Stereotypes, What a Tendency!!Essay title: Stereotypes, What a Tendency!!Stereotypes, what a tendency!!Nowadays, the world is becoming more and more hackneyed and devoted to convection, although most of the people affirm that they are liberal and broad-minded. The reasons behind this dogmatic inclination of societies are the world’s intricacy and the human beings’ nature. Time is passing by like a blink of an eye, and people are always engrossed by their work, family issues and occupations; no one is free to probe everything he sees or analyze the personality of everyone he meets. That’s why stereotypes arise and become part of our social life regardless of our beliefs and convictions. In fact, the Media plays an important role in scattering these stereotypes all around the globe, which may lead to conflicts and misunderstandings among cultures and fire off wars. Therefore, Media has undoubtedly a great impact on our behavior and on our whole living process; it has indeed a positive as well as a negative effect regarding the issue we are dealing with. Fortunately, there are solutions that human beings have suggested in order to fold up the diffusion of stereotypes; still, not too many are practical. Education and refinement, Media, politics, etc. are all factors that can contribute to the standstill of this dilemma.

Stereotyping is a kind of prejudgment that we make, and which is most of the time, totally erroneous and off balance. There are in fact many causes for adopting this classification system. As Robert Heilbroner (1974) mentions in his article, stereotyping helps us in understanding how this abashing world functions and preserves us the strain of analyzing every single aspect. We, therefore, classify and label people unconsciously, even if we are convinced that stereotypes are wrong. The reasons behind them are not as much important as the consequences they may engender. Many social factors are, in point of fact, diffusing stereotypes and encouraging people to standardize and frame others. Broadcasting stations (television and radio), promoting and advertising sources, as well as the Internet, constitute a huge part of the available mass media that is buoying up and boosting the use of stereotypes among people. If we take the television stations for example, these sources are supposed to be objective and extrinsic when transmitting the news about what is going on in the country or in the world. However, what is indeed happening, especially in Lebanon, is that the owners of the most reliable television stations are politicians and hence have their own points of view which will be certainly reflected throughout the programs broadcasted. Media is not being objective anymore and is not revealing the truth to the audience. Each station defends its proprietors and swell stereotypes about other politicians; the fact that makes the situation even worse, instead of settling it up. If we consider for instance “El Manar” station, we can obviously notice its partiality and fondness toward one of the two conflicting political parties in Lebanon. In fact, this broadcasting station always portrays the events and accidents happening locally as to be addressed against the junta it defends. Though, we all know that this political group is the one fanning the flame; and the purpose behind these compulsory accidents is to weaken and deteriorate Lebanon, so that the Syrian Army can take control all over again. (We can mention the demonstration the partisans of 8 march had this year, which aggravated the situation, lead to thousands of injuries, and motivated the slump we’ve been facing for the last ten years.)

Other than the political issues, broadcasting stations can also have a role in expanding racial and cultural prejudices and thus incite strives and contests between civilizations. For example, when a station emits a documentary about the way Africans live, how they dress up, eat, get married, etc… this report is supposed to introduce us to other societies and cultures and not to cause mutual animosity among the nations. Due to this kind of TV programs, the world considers the Africans to be uncultivated and primary people and hence underestimates them and treats them as second-rate creatures. As a result, conflicts occur since some of the information broadcasted is wrong and depicts the negative side of the Africans.

  • For more on the story, see our “How the Afrikaners Are Taking Advantage of the African Community: Race, Ethnicity, and the Future of Civilization.”

One of the most common objections of a journalist is not how to approach the subject of Africa’s history and culture. Rather, their criticisms of Africans must be of an international nature and an attempt to reach a common sense approach. Some critics can, for example, say “allowing the African community to experience history from its own point of view (e.g. through news, films, or music) is nothing more than an attempt to prevent its self-expression. We see this as an attempt to suppress some important parts of Africa’s history from its own view but not to influence its own culture or culture’s thinking on those important things. However, one can argue on this point that a ‘contemporary’ debate about the future will never make it to its own screen: a debate about the future of Africa from a standpoint or a perspective of cultural imperialism. For example, because some people in Africa have been oppressed and exploited for many, many centuries, one cannot possibly be certain that their views differ. The only thing one could reasonably expect from such an argument is that they would hold that African history must be told from a purely personal standpoint, from the perspective of the African Community, or else they might view history from the ‘outside’ as inaccurate, illogical, or ignorant.
The question we ask during our discussions at ANC Media is this not what each of the organizations have to say about each other, but what the individual groups have to say by way of public statements.
In short, what the journalists (and I think they realize the truth, for they’ve written the history) have to say about Africa is so-called “nonpolitical” remarks, no matter which side of the debate you’re taking, such as: “For them this is a national question… for others there is a matter of cultural history and history as it really is but not as a matter of race, race as it is at any rate.”
http://news.cities.gov/index.cfm/noremap/African-History–NewsCenter.php?Title=$1.534.95

http://news.cities.gov/index.cfm/noremap/African-History–NewsCenter.php?Title=$1.534.95

http://news.cities.gov/index.cfm/noremap/African-History–NewsCenter.php?Title=$1.534.95

Get Your Essay