Tags: capitalism, class, inequality, marx/marxism, organizations/occupations/work, political economy, social mvmts/social change/resistance, theory, astroturf organizations, false consciousness, ideology, labor, unions, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2012 Length: 0:31 Access: YouTube Summary: This commercial, which aired during half time of the 2012 Super Bowl, represents a direct attack against unions and is an excellent demonstration of the use of ideology to promote false consciousness. The supposed union workers in the ad complain about unions taking such high union dues and state that they did not vote for the union (suggesting that they don't want the union and that it does not represent their interests). The commercial's narrator explains "only 10% of people in unions today actually voted to join the union" and encourages people to support the Employee Rights Act, a bill that wouldmake it much harder for workers to join unions, and easier to de-certify existing unions. The commercial was created by the anti-union Center for Union Facts, an astroturf organization founded by DC lobbyist Richard Berman and supported by big business interests (astroturf organizations are advocacy groups promoting a political or corporate agenda but designed to make it appear like a grassroots movement). Its statistics may be accurate, but they are misleading in the sense that federal law requires that at least 50% of a company’s workforce vote in favor of the formation of a union, and that most current union members have joined unions formed years before. Furthermore, according to independent analysis by the Economic Policy Institute, laws like the Employee Rights Act hurt workers by leading to lower pensions; workers in unions actually have higher wages and health benefits because they can use their collective bargaining power to improve their working conditions (note that one of the union "actors" in the video is also played by Berman himself). This demonstrates the use of ideology, or the dominant ideas that help to perpetuate the oppressive class system. Marx argued that “The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas … The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production.” In this case, we see that the advertisement (which cost about $3.5 million to air during the Super Bowl) produced by large corporate-funded organizations is meant to shape workers' perception of unions in a negative light. With greater wealth ("the means of production") and access to media ("the means of mental production"), they seek to discourage workers from joining unions in hopes of making them easier to control. When workers accept such ideas as truth, it promotes false consciousness. False consciousness occurs when a class does not have an accurate assessment of capitalism and their role within it, but instead adopts the ideology of the ruling class, and acts against their own class interests. Submitted By: Paul Dean
3 Comments
Tags: aging/life course, bodies, consumption/consumerism, discourse/language, gender, marketing/brands, media, race/ethnicity, social construction, comedy, feminism, reflexivity, representation, self-objectification, sexism, sexual objectification, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2011 Length: 2:14 Access: Vimeo Summary: It is not uncommon to read about Photoshop mishaps these days, and there is even a website devoted to posting pictures of bodies that have been butchered by the software, where the overzealous rearrangement of pixels has inadvertently created an oversized hand or a clavicle that appears to fold up like an accordion. Ralph Lauren's infamous picture of model Filippa Hamilton-Palmstierna was heavily retouched, leaving her torso smaller than her head, and as Rachel Maddow points out (here), in all probability, this is not a combination that exists in nature--_at least outside the insect world" (Jean Kilbourne is also critical of the Hamilton-Palmstierna photo in her documentary, Killing Us Softly 4). The often humorous attention paid to Photoshop mishaps threatens to overshadow the very troubling practice of distorting photographed bodies in popular media, and then peddling those distorted images to the public as real. In this post's featured clip, filmmaker Jesse Rosten creates what appears to be just another commercial for a product that promises youth and beauty in a bottle, but after seeing that the product is named Fotoshop, it's easy to deduce that Rosten's pitch is pure satire aimed at lambasting the similarly named software. Witty zingers abound in the clip (e.g., "Just one application of Fotoshop can give you results so dramatic they're almost unrealistic" and "Brighten eyes, whiten teeth, even adjust your race!"), and it offers a nice foundation for beginning a conversation about Photoshop's impact on the standards men and women are coming to have for their bodies and how Photoshop's ubiquity might be tied up with reflexivity, which denotes the growing awareness people have of their bodies. I find it useful to ask students to articulate what all the fuss is about? What's the harm? The Sociological Cinema has explored the widespread use of Photoshop as a social problem in other videos, but perhaps none is more effective than the Dove Evolution commercial from 2006. Note too that this clip joins a number of other clips on The Sociological Cinema, which deploys satire as a means of critiquing the values promoted in commercials (here and here). Submitted By: Lester Andrist Changes in global production effect jobs in the U.S. _Tags: economic sociology, globalization, inequality, marx/marxism, organizations/occupations/work, global value chains, jobs, mobility, outsourcing, supply chains, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2012 Length: 4:36 Access: New York Times Summary: This animated