during rush hour? Do the passengers waiting to board generally rriose aside to let people off the train first? In Moscow, nobod}• steps aside; in Japan, people matt so long that they pre.ctically miss the train! In England, pants are called “trousers,” women’s underwear “pants,” suspenders “braces,” and garter belts
“suspenders.” You can imagine the confusion that would ensue if an American businessman told his English client he needed to find a shop where he could bu)’ new pants and suspenders because his luggage had been lost. The English- man would either assume the American was a cross-dresser or send him to a lingerie shop to buy something special for his wife. Even your sociology class ’ probably has a different culture—language, meanings, symbols—from a biol- ogy or dance class.
Another way to thjnk about culture is that it is a may of organizing our experience. Take our symbols, foc example. What does n red light mean? It could mean that an alarm is sounding. tt could mean that sociething is X-rated (the “red-light” district in Amsterdam, for instance). It could mean “stop.” There is nothing inherent about the meaning of the red hght. It is embedded within our larger culture and therefore is part of a web of meanings. You can- not change one without affecting the others.
Culture even includes our language. According to the Sapir-Whorf thesis in linguistics, the language we speak direcdy influences (and reflects) the way we think about and experience the world. On a more concrete level, if you speak another language, you understand how certain meanings can become lost in uanslation—you can’i always say ezacdy what you want. Many English words here been adopted ot}tez languages, often ąs s[sng, such os óeufi artd /e we nd in French. Some stsunch tzadióonałists ze opposed to such bq -‘ rowing because they regard ir as a threat to their culture. How many word do we have for college* How central does that make higher education to o society? Many words describe the srate of b’eing intoxicated. What does tha say about our culture?
Concepts such as race, gender, class, and inequality are part of our cu1 as well. If you try to explain the American undersmnding of racial differed’ to someone from another country, you might feel frustrated, because it
not resonate with him or her. That’s because meanings are etribed’ ded. ,
wider sense of cuiturai understanding; you cannot just estract concepts f ” theit c‹intext and assume that their meanings will retain a like of their of some cases, when oppostng concepts come into contact, one will neckń usurp the othet. Por example, when Europeans first encountered them, N( Americans believed that owning land was similar to the way Americans . feel about owning air—a resource that was very difficult to put a price on‘

80 CŁaptet 3: Culiure and Media

‘el

ited

understood as a collective responsibility. From a real-estate perspective, Europeans must have been very excited. (“All this land and »oboVy owns 3 The issue was not a language barrier: Native Americans had a social er that had nothing to do with assigning ownership to pieces of the earth.
:nng on their concepts of: ownership, Europeans thus began the process of isplacing native peoples from their homelands and attacking them when

ded

esis

Ash

rds hat

lay

Ideology

Nonmaterial culture, in its most abstract guise, takes the form of ideology. Ideology is a system of concepts and relationships, an understanding of cause and effect. For example, generally on airplanes you’re not allowed to use the
. toilets in the first-class cabin if you have a coach-class ticket. Why no t? tt’s not as if the lavatories in first class are thar much better. What’s the big deal? We subscribe to an ideology that the purchase of an airline ticket at the coach, business, or first-class fare brings with it certain service expectations-that an expensive £irst-class ticket entitles a passenger to priority access to the lava- tory, more leg room, and greater amenities, such as warm face towels. The ideology is embedded within an entire sedes of suppositions, and if you cast aside some of them, they will no longer hold together as a whole. IN everyone flying coach started to hang out in first class, chatting with the flight atten- dants and using the first-class toilets, the system of class strati£cation (in air planes at least) would break down. People would not be willing to pay extra for a iirst-class ticket; more airlines might go bankrupt, and the industry itself would erode.
Even science and religion, which may seem like polar opposites, are both ideological frameworks. People once believed that the sun circled acound the earth, and then, in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, along came Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo, and this system of beliefs was turned inside

Material versus Nonmaterial Culture

ideology a system o£ concepts and relationships, an understandir+g of cause and effect.

r •-••<- – . •.-

Cutura1 zealirism takirtg into account the d*fferences
across cututes without gassfng judgmezl or assigritng vąlue.

