You are on page 1of 3

Doll 1

The Flower Bed of Democracy

The media seems to become more and more drastically polarized and utterly divided each

day within our current political climate. As a society, we must question what factors have lead us

to our new hermit holes of narrowed perspective, which prevent us from acknowledging a

different viewpoint entirely. Sunstein argues that social media provides consumers of media with

a means to filter only what they want to absorb, “a free society gives people a great deal of

power to filter out unwanted materials” (Sunstein, 11). Thus, individuals are lacking more than a

one sided perspective, which only reaffirms what they previously agreed with. However, he also

promoted the ideology that to avoid such extreme polarization, individuals should consume

materials they wouldn’t typically seek out, through unplanned and unanticipated exposure

(Sunstein, 8).

Deluca, in contrast to Sunstein, proposes that social media provides the platform from

which those who possess diverse perspectives can not only be heard, but can spread their

viewpoints within mainstream conversation. “How, in a mere month, did a marginalized

menagerie of political protesters manage to shake the banking and political foundations of the

United States and transform the political debate of the nation” (DeLuca, 485)? His answer to this

question is social media, being that it isn’t restricted to the narrow agenda set by those in power

(Deluca, 487). Although Sunstein and DeLuca differ along the lines of the role social media

plays within civic life, both believe that exposure through media is essential to democracy

because it provides the platform for diverse opinions to be shared. Unplanned exposure to

alternative points of view creates well rounded citizens who can facilitate and foster a more open

minded and educated dialogue. These perspectives combine to represent a common

understanding that through exposure, such as a fertilizer, media provides a platform that adds
Doll 2

diverse points of view into the soil of our democracy.

Hook argues that the media typically reflects the status quo of our society, thus accurate

minority portrayal and representation is slim to none. However, with this notion, Hook presents

the oppositional gaze which is a critical tool which can be used to stand against the mainstream

in resistance and protest to create change within society. “These scenes invite the audience to

look differently. They act to critically intervene and transform conventional filmic practices,

changing notions of spectatorship” (Hook, 130). Hook calls upon media viewers to take initiative

upon their consumption by utilizing the oppositional gaze to reflect on what can or should

change about the representation presented.

Similarly to Hook, Olson argues that the status quo values within society are promoted

and justified through the mainstream media. Olson promotes that the epideictic is responsible in

society, “because it strengthens the disposition toward action by increasing adherence to the

values it lauds (Olson, 458). However, the epideictic dimension is the analytical tool which can

be used by audiences to detect what the underlying message being promoted by the mainstream

media is. This tool also calls upon viewers to assess how the media specifically incorporates the

status quo agenda to reinforce and justify the set values within society. Both authors provide

consumers with self-efficacy to take active agency in their media consumption by critically

analyzing what they are processing and the impact it creates upon society. Together, these ideas

can be viewed as a tool, such as a soil tester, which similarly to the epideictic dimension and the

oppositional gaze, is used to determine what the flowerbed, of our mainstream democracy, is

either lacking, or has too much of.

These categories, soil tester and fertilizer, work together to first critically analyze the

mainstream soil to assess what elements are most prominent. As active gardeners, they are then
Doll 3

able to reflect upon what can be done to create change that allows for diverse representation

within the flowerbed. Next, fertilizer is used to provide the opportunity to change the consistency

of the ph balance within the soil with random exposure of diverse elements. Both tools are

essential to a balanced flower bed, yet differ upon the conditions of how they are facilitated. The

soil tester calls upon gardeners to take gumption and analyze the soil makeup on their own to

create change. Whereas, fertilizer provides gardeners with the direct means to plant diversity

directly into the soil. Each component of gardening allows individuals to reflect upon the present

components within the soil and the effect that such limited elements have upon the greater flower

bed as a whole. Once gaining an understanding of the mainstream impacts, gardeners can

evaluate what tools and necessary measures are needed to create a flower bed which promotes a

thriving and bountiful garden of equal representations and value systems.

You might also like