Everyone knows what an Astronaut does
As a media analyst at Mediatrack, there is just one aspect of the job that is incorrigibly annoying. When renewing old acquaintances, or making new ones, the conversation reaches the same, predictable sticking point every time; “So, what do you do?”
The response “media analyst” is met with stony-faced confusion every time. From here, there are two turnings proceedings can take. With a degree of schadenfreude you can leave a prolonged silence as furrowed brows of puzzlement turn to glowing cheeks of embarrassment, or, you can try and explain the position. “Well, I analyse media output to evaluate the way a client/company is being represented.”
From here, it is not unlikely that a concurring grunt of feigned comprehension will be the end of most dialogues.
The mission to find a satisfactory, easy and quick summation of the job is akin to journeying across Middle earth to destroy a magic ring. My flatmate of a year still has no idea what I do. For this blog, I will attempt to define my job. I have set myself a fifteen word limit that will leave me with a brief statement that is not only a thorough and informative guideline, but also easily whipped out in all sorts of company.
The internet’s largest free encyclopedia is no help, defining “Media Analysis” as “part of the discipline of Public Relations Measurement.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_content_analysis
Whilst initially seeming completely useless, this definition does incorporate the idea of evaluating (or measuring) the effectiveness of public relations. The money spent on public relations is astronomical. The US Government Accountability Office recently revealed that the George Bush administration has spent over $1.6 Billion on advertising and P.R. since 2003. (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Bush_Admin._spent_over_1.6_Billion_0213.html)
That is a lot of cash. Obviously that is an erroneous example, but it demonstrates the lengths institutions are prepared to go to project the image they want. With out our merry band, who is to say this is worth it or even justifiable? Do we provide tangibility to the intangible? Or moreover, are we the last bastion of sensibility to quell the behemoth that is the PR industry? This is a good concept, inciting visions of chivalry, heroism and dragon slaying. This idea needs to be incorporated into any definition:
“I’m a media analyst; I stop PR consultants from total megalomania through charm, wit and lots of reading” (14 words).
Not very Bond. Try again:
“Media analysis is the study of media with a view to understanding an institution’s image” (15 words). I can hear prospective girlfriends, met on a night out, snoring already!
The O.E.D. defines analysis as “a detailed examination of something to interpret or explain it” and Media as “the main means of mass communication”. This is a useful starting point. “I examine the main means of mass communication in detail to interpret and explain it” (15 words).
In no way does that help clarify anything.
At the risk of giving up, the most recent example of one of these fruitless conversations was on holiday, talking to a young American woman. She told me she was a hairdresser (fair enough, she cuts hair), but after a futile five minutes trying to explain what I did for a living, it was clear I was achieving nothing in the way of clarification. The only way out was to lie: “actually, that’s wrong. I’m an astronaut and play football for Manchester United in my spare time”. Immediately, her grimace of ignorance was replaced with a broad smile. She may have known I was lying, but at least she understood what I meant.
Perhaps this is the point; I’ve been in my job now for eight months and still have so much to learn about every aspect of the business. Perhaps a simple 15 word explanation will never suffice. The easily definable, the one dimensional is commonplace and uninteresting, the mystery and intrigue created by vacuity of understanding isn’t a negative. It doesn’t make for boring conversation, it makes for fascinating learning. The unknown is always more attractive, the grass is always greener. Maybe.
The response “media analyst” is met with stony-faced confusion every time. From here, there are two turnings proceedings can take. With a degree of schadenfreude you can leave a prolonged silence as furrowed brows of puzzlement turn to glowing cheeks of embarrassment, or, you can try and explain the position. “Well, I analyse media output to evaluate the way a client/company is being represented.”
From here, it is not unlikely that a concurring grunt of feigned comprehension will be the end of most dialogues.
The mission to find a satisfactory, easy and quick summation of the job is akin to journeying across Middle earth to destroy a magic ring. My flatmate of a year still has no idea what I do. For this blog, I will attempt to define my job. I have set myself a fifteen word limit that will leave me with a brief statement that is not only a thorough and informative guideline, but also easily whipped out in all sorts of company.
The internet’s largest free encyclopedia is no help, defining “Media Analysis” as “part of the discipline of Public Relations Measurement.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_content_analysis
Whilst initially seeming completely useless, this definition does incorporate the idea of evaluating (or measuring) the effectiveness of public relations. The money spent on public relations is astronomical. The US Government Accountability Office recently revealed that the George Bush administration has spent over $1.6 Billion on advertising and P.R. since 2003. (http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Bush_Admin._spent_over_1.6_Billion_0213.html)
That is a lot of cash. Obviously that is an erroneous example, but it demonstrates the lengths institutions are prepared to go to project the image they want. With out our merry band, who is to say this is worth it or even justifiable? Do we provide tangibility to the intangible? Or moreover, are we the last bastion of sensibility to quell the behemoth that is the PR industry? This is a good concept, inciting visions of chivalry, heroism and dragon slaying. This idea needs to be incorporated into any definition:
“I’m a media analyst; I stop PR consultants from total megalomania through charm, wit and lots of reading” (14 words).
Not very Bond. Try again:
“Media analysis is the study of media with a view to understanding an institution’s image” (15 words). I can hear prospective girlfriends, met on a night out, snoring already!
The O.E.D. defines analysis as “a detailed examination of something to interpret or explain it” and Media as “the main means of mass communication”. This is a useful starting point. “I examine the main means of mass communication in detail to interpret and explain it” (15 words).
In no way does that help clarify anything.
At the risk of giving up, the most recent example of one of these fruitless conversations was on holiday, talking to a young American woman. She told me she was a hairdresser (fair enough, she cuts hair), but after a futile five minutes trying to explain what I did for a living, it was clear I was achieving nothing in the way of clarification. The only way out was to lie: “actually, that’s wrong. I’m an astronaut and play football for Manchester United in my spare time”. Immediately, her grimace of ignorance was replaced with a broad smile. She may have known I was lying, but at least she understood what I meant.
Perhaps this is the point; I’ve been in my job now for eight months and still have so much to learn about every aspect of the business. Perhaps a simple 15 word explanation will never suffice. The easily definable, the one dimensional is commonplace and uninteresting, the mystery and intrigue created by vacuity of understanding isn’t a negative. It doesn’t make for boring conversation, it makes for fascinating learning. The unknown is always more attractive, the grass is always greener. Maybe.
Tags:
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home