NYT video examines the shifting nature of global production and its effect on the distribution of jobs in the US economy. It begins by showing how the components of the iPhone are produced around the world (social scientists refer to this as a global value chain). As most viewers know, this means that low-skilled jobs are then outsourced and sent overseas. But as time passes, it creates a "vacuum" that pulls other higher skilled/higher pay jobs overseas. The video introduces the idea of a "job multiplier" where one job actually creates a higher number of total jobs because of related services that accompany it and tend to be physically located nearby. However, some jobs (e.g. auto manufacturing) have higher multipliers than others (e.g. hospital services). Over time, the US economy has lost jobs that demand higher skills and have higher job multipliers, and these have been replaced by jobs with lower job multipliers and lower skills (and therefore, lower incomes). Jobs at the top and bottom of the hierarchy (e.g. software engineers and service jobs) have grown, but jobs in the middle of the hierarchy (e.g. office assistants, manufacturers) have declined. The video concludes by noting that this is why our economic problems are so hard to solve, arguing that "we've become a nation with fewer chances for people to climb into the middle class." Possible discussion questions for this video are: How has the structure of the American economy changed over time? How does economic globalization alter job structures and mobility opportunities in the US? What impact does this have on economic inequality? Thank you to Michael Miller for suggesting this clip! Submitted By: Paul Dean Tags: community, discourse/language, theory, ferdinand de saussure, langue, parole, post-structuralism, speech act, structuralism, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2011 Length: 1:27 Access: YouTube Summary: This home video of 2-year-old Khaliyl Iloyi rapping with his father can be used to illustrate Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure's (1857-1913) concepts of langue and parole which, for Saussure, comprise a larger system of signs he calls language. Langue entails the total system of possibilities; it is the abstract set of structured rules that a given speech community internalizes. Parole, on the other hand, consists of individual speech acts and the message contained within them. Saussure argues that individuals don't pick and choose what belongs to langue or parole; rather, langue is social (in that it operates according to a set of rules that are in place before and after our existence) and parole is individual. Another way Saussure understood this distinction was that langue is a static, synchronic system while parole is diachronic and contingent. This video clip illustrates how, even at age two, Khaliyl understands the basic underlying structure of language (langue), even if he has yet to master the meaning of individual speech acts (parole). He is engaging in the social enterprise of langue in that he has internalized the abstract rules of language for his speech community, even though a meaningful message has yet to be put into practice (parole). Instructors should point out that Khaliyl's rap does not map perfectly onto Saussure's notion of langue, in that Saussure would consider grammar an example of the structured rules of language---clearly, Khaliyl is not adhering to any grammatical set of rules. Similarly, Saussure would include performance as part of the meaningful speech act that makes up parole; here, Khaliyl obviously demonstrates an understanding of the appropriate performance of the speech act he is attempting to convey. Nonetheless, viewers can still be encouraged to use the clip in order to think about the ways in which Khaliyl's rap does and does not illustrate classical understandings of langue and parole. This discussion of Saussure would be useful in a social theory course that examines structuralism (including the theories of Claude Lévi-Strauss), as well as post-structuralism, as it can be used to illustrate the ideas against which the post-structuralists were reacting. Submitted By: Valerie Chepp _Tags: consumption/consumerism, discourse/language, gender, inequality, knowledge, marketing/brands, media, social construction, feminism, glass ceiling, glass escalator, media literacy, representation, role specialization, sexism, stereotypes, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2012 Length: 0:31 Access: YouTube Summary: We all work in an economy marked by occupational sex segregation. That is, men and women typically work in different occupations. American Men, for instance, are overrepresented as auto mechanics and airline pilots, while American women are overrepresented as preschool teachers and nurses. But why is occupational sex segregation a problem? When I bring this issue up in class, my students often counter rather quickly that segregation is merely the result of a gendered role specialization and doesn't inherently denote inequality. However, the fact is that men segregate into higher paid professions than women. Also, while women often report experiencing a glass ceiling, which refers to an invisible barrier to promotion, men who take positions in fields dominated by women report just the opposite. They face a glass escalator, or pressure to move up in their chosen professions (Williams 1992). In short, occupational sex segregation is a bad deal for women. It is less about role specialization and more about men retaining power and resources for the benefit of men. But why is occupational sex segregation so recalcitrant? Check out the commercial above from Best Buy, which aired during Super Bowl 46, and note the natural affinity it depicts between men (read, male logic) and technological innovation. In rapid succession, the