Author :
Abstract
Televizyon her gün insanlara yaşam, evren, gündem ve insanlar konusunda sayısız ileti aktarmakta ve çok sayıda izlenime, görüşe ve bazen önyargılara neden olmaktadır. Televizyon 21. yüzyıldaki en yaygın medyadır ve en etkili toplumsal dinamik olarak insanları yönlendirmektedir. Televizyonun, toplumsal bir dinamik olarak pek çok toplumsal konuyu yönlendirdiği onaylanmaktadır. Dünyada pek çok toplumun üyesi küresel ve ulusal gündemi, düşünceleri ve yaşamla ve olaylarla ilgili yaklaşımları televizyon aracılığıyla öğrenmekte ve karar vermektedir. Televizyonun yapımları nedeniyle insanlar üzerinde doğal olarak bir egemenliği bulunmaktadır ve insanları değişik görüşlere ve yaklaşımlara yönlendirmektedir. Televizyon, değişik, ilginç ve çekici özellikleri nedeniyle bir toplumda yer alan etnik unsurlarla ilgili materyalleri sıkça kullanmaktadır. Etnisiteyle ilgili materyalleri kullanmak etnisitenin kritik durumu nedeniyle bazı riskler içermektedir ve yanlış izlenimlere ve önyargılara neden olabilmektedir. Bir toplumdaki pek çok insan kalıtsal kökenleri ve ulusal yaklaşımları nedeniyle etnisite ve etnik unsurlar konusunda duyarlılık taşımaktadır. Televizyon kanalları genellikle maddi çıkarlarını hesaplamakta ve planları doğrultusunda tüm materyalleri kullanmaktadır. Bazen etnisiteyle ilgili yanlış iletiler aktarırken, önyargılara neden olabilmektedir. Televizyon özellikle televizyonu tek bilgi ve görüş kaynağı olarak kullanan, başka kaynaktan yararlanmayan ve egemenlik kurduğu az gelişmiş toplumlarda yanlış izlenimlere, görüşlere ve önyargılara neden olabilmektedir. İnsanlar televizyonun çekici görüntüleri ve sansasyonel konuları ve başka kaynaklara ulaşmaktaki ihmalleri nedeniyle televizyondan kolayca etkilenebilmektedir. Televizyon bazen etnik unsurları sorgulamadan, araştırmadan kullanmakta ve etnik unsurları olumsuz biçimde gösterebilmektedir. Toplumların karakterleri ve televizyonun çekiciliği, televizyonun çekiciliği etnisite konusundaki önyargıları arttırabilmektedir.
Keywords
Abstract
Television conveys people numerous messages about life and about the universe and about agenda and about people everday and cause many impressions and opinions and sometimes bias. Television is the most common media in 21.st century and one of the most effective social dynamics in social life and guides society. It is approved that television can guide many social matter as a social dynamic. Many members of society learn global or national agenda and get opinions and approaches about life and about events and decide via television in the world. Television naturally has a sovereignty and influences people via its productions and conveys people to different opinions and approaches. Television often uses ethnic materials in a society because of different and interesting and attractive characteristics of ethnicity. Use of materials about ethnicity can include some risks because of squeamish condition of ethnicity and can cause incorrect impressions and bias. Many people in a society are sensitive about ethnicity and ethnic components because of their hereditary roots and because of their national approaches. Television channels usually plans their material interests and use all available materials due to their plans and can sometimes convey incorrect messages about ethnicity and can cause bias. Television can cause incorrect impressions and opinions and bias especially in underdeveloped societies who use television as unique source of knowledge and opinion and do not use another source and on whom television has a sovereignty. People can be affected via television easily because of attractive images and sensational topics on television and because of their negligence to reach alternative sources for knowledge and for opinions. Television sometimes uses ethnic materials without investigation and can show ethnic components in incorret impressions. Characteristics of societies and attraction of television can increase bias about ethnicity.
Keywords
- ALTUĞ, Selin (2013). ‚Etnisite ve Medya‛. Academia.edu. 10.04.2013. http://www.academia.edu/2394369.
- ANA, Otto Santa (2009). ‚Did You Call in Mexican? The Racial Politics of Jay Leno Immigrant Jokes‛. Language in Society. 38 (1): 23-45.
- AZZI, Abderrahmane (1998). ‚Development: Ethical Competence in the Information Age‛. Islamic Studies. 37 (1): 77-102.
- BAL, Müjgan (2011). ‚İmaj ve Önyargı Faktörünün Gazete Haberlerine Etkisi‛. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 1 (2): 201-226.
- BARKAN, Elliot R. ve VECOLI, Rudolph J. ve ALBA, Richard D. ve ZUNZ, Olivier (1995). ‚Race, Religion, and Nationality in American Society: A Model of Ethnicity: From Contact to Assimilation *with Comment, with Response+‛. Journal of American Ethnic History. 14 (2): 38-101.
- BLONDHEIM, Menahem ve LIEBES, Tamar (2009). ‚Television News and the Nation: The End?‛. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 625: 182195.
- BJORNSTROM, Eileen E. S. ve KAUFMAN, Robert L. ve PETERSON, Ruth D. ve SLATER, Michael D. (2010). ‚Race and Ethnic Rpresentations of Lawbreakers and Victims in Crime News: A National Study of Television Coverage‛. Social Problems. 57 (2): 269-293.
- BUDD, Edward C. ve SIGELMAN, Carol K. ve SIGELMAN, Lee (1981). ‚Exploring the Outer Limits of Response Bias‛. Sociological Focus. 14 (4): 297-307.
- CERECİ, Sedat (2011). ‚Medyanın Doğu Politikası ve Irk Ayrımcılığına Katkısı‛. Broadcasterinfo. 90: 99-100.
- DALY, Marry ve SILVER, Hillary (2008). ‚Social Exclusion and Social Capital: A Comparison and Critique‛. Theory and Society. 37 (6): 537-566.
- DERONG, Pan ve LIN, Zhang (2009). ‚Reader and Text in the Horizon of Understanding Methodology: Gadamer and Methodological Hermeneutics‛. Frontiers of Philosophy in China. 4 (3): 417-436.
- DESAI, Sonalde (2008). ‚Obama, Indian Americans and a Conversation abot Race‛. Economic and Political Weekly. 43 (14): 23-36.
- DUVALL, Donna ve BOOTH, Alan (1979). ‚Social Class, Stress and Physical Punishment‛. International Review of Modern Sociology. 9 (1): 103-117.
- ELLIS, John (2009). ‚The Performance on Television of Sincerely Felt Emotion‛. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 625: 105-115.
- FROSH, Paul (2009). ‚The Face of Television‛. Annnals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 625: 87-102.
- GOREN, Paul (2007). ‚Character Weakness, Partisan Bias, and Presidential Evaluation: Modifications ans Extensions‛. Politcal Behavior. 29 (3): 305-325.
- GRATTET, Ryken (2009). ‚The Urban Ecology of Bias Crime:A Study of Disorganized and Defended Neighborhoods‛. Social Problems. 56 (1): 132-150.
- GÖREGENLİ, Melek (2011). ‚Önyargıyı ve Ayrımcılığı Azaltmak‛. http://www.secbir.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/20. 09.04.2013.
- HANSON, Jeffery R. (1997). ‚Ethnicity and the Looking Glass: The Dialectics of National Indian Identity‛. American Indian Quarterly. 21 (2): 195-208.
- HAYES, Danny (2009). ‚Has Television Personalized Voting Behavior?‛. Political Behavior. 31 (2): 231-260.
- HAZELL, Vanessa ve CLARKE, Juanne (2008). ‚Race and Gender in Media: A Content Analysis of Advertisements in Two Mainstream Black Magazines‛. Journal of Black Studies. 39 (1): 5-21.
- PERSELL, Hodges Caroline ve GREEN, Adam ve GUREVICH, Liena (2001). ‚Civil Society, Economic Distress, and Social Tolerance‛. Sociological Forum. 16 (2): 203230.
- HOGAN, Robet T. ve EMLER, Nicholas P. (1978). ‚The Biases in Contemporary Social Psychology‛. Social Research. 45 (3): 478-534.
- MCCARTHY, John D. ve MCPHAIL, Clark ve SMITH, Jackie (1996). ‚Images of Protest: Dimension of Selection Bias in Meia Coverage of Washington Demonstration, 1982 and 1991‛. American Sociological Review. 61 (3): 478-499.
- MCDERMOTT,Monica (2002). ‚Trends in the Race and Ethnicity of Eminent Americans‛. Sociological Forum. 17 (1): 137-160.
- RANGEL, John Paul (2012). ‚Moving Beyond the Expected: Representation and Presence in a Contemporary Native Art Museum‛. Wicazo Sa Review. 27 (1): 231
- SAWCHUK, Joe (2001). ‚Negotiating an Identity: Métis Political Organizations, the Canadian Government and Competing Concepts of Aboriginality‛. American Indian Quarterly. 25 (1): 73-92.
- SCANNEL, Paddy (2009). ‚The Dialectic of Timem and Television‛. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 625: 219-235.
- SKRENTNY, John D. (2008). ‚Culture and Race/Ethnicity: Bolder, Deeper, and Broader‛. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 619: 59-77.
- TAHMAHKERA, Dustin (2008). ‚Custer’s Last Sitcom: Decolonized Viewing of the Sitcom’s ‘Indian’‛. American Indian Quarterly. 32 (3): 324-351.
- THOMPSON, Irene Taviss (2005). ‚The Theory That Won’t Die: From Mass Society to the Decline of Social Capital‛. Sociological Forum. 20 (3): 421-448.
- TURNER, Joel (2007). ‚The Messenger Overwhelming the Message: Ideological Cues and Perceptions of Bias in Television News‛. Political Behavior. 29 (4): 441-464.
- WINCH, Robert F. ve GREER, Scott A. (1968). ‚‛Urbanism, Ethnicity ,and Extended Familism‛. Journal of Marriage and Family. 30 (1): 40-45.
