Summary of The Kardashian Phenomenon: News Interpretation

News tropes, especially from media sources regarded as information-based, do an injustice when merely echoing celebrity-incited imagery.  That was the foundation for Amanda McClain’s article centered on how news media are responsible for the “dominant framing” of a story, which accordingly “affects how people understand culture” and in turn “form ideologies, or paradigms of understanding” that audiences use to shape their interpretation of reality (McClain 12).  McClain’s underlying contention in The Kardashian Phenomenon was to shed light on the precarious impact of broadcasting Kashardian family antics within the current media discourse.  McClain defined this discourse as “characterized as a portion of speech, either written or verbal, advocating a particular point of view and often used to position authority” (McClain 12). 

As is the case with the media discourse about the Kardashians, the media does advocate a particular point of view and positions authority, perpetrating hegemonic privilege of a segment of our society: the rich and famous.  Thereby, when news tropes showcase the antics of the Kardashians – their conspicuous consumption, prominent displays of sexuality, and moral buffoonery – but fail to interpret these as social excesses and moral travesties, news media perpetuate commodification of women, commercialization of sexuality, and degradation of behavioral standards. 

By examining the wildly popular Kardashian family, this article sought to analyze how news coverage reinforces the power of society’s rich and famous.  This reminded me of the saying “All’s fair in love and war” because while there are stringent rules that govern actions acceptable from the average citizen, anything goes when it comes to the pursuit of publicity, which leads to becoming famous (or, infamous), which leads to using one’s fame to build more fortune.

That was precisely what Kim Kardashian and siblings have done, leveraging the success of their antics on reality TV’s “Keeping Up with the Kardashians,” to wield $75,000 for a club appearance, a clothing lines at Sears, a perfume collection, etc. and parlay that all into $60 million in gross earnings for 2010.   The only factor which appears to anchor them to the rest of society is that they treasure and support their intra-family relationships (or, is that too a ploy to retain celebrity status?).  Again I go back to “All’s fair in love and war" because that one element (value of family) is used to justify otherwise questionable actions – a means of freeing the Kardashians to use resources, in this case the media, to achieve their desired goals.

What becomes infinitely clear is that the Kardashians are not to blame.  In The Kardashian Phenomenon, author Amanda McClain placed culpability at its root source – the media, whose responsibility it is to interpret news and in so doing “provide a dominant framework of understanding [for] how people understand culture” (12).  The point of reading this article was to comprehend the media’s dangerous lack of due diligence when reporting on celebrity buffoonery – calling attention to patently ridiculous but nonetheless amusing behavior – is an injustice and one to be avoided through responsible news media.  Author Amanda McClain’s perspective was not to ogle the Kardashians, but in direct opposition to appreciate the power that the media has in creating and sustaining celebrity images, whose behavior is deviant from society’s accepted norms for regular people, which privileges these icons with power and opportunity to further shape society through the power and dominance that their wealth and fame hold over others.