this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
4 points (75.0% liked)

Books

4533 readers
44 users here now

A community for all things related to Books.

Rules

  1. Be Nice

Official Bingo Posts:

Related Communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
dresden@discuss.online
dresden_do@lemmy.world
JaymesRS
4
Rant: Media literacy =/= correct interpretation (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 month ago by yesman@lemmy.world to c/books@lemmy.world
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Internet culture loves nothing more than adopting half-understood academic jargon. And more and more I'm seeing the phrase "media literacy" to mean: being smart enough to come to the correct interpretation, or even worse: being able to decipher authorial intent.

I'm a 'death of the author' kind of guy, but we all should agree that any text will have multiple valid interpretations, so long as you can back it up with the text.

I wanna stress that I'm not gatekeeping the phrase, I just want to promote the idea of media education over the smug notion that one person reads books better than another.

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] m_f@midwest.social 10 points 1 month ago

I've heard the phrase as meaning "able to analyze veracity of media source". I've never heard it used in a sense like "smart enough to come to the correct interpretation", other than being able to say "Yeah, this is probably propaganda".

[โ€“] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I'm somewhere between "death of the author" and "there are no/all valid interpretations". Stories help you explore through eyes that aren't your own and ask questions or raise contradictions you wouldn't otherwise consider, but I don't really think critically analyzing fiction is all that useful.

Dive deep into a story, feel what you feel, let your mind wander. I think classes analyzing themes in the Scarlet Letter or whatever are missing the point of storytelling. It should be organic, and whatever it triggers is valid.