Topic 3: Popular Culture Studies – Bowling Green and Birmingham
Activity 5: Reading – Popular Culture Studies: Bowling Green and Birmingham
Please read the following text which introduces you Bowling Green and Birmingham
This activity is adapted from 8.3: Popular Culture Studies: Bowling Green and Birmingham in Communication Literary: An Introduction to Communication Studies by Dr. Victoria Newsom and Desiree Ann Montenegro, MA which is shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. Changes for readability, to add Canadian context, and to add illustrations as cited from other sources.
The contemporary study of popular culture emerges from the intersection of two major academic traditions: communication studies and cultural studies (Carey, 1989; Grossberg, 1993). As sociologists from the Chicago School shifted their focus away from media research, the field of mass communication became more clearly defined as a distinct academic discipline (Carey, 1996). This transition marked a move toward more systematic study of media processes, audience behaviour, and the broader societal impacts of mass communication.
A significant development in this evolution occurred when mass communication scholars began engaging with speech and rhetorical communication scholars. This collaboration led to the establishment of communication studies as a more expansive field (Harwood & Cartier, 1953). This broader discipline incorporated textual analysis and rhetorical criticism alongside traditional mass communication research, allowing for deeper examinations of media products and their cultural messages. As a result, text-based studies of media—analyzing how meaning is constructed, reinforced, or challenged within media texts—became a central approach in the academic study of popular culture.
The Birmingham School: Center for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) and Its Influence
The study of popular culture has been shaped by both scientific and behavioural audience-based analyses as well as interpretive analyses of media texts. Some interpretive approaches have been closely linked to ethnographic research, which examines how audiences engage with and interpret media messages within their social and cultural contexts. This focus on audience reception has been instrumental in understanding how media consumers actively negotiate meaning rather than passively absorbing content.
The influence of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) has extended beyond academic discourse, shaping mainstream understandings of media and culture. CCCS scholarship has contributed not only to academic research but also to consumer-based, collective, and preservation efforts aimed at documenting, analyzing, and protecting cultural practices. Today, insights from CCCS research inform a wide range of fields, from media literacy and fan studies to digital activism and cultural heritage initiatives.
Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the ideas of the Frankfurt School began influencing the fields of semiotics and rhetoric, particularly through scholars like Roland Barthes, whose semiotic theories were discussed earlier (Storey, 2018). In this approach, media products were analyzed not only for their content but also for the ways in which they function as signs that communicate deeper cultural meanings. While these studies focused on media messages and texts, they often retained the social reform goals of Critical Theory and Marxism developed by Frankfurt School scholars.
This intellectual landscape also incorporated insights from French psychoanalytic theorists and literary critics, such as Jacques Lacan and Jean-Paul Sartre, whose work laid the foundation for Postmodern and Post-Structural theories. These perspectives, which we will explore in more detail in the next unit, introduced new ways of understanding identity, ideology, and media representation (Storey, 2018; Turner, 2005).
On both sides of the Atlantic, as these academic traditions converged, two key programs emerged that would shape the field of popular culture studies (Carey, 1989; Grossberg, 1993; Storey, 2018). The first of these was established in 1964 at the University of 0 in England—the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS). As previously discussed, CCCS played a central role in developing cultural studies as a field, focusing on how media and cultural products reflect and reinforce social power structures. Popular culture studies was one of the prominent areas within this program.
The Bowling Green School: Advancing Popular Culture Studies
As interest in popular culture studies grew in the United States, scholars began developing institutional spaces for its research and preservation. In 1969, Ray Browne established what would become the Browne Popular Culture Library at Bowling Green State University (BGSU) in Ohio (Browne, 2002). Today, it remains the largest collection of popular culture artifacts produced in the United States since the 1880s (BGSU Libraries, 2018).
Browne continued expanding the field by founding the Center for Popular Culture Studies in 1970 and, shortly thereafter, the Department of Popular Culture at Bowling Green in 1973 (Brandt & Clare, 2018; Browne, 2002). This department became a major hub for popular culture scholarship, integrating interdisciplinary approaches to the study of media, literature, folklore, and everyday cultural practices.
Beyond academia, Browne played a key role in institutionalizing popular culture studies at a national level. He was instrumental in founding both the Popular Culture Association (PCA) and the American Culture Association (ACA), organizations dedicated to the scholarly study of cultural artifacts and mass media (Browne, 2002; Stevenson, 1977). These associations continue to support research on how popular culture shapes and reflects social values, politics, and identity.
In its early years, the Birmingham School maintained a strong focus on Marxist critiques of popular culture as a hegemonic force, emphasizing how mass media reinforced dominant ideologies. In contrast, the Bowling Green School took a primary-source, text-based approach, analyzing individual artifacts of popular culture to identify myths, heroes, icons, and other semiotic elements embedded in them. This method sought to uncover the deeper cultural beliefs reflected in these artifacts.
