Ideological criticism refers to a set of ideas that gives a particular account of the world, and those ideas are usually selective and seem natural and obvious (hello, hegemony!). This process studies how ideas reflect and serve interests of elites and how the ideas largely go unnoticed and unchallenged. It differs from other approaches because it’s just not looking at a text like semiotics does, but it looks at who produces it, how it’s structured and how a text interacts with life experiences.
Ideological criticism emphasizes value in understanding how media texts establish and sustain existing power relations and expose and challenge dominant ideas and values, even though such a concept can be confrontational (hello, counterhegemony!).
If ideology and political economy were both on Facebook, they’d definitely be in a relationship (not to mention they both fall under the production point of the cultural diamond).
But, on a serious note, since political economic analysis examines the role of ownership in the media and looks at how distribution shapes media texts, ideology undoubtedly has something to do with that process. Ownership is based on who is most powerful in the media industry, which in turn determines how media are produced and distributed.
Disney, for example, is a huge hegemonic power of the media conglomerates. Since the trend of deregulation became the norm, nothing is stopping Mickey Mouse and the gang from extending their global reach. (Okay, I lied. Mickey, Minnie and the others don’t really have anything to do with it, but associating the mice with the company is a hint of how big of a market they’ve become. Everybody can associate Disney with the characters, unless they’ve been living in a cave).
Disney and other conglomerates have increased their power through synergistic practices like cross production, cross promotion and cross advertising. Disney and Coca Cola are closely connected through cross advertising because there are Coca Cola machines all through Disney amusement parks. However, I wouldn’t go as far to say they are in a Facebook relationship. They’re more like acquaintances, if I had to put a label on what they are at all.
According to political economic analysts, the media serve as bullies to children. (Well, they just said the media impact children. “Bullies” was my word. But, I have justification for using it!)
In Consuming Kids: The Commercialization of Childhood, the video emphasizes what you buy is what you are. This means that not only are products marketed, but they’re considered values in society, too. Marketing industries permeate children’s lives.
Basically, marketing companies (not that I’m pointing any fingers, Seventeen magazine) take advantage of kids wanting to grow up when they’re, well, just kids! Girls who read Seventeen are younger than seventeen. (I admit, I had a subscription when I was thirteen. I tried to come up with a “but” statement, but honestly by thirteen I really didn’t think of myself as a kid anymore. Thanks, media.)
In conjunction with this argument is that of the American tween. According to the video, tweens, who used to be defined as 10-to 12 year-olds, are now between six and 12 years old. Six-year-olds are drawn to makeup and other more mature privileges usually granted to a girl who’s 12 or 13. Moreover, the market is giving right in! Libby Lu was a chain store who catered to making young girls look like rock stars, princesses or their favorite celebrities. They closed in 2009, and I can’t say I’m heartbroken.
Marketing executives also use the power of children’s persuasion to market adult products, too. Car commercials use kids as means for begging their parents to buy a certain car so they will look cool when they’re dropped off at school or soccer practice. Oh, and the best part is, parents give in to it!! My favorite is the Toyota Highlander commercial, where the kid is embarrassed to get in his parents’ car that “says, ‘hi, we’re the geek family,’” so they get the Toyota Highlander after the kid thinks that’s the cool car. It features screens for the children’s entertainment, which bothers me for the lack of communication between parents and kids these days, but I can vent about that in another blog post another time.
In Mickey Mouse Monopoly: Disney, Childhood and Corporate Power, one girl explains just how Disney films shape little children’s lives: “I just remember a comment my daughter made once. And she said, ‘Mommy, I don’t want to be racist,’ so she knows this word, ‘but why is it that dark people always doing bad things?’” So, a young child’s values are already being shaped (which is a euphemism for her brain being molded) by ideas media embeds in her. Oh wait, you mean you don’t think it’s offensive naming one of the black crows in Dumbo Jim Crow?
Means of production leads to means of power, which determines ideologies like class, patriarchy and race. According to the video, The Walt Disney Company has been a powerful force in creating childhood culture worldwide. Powerful force, bullying, whatever. The films stay with children for life, too. The video had clips of young adults in college who were singing the Disney films’ songs by heart. And, as much as I’m criticizing Disney for impacting children’s lives so much, I’m a victim, too. I can do most of the Beauty and the Beast movie by heart, and I’m turning red admitting it in print.
What you ask is the point of all of this? Not that this assignment is supposed to criticize the readers, but how can you not realize the point? (With all do respect 
). It’s important to examine media through the lens of a political economist because media is earning more power and gaining more dominance by the second in the advertising and marketing world. Because of deregulation, which is a top concern of political economists, media conglomerates like Disney are not only controlling their movies, but they’re influencing what’s on stations like ABC and ESPN because of their ownership of these stations. There’s no way anyone from infancy to someone in their 90s can say they haven’t been influenced by media’s hegemony. They may not realize it right away, but if a political economist had the opportunity to point out the media’s subliminal messages, they’d be shocked to learn how often their lives revolve around production by means of power.
