War of the Worlds: Blog tasks

1) What is the history and narrative behind War of the Worlds?

It's an adaption from a H.G wells novel from 1898 of the same name. 
2) When was it first broadcast and what is the popular myth regarding the reaction from the audience?

Broadcasted on the 30th of October 1938, the myth being that thousands of New Yorkers fled their home, resulting in the one of the first examples of mass hysteria 
3) How did the New York Times report the reaction the next day?

NY times reported it as "Radio listeners in panic, taking war drama as fact"
4) How did author Brad Schwartz describe the the broadcast and its reaction?

Schwartz described the broadcast as not purely exaggerated, and instead stated that it gave an insight into how audiences engage with media. The whole event was also the very first example of viral media taking effect
5) Why did Orson Welles use hybrid genres and pastiche and what effect might it have had on the audience?

He took pastiche from the original novel which set in the Victorian era. Welles believing that this was boring had changed the sci-fi novel to fit the media conventions of that time; with these two factors included the end result was not only entertaining, but also very convincing 
6) How did world events in 1938 affect the way audiences interpreted the show?

news about Hitlers plans to start a new world war also gave an air of legitimacy to the show
7) Which company broadcast War of the Worlds in 1938?

CBS
8) Why might the newspaper industry have deliberately exaggerated the response to the broadcast?

At the time of broadcast, radio was still a relatively new form of media, and as an attempt to try and scares listeners from radio, newspapers exaggerated the reaction.
9) Does War of the Worlds provide evidence to support the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory?

It does to an extent, since some audiences choose to take the broadcast literal, but at the end of the day, not everyone who was listening was fooled. 

10) How might Gerbner's cultivation theory be applied to the broadcast?

Cultivation theory is the theory that people become more susceptible to what the media tells them the more they consume it. This applies to the WoW broadcast because audiences became familiar with the conventions of a radio broadcast e.g. the cut aways for emergency broadcasts; this made the audience far more susceptible.  

11) Applying Hall's Reception Theory, what could be the preferred and oppositional readings of the original broadcast?

Prefered:

the broadcast is an example of why you should not believe everything you hear

Oppositional: 

It was morally wrong to take advantage of fears the people had, especially since there were fears of Hitler starting WW2

12) Do media products still retain the ability to fool audiences as it is suggested War of the Worlds did in 1938? Has the digital media landscape changed this?

I believe it's possible to still fool audiences, but it's significantly more difficult, and to do it to the same extent is practically impossible due to media literacy. e.g. a small hoax such as that we swallow spiders in our sleep was successful but was not as effective as the original WoW broadcast 


Analysis and opinion

1) Why do you think the 1938 broadcast of War of the Worlds has become such a significant moment in media history?

I believe it holds significance due to the fact that it's not only the very first example of a mass hysteria related to a media product, but it was also the first example of a viral media text 

2) War of the Worlds feels like a 1938 version of 'fake news'. But which is the greater example of fake news - Orson Welles's use of radio conventions to create realism or the newspapers exaggerating the audience reaction to discredit radio?

The over exaggeration of the effects of WoW on the public I believe is the greater example of fake news because Orson Wells states that the follwoing broadcast was a play, nothing else. The newspapers over exaggeration was intentional  

3) Do you agree with the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory? If not, was there a point in history audiences were more susceptible to believing anything they saw or heard in the media?

 I think in the early stages of media interaction, the hypodermic needle theory may have been relatively accurate, but with the increase in understanding of how the media works and the improved media literacy the chances of audiences being fooled is significantly lower than what it was before. Then again the human population is, for lack of a better word, stupid; so you never really know nowadays.

4) Has the digital media age made the Hypodermic Needle model more or less relevant? Why?

The digital age has made the Hypodermic Needle theory less relevant due to the fact that news/information/texts can be confirmed by other digital media users 

5) Do you agree with George Gerbner's Cultivation theory - that suggests exposure to the media has a gradual but significant effect on audience's views and beliefs? Give examples to support your argument.

I do believe that Gerbners Cultivation theory has some truth to it, but primarily with older audiences e.g. my grandmother is far more likely to believe a certain media text than I would since shes been viewing the media for far longer than me 

6) Is Gerbner's Cultivation theory more or less valid today than it would have been in 1938? Why?

I believe it holds relatively the same level of validity