SCREEN-L Archives

September 1996, Week 1


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Matt McAllister <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:54:17 -0500
text/plain (37 lines)
Hi everyone,
I've got a TV-related question to throw out.
Criticism of advertising, traditionally, has been divided into two camps.
One camp looks at the ads themselves: from a semiotic/ideological
perspective, these critics focus on the message in ads (folks like Judith
Williamson).  The other camp looks at ads' economic effect upon media
content: how TV programs include or exclude certain ideas/forms/tones
because of advertising funding incentives (folks like Herb Schiller or Ben
Bagdikian).  Rarely, it seems to me, do these two camps merge.
But I am currently working on a paper that looks at certain types of
Olympic Sponsorship ads broadcast in the US, arguing that to really
understand possible meanings of these ads you have to contextualize them in
the NBC broadcast.
So my question is: does anyone know of examples of advertising criticism
that interpreted TV ads in the context of the program that surrounded the
ads?  Where the critic did not separate the two discourses, but rather saw
them as part of the same meaning system in his/her analysis?
Any tips would be much appreciated!  Thanks!
Matt McAllister
Department of Communication Studies, Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA  24061-0311  ph: 540-231-9830  fax: 540-231-9817
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Department of Communication Studies at Virginia Tech Home Page:
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]