Hegemony, as defined by the free dictionary, consists of “the predominant influence, as of a state, region, or group, over another or others.” Cultural hegemony, as defined by the same source, is more specific: it means that a diverse culture can be ruled or dominated by one group, and that “everyday practices and shared beliefs provide the foundation for complex systems of domination.”
In other words, the social status quo—the “ruling” power of the dominant group—is kept alive by pervasive concepts and images (ideologies) that continue to be utilized in (typically) subtle ways.
Take the 2006 SONY PlayStation Portable (PSP) gaming system advertisement put up on an Amsterdam billboard, and on the Dutch website for the product, placed at the beginning of this article.
The advertisement is for the PlayStation Portable White handheld console, which features a new color casing for the system; the original color of the PSP is black. The implications of this image are clear: the white PSP is dominant, superior, and more desirable than its black counterpart. Notice the way the two models, used to represent the systems, are interacting. The white model grips the face of the black model in one hand and glares disapprovingly at her; she forces the black model into a slight crouch in order to look down at her. The white model, dressed in bright white, seductively-cut clothing and sporting dyed-white hair, stands out starkly against the pitch-black background of the billboard, while the black model, in a plain black button-up shirt, is left to blend into and eventually altogether melt into the background.
The ad wants the viewer to see that the white PSP is sexier than the black, more original than the black, better than the black. And it does so by blatantly implying the same thing about the white and black human beings used to represent them, enforcing the subconscious social beliefs regarding whites “versus” blacks, and the hegemony it creates. This is offensive and inappropriate enough without the likewise troublesome convention of using sexualized images of women to represent products to be bought and owned; when the two are united, it only compounds the problem. Whites are a privileged group, and the group most directly in change of media portrayals, making it fairly easy for the group as a whole to get away with utilizing such awful imagery. Worse, white viewers of the imagery, as a result of being constantly barraged with it, are unlikely to recognize just how degrading the images are. Unconscious and subconscious racist attitudes of whites towards people of color are shaped this way, whether white society is “comfortable” with owning up to and correcting them or not.
Some might argue that because racism has never been a ‘big issue’ in Holland, the ad isn’t as offensive as it appears. On the contrary: the fact that WHITE is dominant enough there for racism to be seen as so paltry may actually make it worse. Here in the US, where non-whites are continually portrayed as somehow lesser through (more subtle) images in the media, such an ad would lead to a public outcry; criticisms leveled at the persons responsible for the ad would ultimately lead to a retraction and public apology. Regardless of how empty and face-saving that apology might be, it means that those who would fight for the apology to be made would be fully aware of the blatant racism, and realize it was not okay in any sense. In Holland, however, the implication seems to be that the white population there isn’t be able to see what the problem is in the first place.
Blindness to racism leads to racist attitudes and behavior, even if it is not as overt or even as intentional as “active racism.”
(Post by Amanda Batson)
Sources:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hegemony
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/cultural+hegemony
http://welovemediacrit.blogspot.com/2009/09/hegemony-and-media.html
http://www.stanford.edu/group/ccr/blog/2007/11/lumo_on_racist_playstation_ad.html
No comments:
Post a Comment