Ok, here's the thing, please don't fucking do this.

"Media" is a cool sounding word. It is tempting to use it as often as possible.

BUT

Remember that "media" is a plural. If you want the singular, see "medium." The proverbial entity "the media" is not one thing, it is many things.

Not one. More than one. Many.

Please remember to conjugate accordingly. Otherwise you will face the wrath of the millions of otherwise well adjusted grammatically aware people who keep a baseball bat under their beds in the secret hope that one day, someone will say "the media is" on national television one too many times and the hundredth monkey phenomenon will kick in and these people, millions of them, will spontaneously and simultaneously press out into the streets, smashing televisions through shop windows shouting "PLURAL!!! PLURAL!!!"

So, to avoid unncessary rioting, note these examples:

"The media are going to destroy you." is correct.

While "The media is going to destroy you" is incorrect. It is more than incorrect. It is offensive.

Remember: We are legion.

In Tissue Culture:


Media is the liquid that bathes the cells or tissue. It contains all the nutrients needed for cell growth and is adjusted to appropriate pH. It often looks like a delicious kool-aid type drink, but smelling it will deter anyone sane from drinking it.

For optimum cell growth the media must be changed every 2 to 3 days, or extra media must be added at the same intervals. Addition is the prefered procedure since it doesn't cause the cells to slow or stop growth as a complete change can.

Media comes as a fine powder which is reconstituted with deionized water. It is manufactured to have low moisture content, be free flowing and readily soluble, and most importantly consistant from batch to batch.

Each cell line requires a specifc medium with the proper amounts of the following ingredients in order to survive:

  • L-Glutamine
  • Sodium Bicarbonate
  • Phenol Red
  • Hank's Salts, a mixture of various salts
  • Earle's Salts, a mixture different than Hank's
  • Nonessential Amino Acids
  • a-Thioglycerol
  • b-Mercaptoethanol
  • Tryptose Phosphate Broth
  • Sodium Pyruvate
  • Glucose
  • Ribosides
  • Deoxyribosides
  • Note: no media contain all these ingerdients, they are many of the possible ingredients.

    In some cases media is ordered without certian ingredients because it is more cost effective to add them seperately. In particular, sodium barcarbonate, which changes the colour of the media I've used from yellow to red. Most cell lines also require the addition of FBS, Fetal Bovine Serum, at about 10 percent. This must be added seperately since it is sold as a frozen liquid.

    Culture media must be sterilized for use in tissue culture. This is usually done by means of a vaccum filter. Media is generally stored in glass bottles, which have been sterilized by autoclave. The media cannot be autoclaved as that would change the dissolved gas content (and therefore the pH) as well as degrade some of the chemical components of the media. A check of the sterility should be preformed before using the media to culture cells, either by a manufactured test kit, or by simply placing some media in a flask and allowing it to incubate for 5 days. The flask should then be checked under a microscope for any growth.

    Freezing Media

    Freezing media is manufactured by a few companies, or can be made with the regular medium by increasing the FBS content to 20 or more percent, and adding 10 percent DMSO, Dimethyl Sulphoxide. The DMSO does not need to be sterile because nothing ever grows in it, its toxic. This allows the cells to be frozen and thawed with mininal damage and loss. However, the DMSO is harmful to the cells, so when adding thawed cells in freezing media to a culture flask, it should be heavily diluted and changed soon after.

    The term "the media" has been used for half a century as a singular "mass noun" to refer to the agencies of mass communication. Suggesting that the word media be used in its plural form causes more problems than it solves, since the more recently-developed singular form has developed its own meaning separate from medium, which is defined as a means by which something is conveyed. Media is not the only plural word which is used as singular. For example, the word "data" can be used acceptably as plural or singular. One doesn't often ask "How many data?" and "The data show...", but rather "How much data?" and "The data shows...."

    The media form a powerful force in our society. They influence virtually all aspects of our life, for example:

    • Government elections
    • Consumer purchasing decisions
    • Consumer trends
    • How wars are fought (e.g. consider the recent coverage of the IRAQ war)
    • What sort of "news" we discuss in our daily lifes
    • etc. etc. etc.

    Who controls the media? This varies from country to country, but we have probably all heard of media moguls like Rupert Murdoch, John Mallone and Summer Redstone. The folks who control large chunks of the media industry, certainly have some influence over what kind of content gets distributed. I'd bet on that.

    And what's our most popular medium? Probably the TV. Just like Oppenheimer was not fully aware of all the "effects" of the A-Bomb, the folks who invented the TV could have not foreseen all its the "effects" either.

    Just look at what happened in Bhutan. Apparently ever since Satellite TV was introduced into this innocent place a few years back, it's crime rate has drastically shot up (from virtually nothing). Co-incidence?

