Interview: Ellen Besen on Visual Literacy

With older kids, you can go deeper into exploring the structural elements and also have them discuss news coverage along with their favorite shows and films. Structurally, they can consider how the frame of a camera angle showcases some elements but excludes others -- in fictional media, this can be a powerful storytelling device, one where the creator deliberately holds back information to create tension or to set up a joke. But in news coverage, this can falsify information -- making a tiny crowd look big, for example, by keeping the camera in close.
Older kids can also begin to look for hidden agendas, even in fictional work -- here their knowledge of their own life is a valuable point of comparison -- how are kids their age treated in a given show -- are they all much smarter than the adults? Do they speak and act the way real kids their age do or is their performance distorted? If it is distorted, why? Is it to create humour or satire? Is the show intended mainly for adults and the creators are playing on parents' fears? Etc!

For elementary school kids and older, you can also encourage them to try making their own media. it's fun, inexpensive and very instructive for them.

Is visual literacy different for television, movies, and games or are the principles the same?
The basic principles are the same but each medium also has issues of its own, some inherent to the medium, itself; others created by the delivery systems, business models behind them, expectations about the intended audience, etc. Gaming, for example, has developed a visual language which is quite distinctive, with the interactivity inherent to this medium being a primary factor.

What should kids know about the way ads use media tricks to make their products more appealing?

As mentioned above, the doctoring of the product is an important thing for kids to be aware of, as is the use of animated mascots for younger kids and celebrity endorsements for older kids. You can ask a child what the celebrity really has to do with the product and what impact their endorsement has on the audience's perception of the product. Or if an ad uses a " medical doctor" as an endorser, you can ask whether this is a real doctor or an actor and how could the audience tell? In ads that sell non prescription health aids, kids can start to listen for descriptions of the product that sound scientific and authoritative but are really just meaningless phrases invented by the ad agency. And you can have kids start to question the more subtle approach which sells by association -- beer ads which show everyone having the time of their lives, etc.

You can also have kids start watching for product placement within a film or TV show. Why are all the actors drinking Coke in this scene or mentioning the kind of car they drive? Is it really part of the story or a hidden ad?

How does violence in media affect young audiences? Is it different if it is cartoony, action-style violence instead of more realistic, graphic violence?

It depends to some extent on the individual child, some being more sensitive and others being suggestible and not sensitive enough. I think all kids should be reminded that all fictional violence is just that -- it's carefully choreographed to make sure it looks exciting while actually being safe for the actors and stunt people. You can help point out the differences between violence which is more stagy -- meaning perhaps that it isn't intended to be taken seriously (and therefore meaning that the audience is in on the knowledge that no one is actually getting hurt) versus violence which is made to look very real in order to create a strong emotional reaction. Then you can talk about the different impact each has on an audience.

Certainly, with cartoon violence, I think all but the youngest audiences are easily made aware of the extreme exaggeration which sends a clear message that no one is being hurt. But one way or the other, I think the overall impact of media violence is greatly reduced by visual literacy. Aware kids are less likely to fall into mindless imitation of what they see on TV and are also more open to the idea that there can be one set of rules in a fictional world and another in the real world -- this could be broken down as, it's one thing to imagine hurting someone (fictional) and quite another to actually hurt someone.

Why do you recommend turning off the sound?

There's lots to be learned from the soundtrack as well.

The relationship between sound and picture is more complex than it seems at first glance. Music affects pacing, for example, and can seem to make action speed up or slow down. Precisely synchronized sound can control what part of the screen we look at, making some elements more visible and others disappear in plain sight. Here, it's interesting to have children watch a particular sequence (say a musical number from a Disney film) first with the sound off, then with the sound on and compare what they noticed on the screen each time. They may notice, among other things, that tiny but important details, which were completely overlooked when the sound was off, pop right off the screen when seen together with their assigned sound effect.

Music and effects can also be used to bump up the excitement of a show -- creating the feeling that something really important is happening. This technique is frequently found in reality and TV documentary shows. Used well, it can make a show more entertaining but it can and often does become manipulative, lending a given show more authority than it deserves. These sorts of shows may be hard to follow with no sound at all. However, you still can encourage children to be extra aware of the music and sound effects when they watch and see if they can identify the parts that seem "over the top" for no real reason.

Our family ate in a restaurant where the family at the next table had a portable DVD player with "Cinderella" for their little girl to watch without headphones. Most families have DVD players in the car. What do you think about this?

I think it's fine in its place but it's awfully easy for parents to become too dependent on this approach to child management. It may be that the particular girl above was too active a kid to get through a restaurant meal any other way and this allow the parents a night out without totally disrupting the other diners. But often it is just habit -- one that becomes too expected for the child (who gets easy gratification) and as well as for the parents (who get a different kind of easy gratification).

You don't want media to take the place of real interaction with other people or to become the only trick parents have up their sleeves. Overuse can tend to become totally unsupervised use which as mentioned at the start, means the child has an unmediated relationship with media itself -- making its impact much greater. Children who are always being passively entertained can also become dependent on this and rather at sea if it isn't constantly available. In fact, not knowing how to entertain themselves makes them essentially more dependent on adults altogether. It's not bad for a child to learn that a quiet period with little or no outside stimulation not only makes them more appreciative when the stimulation returns but also gives them room to think, to notice the world, to make up their own stories or seek new, active stimulation on their own.

How does today's multi-media world affect the media literacy of our children?

There's no question in my mind that they are different from us! They can absorb and process great amounts of varying material coming in from different sources, all at the same time, making them wired for multitasking. They have a huge portion of the world's knowledge at their finger tips and most of the world population as well- and they have never known any other kind of world.

Every element of the multi-media world has good and not so good potential. Internet friendships can be a real boon for a shy or less average kid- they have a much greater chance of finding a group where they do fit and can start to build social skills. But the kid who only has cyber friends, of course, is going to have a hard time functioning successfully in the real world.
So it's not only a good thing for kids to be put in situations where they can't access any of their e-toys (at least from time to time, better yet on a regular basis), it's actually is a very important thing. They are going to be lopsided in this direction to a greater extent than previous generations- I don't think we can help that but we should be making a point of mitigating this extremely seductive influence where we can.

On the other hand, two of the great things about this world are that it is participatory and very word based. Remember how we worried that kids would stop learning how to write? We may not fully approve of the new language they are developing but we cannot deny that written communication rules this world. And it is also easy for kids to make and see each other's media productions. Again, this can foster confidence but the downside can be a lack of reference to professional standards. So here, once again, some adult intervention used to expose kids to a higher standard of communication is a good thing.

Are there classic films or television programs you recommend for families?

There are lots of great animated classics- from the timeless Disney features to more recent work by Pixar or Miyazaki, all well worth watching. Some of the great musicals- such as Singing in the Rain or the best of Fred Astaire's films hold up really well. There are some lesser known animated features such as The Iron Giant, The Brave Little Toaster, The Point, The Magic Tollbooth and James and the Giant Peach that make good family viewing. And Disney's classic live action/animation films, such as Mary Poppins, are a lot of fun too. And for your slightly older kids, who are not too easily frightened (if they are good with Wizard of OZ, for example), the best of special effects genius, Ray Harryhausen, can be a real treat- particularly Jason and the Argonauts.