“Producing Peace”: The Possibilities and Limits of Using Media Literacy to Foster Student Agency

In 2018, Greta Thunberg, an individual adolescent, was moved to protest the frightening reality of climate change.  Her actions, promoted intentionally through social media, inspired 17,000 other people to join her within just 3 months.  Within 7 months she had rallied over 2 million people across 135 countries. One year later, this 16 year old child had impassioned 3.5 million people to join her protest, had been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, and won the title of Time’s most influential person of the year. Greta Thunberg proves what we already knew: that media can be amazingly powerful, and can motivate and organize shocking numbers of people with astonishing efficiency.  So while most high school students are not yet 18 and cannot vote, they still quite literally have the tools at their fingertips to let their voices be heard and motivate global change.

Scholars in the media literacy field, like Henry Jenkins, have already promoted the idea that the tools available to us and to our youth create the conditions for much more active participation and collaboration. We currently live in a “participatory culture,” defined by Jenkins as “a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement [and] strong support for creating and sharing creations…In a participatory culture, members also believe their contributions matter and feel some degree of social connection with one another.” (Jenkins, 2009, p. xi) Since students have ready access to the tools they need to amplify their voices, our job as educators is to help them understand how to use these powerful tools responsibly and productively. Scholars and educators alike recognize that media literacy is the best framework for this task. But media literacy is not just the analysis and evaluation of media. To quote Renee Hobbs (2010):

Today full participation in contemporary culture requires not just consuming messages, but also creating and sharing them. To fulfill the promise of digital citizenship, Americans must acquire multimedia communication skills that include the ability to compose messages using language, graphic design, images, and sound, and know how to use these skills to engage in the civic life of their communities. (vii)

A primary focus of media literacy education requires the intentional instruction and cultivation of student voice through media production for the sake of active political participation. Promisingly, it has been found that effective media literacy education undoubtedly fosters effective political engagement in youth (Kahne and Bowyer, 2019). 

Inspired by this research and exemplary youth models like Thunberg and the Parkland teenagers, we sought to create a media literacy course that strove beyond just analysis and evaluation of media, intended to equip students with the tools they needed to share their voices.  Our class, “Producing Peace: Civic Media Literacy & Production.”  is a cross-disciplinary co-taught arts and history course that explores the history of all communication—starting with cave painting, and moving through more modern communications like radio and film. We use a wide variety of historical and contemporary case studies of (both analog and digital) media to help students understand the nuances of storytelling and media creation.  We explore how narrative structure, rhetorical appeals, framing and omission, timing, symbols etc. shape how people receive messages and how in turn they shape beliefs and attitudes.  In teaching how and why media has been and is used as a tool for social change, our intention is to help students discover how they may use it for their own causes, ideas, and beliefs as well. While we lay an academic foundation for this class, all major assessments come in the form of media products, and our goal with this is to produce confident media makers enthused about sharing their own unique messages to contribute actively to a more just and compassionate world.

While our ambitions were high, we quickly found what other scholars in the field have, that our youth have trouble discerning news and information from entertainment.  The spheres of their world are not distinct, and their engagement with media platforms is often superficial and recreational. (Milhailidis, 2014) Further, even though they often are creating and/or sharing messages weekly, if not daily, they do not consider themselves media-makers.  They see the media landscape as something outside of themselves, not a larger conversation of which they are apart. We figured part of our task was thus to elevate their confidence to assure them their voices mattered. This was not the primary impediment to participation, however.  What we started to realize was that many of them had not yet found their voices at all.

We teach at Quaker school, so this revelation was particularly surprising to us.  Quakers hold a steadfast commitment to radical equality.  Theologically speaking, Quakers believe “There is that of God in everyone.” This means Quaker worship is called a “meeting” and there is no minister or priest presiding over it.  Everyone in the community sits together in silence until someone has a message to share and anyone—from an elder who has been a defacto community leader for decades, to a new non-Quaker guest visiting for the day, to a young child, can stand up and deliver a message—and the sum of these messages is what is considered the sermon of the Meeting.  Put into pedagogical practice, we ingrain in our students that every voice matters, and it is our job to teach students to independently form authentic messages and share them regularly and publicly. Consequently, we expected that students at our school were already hardwired to use media literacy as a tool for citizenship. Before even stepping into our classroom, they have been acculturated to sharing their voices and messages regularly within our community.  We figured our duty therefore was not to help them craft their messages, but to provide them the technical and creative tools through which they could elevate their own voices. They needed better discernment in how to distinguish between entertainment and news, and similarly, rhetorical strategies for making compelling media that would help ensure their messages were impactful to their intended audiences.

