Abstract
The concept highlighted in the context waylays the interrelations on how televised messages are relayed via the dominant system to the discord prevailing labor structures and the ideology of the hegemony process in the American society. The entire process of hegemony is again extended to the ruling status whereby both rulers and the ruled parties encounter psychological motivation through attaining material physical and psychological rewards. The sense of hegemony globally sails in the mass of common sense reproduced and explicitly resembling the generated sense of understanding in the development of the economy. In most cases, it is evident that in liberal capitalist societies, there is always a lack of devoted hegemonic functions which play no role in instilling hegemonic work. This process has turned out to be of an entire cultural industry accompanied by the education system in the entertainment and production sector. This is of great significance in the gearing up and relaying of a convulsive hegemonic ideology.
Todd Gittin is the author of The Prime Time Ideology: The Hegemonic Process in Television Entertainment. He is an American communication scholar, writer, novelist, sociologist, and private intellectual fellow who has managed to write up fourteen books. He is considered to be the professor of journalism and sociology at the same time the chairperson of the communication program at Columbia University. The book entitled the prime time ideology: the hegemonic process in television entertainment is based on the formal convention support of the hegemonic structure in the entertainment zone of American television. The title provides a fundamental approach to the problems related to the control of ideology with the guidance of ideological hegemony (Gittin250).
Ideological Hegemony process based on Gramsci theory
Considering the contemplative mass media production in the United States, it is clearly evident that this is one sector of close intellectual impulse on the promotion of ideological production. In American television, the concept of ideology is conveyed in different perspectives that result in great changes in the television programs that are broadcast. The attempt of explaining various sources and information that gears to the revolutionary process of the ideology in America is focused under various theories under social and psychological interrogation. There being no elaborate and solid theory of hegemony, the process entails specified historical conditions and social structural integration of the source thus delimiting strengths and weaknesses of the ideological hegemony process.
Since the period of the diminishing process of the New Left system that occurred in the 70s, a certain paradigm has evolved leading to the translation of Antonio Gramsci’s writings in the prison as stated by Gittin (253). It is in this paradigm that a resolved domain has emerged on the history of media movement remitting the sensitivity to work on media-oriented issues. However, the concept was not well ingested thus becoming too much explicit to Gramsci who was the first person to pioneer the specification of the concept in relation to the context of the modern Marxist. This was presented by Gramsci in ambiguity state with fragmented writings after being eliminated from a fascist lock-in prison. During that period Gramsci was in an impulsive pain of attaining censorship and at the same physically ill. This was in accordance with the condemned imprisonment held on him for a period of nine years after which he passed away.
Before Gramsci’s death, he filled innumerable notebooks in the search of understanding natural status such as the factors that attributed to the rise of the working class in northern Italy immediately after the First World War. This explanation was extended in search of an answer as to why the working class system in Italy during that period of ideological hegemony was not revolutionarily necessitated and more so why most of such cases went on managing to defeat the fascism with regard to Gittin (251). With the attitude of neglecting the securing force of state’s power, Gramsci’s sensational power of delimiting the working class was consciously welcomed with the surety of issue on whether and when the working class ought to confront the bourgeois conformity of its position in the world.
In relation to Gramsci’s conceptual perspective, hegemony becomes the fundamental ruling class or integrated coalitions to form alliances that dominate over different subordinate categorical groups on the basis of developing elaborate ideology that penetrates into the sense of daily routine. This is a practice that is considered to be of a systematic order in the mass consent engineering to the developed order. The idea that is clearly drawn from this statement is that there is no clear-cut distinction between the hegemony mechanism and the coercion mechanism in the mass entertainment context. Instead, the hold of hegemony upholds the coercion element with regard to the force of coercion over the domineering reinforcement and the presupposing elements pertaining to hegemony (Gittin254).
Ideological Hegemony and Coercion
In any given community, hegemony and coercion are intertwined in one code Gittin elaborated on the basics of the hegemony and the notion of the entire process in determining the effectiveness in the analysis of culture popularly related to the entertainment phenomenon. With regard to that paraphernalia, it is clearly expressed that hegemony at the end emerges to be the process of combining both parties that are either dominated or dominating (dominated and dominator). The entire process of hegemony is again extended to the ruling status whereby both rulers and the ruled parties encounter psychological motivation through attaining material physical and psychological rewards. The sense of hegemony globally sails in the mass of common sense reproduced and explicitly resembling the generated sense of understanding in the development of the economy.
In most cases, it is evident that in liberal capitalist societies, there is always a lack of devoted hegemonic functions which play no role in instilling hegemonic work. This process has turned out to be of an entire cultural industry accompanied by the education system in the entertainment and production sector. This is of great significance in the gearing up and relaying of a convulsive hegemonic ideology. The media industry in this sense is basically manipulated by the top corporate members and political elites imparting influence on the cultural industry in the attempt of centering people to the social world. Similarly, the ruling coalition of the fractionated class in terms of the social world is greatly dependent on the institutions that are necessary for the shaping of the hegemony ideology. This naturist practice is considered to be of a systematic order in the mass consent engineering to the developed order. The idea that is clearly drawn from this statement is that there is no clear-cut distinction between the hegemony mechanism and the coercion mechanism in the mass entertainment context. Instead, the hold of hegemony upholds the coercion element with regard to the force of coercion over the domineering reinforcement and the presupposing elements pertaining to hegemony with regard to (Gittin267).
Work Cited
Gittin, Todd. Prime Time Ideology: The Hegemonic Process in Television Entertainment. Los Angeles: University of California press. 2000.