    Personally, I think that the "TV" has become more of a curse than blessing due to the excessive amounts of bloody advertising. I think it's ridiculous to have ad-breaks every 5min-10min, which seems to be the norm now on most American, Australian and even British public TV channels. And bear in mind that this is just one medium that bombards us with ads...

    I think we should always bear in mind what effects the media have on us, who controls the media and what kind of stuff "they" want to feed us. At the end of the day, we should never stop to make up our own mind. How I wish to have a chat with George Orwell now :-)

    Using the most basic of definitions, media can be defined as communication applied through mediation before reaching the intended audience. The intended communication must go through a “buffer” of sorts that interferes to some degree with direct transfer of meaning from one party to another. This definition therefore can include writing, radio, television, the internet, and all of the other classic means of mediation commonly referred to in media studies.

    Unfortunately, such a definition has one key flaw: any sort of communication is inherently mediated, including direct, face-to-face communication. In this case, it is through language and non-verbal cues that meaning must pass, mediums that carry any number of potential pitfalls in misunderstanding and limitations. To use the definition offered above would therefore place any sort of communication short of telepathy under the category of “media,” which largely defeats the purposes of such a term.

    To refine the definition, then, media can be define as communication applied through mediation beyond that of face-to-face communication. Despite its own inherent problems, face-to-face communication is still seen by many as being “better” than communication that it otherwise mediated. Exactly how “direct” communication is superior to media is difficult to pin down: while it is true that media often lacks certain familiar elements that facilitate communication (particularly the more delicate dynamics involving nonverbal cues), it can often possess elements that direct communication lacks: durability of form, use of complex visual symbols, and ease of transmission to multiple parties, to name but a few. What media “lacks” may not have so much to do with efficiency, then, as much as a loss of intimacy.

    “Intimacy” in this case refers to that intangible element that is created between parties in close proximity that helps promote feelings of trust, affection, and connection. Few lovers would claim to prefer writing letters or using AIM to face-to-face encounters. Political candidates recognize the continued value of making live campaign appearances in politically strategic communities, creating intimacy both with the immediate crowd and the population they represent – though the latter still must go through media to access that intimacy.

    Which raises an important point: intimacy is still possible through media, and much of the drive towards new media technologies seems in part to originate in the desire for greater intimacy. Oftentimes this requires the introduction of new cues and ideas within the confines of the technology to replace the familiar elements of face-to-face communication that are lost in mediation; a prime example of this is the prevalence of emoticons in internet messaging. While imperfect, these added layers of intimacy serve to “humanize” media, though to what ends can be debatable, depending on what purpose the media in question is being used towards.

    Just what it can be used for is remarkably diverse: while lacking the intimacy of face-to-face conversation, media is capable of doing many things direct communication cannot. Some of these advantages are obvious, such as being able to reach significantly larger audiences and cover great distance. Other advantages are more subtle: for example, the loss of intimacy can actually be used to benefit the sender of mass media who desires to enforce conformity of understanding, worldview, desires, etc. upon large numbers. Intimacy promotes an individualized understanding of an interaction – lack of intimacy creates a situation where the receiver is more conscious of the group dynamic and is more likely to be received in a predictable fashion.

    Moreover, the desire for intimacy in media can itself be used as a tool for manipulation as well. Since tools used to simulate intimacy are imprecise and often not entirely understood, it is easier to create a false sense of intimacy to deceive the receiver. To go back to the emoticon example, it is far easier to write :) to express a false sense of happiness than it is to attempt to emote such a feeling in person. On a larger scale, advertising can take advantage of an audience’s desire for intimacy through subtle cues meant to make the viewer believe that an ad is speaking directly to them, rather than to their demographic.

    On the other hand, lack of intimacy can also allow media to serve as an agent of self-awareness and reflection. The very lack of familiar elements encourages those who take part in media to consider the very nature of communication itself as it relates to self and society, setting the stage for possible revolution (or at least reform) in the social structure.

    These potentials, whether they be positive, negative, or neutral, are inherent in all media, though it becomes particularly obvious the more new and unfamiliar the form of media is in question – hence the utopian dreams and dystopian nightmare that have emerged with the introduction of the radio, television, and Internet, each expressing in the language of the era the almost identical hopes and fears we see reflected in the potential of media. Though such potential may be exaggerated at times, the persistent discussion surrounding it suggests that the value of studying media in its continuing evolution will remain on par with the value of studying society as a whole.

    Me"di*a (?), n.,

    pl. of Medium.

     

    © Webster 1913.


    Me"di*a, n.; pl. Mediae (-&emac;). [NL., fr. L. medius middle.] Phonetics

    One of the sonant mutes β, δ, γ (b, d, g), in Greek, or of their equivalents in other languages, so named as intermediate between the tenues, π, τ, κ (p, t, k), and the aspiratae (aspirates) φ, θ, χ (ph or f, th, ch). Also called middle mute, or medial, and sometimes soft mute.

     

    © Webster 1913.

    Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.