“Do You Understand How Racially Motivated This Is?”: Institutional Discipline, Double Standards, and Projects of Media Fugitivity

IF 1.6 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Marla Martin
{"title":"“Do You Understand How Racially Motivated This Is?”: Institutional Discipline, Double Standards, and Projects of Media Fugitivity","authors":"Marla Martin","doi":"10.1111/traa.12244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mainstream imaginaries of success in the United States tend to center white men. This phenomenon, though increasingly criticized, pervades media systems, which have effectively served as major channels to facilitate, disperse, and popularize such ideals globally. Unsurprisingly, then, US mainstream media institutions have not generally favored non‐white and/or non‐men creators. Via code phrases such as best practices and professionalism, racialized and gendered assumptions continue to shape participatory landscapes of media production. Hence, for many Black women enrolled in formal media education and training programs, schooling's disciplinary norms—alongside society's inclination to mark and marginalize Black women as Other—both frustrate and inspire them to develop cunning, culturally mindful approaches that make use of accessible lessons, resources, and networks without abandoning the social issues and objectives that brought them to media in the first place. Framing their flexible methods of resource procurement and repurposing as projects of media fugitivity, this article explores how Black women navigate the overlapping social, technological, and ideological disciplines of institutional subjecthood and cultivate strategies through which to participate in these schooling infrastructures, while at the same time also protecting themselves from them; redistributing gains accrued in them; and selectively challenging hegemonic asks made, norms modeled, and compliances expected in them.","PeriodicalId":44069,"journal":{"name":"Transforming Anthropology","volume":"31 1","pages":"29 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transforming Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/traa.12244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mainstream imaginaries of success in the United States tend to center white men. This phenomenon, though increasingly criticized, pervades media systems, which have effectively served as major channels to facilitate, disperse, and popularize such ideals globally. Unsurprisingly, then, US mainstream media institutions have not generally favored non‐white and/or non‐men creators. Via code phrases such as best practices and professionalism, racialized and gendered assumptions continue to shape participatory landscapes of media production. Hence, for many Black women enrolled in formal media education and training programs, schooling's disciplinary norms—alongside society's inclination to mark and marginalize Black women as Other—both frustrate and inspire them to develop cunning, culturally mindful approaches that make use of accessible lessons, resources, and networks without abandoning the social issues and objectives that brought them to media in the first place. Framing their flexible methods of resource procurement and repurposing as projects of media fugitivity, this article explores how Black women navigate the overlapping social, technological, and ideological disciplines of institutional subjecthood and cultivate strategies through which to participate in these schooling infrastructures, while at the same time also protecting themselves from them; redistributing gains accrued in them; and selectively challenging hegemonic asks made, norms modeled, and compliances expected in them.
“你知道这是多么的种族动机吗?”:制度纪律、双重标准和媒体逃亡计划
在美国,对成功的主流想象往往以白人男性为中心。这种现象虽然受到越来越多的批评,但却普遍存在于媒体系统中,这些媒体系统有效地成为促进、传播和在全球普及这种理想的主要渠道。因此,不出所料,美国主流媒体机构通常不喜欢非白人和/或非男性创作者。通过诸如最佳做法和专业精神等暗语,种族化和性别化的假设继续塑造媒体生产的参与性景观。因此,对于许多参加正规媒体教育和培训项目的黑人女性来说,学校的纪律规范——以及社会将黑人女性标记和边缘化为“他者”的倾向——既让她们感到沮丧,又激励她们发展出巧妙的、文化上有意识的方法,利用可获得的课程、资源和网络,同时又不放弃最初把她们带到媒体领域的社会问题和目标。这篇文章将她们灵活的资源获取方法和重新利用作为媒体逃亡的项目,探讨了黑人妇女如何驾驭制度主体的重叠的社会、技术和意识形态学科,并培养参与这些学校基础设施的策略,同时也保护自己免受它们的侵害;重新分配利润;并且有选择地挑战霸权主义的要求,规范,以及他们所期望的服从。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信