out. The earth no longer lay at the center of the universe but orbited the sun. This undeistanding represented a major shift in ideology, and it was not an easy one to make. In a geocentric universe, humans living on earth stand at its center, and this idea corresponds to Christian notions that humans are the lords of the eatth and the chosen children of God. However, when we view the eaith as a rock orbiting the sun, just like seven other plancts and countless subpłanetary bodies, we may feel sigriificantly less special and have to adjust our notion of humanity’s special role in the uińvetse. People invest a lot in their belief systemu, and those wiio go against the status quo and qucstion the prevailing ideology may be severely puriished, as was Galileo.
More receritly, the 2000 presidential clecdon had the potential to shatter the ideology of democracy—that is, the behcf that the candidate who zeceives the most votes ascends to power. The winner of the popular vote, Al Gors was in fact defeated by George W Bush, wŁo accumulated the requisite num- ber of Electoral College votes after the Supreme Court interceded on the mat- : ter of voter irregulaóties in Florida, the tie-breaker state. The concept of the: Electoral College ęoon becarrie a hot topic od debate, but the final electioit iesult did not prompt riots in die streec. As it turned out, the eritire ideology of Amencan democracy did not crurnble.
Of course, on occasion ideologies do shatter. The fall of the former Sovi Union, for example, marlred not just s tnnsition in government but the sha tering of a particular brand of Commurfist ideology. Similaily, when aparthei was abolished in South Afiica, more than just a few laws changed; a total reo ganization of ideas, beliefs, and social telations followed. Often, ideologi change comes more slowly. The fight ton women’s rights, including equal pa ” oogolng even todar but womcn won the right to vote way bac/c in 1920.

SudyngCuhue
The scholarly smdy of culture began in the £eld of anthropology in the U States. Franz Boas founded ilie first PhD program in anthropology •t Cop bra University in the early i 930s and developed the concept of cultural r ity. Ruth Benedict, following Boas, hef teacher and mentor, coined thd”‘ literal relati in her book Pattie of Gore (1534). Cultural relativism.’ taifing into account the differences across cultures without passing jod, or assigriing value. For example, in the United States you are expected someone in the eye when you talk to him or her, but in China this is con rude, and you generally divert your gaze as a sign of respect. Neither ’
is iriherendy right or wrong. By employing the concept of culniral rna we can understand difference for the sake of increasing our knowledg the world. Cultural relativism is also impormnt for businesses th’ at ci
a global scale. •

82 Oliaptet 3: Culture and Media

alic meanings they attach ro it, just as Geertz learned such things Jnese by using cockfiglits as the center of his analysis. jyprprelation of CulMrei (1973), perhaps his most famous book, te, “Culture is a system of inherited conceptions expressed in sym
» by means of which people communicate, perpetuate, and develop pledge about and attr tudes toward life” (p. 89). He was trying to get a monolithic detuition of culture. So for some, culture is watching
jjt small, hard ball into a field and run around a diamond; for others,
.wn in the dust beside a ring and watching Evo roosters brawl. stime isn’t inherently better than the other. They’re both interesting in o’ri right, and by understanding the sigriificance of these events for the people, we can better understand their lives.

iculture

;tSf

e culture, subculture as a concept can be a moving target: It’s hard ro lock i one specific deTuition of the term. Historically, s ubcultures have been ned as groups united by sets of concepts, values, symbols, and shared eaning specific to the members of that 6’oup. Accordingly, they frequentl} e seen as vulgar or deviant and are often marginalized. Part of the original ipetus behind subculture studies was to gain a deeper understanding of indi- duals and groups who traditionally have been dismissed as weirdos at best nd deviants at worst.
For example, man} music genres have affiliated subcultures: hip-hop, hard core, punk, Christian rock. High-school cliques may verge on subcultures—the jocks, the band kids, the geeks—although these groups don’t really go against the dominant society, because ath1eticisrr+, musical talent, and intelligence are fairly conventional values. But what about the group of kids who dress in black
ear heavy eyeliner? Maybe teachers simply see them as moody teenagers with a penchant for dark fashion and extreme makeup just seeking to annoy the adults in their life, but perhaps their style of self-presentation means more to them.
Goth culture has its roots in the United Kingdom of the 1980s. It emerged as an offshoot of post-punk music. Typified by a distinctive style of dress— namely, black clothing with a Victorian flair—and a general affinity for gothic and death rock, goth culture has evolved over the last three decades, Cth many internal subdivisions. Some goths are more clrawn to magical or religious aspects of the subculture, whereas others focus mainly on the music. Even the term goth has different meanings to people within the subculture: Some see it as derogatory; some appropriate it for their own personal mearñng. An internal struggle has grown over who has the right to claim and define tHe label.
What makes today’s goths a subculture? They are not just a random group of people in black lis herring to music (classical musicians usually wear black

