Conclusion

In Playing with the System, Playing with Fire, Gournelos starts out with discussing his prior argument made about Andrew Meyer’s ability to demonstrate “the limits of the public sphere in the contemporary political landscape (247).” He talks about what is “acceptable discourse” and how he acted outside the norm of what the university and police sought out to be “correct.” I thought it was interesting how Gournelos mentions that it is not Andrew Meyer who defined the event, but it was the media who circulated his story, films, and videos. Gournelos then talks about South Park in being similar to the Andrew Meyer event in that it “demonstrates the implications of a convergence culture (247).”

The next few pages discuss the three oppositional tactics: the allusive, the responsive, and the disruptive. Allusive ontology’s being seen to spread the foreground for aesthetic modes of production. Responsive being drawn from the news and reintroduce a level of complexity by “engaging social norms in the terms by which they are negotiated in contemporary cultural events (248).” Disruptive ontology’s are seen to try to create room for silences or social constraints that were untouched by the responsive. It exposes frictions in contemporary society.

Gournelos then speaks about Nina Eliasophs study of apathy. Eliasoph argues “apathy is produced, not inherent, in communities, and that even activist groups are limited by what they deem is acceptable speech (249).” Gournelos brings about an important point that Eliasoph neglects to discuss the media. I found it interesting the way that Gournelos analyzes the use of media. “Communities, discussions, and relationships are formed daily on the basis of a shared knowledge of or access to the media (250).” This is very true and then he goes to mention that people connect to the media. They connect to films through memories and to discussions through memories of films. Media serves as a way to broaden terms of debate.

We Need Conflict

In the conclusion the idea that society revolves around conflict is taken for granted and I agree with that idea. Some people may say that society looks to resolve conflict and is uncomfortable with tension, however, I think that society is built on conflict. While society does frown upon people who create conflict simply for entertainment purposes and while it does try to end conflict that has turned into physical violence; conflict is necessary for growth. If no one ever questioned the status-quo, nothing would ever change, and it is obvious that our society changes all the time.

It isn't necessary for people to be tasered like Andrew Meyer or for people to act violently or radically. Conflict can be small, it can be meaningful. I think the discussion that happens in our class is conflict because it is disrupting the way we look at the media, society, and ourselves.

I'm posting the video of Andrew Meyer - I had never seen it and here it is in case you haven't!

South Park

“A Neo-Con Parade: South Park and Post-9/11 Politics” was interesting to me because it discusses the irony and use of humor in the media about a situation which certainly was not humorous, such as 9/11. This chapter looks at the media, and especially South Park and how humor and irony is used maybe not to mock and current issue, but to inform society in a different way.

“However, it does not come to terms with humor’s potential to bridge social gaps or work through traumatic social changes, nor does it allow for humor, satire, parody, and irony to be mobilized as tools through which individuals or communities differentiate themselves from or negotiate the politics of the dominant (200).”

The chapter looks how humor can bind society together, along with other somewhat similar shows such as The Daily Show where they make very real problems in society into humor. I think it is important for shows like these to use humor to “bridge social gaps or work through traumatic social changes.” Although the show could be deemed controversial, it points out issues in society in a different way and through a different light from the media. In episodes regarding 9/11, although South parks humor could be interpreted in different ways, they inform the public about the issues at hand. South Parks humor could certainly interpreted in different ways, but overall South Park is able to use extreme irony and humor to poke fun at the issues and possibly bridge gaps in society.

Teaching Taboo

The animated American sitcom South Park represents all that is taboo. The show has become infamous for its crude (and dark) humor exhibited in portraying world events or topics and tainting with social satire. Furthermore, South Park’s use of humor is able to break boundaries, which restrict the public from the “dominant representations and rhetorical pathways [which] are seen as the only valid (or acceptable) discourse” (Gournelos, 197). For example, how open the show is with Mr. Garrison’s sexuality. Over the course of the show Mr. Garrison has undergone two sex changes, an alias (Mrs. Janet Garrison), and several different alterations to his character. The show has become famous, because of the bold messages encrypted within the story lines, giving viewers the real facts, in a comic light.