viewer encounters distinguished, white men holding their high tech inventions. "I created text messaging," says SMS innovator, Neil Papworth. Only at the end of the thirty-second spot do women appear, and they are Best Buy's relatively low status sales representatives. Elsewhere on this site (here), I have argued that the symbolic domain of high tech is almost the exclusive provenance of men, and while men are overrepresented in ads that pitch items like smart phones and iPads, women are overrepresented in ads that pitch “domestic” technologies, or those that pertain to, say, cooking and other household chores (see here, here, and here). Insofar as the Best Buy ad succeeds, the approximately 100 million people who tune into the Super Bowl, will be persuaded that Best Buy is good place to buy a smart phone, but they are also left with an impression of the world they inhabit. "Why does occupational sex segregation persist?" my students ask. An important part of the answer is that advertisements reinforce the fiction of immutable differences between men and women, and by extension, they suggest that men and women naturally gravitate toward different occupations. The Best Buy commercial can be a useful reminder that advertising is a medium that excels at constructing the reality it claims to merely reflect. What is "natural" is itself a social construction. Submitted By: Lester Andrist Tags: capitalism, historical sociology, inequality, marriage/family, race/ethnicity, racism, slavery, white privilege, 61+ mins Year: 2008 Length: 86:00 Access: Netflix (trailer here) Summary: This full-length documentary follows a family's journey—headed by family member/filmmaker Katrina Browne—through the Triangle Trade between Rhode Island, West Africa, and Cuba. In doing so, family members begin to recognize how their White privilege is directly tied to enslavement of Africans by their ancestors. The film is useful for the classroom in four ways: 1) it provides a history lesson of the Triangle Trade, demonstrating how the American North was/is as culpable in the enslavement of Africans as the South, 2) it demonstrates the direct tie between New World/American capitalism and its survival to the slave trade, 3) it slowly reveals the consciousness-raising of privileged White folks as they understand how their privilege is directly tied to slavery and racism, and 4) it demonstrates the awkward yet necessary dialogues and discussions White people need to have about U.S. history and racism. I like to use this film as a companion to Tim Wise's talk "The Pathology of White Privilege." After my students watch Traces of the Trade and Wise's talk, we discuss how contemporary White privilege is directly tied to the conception of our nation, the contradictions and paradoxes of capitalism and democracy, and their own embodied and/or witnessed experiences of White privilege. The film's website includes purchasing information and teaching materials. Another great companion piece to Browne's documentary is the book Inheriting the Trade. Written by Browne's relative Thomas DeWolf, the book more deeply documents the family's physical and social psychological journey. Submitted By: Beverly M. Pratt _Tags: bodies, consumption/consumerism, gender, health/medicine, knowledge, political economy, biopolitics, feminism, medicalization, menarche, menstruation, menses, patriarchy, stigma, taboo, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2007 Length: 3:57 Access: YouTube Summary: In this scene from the movie Superbad, Seth finds himself dancing close to a woman at a party and winds up with her menstrual blood on his pant leg. A group of boys at the party spot the blood and deduce the source, and thus begins one of the film's signature gags: an awkward adolescent deals with what is supposed to be an awkward adolescent moment. In addition to Seth's panicked yet futile attempts to stave off humiliation are his efforts to work through the disgust of this unambiguous contamination. "Someone period-ed on my fucking leg!" he cries while gagging. Feminists have long been critical of this all-too-common fear of menstrual contamination and point to its roots in patriarchy. It is an instance of re-imagining the natural human experience of menstruation as a pathology, which can only be experienced with a measure of shame and dread. But more than men simply pathologizing a distinctly feminine experience, the pervasive fear of menstruation also fuels a multibillion dollar industry, which produces and markets hundreds of products designed to manage and even suppress menstruation (e.g., Lybrel and Seasonique). In an interview (here) about her recent book, New Blood: Third Wave Feminism and the Politics of Menstruation, sociologist Chris Bobel nicely articulates the connection between menstrual anxiety and corporate profit: "The prohibition against talking about menstruation—shh…that’s dirty; that’s gross; pretend it’s not going on; just clean it up—breeds a climate where corporations, like femcare companies and pharmaceutical companies, like the makers of Lybrel and Seasonique, can develop and market products of questionable safety. They can conveniently exploit women’s body shame and self-hatred. And we see this, by the way, when it comes to birthing, breastfeeding, birth control and health care in general. The medical industrial complex depends on our ignorance and discomfort with our bodies." The clip would work nicely with Bobel's book and as a means of opening a discussion about biopolitics, and specifically, the intensity with which women's bodies are scrutinized and managed by both the state and economy. I would like to thank Aimee Koon for suggesting this clip. Submitted By: Lester Andrist Tags: children/youth, consumption/consumerism, gender, marketing/brands, commercial, feminism, sexism, toys, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2012 