Mate ri a1 versus Norrmate rial Culture

Subculture the clistinct cultural values and behavioral patterns of a particular group in society, a group united
by sets o1 concepts, values, symbols, and shared meaning specific to the members of that 9iou9 distinctive enough to d stir gal ish it from otfitezs within the same cub lure or

Cultural Effects: Give and Take

Reflection Theory

äl1 by the

Ztedia

Me‹tia any formats. platforms, or vehicles tfiat carry present.
. ..« … « > ‹»

From the Town drier to the Facebook Wall: A Brief History

When we talk about the media, we’re generally talking about the mass media. The first form of mass media was the book. Before the invention of the print- ing press, the media did exist—the town crier brought news, and royal mes- sengezz uavHeb by horseback, every now and then hopping off to read a scroll—but they did not exacdy reach the masses. People passed along most information by word of mouth. After the 1440s, when Johannes Gutenbei developed movable type for the printing press, text could be printed mu more easily Books and periodicals were produced and circulated at m greater rates and began to reach mass audiences. Since that time the t media arid uoiJ medls have become virtually synonymous.

90 Chagte¥ 3: Culture aztd Media

he innovations didn’t stop there, however. In the t 880s along came mother invention: the moving picture or silent film. Its quality was not the best
.r fitst, but it improved over time. In the 1920s sound was added to films. For many, this represented an irrrprovement over the radio, which had come along out the same time as the silent film. Television was invented in the i930s, though this technolog}’ didn’t make its way into most American homes Wti1 after U’oild War II. During the postwar period, new forms of media tech- nolog’ quickly hit the market, and the demand for media exploded: glossy magazines; color televisions; blockbuster movies; Betarriax videos, then VHS videos, then DVDsi vinyl records, then eight-track tapes, then cassette tapes, then CDs—and once the Internet came along, the sky was the limit! In 2013, 70 percent of the American population had broadband at home, with access flustered among the younger, wealthier, and better educated (Zickuhr &
Smith, 2013).
You’re well aw’are of all the forms the media come in, but let’s stop for a minute and contemplate the impact certain forms, such as television, have had on society. Again, televisions didn’t become household items in the United States until after World War II. From 1950, the year President Harry S. Truman ftrst sent military advisors to South Viemarri, to t 964, when Congress approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution calling for isctory by any means nec essary, the share of American households with television sets increased from

Media 91

9 to 92 percen r. During the Vietnam Uar, the American public witnessed mili tary conflict in a way they netter had before, and these images helped fuel the antiwar movement. Likewise, television played a large role in the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. I t was one thing to hear of discrimination secondhand, but quire another to sit ‘ith your family in the living room and watch images of police setting attack dogs on peaceful protesters and turning fire hoses on little African American girls dressed up in their Sunday best,

Hegemony: The Mother of All Media Terms

£feqemony a condi iron by which a dominant group uses its power to elicit the volunitary ‘consent’ of ttie masses

