Media+essay+3

Is the "mook" (the stereotypically crude, adolescent male) real, or just a media construction? How about the "midriff" (the girl as sex symbol)? Do you know any "mooks" or "midriffs"? Do you think you or your friends are influenced by the MTV standard of "cool"? If so, how? Are there ways to be "cool" without copying media? How do the "mook" and "midriff" stereotypes relate to the corporate interests of the media outlets that perpetuate them (in other words, why these particular stereotypes and not some other stereotype)?

In my view there are varying degrees where the mook stereotype actually exists in real life. The overwhelming presence of the mook today however is due to the power of advertisement and subconcious control the media giants want us to think today. The Image of a hunky, thug-attitude adolescent male popularised in today's soap operas were the conjurations and ideas most teenage boys dream themselves to be, rather than what is actually present in real life. As I have stated before in Essay Two, the media will more often than not create a set of perceived flaws and values which would further the cause of Media and advertisements themselves. Images of a scrawny teenager (commonly referred to as a "Nerd") and the "cool", "hunky" and crude teenager were depicted in Negative and Positive terms respectively. As a result, people would try their best to avoid "becoming a nerd" and try their best into becoming anything "cool" and "crude" (just like the mook). It is a direct correlation to the sheer advertising and influencing powers of the media.

The Midriff meanwhile has a far more interesting back-story compared to the mook. Throughout human history Beautiful women had been prized simply because of their looks. Many cultures also perceive women as delicate sex symbols which are there to act as equal partners at best or a mere object of male passions at most. So the midriff today is just a simple extension of what was once the obsession of men in historical times with regards to sexuality. The only difference is the change of clothing and the change of technology which, as we all know modified the image of the midriff to what it is today.

Personally, I dont know any mooks or midriffs since popular culture and social stratification in Indonesia are vastly different than that of the Western World. The conservative Religious establishment in my home country had made steps in discouraging the proliferation of sex symbols. The growing rate of consumerism and Globalisation however had changed the trend. Actors, Models, Actresses, and Musicians had begun showcasing their physical looks and sensuality in mass media (including radio, television channels and the Movies). As a result of this, there is a real possibility of having a set of subcultures and Media Constructs, predominant in the Western World, to replace and/or supplant the one found today. Perhaps More 'mooks' or 'midriffs' would travel around our malls and recreational squares in the future, if the rate of Globalisation and Commercialism in the West found its' way fully to Indonesia.

Based on what I knew about my friends and acquaintances (both in real-life or in Social Networking sites), it is sufficient to say that a fair number of them are influenced by the MTV's standard of 'cool'. However, it seems that the current social and geographic conditions here did little to perpetuate the images MTV and the 'Western' mass media desired for youths around the world. Younger Generations in Indonesia are more interested in Japanese and/or Korean pop-culture than they are to the MTV and it's social constructs, due to it's more subtle standards in terms of sensual norms. But still, there are exceptions to the rule. MTV-endorsed celebrities like Lady GaGa, Adam Lambert and Justin Bieber had quite a major following here, and a fair number of my friends are die-hard fans of them (If you look at the **second part** of my essay, you will see a vivid example of that alone on the second paragraph). And the reason for the proliferation of the 'mook' and 'midriff' stereotype is none other than the vast intelligence gathering network of the 'cool hunters', which seeks information about what certain people/teenagers like and emulate 'perfect', almost utopic versions of their ideals.

As for me, I chose to play the role of the nonconformist. I don't put much attention to what is 'trendy' or 'cool' in MTV as of the moment, because I think that liking, or **//__emulating__//** a MTV trend would only serve to benefit the 'cool hunters' and the huge media corporations which perpetuate and create them for the consumption of the youth, in exchange for brief popularity from emulating a passing fad/trend. Neither do I believe in the MTV's standards of 'cool', as it is only a media construct meant to be emulated by youths to further fuel this industry. The only way to be 'cool', in my view, is to be __//**yourself**//__, in the sense that we still maintain our sense of individuality and not end up being the 'perfect clone' of the cool kid which the MTV Offers. I only like what I truly like, as opposed to liking things just because they are 'popular', 'cool', or 'trendy'. And by that I mean not to follow those standards which the MTV continually manufactured just to satiate their desire for profit from people oblivious enough to follow those trends.

In conclusion, it is easy to be 'cool' without following MTV standards. One must only be creative enough in order to remain individualistic and stay free of these media constructs and follow what they truly like, and what they strive to emulate in their hearts. They could like a certain media construct if they want to, but they should not degrade themselves into a simple 'carbon copy' of it, and instead focus on creating their own individuality while still having a media construct as an idol.


 * END OF ESSAY.**