Length: 5:56 Access: YouTube Summary: This video examines and challenges gender stereotypes used in LEGO advertising. It was created in response to LEGO's release of a stereotypical gendered line of toys aimed at girls, and 10+ years of boy-geared advertising that led to LEGO losing their girl audience in the first place. The video's creators, SPARK, promotes grassroots mobilization around issues of female sexualization, and started a petition to ask LEGO to commit to better gender equity in its marketing practices and toy creation. The video documents changes in LEGO's advertising, explains the basic premise of the LEGO petition (which is highly critical of gendered advertising like that seen in the graphic here), seeks to give voice to some of the young girls LEGO missed in their targeted marketing, and discusses where SPARK and PBG (a partner organization, Powered by Girl) want to see LEGO go in the future. Viewers may be encouraged to reflect on how LEGO's use of gender advertising changed over time and what might explain these changes? Why does the video's creator see gender stereotyping as a problem in advertising? How can this be considered a social problem, and how do its creators promote change in addressing the problem? This can also be paired with other examples of gender in television in commercials (e.g. see here and here). Submitted By: Bailey Shoemaker Richards, Sparksummit.com _Tags: class, discourse/language, inequality, intersectionality, prejudice/discrimination, race/ethnicity, code speak, 00 to 05 mins Year: 2011 Length: 4:20 Access: The Daily Show Summary: Since outright hatred and discrimination of people because of their race is no longer socially acceptable in our post Civil-Rights era, many argue racism no longer exists. But sociologists suggest that racism simply changed, becoming more implicit and indirect. Eduardo Bonilla-Silva argues that the new racism entails individuals saying and doing things that perpetuate racial stereotypes and inequalities, but they do so in such a way that the offender is able to deny being explicitly racist. One of the many types of new racist strategies Bonilla-Silva highlights is the use of racially charged code speak, or using indirect racial rhetoric and semantic moves to express an ideology that serves to reinforce white dominance over minorities. In this clip, The Daily Show’s Larry Wilmore illustrates the code speak implicit in presidential candidate Newt Gingrich’s suggestion that we combat poverty by hiring poor children to clean the restrooms at their schools. Wilmore notes that “it’s 2011, and you can’t just call Black people lazy,” and then points out Gingrich’s racial code speak. He notes Gingrich’s statement about “neighborhoods where they may not have that experience [of working]” is “code for inner-city, which is code for urban, which is code for Black.” Gingrich’s statement about poor children having “no habit of showing up [to work] on Monday” is “code for shiftless, which is code for lazy, which is code for black.” Wilmore then plays more of Gingrich’s speech where the presidential candidate cites statistics about Black unemployment, thereby making his implicit racial assumptions explicit. When John Stewart asks why this is important, Wilmore points out how the causes of poverty “matter to the solutions.” Viewers can be encouraged to consider how framing these issues as individual problems (e.g. a person being lazy) differs from framing them as social issues (e.g. lack of available jobs), and how that might "matter to the solutions" that society seeks as a result? How is this related to race and do we see code speak in reference to other groups as well? Note: This summary is an edited excerpt from Jason's original post at Sociological Images. Submitted By: Jason Eastman Tags: capitalism, children/youth, consumption/consumerism, corporations, marketing/brands, media, psychology/social psychology, advertising, false needs, 06 to 10 mins Year: 2004 Length: 9:28 Access: YouTube Summary: This excerpt is from the documentary The Corporation (based on the book by Joel Bakan), which examines the role of corporations in our lives today. This brief clip moves between commentary from Barbara Linn (professor of Psychiatry at Harvard's Baker Children's Center) and Lucy Hughes (a marketing executive at Initative Media), a Co-creator of "The Nag Factor." The Nag Factor is a scientific study of how children nag their parents to to "help corporations to help children nag for their products more effectively." Hughes notes the study found that "20% to 40% of purchases would not have occurred unless the child had nagged their parents" and emphasizes the use of psychologists and media technology to better advertise to children. Professor Linn is highly critical of the industry that spends $12 billion/year to market to children, and argues "comparing the marketing of yesteryear to the marketing of today is like comparing a BB gun to a smart bomb." Viewers may be asked if it is ethical to market to children? While Professor Linn argues against it, the marketing executive says she doesn't know, emphasizing that it is her job to sell products. What is the role of marketing and advertising in society today and has it gone too far? How is it related to capitalism (e.g. the Marxian concept of false needs) and the corporation? At 7:40, the clip ends with the story of two college students who became "corporate sponsors" to pay for their college tuition. See other educational uses of the documentary here and see also this NYT video on advertising on college campuses. Submitted By: Paul Dean |
Tags
All
.
Got any videos?
Are you finding useful videos for your classes? Do you have good videos you use in your own classes? Please consider submitting your videos here and helping us build our database!
|