I l

All of us might be willing to agree that, on some level, the media both reflect culture and wr›rk to produce the ver} culture they represent. How does tlus dynamic work? Antonio Gramsci, an Italian political theorist and activist, came up Cth the concept of hegemony to describe just that. Gramsci, a Marxist, was imprisoned by the Fascists in the 1920s and 1 930s; while in jail, he attempted to explain u hy the working-class revolution Marx had predicted never came to pass. He published his findings in his “prison notebooks” of 1929—55 (Gramsci, 1971). In this vein, then, hegemony “refers to a historical process in which a dominant group exercises ‘moral and intellectual leadership’ through- out socie9• by winning the voluntary ‘consent’ of popular masses” (Kim, 200t). This concept of hegemony stands in contrast to another of Gramsci’s ideas, domination. If domination means getting people to do what you want through the use of force, hegemony means getting them to go along with the sta- tus quo because it seems like the best course or the natural order of things, Although dorriinadon generally involves an action by the state (such as the fascist leaders who imprisoned those who disagreed with them), “hegemony takes place in the rea1tn of private institutions . . . such as families, churchs trade unions, and the media” (Kim, 2001). For example, if free-market capiJ- ism is the hegemonic economic ideology of a given socie 9, then the state d
not have to explicidy work to inculcate that set of principles into its citize Rather, private institutions, such as families, do most of the heavy lifting in regard. Ever wonder why children receive an allowance for taking out the m and doing other household chores? Gramsci might argue that djs is the . capitalist free-market ideology is insulled in the individual within the pti realm of the family.
The concept of hegemony is important for understanding the impact the media. It also raises questions about the tension between struck agency. Are people molded by the culture in which they live, or do they 8C participate in shaping the world around them? As we discussed earli6t chapter, it’s not an either/or question. Below v e’ll talk about some of* debates between structure and agency with regard to the media, look at S examples of hegemony in practice, and discuss the possibilities for coUtlt tural resistance.

9Z Chap ter 3: Culture and Meaia

dia Life Cycle
iø ø yødia-satura red society, but one of the most exciting aspects of the media İS that it allows us ro explore the tensions and contradic- ated when large social forces conflict with individual idenuty and free ïe see how people create media, how the media shape the culture in people ńve, how the media reflect the culture in which they exist, and ividuals and gto’aps use the media as their own means to shape, rede-
, and change culture.

do the adventures in a dairy tale o£ten begin once a mother dies? Are
:ks more often portrayed as professionals or criminals in television sitcoms? ow often ate Asians the lead characters in mainstream fìlmsP Who generally uates conversańon, men ot women, in U.S. (or Mexican) soap operas? These quesńons are all examples of textual analysis, analysis of the content of media its various forms, one of the important strands of study to materialize in the
ke of Gramsci’s work.
DurÍng the 1960s and 1970s, academic z nsãies focused almost solely on texts—television talk shows, newspapers, magazine pages. Finally, scholars reef ognizeö the importance of finding out how people read and interpret, and are affected by bese texts: Audience studies wete born. The held of psychology has expended a lot of time investigating clsims about the effects of televi- sion on children, and the debate continues. Sociologists have explored the way women read romance novels or how teenage girls interpret images of super- thin models in magazines. For example, in Reedïżg /ée Romatice: Women, P‹itriarcłzf,
«d fØ»ñr U/ermo (1987), Janice Radway argues that women exhibit a great deaÎ of individual agency when reading romance novels, which helps them cope with their daily hves in a patriarchal society by providing both escapes fr rri the drudgery of everyday life and alternative scripts to their readers. We are not just passive receptors of media; as readers or viewers, we es9erìence texts through the lens of our own critical, interpteove, and analytical processes.

Back to the Beginning: Cultural Production

The media don’t just spontaneously spring into being. They aren’t orgarùc; they’re produced, You may have heard the expression “History is written by the winners.” Well before something becomes history, it has to happen in the pres- ent. Who decides what’s news? How are decisions made xbout the content of television shows? To write his classic Deciding What s I•fews (l 979a), Herbert

Media Effects

LON ß—T E II’t

THE BACE AND sENDEP9OL!TlCá

’when not required by the plot or for proper chatactenzation.’
• Meta+ads of crime (e.g.. safe-cracking,
” arson, smuggling) were not to be exglfcitly
presented.
• References to ’sex perversion’ (such as tromosexualityl and venereal disease were forbtdden, as were depictions of

“ fien /’m“good, /’m ve/ good. ” ” ” ” ” ”” bul wAen T”m óad 7in óerTw.“ —ACTRE SS DE WEST

‘’: ‘ The moyie inQustry’s Production Gode enu-
merateü th ee “general pnncip1es“’

* ’ ‘* 2. No p›cture stall be produced that will
– lowe the moral standards of those wbo
see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thTown to the side of exime, wrongóotng. evii, or sin.
2. Colect stanaatds of life. subject only to the
reputiements of drama and entertainment.
sball be presented.
3. Law, natura] or humarL stall not be nQiculed.
nar shalt sympathy be created for its violation.

Specific zestzictions were spelted out as
‘particular appltcations” of these p inciples:
• Nudity and suggestive dances were

• Tne language section banned various words and phrases considered to be oPensive.
• Rur6er scenes bud to be fitrned in a way that would not inspire imitation in real like. and brutal killings could riot be shown in detail. . ’Revenge in modern times‘ was not to be justified.
• the sanctity of maYriage and the home
had to be upheld. “Pictures sfall not infer -”* tl at low forms of sex relationship are the , accepted or common thing.” Adulte gnd illicit sex, altoough recognized as sometim necessary to the plot, could not be explicit justified; they were never to be presented an attractive optton. ‘’
• PortzayaTs of intermciat relationships were *
forbidden.
• “Scenes of passion” were not to be introduced when not essential lo the plót “Excessive and tustful kissing” was to be avoided, along with any otbe physical
interaction that might “stimJ late the low,
and baser element.” “. ‘
• The flag of the United States was to bé ‘ treated tespectMlly. as were the peop! ‘’ history’ of other nations. ‘‘

, , . . .. .., , ’””’ ”’ ’
r v”
<

. ‘ .’ ’ ‘ ” – ‘ ” *“ “!’* ” -* ‘•‹
” ”” ” .” : ’’” ””. . ” :’ *

comrriit violent crimes*” And the response wilt be, “That is not my intention at all. I use violence as a metaphor.” Scientific research hasn’t yet ruled dehrñtlvelj’ one way or the other or this conuoversial subject, bur man)’ beheve that the media occasionally have short-term, unintended effects.
Finally, section D of die illustration represents the long-term, unintended effects of the media. many people, not just cultural conservatives, argue that we have been desensitized to violence, sexuai imager j, and oder content that some people consider inappropriate for mass audiences. In the film industry; for example, the Production Code, also known as the Harm Code, was a set of standards created in 1930 (although it wasn’r officiallj enforced until 1934) to protect the moral fabric of society. The guidelines were fairly strict, and they were a testament to the mainstream ideologies of the time (see the box on pages 96-97). Slow.ly, however, the power of the code began to erode because of the ›minence of telemsion, foreign films, arid the fact that being condemned as immoral didn’t prevent a Um from becorriing a success. In ] 9G7 thy 5c›d2 was abandoned for the movie rating system. Over time, we have grown accus- tomed to seeing sexually explicit material In films, on television, and on the Internet. Those who lament this desensi6zation seek to reinstimte controls over media content.

Mommy, Where Do te e pes
home From?
Racism in the Media

On December 22, 1941, two weeks efter the ]apanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Time magazine ran an article titled “How to Tell Your Friends from the Japs.” There were annotated photographs to help readers idenñfy characteristics thai would distinguish, for instance, friendly Chinese from the ]apanese, American enemies during World War II. The magazine offered the following rules or iliumb, although it admitted that they mere “not always reliable”:
• Some Chinese are tall (average: S ft. 5 in.), Virtually all ]apanese are short (a erage: 5 ft. 2-’Zz in.).
• japanese are likely to be stockier and broadet-hipped than short Chines

• japanese xcept for wrestlers—are seldom fat; they often dry up and * grow lean as they age. the Chinese often put on weight, particulñl/ „ if they are prosperous (in China, with its frequent famines, being fit iS esteemed as a sign of being a solid citizen). ›i
• Chinese, not as hairy as japanese, seldom grow an impressive mull

