“The person who exited from cinema”

I would like to present a part from Yusuf Atılgan’s Aylak Adam. Yusuf Atılgan (1921-1989) is an esteemed author from Turkey. Aylak Adam (Idle Man – 1959) is the one of his novels. The story of a lonely man, C., was narrated in the nnovel. C. resembles Kafka’s and Dostoyevski’s characters. While C. is looking for love, we have a journey inside his mind.
Atılgan narrates the person who exited from cinema in a part of the book. He is depressed and he goes to cinema. When he exits from cinema, he is like another man. He is totally changed. He says “a creature that has a short existence lives at our epoch. The people from last centuries do not know it. The person who exits from cinema… the film that was watched affected him/her. It does not think about only itself. It does not think about its own benefits anymore… It lives in a harmony with people… we hope that it brings off a difficult task… but it dies in a few minutes.”
The creature dies in a few minutes because it meets with ordinary life and people outside. Atılgan thinks that if we build huge cinema theaters and they watch the same film at the same time, when they go ouside, they can change the world.
In my opinion, it is the best way to explain media effects on society. The propaganda films should be directed with the same base.
Mr. Atılgan, I am really sorry for the translation… RIP…

“İki saat sonra kalabalığın içinde , sinemadan bir dar sokağa çıkan sanki başka birisiydi.. düşünüyordu : ‘çağımızda geçmiş yüzyılların bilmediği , kısa ömürlü bir yaratık yaşıyor.. sinemadan çıkmış insan.. gördüğü film ona bir şeyler yapmış.. salt çıkarını düşünen kişi değil.. insanlarla barışık.. onun büyük işler yapacağı umulur.. ama beş-on dakikada ölüyor.. sokak sinemadan çıkmayanlarla dolu ; asık yüzleri , kayıtsızlıkları , sinsi yürüyüşleriyle onu aralarına alıyorlar , eritiyorlar..’ saatine baktı : dört buçuğa beş vardı.. ‘eve gitsem okusam..’ durağa yürüdü.. ‘bunları kurtarmanın yolunu biliyorum.. kocaman sinemalar yapmalı.. bir gün dünyada yaşayanların tümünü sokmalı bunlara.. iyi bir film görsünler.. sokağa hep birden çıksınlar..’ kafasından geçene güldü.. duraktakiler dönüp baktılar.. kadının biri kaşlarını çattı.. sokakta kendi kendine sesli gülünemeyeceğini bilmeyen yoktu.. ‘ne adamlar be.. güldüysem güldüm , size ne..’ duramadı orada , yürüdü.. eve gitmeyecek.. içindeki ‘sinemadan çıkmış kişi’yi öldürdüler.. sağ kalan sıkıntılı , kızgın.. hep ölçülü-biçimli mi davranmak gerek.. kim demiş.. başkaları onu eve gidecek sanırken o gidip bir meyhanede içecek.. yolun çivisiz yerinden karşıya geçti.. kayıp giden otomobiller duraksadılar.. bir şoför sövdü.. o duymadı..’”

Atılgan, Y. (1959), Aylak Adam. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları

Media Effects

Turkey devastated by the quake last week which showed Turkish solidarity to the world once more. Allowing for the last week’s topic, I would like to mention about two projects in which the society participated substantially. In the weekdays of last week, there was a live program stream jointly broadcast on two rival channels concurrently. The theme was based on collecting donations to the victims of the earthquake in eastern Turkey. The result was huge, thanks to many people collectively participated into this program. This case shows us TV is maybe the most crucial medium to attract people’s attention and make them contribute at hard times.
The second project was a rock concert, called ‘Rock for Van’. There have been speculations that even people abroad or non-Turkish citizens bought the tickets in order to contribute to the victims even though they might have gone to the concert place.
Turkey’s agenda is changing so constantly that one day we cry for the trapped people, one day we lose ourselves in trifling issues. At this point, the media is the tool to circulate happenings; but, on the other hand, also a kind of authority to shape our sentiments and the way we reason ourselves and the world.

Agenda Setting

Media do not tell us what to think, they tell us what to think about. Mass media which can be a newspaper, a book and television takes control of the information that we see or hear.

These are the levels of agenda setting theory:

First Level: Media uses objects or issues to influence the people what people should think about.
Second level: Media focuses on the characters of issues how people should think about. The main concept associated with the agenda setting theory is gate keeping. Gate keeping controls over the selection of content discussed in the media; Public cares mostly about the product of a media gate keeping. It is especially editors media itself is a gatekeeper.
Priming: Activity of the media in proposing the values and standards by which objects of the media attention can be judged. Media’s content will provide a lot of time and space to certain issues, making it more vivid.
To say in simple words, Media is giving utmost importance to news so that it gives people the impression that is the most important information. This is done everyday the particular news is carried as a heading or covered everyday for months.
Framing: Framing is a process of selective control. Framing talks about how people attach importance to certain

It is the fact that mass media become more powerful on the masses nowadays. For this reason, agenda setting statement enhanced and ‘how’ part is included to the definition. Thus media may also tell us how and what to think about it. Perhaps even what to do about it.

Agenda Setting Example: Actions surrounding the O.J. case and the Clinton Scandal are both excellent examples of Agenda-Setting in action.  During these historic events, the media was ever-present.  The placement of full page, color articles and top stories on news programming made it clear that Americans should place these events as important issues.  Some people believed O.J. was guilty, and others believed he was innocent.  Some believed Clinton should have been impeached, and others thought otherwise.  Therefore, the media wasn’t extremely successful in telling us what to think on these issues, but most Americans did believe these were both important issues for a long period of time.