Unit 4 Outcome 2 requires students to use arguments, evidence, and ideas to analyse and evaluate the contemporary media landscape. This means engaging with competing theoretical positions, drawing on current examples, and constructing evidence-based analytical responses.
Arguments:
- Agenda-setting research (McCombs and Shaw, 1972) demonstrates that media coverage determines which issues the public considers important — media does not tell people what to think, but what to think about
- Cultivation theory (Gerbner) shows cumulative media exposure shapes perception of social reality
- Contemporary evidence: Cambridge Analytica’s use of Facebook data to target political advertising during the 2016 US election demonstrates that microtargeted media can influence political behaviour
- Algorithmic amplification of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic shaped public health attitudes and behaviour
Counter-arguments:
- Media effects are difficult to isolate from other social influences (family, education, peer groups)
- Audiences apply oppositional and negotiated readings that resist preferred messages
- Effects are variable across different audience groups and contexts
Arguments:
- Uses and Gratifications research shows audiences actively select media to serve their needs — they are not passive recipients
- Social media enables audiences to contest, reframe, and counter mainstream media narratives
- Participatory culture (Jenkins) demonstrates audiences co-create meaning, remix content, and produce their own narratives
- Consumer power: audiences can and do force media institutions to change content, representations, and policies through organised pressure
Counter-arguments:
- Audience ‘choices’ are constrained by algorithmic curation — the appearance of choice masks structural limitation
- Media literacy is unequally distributed — audiences with lower media literacy may be more susceptible to influence
- Participatory culture primarily benefits those with digital access, skills, and cultural capital
| Example | What It Demonstrates |
|---|---|
| Cambridge Analytica / Facebook (2016) | Targeted media can influence political decision-making at scale |
| #MeToo movement | Social media enables collective audience action to contest dominant narratives |
| Rupert Murdoch’s editorial influence | Media ownership concentrates narrative power; editorial decisions reflect owner interests |
| COVID-19 infodemic (WHO term) | Misinformation spread via social media had measurable public health consequences |
| Streaming algorithms (Netflix) | Platform recommendation shapes viewing behaviour and normalises particular types of content |
| Indigenous media in Australia (NITV) | Alternative media institutions can provide counter-narratives to mainstream representation |
Effective analytical arguments in VCE Media:
1. State a position clearly at the outset
2. Support with specific evidence — name the example, explain what it demonstrates
3. Apply a theoretical framework — name the theory and show how it explains the evidence
4. Acknowledge counter-evidence or competing perspectives
5. Conclude by reasserting the position in light of the evidence
EXAM TIP: VCAA examination questions on media influence and agency typically ask students to ‘discuss’, ‘evaluate’, or ‘analyse’ — these command words require more than description. They require you to weigh evidence, consider multiple perspectives, and reach a defensible conclusion.
APPLICATION: Build a personal evidence bank of 5–6 contemporary examples (from the past 5 years) that illustrate different aspects of media influence and audience agency. For each, note: what it demonstrates, which theoretical framework it supports or challenges, and how you would use it in an examination response.