98 Chapter $’ Culture and Media

Sexism in the Media

lid

torizing and perpetuating unrealistic ideals of feminine beauty. Some rat repetitive bombardment by these images decreases girls’ sell-esreem tributes to eating disorders. Women’s magazines have been heavily crit- although some researchers (such as Angela McRobbie from the United pm) have taken care to show that women who are active, critical readers ijoy reading women’s magazines. However, as the Canadian sociologist Currie points out 1999), although girls can choose which magazines, if read and iIOw rO Critically read them, they can’t control the images avail- them in those and other texts.
other focus of feminist media critiques has been images of violence nst women. jean IObourne has become one of the most popular lecturers ollege arid university campuses across America. In 1979 she released a film ed U/log Ui lofty: Ndrrm/i»g i Image o/ Pomsn, in which she examines the
/s in which women are maimed, sliced, raped, and otheruñse deformed in vertising images. One classic example is a photo that shows the image of a
.man’s body in a garbage can, with only her legs and a fantastic pair of high els on her feet visible. The message is clear: These shoes are, literally, to die
t. Kilbourne’s point is clear, too: Such images help sustain a kind of symbolic olence against women. In this critique, advertising does not just reflect the derlying culture that produced it but also creates desires and narratives that
enter women’s (and mens) hves with causal force.
Of course, there’s always room for innovation. Some girls (with the help of their parents) have responded by creating their owri magazines that focus on topics other than makeup, clothing, and boys, as mainstream teenage maga- zines do. for example, New doo» G/r/i is written and edited by girls aged 8 to 13 and contains no advertisements. Likewise, magazines exist for adult women that have more pro-woman messages; Mr. magazine was founded in 1971 dur-

Because such magazines don’t accept advertising from huge makeup compa- nies and designer fashion houses, however, they are often less economically viable rhan mainstream worr+en s magaxines, which carry ads on as many as 50 percent of their pages. Brick magazine (“Its a noun; it‘s a ver t’s a maga- zine’3, which has been around since t 996, is a self-declared feminist response to pop culture. It is supported by advertisers but is a not-for-profit publication.
Some advertisers have responded to feminist critiques of the media Cth new approaches. In 2005 Dove. a manufacmrer of skin-care products, launched a new seties of ads backed by a social awareness program called rhe Campaign for Real Beauty. Instead of models, the ads featured “real” women complete with freckles, frizz}• hair, wrinkles, and cellulite. The images were intentionally meant to offer a contrast to the images we’re accustomed to seeing. And, as Dover advertisers have said, “firming the thighs of a size 2 supermodel is no challenge” (Triester, 2005). The latest version of Dove’s Real Beauty campaign shows side by-side sketches of tire same woman as drawn by a sketch artist. The first image is drawn based on the woman’s description of herself and

Mom my. Wher e Do Stereotypes Come From? 101

oł the Media

iple, Apple’s iTunes app store is the dominant player in the sales of
• Smartphones. Apple demands to review every app to ensure that the is not something that they “believe is over the line,” which they go on in is something developers i• >osv when they cross it. This type e policy tends to promote a “chilling effect” whereby developers—
j g where this mystical “liae” is—choose to avoid and content they tnight be at all objectionable. Receiving Apples approval is important use once developers have made an app for Apples iOS platform, they ot sell it .nywhere but the iTunes store. Is Apple protecting its shoppers ir+g the app developers through a combination of monopoly power and owy threats? As corporate control of the media becomes more and more ized (owned by fewer and fewer groups), the concern is that the range opinions available will decrease and that corporate censorship (the act of
9pressing information that may reflect negatively on certain companies and/or ir affiliates) will further compromise the already-tarnished integrity of the
tream media.
The Internet, to some extent, has balanced out communications monopo- as s. It’s much easier to put up a website expressing alternative views than it is to ‘roadcasr a television or radic› program suggesting the same, The MIT Center
or Fumre Civic media, led by Ethan Zuckerman, works to leverage the Inter- net fot the promotion of local acfivism. One of the MIT projects—VGAZA or Virtual Gaza—allowed Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to document crises and share local stories glohally while under embargo. But not even the Internet is beyond the realm of pohtical economy. Srrialler sites, for example, cannot afford ro have sponsored links on Google’s search pages.

Consumer Culture

America is often described as a consumer culture, and rightly so. In my inter- her’ with sociologist Allison rugh, she pointed out that “corporate marketing to cluldren is a 22 billion dollar industry.” She then added, “Children 8 to 11 ask for beoveen W’o and four toys [for Christmas], and they receive eleven on aver- age!” (Conley, 2011a). Sales on mxjor patriotic holidays (Veterans Day, Memo- rial Day, Presidents’ Day) thrive as a tesult of the notion that it is our duty as American citizens to be good shoppers. As Sharon Zukin points out in her book on shopping culture, Point of Pyrcñai•.- How’ Xboppi’ng Changed American Cul- ture (2003), 24 hours after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, h4ayot Rudy Giuliani urged New Yorkers to take the day off and go shopping. It’s the tie that binds our society; everyones got to shop. iialls are our modern day marketplaces—they are where teenagers hang out, where elderly suburbanites get their exercise, and where Europeans come as tourists to see what Ameri- can culture is all about. The term ru»rrrrfm, however, refers to more than

