As discussed in previous postings, spaces can be distinguished into public or private areas in people’s lives. However, there seems to be no clear constitution of what each means; what may be considered a public space to one, may not necessarily mean the same to another and vice versa. The advancement of technology; the shift in perception and use of media; and the change in social trends and lifestyle leave grey areas in the distinction of public and private spaces that are constantly evolving, leaving researchers with something to ponder about. Whether public or private, these spaces affect the way people use media and similarly they influence the effects that media leave on people as well.
From a wide perspective, place affecting media effects on its audiences can be seen through the way culture influences the way people perceive and act upon a specific media message. Here’s a scenario for instance, advertisements in China irregardless of products or services are very commonly linked to collectivistic values that resonate with its audiences. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, the Chinese culture embodies collectivistic traits and would appeal to it. However, if we were to put the same type of ad in countries of an opposite culture, for example in the United States or Australia where individualism and informality are emphasized, audiences would not be able to connect with the advertisement as well as compared to the audiences in China (Lin 2001). Hence, it simply boils down to the fact that physical place do actually influence the effects media have on its audiences. The way we are brought up and the things that we are taught within our culture mold the way we perceive and use media and ultimately affects the prints it leaves on our lives.
Zooming in to a more domestic setting where clear examples of space affecting media effects on its audience can be seen;
Today, it has become a common phenomenon for many households to own more than one television set. Parents and children seem to have personal television sets in the vicinity of their own private space, from their bedrooms to their bathrooms. On top of this, many of us also have access to other mediums too, for instance our smart phones, laptops and tablets. In comparison with the times where television used to be watched in the living room as a form of family bonding time, the way we consume media in specific spaces today has a profound difference in terms of the effects it leaves.
One aspect that we can look is that the privatization of spaces and the personalization of use of media have empowered its users. Previously where one television set is shared among members of the family and very usually the head of the family (the father) gets to control the channels and the duration of television watching. With the advancement of technology where people have their personal smartphones, smart televisions that are connected to the internet, tablets, laptops and what not, each individual has been empowered to make choices in terms of what media they want to use, for how long and for what purpose. This can be closely related to Professor Henry Jenkin’s theory of media convergence and audience empowerment. In long run, I would say that this phenomenon of freedom of choice would produce a generation of people that see themselves as individuals and equals; and are less submissive to ‘authority’.
Reference
Lin, CA 2001, ‘Cultural Values Reflected in Chinese and American Television Advertising’, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 83-94, accessed 26/9/2013, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4189198
Jenkins, H 2004, The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence, International Journal of Cultural Studies, Volume 7(1): 33–43, accessed 18/9/2013, http://ics.sagepub.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au/content/7/1/33.full.pdf+html
Media, Audience & Place 