Devoted readers of mine will be aware I am keeping tabs of the ever-growing Marxist and Leftist prevalence in modern academia (see here, here and here) and today I bring you another indictment of our wonderful education system. Most people are aware of the influence of Marxism and Leftism in the Humanities, particularly Gender Studies and the such-like but, it is also rife in Media Studies.
According to the Collyer’s College website, “Media Studies encourages you to think critically about the messages you receive daily from the mass media” yet, rather than actually think critically, students are taught to utilize Marxist critical thinking. There is an issue of representation in the media – there are those who are being oppressed and their “message” needs telling (remember, in the Marxist’s mind, everything is about power and oppression).
Consider the below paragraphs, sent to me by a former student of the college:
“I haven’t experienced the extent of bias prevalent in media studies anywhere else. In AS, in particular, the victimhood complex is literally unavoidable because a good chunk of the exam questions on the WJEC MS1 syllabus are entirely devoted to representation of social groups. All past papers are available online for reference. Every year we will be asked on the paper to discuss the representation of one social group. My teacher specifically spent disproportionate amounts of time ‘analysing’ multiple, dozens, of ads about how absolutely everything is racist, sexist, ageist, or too patriotic (eg James Bond movies). He went on a complete rant for about half the lesson about how Nigel Farage is racist, like what does that teach us?
When revealing the bias of British education, a lot of critics totally ignore media studies. They focus on the social sciences like sociology and gender studies.
I would say media studies is the most biased subject because any complaint goes as valid It is entirely subjective. If you can make some stretch of a claim, deeming a certain group like black people or women to be marginalised in the advert, it is accepted without question. Objectivity is dead.”
The stench of Adorno thinking is worrying to say the least and this is not limited to the one college, this thinking is widespread. Theodor Adorno defined a concept called the “authoritarian personality” which was premised on the idea that Christianity, Capitalism and the traditional family cause a person to become susceptible to fascism and racism. Ergo, to hold these (Western) views is to be on the road to fascistic and racist behaviours. To counter the creation of fascism and racism, the causes and values that spawn racism and fascism will have to be destroyed. Thus, these ideas prevalent in Western culture are racist, sexist, nationalist, oppressive… etc.
Here, students are presented with, taught, then tested on their acceptance of the far-Left “oppressor-oppressed” dichotomy. This is unsurprising considering the class is taught by Jonathan Nunns, who also moderates for a “major awarding body” and writes for the student magazine MediaMagazine, an online and print quarterly magazine available for A-Level students with subscription websites – it is provided across the nation by The English and Media Centre. In it, Mr Nunns has written delightful articles such as Pathetic Fallacy – Representing Brexit which reads more like a political manifesto rather than a dissection of media and Brexit.
Such a quote of it is:
Looking for the (Br)-exit
The weeks following the leave vote were tumultuous. The Brexiteers largely evaporated, having ‘taken back control’ – in other words, having split the nation on geographic, educational, ethnic and class lines with the opposing sides viewing each other with more mistrust and loathing. Each stereotypes the other, on one side, an out of touch ‘moneyed metropolitan elite’, on the other side ‘Shrek-faced bigots’. Elsewhere, there were heavily publicised killing sprees and terrorist attacks across Europe, whilst in America, the Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump [aka, ‘The Tangerine Mussolini’] talked seriously about building a ‘beautiful’ wall to keep Mexicans out and banning Muslims from entering the USA.
The above agitprop is not limited to the printed word, Mr Nunns is known at the school for repeating these ideas in the classroom, often referring to Trump as a fascist, causing students discomfort and has given some the desire to leave. “Tangerine Mussolini”, “Fascist”, I’m not so sure Mr Nunns knows what he is talking about. Whatever your views of Trump may be, naming him a fascist is wrong.
In another article, titled What Really Happened? The Oscars 2017, he continued his political campaigning by opening with:
“You might think that in a year dominated by the awfulness and uncertainty of the Trump presidency and with the dark storm clouds of an unravelling Brexit gathering ominously, there would be little to say about the Oscars.”
If there is an opportunity to attack Trump, we’ll take it! Am I right, Mr Nunns!?
But, I digress.
The twenty-year veteran at the college, who also allegedly preaches his views to his Film Studies class, continues with his desperation to mention Trump and the evils of the right, saying “So it really mattered that Moonlight had its moment spoiled. Especially, as it turned out, in the year of Charlottesville, Trump and white nationalist/far-right resurgence, when so much social progress seemed on the cusp of reversal.” Racism is the fault of the right, Charlottesville happened, white nationalism/far-right ideas are resurging and, not only is Trump happening but, he can be lumped in with the lot of them. These are topics 100% relevant to a discussion about the Oscars last year. How these are relevant, your guess is as good as mine.
I could continue with this expedition through Mr Nunns’ work with MediaMagazine but, I lost all desire to read on when I stumbled across this delightful gem found in an article discussing the Bond film Skyfall and the relationships between Bond, Silvia and M:
Bond & Silva = Homosexual Incest??? Whatever you say, sir!
Overall, I question the legitimacy of the education supplied in the media studies classes and the legitimacy of the ‘information’ published in MediaMagazine – that it is made available to all students is worrying. Thankfully, it is not required reading. What good does a media and film studies classroom provide by filling the heads of students with far-Left agitprop!? As is par for the course, this is further evidence academia is tainted with far-Left ideology.
On a positive note, this school of thinking is limited only to the Media Studies and Film Studies classrooms and is not indicative of the entire college.
An attempt was made to reach Collyer’s College but no response was received.