What I've learned - Theme 2. Critical media theory

What is art? This question was the main focus during our seminar discussion this week. I did not expect us to discuss just that question after reading the text, but I did see the connection between this week’s theme and the importance of defining what you are critic to before judging it. If it is even possible to judge some not so defined as art. The definition of art as I see it is not something that is easily done and after this week’s discussion, I don’t find it possible. Art for me is everything around me, everything that I can see and everything that I can react to. Therefore I think there is as many definitions of art as there is beholders of art, because how people relate to their surroundings are all different.

My group talked a lot about the use of myths in human history to explain unexplainable event around us like lightning and other natural phenomenon. The enlightenment and what is viewed as “truth” is a continuously changing matter where new knowledge relegates old knowledge to the myths. Todays knowledge might there for be myths in the future even if it is viewed as fact today it might not be viewed as that tomorrow.

I’m curious to see what “myths” that we see as truth today that will be outdated and old in the future.

During the lecture I found the theme was more connected to the individual responsibility to be critical to what media industry provides us and how the industry even can affect the view on historical events. And I me thinking about a article I read a few days ago. Apparently, according to the article the react around the world regarding help when natural disasters acquire depends on how it is perceived in the medias. And it even affect the politicians in where to send help and how much help others get. I can understand this is a tricky question but is it okay that the medias have so much power so they can almost decide where to send help and where not to in case of catastrophe only in what they are reporting about.