Following & Controlling in the Media

     There are opposing theories concerning whether the media has strong effects or limited effects; that is, whether things such as advertisements are responsible for our culture's ideology and perception, or individuals are intelligent and rational enough to accept and interpret advertisements selectively, according to their own independent values. This issue leads to an important question in society: does the media control our interests, or does it simply follow them? From my perspective, the media exercises a certain amount of both attempted control and natural following; it pursues society's inherent interests, and then oftentimes attempts to persuade the audience of certain ideas. On the whole, however, I view the media as a self-sustained and cooperative institution; there is not one dominant force that controls all ideologies, but rather, a plethora of various beliefs that engage in smooth conversation with one another throughout the media.
     I believe that society begins as inherently intelligent and self-interested; individuals have benefits that they are naturally inclined to pursue, such as food, shelter, companionship, and resources, and in order to obtain these benefits, they seek out the most rational solution, ideally using it to advance themselves and society as a whole. It is this natural order of needs that has allowed the media to come into power; media institutions are aware of society's needs, and so they produce material that appeals to the concerns of their audience. In this way, the media is simply following the interests of the public; however, it has grown more complex as society has expanded and increased. With growing populations and communities, a number of varying ideologies have emerged, meaning an increase in the public's interests. And with so many interests in society, we cannot view one popular ideology as the unanimous truth of the population. Likewise in the media, because there are so many different messages being presented (many intended for persuasive purposes), we cannot view one as the unshakable source of control; rather, the various messages coexist in constant conversation with one another, and the viewer is free to interpret them.
     As an example, let us examine an observation made in the documentary Tough Guise: the documentary's host observes that the ideal physicality of men and women has evolved over the decades. We are shown that in the 1950s, the full-bodied Marilyn Monroe was considered the paragon of beauty, while present-day media presents women who are extremely thin; likewise for males, the documentary shows how the GI-Joe doll has evolved from a fit male figure into an unrealistically bulky action hero, complete with over-sized biceps. The documentary seems to overlook the possibility that this evolution is a result, and not merely a cause of established ideology. We know that, as time has passed, society has increasingly stressed a healthy diet and plenty of exercise; several modern interest groups condemn fattening fast-food institutions, and countless public programs remind us of the importance of fitness and physical exercise. In my personal view, these health-driven movements can very possibly be connected to the evolution of the physical paragon. This is not necessarily a negative occurrence; it is simply an example of how society's interests can converse with one another: society becomes increasingly interested in fitness and non-fattening diets, and therefore, the media appeals to the growing health interest. I believe it is important that this concept not be excluded from discussion.
     In short, I believe that individuals are presented with countless messages, and are free to make countless choices independently. It is true that many media sources attempt to persuade their audience; they desire control over those who identify with them. My conclusion, however, is that individuals are intelligent enough to scan the enormously diverse media world, and, according to their own interests, decide which concepts they are willing to 'buy' - the media may often desire control, but is not whatsoever unified.