Political Economy ot the Media

Coneumezism fhe steady acqois t on of material possessions. o/ten with fhe belief that happiness
aod MU\ment can tints be achieved

just buying merchandise; it refers to the belief thxt happiness and fulfilment can be achieved through the acquisidon of matenA possessions. Versace, j. Crew, and realtors in certain hip neighborhoods are not just peddling shoes, jeans, and apart- ments. They are also selling a self-image,
a lifestyle, and a sense of belonging and i*? self-wonh. The media, and advertising in particular, play a large role in the creation
and maintenance of consumerism.

Advertising and Children

The rise of the consumer-citizen has met with increasing criticism, but how doe our society produce these consumer
citizens* The Canadian author and activi ‘
Naomi Klein published No Logo.- TaN»g km at the Brand Bellies N 2000; in thi book Klein analyzes the growth of advertising in schools. Pepsi and Co Cola now bargain for exclusive rights to sell their products witkin schools, brand-name fast foods are often sold in cafeterias The logos of compani that sponsor athletic fields are displayed prominendy. This has been commo place in many colleges and universities for some time now, but the increas’ presence of advertising in middle and high schools should also be noted. .
One striking example is Channel One, which has been airing in sch around the United States since 1990 (Rhode Island was the only state to re Channel One funding). In exchange for television sets, video equipment, satellite dishes, schools are required to show 12 minutes of prepackaged -‘ granuning every day. Although Channel One provides news and public af informañon, its programming also includes to minutes of commerciâi 12-minute segment. One analysis found that only 20 percent of air devoted to “recent political, economic, social, and cultural stories”; the r ing 80 percent of the prepackaged programming includes sports, weath other topics, as well as advertisements for Channel One itself. Studie found that Channel One cosr taxpayers JI.8 billion a year in lost schoo;t
of that amount, $300 million was lost to commercials alone (Molnar & S 1998). Meanwhile, Channel One charges advertisers almost $200,000 I 30-second segment. Channel One is disproportionately found in lowei-
schod disnicts that struggle with funding for books and technologji rti
disadvantaged students in these schools are exposed to more adver ’ and fewer academic lessons than their peers in systems that can afford this kind of sponsorship. ‘

104 Chagte¥ 3• Cuttu¥e auld Media -‘

CO
Jo”

Culture Jams: Hey Calvin, How ’Bout Giving That Girl a Sandwich?

What’s in a Name?

iy kids E and Yo Xing Heyno Augustus Eisner Alexander Weiser so forgive me if I didn’t see what all the fuss was about when Kan}e Kim Kardashian named their daughter North (West). Afrer all, she
ies such as France or]apan, there is no U.S. law that constrains what oe our offspring; only names that would be considered abusive can ed. Names present a unique measure of culture: There are few rules, stitutions attempt to directly influence our choices, unlike almost her aspect of culture from food to firm to fashion. Thus, trends in
:e as close to a pure, unmediated, reflective mirror of societal culture

that light, one could say it was almost inevitable that West and Kar- n chose a unique name for their child. On the one hand, there’s a long

ced
elm)

i. Remember Moon Unit Zappa? Born in 1967, she was perhaps one rst notable celebrity offspring given a “weird” moniker. The 1960s was
ge of Aquarius, after all. Besides her own siblings, she was followed by
.italized “america,” the child of Abbie Hoffman; and Free, the span of ara Hershey and David Carradine, just to mention a few. Fast toward «o ieth Paltrow’s daughter, Apple Martin, and it should come as no surprise

