[BloodEagle]

Courtesy of MIT.

http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Comparative-Media-Studies/CMS-603Spring-2008/CourseHome/index.htm

Course Description:

The television landscape has changed drastically in the past few years; nowhere is this more prevalent than in the American daytime serial drama, one of the oldest forms of television content. This class examines the history of these "soap operas" and their audiences by focusing on the production, consumption, and media texts of soaps. The class will include discussions of what makes soap operas a unique form, the history of the genre, current experimentation with transmedia storytelling, the online fan community, and comparisons between daytime dramas and primetime serials from 24 to Friday Night Lights, through a study of Procter & Gamble's As the World Turns.

[Mars]

And then you realize you're paying $50,000 a semester

[Angelus]

This has to be a joke.

[noodlezombie]

And then you realize you're paying $50,000 a semester

lol college.

[StarSlayer]

Depends on the content of the class rather then the subject.  If your spending your class watching Days of Our Lives for 1.5 hours a day clucking about who is boinking who then yeah its kinda stupid .  On the other hand if they are taking a serious look at analyzing the genre in context with society, marketing and development then yeah I could see how it would be a legitimate class.  Think of it this way replace soap opera with Victorian era serial publications and it's basically the same as a Lit class.  The subject matter doesn't really need to be "fancy" to provide important info, for example you could learn a lot about technological development of the home entertainment and the internet by studying the pornography industry.

[Rian]

I actually took a class last semester with a couple of grad students in MIT’s comparative media studies department. They’re among the smartest people I know, and I’ve been astounded more than a few times by their critical capacities.

Besides, if you’re trying to get a good look at culture and how it works, it’s important to look at the media people are actually consuming and not just the stuff that seems worthy to the academics.

[CP5670]

All universities are loaded with odd classes (and departments, for that matter) like this. I did one myself at one point to satisfy some requirements.

[Polpolion]

Somehow, I think that this course is deeper than meets the eye.

[Mongoose]

These are the sort of classes that can make school enjoyable, even bearable.  As a physics major, I easily count the History of Rock class I took in my last semester of senior year as the most enjoyable out of my four (and counting, I suppose) years.

[Galemp]

Besides, if you’re trying to get a good look at culture and how it works, it’s important to look at the media people are actually consuming and not just the stuff that seems worthy to the academics.

This. Marshall McLuhan would commend you. This isn't a class for people fascinated by soap operas; it's a class for people fascinated by people fascinated by soap operas.

[General Battuta]

There was a great bit of psychological research done recently.

Experimental confederates worked in South America or Africa (can't remember which) to put pro-contraceptive, pro-family planning, pro-safe-sex messages in local soap operas.

Subsequently, visits to family planning clinics skyrocketed.

Soap operas can do real good work.

[iamzack]

By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.

[General Battuta]

By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.

No, the evidence here suggests that people emulate their TV role models.

If characters in the soap operas began having a lot of unprotected sex and a lot of babies, that doesn't mean people would do that.

Be careful not to draw broad claims from a pool of data without an analysis of effect size and variance.

[IceFire]

By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.

Thats whats largely called the "hypodermic needle theory" (or magic bullet theory) and its been shown time and again to not add up properly.  TV and media in general do have influence but most theories now realize that the decision making processes of a population in relation to media are complex (everything from established tradition to people who are in effect opinion leaders).  People rarely do or emulate what they see on TV exclusively.

I've taken a few classes like the one described in the original post.  If it is presented like the classes I was in then it will be a very academic look at soap operas.  Its not likely to be a fluff course and its likely to dive into the statistics, ratings, cultural significance, gender roles, class/socioeconomic status, race, and so on.  Or at least all of those kinds of things are on the table.  When you look into media and communications...studying this sort of thing is actually very relevant academically.  But its not likely to be a great class for people who love soaps as the shows will likely be methodically pulled apart.

I remember a lecture on gender roles in TV sitcoms.  That was a challenging lecture actually.

[iamzack]

People spend so much time watching TV that it becomes their main source of infomation on everything.

[IceFire]

People spend so much time watching TV that it becomes their main source of infomation on everything.

It may seem that way but if you think about the influence of media in general then the impact of TV is not nearly the whole picture.  You have to factor in things like advertising, billboards, the rise of the internet, and more important than all of those things is that people are still social creatures and the opinions of someone you know has significant weight.  Particularly if you categorize that person as an opinion leader.

The Internet is quickly displacing the TV as a source of information.  Thats complex because the Internet has fewer gatekeepers and many more sources of information than TV does.  Its easy and relatively cheap for me as a user on the net to disseminate my message and I could do it in a very media rich sort of way with comparatively little knowledge versus me trying to get time on at TV station or run a TV station.

Also what country you're in also makes a big difference here.

EDIT: Oh and I forgot to add...its been generally thought that whenever a new media type (and ultimately a source of information) arrives on the market that it displaces the old sources of media.  This also doesn't seem to be the case.  TV never displaced radio which never displaced newspaper.  All of which still exist although in modified forms...newspaper is still very important as an authoritative source of information, however, its often now available in online format.  So I'd say that TV is not the only source.

[iamzack]

Also your socioeconomic class matters. Lower class folks use the internet for MySpace. And occasionally YouTube. They're the reason TV is still around. :P

[General Battuta]

IceFire is saying good things here.

[iamzack]

He's saying a lot of things here. I don't have my glasses.

[redsniper]

He's saying a lot of things here. Some of them even true.

Fixed.

Not that I disagree with Icefire, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity.