Sarah Nilsen and Sarah E. Turner (Eds.), The Colorblind Screen: Television in Post-Racial America

IF 1.9 3区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Dayna Chatman
{"title":"Sarah Nilsen and Sarah E. Turner (Eds.), The Colorblind Screen: Television in Post-Racial America","authors":"Dayna Chatman","doi":"10.5860/choice.51-6570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sarah Nilsen and Sarah Turner’s edited volume, The Colorblind Screen: Television in Post-Racial America, considers how American politics of multiculturalism, along with colorblind racism, contribute to a unique atmosphere in television where race is briefly taken into account in celebration of diversity, but then immediately dismissed as inconsequential. This volume adds a new dimension to recent works on television that highlight the various ways the medium has evolved, transitioned, or transformed over the last three decades (see Lotz, 2007; Spigel & Olsson, 2004). These studies document the changes in television as a result of deregulation, media convergence, changes in programming, the introduction of new technologies, shifts in audiences’ viewing habits, and so on. While recognizing the valuable contributions such works make to the field of media studies, I think it is wise to examine what is meant by “change,” “transformation,” and “evolution” with respect to contemporary television. In discussions about how television has changed, there is a failure to account for the ways the medium has, when it comes to representations of racial difference, perpetuated an illusion of progress. Put simply, notions of television’s evolution are complicated by the medium’s racial paradox: At this moment in the 21st century, racial politics on television appear to be both progressive and regressive. Nilsen and Turner address this paradox in their collection of essays.","PeriodicalId":51388,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Communication","volume":"70 ","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.51-6570","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Sarah Nilsen and Sarah Turner’s edited volume, The Colorblind Screen: Television in Post-Racial America, considers how American politics of multiculturalism, along with colorblind racism, contribute to a unique atmosphere in television where race is briefly taken into account in celebration of diversity, but then immediately dismissed as inconsequential. This volume adds a new dimension to recent works on television that highlight the various ways the medium has evolved, transitioned, or transformed over the last three decades (see Lotz, 2007; Spigel & Olsson, 2004). These studies document the changes in television as a result of deregulation, media convergence, changes in programming, the introduction of new technologies, shifts in audiences’ viewing habits, and so on. While recognizing the valuable contributions such works make to the field of media studies, I think it is wise to examine what is meant by “change,” “transformation,” and “evolution” with respect to contemporary television. In discussions about how television has changed, there is a failure to account for the ways the medium has, when it comes to representations of racial difference, perpetuated an illusion of progress. Put simply, notions of television’s evolution are complicated by the medium’s racial paradox: At this moment in the 21st century, racial politics on television appear to be both progressive and regressive. Nilsen and Turner address this paradox in their collection of essays.
Sarah Nilsen和Sarah E. Turner(编),《色盲屏幕:后种族美国的电视》
萨拉·尼尔森和萨拉·特纳合编的《色盲屏幕:后种族美国的电视》探讨了美国的多元文化主义政治,以及色盲种族主义,是如何在电视中形成一种独特的氛围的。在这种氛围中,种族在庆祝多样性时被短暂地考虑了一下,但很快就被视为无关紧要。本卷增加了一个新的维度,以最近的电视作品,突出了各种方式的媒体已经演变,过渡,或在过去的三十年转变(见Lotz, 2007;Spigel & Olsson, 2004)。这些研究记录了由于放松管制、媒体融合、节目编排的变化、新技术的引入、观众观看习惯的转变等等而导致的电视变化。在认识到这些作品对媒体研究领域做出的宝贵贡献的同时,我认为,就当代电视而言,审视“变化”、“转型”和“进化”的含义是明智的。在讨论电视是如何变化的时候,人们没有考虑到这种媒介在表现种族差异时延续了一种进步的幻觉。简而言之,电视进化的概念因媒体的种族悖论而变得复杂:在21世纪的这个时刻,电视上的种族政治似乎既进步又倒退。尼尔森和特纳在他们的论文集中谈到了这个悖论。
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
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Communication is an online, multi-media, academic journal that adheres to the highest standards of peer review and engages established and emerging scholars from anywhere in the world. The International Journal of Communication is an interdisciplinary journal that, while centered in communication, is open and welcoming to contributions from the many disciplines and approaches that meet at the crossroads that is communication study. We are interested in scholarship that crosses disciplinary lines and speaks to readers from a range of theoretical and methodological perspectives. In other words, the International Journal of Communication will be a forum for scholars when they address the wider audiences of our many sub-fields and specialties, rather than the location for the narrower conversations more appropriately conducted within more specialized journals. USC Annenberg Press USC Annenberg Press is committed to excellence in communication scholarship, journalism, media research, and application. To advance this goal, we edit and publish prominent scholarly publications that are both innovative and influential, and that chart new courses in their respective fields of study. Annenberg Press is among the first to deliver journal content online free of charge, and devoted to the wide dissemination of its content. Annenberg Press continues to offer scholars and readers a forum that meets the highest standards of peer review and engages established and emerging scholars from anywhere in the world.
×
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