Presentation Title

The Propaganda Model: A Critical Pedagogy for Media Analysis

Biographical Sketch

Zane Wubbena is a recent PhD in School Improvement at Texas State University, where he received the 2017 Outstanding Doctoral Student Award. His research interests include critical pedagogy, media studies, and educational policy. More information can be found at zanewubbena.com.

Type of Presentation

Individual presentation

Brief Description of Presentation

My presentation introduces the propaganda model to the field of education for scholars and practitioners interested in analyzing the media from an institutional or political-economic perspective. I will first review the theoretical and methodological characteristics of the model. Then, I will present results from the application of the model during the 2016 US presidential election.

Abstract of Proposal

RQ from Call for Papers: How can various critical theories enrich our understanding of the mass media in the age of neoliberalism?

The purpose of this study is to introduce the “propaganda model” to critical education scholars and practitioners as a theoretical and methodological framework for analyzing the mass media. This model rests on five structural factors for determining news coverage: (a) ownership, (b) advertising, (c) sourcing, (d) flak, and (e) anti-communism/market ideology. This model was developed by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky and presented in their 1988 book, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.[1] Since it was first introduced, the model has received much theoretical attention and empirical support in the fields of political and mass communication and journalism studies. However, it remains relatively absent in the field of education, especially among education researchers interested in understanding the role of the media in the age of neoliberalism.[2] The model has great utility for not only education scholars concerned with examining education in the media, but also for teachers and students of critical pedagogy from elementary school to higher education. To illustrate the utility of the model for researchers and practitioners, I present a content analysis of the 2016 presidential election by examining the mainstream media coverage of the two main democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. This analysis, in particular, and the model, in general, provides education researchers and practitioners with a tool for answering Lenin’s age-old question at the heart of critical pedagogy: “Who stands to gain?”.

[1] Herman and Chomsky’s book Manufacturing Consent was first published in 1988. New editions were subsequently released both in 2002 and in 2008.

[2] One exception to this claim is: Cooley, A. (2010). Failed states in education: Chomsky on dissent, propaganda, and reclaiming democracy in the media spectacle. Educational Studies, 46(6), 579–605. doi:10.1080/00131946.2010.524132.

Start Date

2-24-2018 1:10 PM

End Date

2-24-2018 2:40 PM

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Feb 24th, 1:10 PM Feb 24th, 2:40 PM

The Propaganda Model: A Critical Pedagogy for Media Analysis

RQ from Call for Papers: How can various critical theories enrich our understanding of the mass media in the age of neoliberalism?

The purpose of this study is to introduce the “propaganda model” to critical education scholars and practitioners as a theoretical and methodological framework for analyzing the mass media. This model rests on five structural factors for determining news coverage: (a) ownership, (b) advertising, (c) sourcing, (d) flak, and (e) anti-communism/market ideology. This model was developed by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky and presented in their 1988 book, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.[1] Since it was first introduced, the model has received much theoretical attention and empirical support in the fields of political and mass communication and journalism studies. However, it remains relatively absent in the field of education, especially among education researchers interested in understanding the role of the media in the age of neoliberalism.[2] The model has great utility for not only education scholars concerned with examining education in the media, but also for teachers and students of critical pedagogy from elementary school to higher education. To illustrate the utility of the model for researchers and practitioners, I present a content analysis of the 2016 presidential election by examining the mainstream media coverage of the two main democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. This analysis, in particular, and the model, in general, provides education researchers and practitioners with a tool for answering Lenin’s age-old question at the heart of critical pedagogy: “Who stands to gain?”.

[1] Herman and Chomsky’s book Manufacturing Consent was first published in 1988. New editions were subsequently released both in 2002 and in 2008.

[2] One exception to this claim is: Cooley, A. (2010). Failed states in education: Chomsky on dissent, propaganda, and reclaiming democracy in the media spectacle. Educational Studies, 46(6), 579–605. doi:10.1080/00131946.2010.524132.