this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
89 points (100.0% liked)

chat

8547 readers
13 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Like a story can literally beat someone over the head with a theme or moral and people somehow come to the opposite conclusion?

It's like "Tyler Durden is so manly and cool" except every bit of media feels like it's misinterpreted like that now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] trompete@hexbear.net 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I suck at media literacy, but I have gotten better. I can't imagine learning any of it without the internet, and so over the course of my live, my personal media literacy has improved. I imagine there's lots of people like me.

On the other hand, I know a bunch of people who supposedly studied literary criticism at uni, and they're mostly a bunch of liberal Zionist (including literal genocide apologia) and other such reactionary crap, and so I can only conclude that the main thing they are taught in these classes is propaganda and sophistry, and not how to actually critically read anything.

A couple of decades ago, these educated morons would have had a near monopoly on literary opinions, while the unwashed masses had no say. So, no, I do not think, at all, that people have gotten worse overall in media literacy.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

On the other hand, I know a bunch of people who supposedly studied literary criticism at uni, and they're mostly a bunch of liberal Zionist (including literal genocide apologia) and other such reactionary crap, and so I can only conclude that the main thing they are taught in these classes is propaganda and sophistry, and not how to actually critically read anything.

Some people get a degree to learn, some people get a degree so they can insist that their interpretation of things is the "correct" one inherently because they are smarter than people who didn't go to uni.

[–] MayoPete@hexbear.net 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I think most people go to college these days for the higher wages / better jobs that supposedly comes with the degree. Whether you actually learn anything while there is secondary.

[–] Wheaties@hexbear.net 8 points 1 week ago

If money weren't a concern, I think I'd spend a decade just taking whatever classes interested me.

But there's no degree or accreditation I particularly want, so I ain't about to pay for that shit.

[–] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 8 points 1 week ago

For something like a degree in "media analysis" though? I doubt anyone studying that expects a job to come out of it.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 9 points 1 week ago

When that's what university is mostly pushing, that's what people who don't question learn.