The more interesting sociological phenomenon that North West embodies,

fler

black man, is the rise of unique black names, Atound the

107

1995 pap followed it only through the 1980s. But 1’d be * tp guess that the practice has contin- ned Tt a similar rate (Ligberson & Milrelson, 1995). p ght think Chat all this name coinage
would lead to gender COflfusion in kindergartens. rough I M pt advocating gender rigidity, there
is some evidence that gender-ambiguous names :’ c•» cause problems fOr boys. EconOmiSt David’ pÍgJio hound /áÜ “ /* nam4•d Sub” tend to get.
i•‹o gore trouble at SchOOl dfottfld sixtli grade,’
when QUb€f/ tS (2007)
got ¡t sms o»i thet even unique names are

band
ers o
’.’. them

,
’ %d ‹

gendedred.en Lieberson

and Milrelson gave

{¡$t ique names they found in time Illinois ‘ . ,
database to re•@Jdents, the vast majority idend-
fied the gender of the acnial child—for excl ‘

experienc° fO s this. Nobody mistaires Yo for
1’, nte. M•whilc, three other Es, who he

,host ay daughter’s name from my public’

rñü

Ags, nte to me. (SO ml3ch for uriique .. . ) T
of them were female, bringing the total to 75
Cert female. I ° 2 Sk I had 25 other kids:so,
test the gender of every letter in the .alp
could
bet. If you ink I’m crazy, move to Paris. :. ‘

N0u 0f

fl Chapter opened

th a descriptioÇ Of how sevez£ suicidas gave üs

” +’°nzy of YouTube videos and may have eben made it easier for Pre
follar ugh on his campaign prornise to dó
tell segre tjon policy in the U.S. military. Nós’
áP› yoll can see why )át uito s story is part of a discussion of cultur
medio. Bat the fact Mat YOuTube’s parent company, Google, ís making’

°ir all of the trafíic •’sociate^ “* “’ Ir G”s

Better Project speaks to th

dWentalnature Of media and M in our society. Remember that. Ó

the sociologist is to «ee as

psiructed What iS usually taken for gran:

8 *’ay, It Gets Bgtt« asruptedthe mesa gow; the campzign makes me ’
dtjcers out of pyple who are ty2lC 7 corisumers of the largely gay-*’

tepJeySi

and even vicóms of the thug-like beM

pe ,he ca crs just getting on the ceIebri@

consume6sm, it’s based on the notion that advertisements are basically props ganda. Culture jamming differs from appropriating advertisements for the say of art and sheer vandalism (where the sole goal is destrucdon of propertj§ although advertisers probably don’t care too much about this latter distinctiof Numerous anticonsumerist activist groups have sprung up, such s Adjvits,fi Cwadian magazine that specializes in spools of popular advecâsing can paigns. For example, it parodied a real Calvin Klein campaign (which advance the careerof Kate Moss and ushered in an age of ultra-thin, wniftike model with a presumably bulimia woman vomiting into a toilet. AdbusM also spc’ sore an annual Buy Nothing Day (held, with great irony, or the day aft, Thanksgiving, known in xetail as “Black Friday,” the busiest shopping days the year), which encounges people to do just that—buy nothing on this s cific day of the year, encouraging them to reclaim their buying power and fci
on the noncommercial aspects of the holiday, such as spending time Tt

Another Adbuiters spoof caricatured the legendary joe Camel the an cnorphi advertising icon of Camel cigarettes from t987 until 19.
when R. j. Reynolds, the tobacco firm that conjured up the character, vol tartly stopped using his image after receiving complaints from Congress various public-interest groups that its ads primarily targeted cMdren. (In l§ a Jc«rwe/ «J th in Medical Assuoati’nn smdy found that more five- six-year-old kids recognized joe Camel than Mickey Mouse or Fred F’lin
[P. M. Fischer ct al., 1991].) In the Xdhusiers zpoo¥,“]oe Chemo” is w down a hospital hallway with an IV, presumably dying of cancer caused smoking.

106 Chapter 3: Culture ana Medta

increase their own reputations? Or are they rneaningful ptoduc-
, reihaping and rerrüxing the messages and rrraterials available to
uce their new, noncommercial message?
ipter has presented some new ways of looking at culture: how we how it affects us, and what this means for understanding ourselves Id in hich we hve. Do you non have a new understanding of you now see your own culture through a critical lens? What have
ously taken for granted that you can now view as a product of our Can you now look at the media in a different ray? Don your critical cnp and put some of the stuff you’vc just learned into practice.

to 75

the atp

gave tlSC t Presid’ e to d° ^

pt g$gnted ées rneÔà Q y gay iHVïS?’
‹e behavi°’

109