While our students most certainly have opinions and interests–which they readily share in class and within our small community–we have been surprised to find that they do not quite have the clarity they need to define a message, an audience, and a goal in their media making.  We observed this most pointedly in a project we called our Community Change Campaign.  To begin this major project, we introduced the idea of “propaganda.”  We used the Mind Over Media “Defining Propaganda” assignment to explore varying definitions of propaganda to show the range of perspectives about this term and to also break down assumptions about what propaganda is (and isn’t). (Mind Over Media, Analyzing Contemporary Propaganda, 2018) Then we discussed a variety of historical examples with a wide range of tones and goals. While of course we included the iconic WWI and WWII propaganda we often think of when considering the term, we also included examples like Ashoka’s Rock Edicts, which served as messages that promoted notions of inclusion, integrity, compassion, and well-being that had a significant impact on the Mauryan Empire. Our goal was to demonstrate that “propaganda” has more to do with a power to disseminate information with an intention to change beliefs and behaviors, rather than just a tool to lie or seed hate.

We tried to use this example to show the power of media to shape beliefs and spur action, and to instill in our students the idea that positive “propaganda” campaigns could be effective in creating concrete and constructive change. The goal was to demonstrate that media is neutral, and media makers are the active agents with responsibility to use their tools constructively, not destructively.  The message is everything, and this is why students need to be so attuned to messaging–both those they take in, but also those they create and share out with the world.

After the academic foundation was set, we tasked our students to create a multi-media campaign that was intended to produce a concrete change to improve their community. The parameters were pretty open. They needed to start with a message, and then develop concrete goals, and a plan for how to use media to achieve those goals using intentional styles and techniques to reach their audience and influence their perspectives.

The students did meet some success. Each project had a message and a goal, and students were able to produce pretty compelling pieces of media that would engage their audience. Yet, while they achieved technical competency, as teachers we were not satisfied that what we produced was productive citizenship. The students really struggled to just pick a topic and find a message. They weren’t really sure of what was an achievable goal, and they were far more motivated by what would be entertaining rather than what would be impactful. Our highest achieving seniors, for example, started by considering topics they really cared about, like student mental health, equal access to better academic learning supports, or even rape culture.  After weeks of deliberation, they eventually settled on an anti-litter campaign with the slogan “Bin It,” that used the “Got Milk” campaign’s format of associating influential people within our school throwing their trash away. They readily admitted they didn’t expect any real change to come as a result of this, but they felt like it would be easy to accomplish and of most note, really enjoyed by their peers (which it was).  In short, they made some entertaining media, but nothing that would produce actual change. While, of course, anti-littering is a productive course of action, it was evident to us as teachers that these products were not earnestly reflective of our students’ unique voices or passions. They made good, entertaining media, but ultimately, they were not yet fully engaged citizens.

As we stepped back, and reflected on what felt like a disappointment to us, we were able to recognize some of our oversights. First, these students are young—even those on the precipice of graduation from high school.  Well-known brain science makes it clear that the prefrontal cortex is still forming until our mid-twenties. This region of the brain is integrally linked to identity formation and understanding of ourselves and our relation to others. (Lieberman, 2018)  High school students do not yet fully know themselves, nor do they have a fully developed clarity about how they want to interact with others–and we should not expect them to. Maybe some exceptional young activists like Greta Thunberg have a keenly focused message and perspective, but the wide majority of students at the secondary level are still wading their way through identity formation and need our support in figuring out exactly what they want to say and how to say it. We began to realize that while there are tremendously exciting conversations taking place academically about media literacy and its capacity to support citizenship, justice, and equity, some of these conversations look at exceptional youth and take for granted that youth know what they want to say and accomplish. But media literacy education needs to account for the reality that students need more than analytical and evaluative frameworks, and they need more than technical production skills. They need clear and intentional lessons that support the development and articulation of who they are as individuals, what kind of future world they want to live in, and ideas for how they can use their unique ideas and perspectives to get there, and they need to know this in and outside of media landscapes.

In our course we draw on supremely helpful and thoughtfully developed “Digital and Media Literacies” articulated by Hobbs (2010). This list of essential competencies looks at each stage of a complete media literacy education and breaks down the skills needed to “access,” “analyze,” “create,” “reflect,” and “take action.” These are the steps adopted by many media literacy organizations and educators to follow in order to use media literacy as a tool for citizenship. Within this there is some acknowledgement that self-reflection and cultivation of identity are explicit parts of this process.  For example, within the category “creation,” students need to “Recognize the need for communication and self-expression” and “Identify your own purpose, target audience, medium & genre.” 

We are in agreement with Hobbs regarding the essential nature and value of these traits, but would argue they would benefit from being their own separate criteria.  In fact, our conclusion is that Self-Knowledge should be its own separate category included in the Access/Analyze/Create/Reflect/Act framework so often employed in media literacy programs. Competencies within this “Self-Knowledge” criterion would include:

• Knowing what topics interest you and motivate you to participate
• Having clarity and resolve in your values
• Being sure about why you want to participate
• Demonstrating awareness of what unique perspective you may contribute to a conversation (and why that’s of value)
• Articulating a clear goal or outcome for your participation

Ensuring that educators take deliberate steps to cultivate these skills and traits in our students is an important part of enabling media literacy to be used as a tool for authentic student citizenship.

Media literacy education must include frequent and deliberate reflective exercises that are geared towards developing identity and articulating student values and goals, even outside of media analysis and projects. Class time and assessments should allow space and opportunity for students to simply consider who they are, what they want to say, and what kind of world they want to build. Media literacy analysis often integrates Social and Emotional Learning to help students develop keen awareness of their own biases and perceptions when taking information in.  For example, KQED’s Above the Noise offers a variety of activities that do just this. Their lesson plans aim to help students develop self-awareness, self management, social awareness, responsible decision-making and relationship skills.  (Mock, 2021) However, a lot of the lessons out there that we have come across focus on identity more in terms of the value of recognizing bias.  This is essential in student analytical thinking, but it doesn’t as pointedly help them identify who they are and what they want to say as citizens.  More media literacy instruction time should focus on developing these perspectives. One such guide we could look to could be American University’s project on Civil Discourse, which offers students a “Building My Voice” workbook. (American University, 2018) This reflection document helps students consider how to participate in civil discourse by prompting students to think concretely over an extended period of time who they are, what kind of world they envision, and how they might participate in conversions to achieve it.  Such a resource can easily be adapted to media literacy curriculum, by prompting students to articulate and reflect regularly on their beliefs, values, hopes, and goals. The focus should primarily be on self and citizenship, before and concurrent with media literacy instruction.

We remain excited by the capability of media literacy education to be the foundation for building engaged citizens, but increasingly convinced it cannot just be about analysis and production tools in the media sphere. We need to think about the role of citizenship first, and take a holistic approach to building up our students as full agents of themselves. Comprehensive media literacy for the purpose of integrating youth into civic life needs to distinctly, intentionally, and robustly include the development of identity and a sense of self and purpose.

The first of the core questions in media literacy analysis is “who created this message?” This should be the primary question in student media production as well. Prodding students to think “who are you when creating this message?” and promoting self-reflection is vital.  Only if students have a deep sense of authentic self and purpose, will we be able to ensure that media literacy skills can produce earnest, productive, and conscientious citizens who are eager to produce peace.

References

American University School of Public Affairs (2018) Building My Voice: Project on Civil Discourse. https://www.american.edu/spa/civildiscourse/upload/final_building-myvoice-8-27-2021.pdf

Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action. Washington DC: Aspen Institute and the Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Citizens in a Democracy. https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Digital_and_Media_Literacy.pdf

Jenkins, H., et al. (2009) Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kahne, J. and B. Bowyer, (2019) “Can media literacy education increase digital engagement in politics?” in Learning, Media, and Technology,  Volume 44, 2019 – Issue 2, pp. 211-224; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17439884.2019.1601108?scroll=top&needAccess=true.

Lieberman, M. (2018). Why people are always thinking about themselves. Retrieved from http://www.scn.ucla.edu/pdf/Meyer(2018)JCN.pdf

Milhailidis, P. (2014) Media Literacy and the Emerging Citizen: Youth, Engagement and Participation in Digital Culture. PeterLang, Inc.

Mind Over Media. (2018.). Analyzing Contemporary Propaganda: Lesson Plans. Retrieved from https://mediaeducationlab.com/sites/default/files/FINAL%20Mind%20Over%20Media%209.17.18.pdf

Mock, A. (2021, September 13) Integrating SEL and Media Literacy With Above the Noise. https://www.kqed.org/education/535330/integrating-sel-and-media-literacy-with-above-the-noise