Bowling Green’s approach also took an ethnographic turn, incorporating contemporary folklore studies and exploring how audiences interacted with cultural products. Meanwhile, the Birmingham School remained primarily focused on the culture industry, examining how mass media and capitalism shaped cultural consumption.
Despite their differing methodologies, popular culture studies on both sides of the Atlantic shared a common focus on the relationship between cultural artifacts and the communication of power. Stuart Hall’s (1973, 1974) reception theory introduced a critical shift in this discourse, particularly through his concept of encoding and decoding. Hall challenged the long-held Marxist assumption that popular culture was inherently oppressive. He argued that non-White audiences did not passively accept White-dominated media but instead interpreted it critically and subversively, often challenging the normalizing tendencies of the culture industry (Adorno & Horkheimer, 1944/1946).
Simultaneously, Ray Browne advanced a different argument, asserting that popular culture artifacts deserved academic study precisely because they reached a larger portion of the public and had greater influence than the so-called great works of literature and theatre traditionally studied in English departments (Brandt & Clare, 2018; Browne, 2002). He contended that popular culture provided a more accurate reflection of American political and ideological values than elite cultural productions, further reinforcing the necessity of studying mass media and entertainment (Duncum, 1987).
Resistance and Institutionalization of Popular Culture Studies
In both the United Kingdom and the United States, academic resistance to popular culture studies emerged within traditional disciplines. Some scholars viewed the movement as a threat to the established hierarchy of knowledge:
In some established academic departments, this movement clearly constitutes a threat from within. It is one thing to have to contend with those forces of mass communication which rage untrammeled outside of the walls of academia. It is another to be challenged by one’s colleagues. A scholar who has, for example, spent his life studying the works of Beethoven does not take kindly to the suggestion that a study of the Beatles should have an academic priority comparable to that accorded Beethoven (Stevenson, 1977).
Despite such criticism, supporters of popular culture studies argued that the pervasive influence of media and entertainment justified the field’s academic legitimacy. They maintained that analyzing popular culture was essential for understanding societal values, identity formation, and mass communication (Brandt & Clare, 2018; Browne, 2002; Stevenson, 1977; Storey, 2018).
In the United States, Browne’s scholarship helped inspire the development of similar programs in Communication Studies, English, History, and American Studies at institutions such as Michigan State University, the University of Chicago, Western Kentucky University, and the University of Maryland. This expansion was followed by the integration of popular culture studies into media and communication programs, including at the University of Southern California’s film school and the Annenberg School for Communication Studies (Mintz, 1983; Stevenson, 1977).
Popular culture studies today encompass many fields of study, particularly in the humanities and social sciences. Media studies and communication continue to house some of the more robust approaches to the study of popular communication, especially as communication technologies continue to increase in reach, mobility, and significance to daily life.
Activity 6: Personal Reflection Journal – Reflection Question 3
Please answer the following reflection questions in any format you like (such as in writing, a video, note form, or a drawing). Save your reflection responses in one large file so you can refer to them later in the course if needed.
Reflection Question 3:
Reflect on the relationship between media, power, and audience interpretation. Choose one of the following three queries:
- Can media be both a tool for reinforcing dominant ideologies and a space for resistance? Provide an example of a contemporary media product (film, TV show, social media trend, or advertisement) that demonstrates this dual role.
- How might different critical approaches (e.g., Marxist critique, semiotics, reception theory) analyze this media product differently?
- Do you think studying popular culture is as academically valuable as studying traditional “high culture” (e.g., literature, classical music, fine art)? Why or why not?
Use concepts from Hall, Browne, or Storey and other Frankfurt School scholars to support your argument.
Media Attributions
Marino, G.C. (2020, September 18). Red white and black wall art [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/red-white-and-black-wall-art-qdVglubDXhs
Rosen, J. (2021, March 25). Vinyl record on vinyl record [Photograph]. Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/vinyl-record-on-vinyl-record-KA1WM_yQGF8
References
Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (1946). The culture industry: Enlightenment as mass deception. In S. During (Ed.), The cultural studies reader. Routledge. Original work published 1944.
BGSU Libraries. (2018). Ray and Pat Browne Library for Popular Culture Studies. https://www.bgsu.edu/library/pcl.html
Brandt, J., & Clare, C. (2018). An introduction to popular culture in the US: People, politics, and power. Bloomsbury Academic.
Browne, R. B. (2002). Conversations with scholars of American popular culture: Ray B Browne. Americana: The Journal of American Popular Culture, 1900 to Present, 1(2).
Carey, J. W. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Unwin Hyman Inc.
Carey, J. W. (1996). The Chicago School and mass communication research. In E. E. Dennis, & E. Wartella (Eds.), American communication research: The remembered history (pp. 21–38). Routledge.
Duncum, P. (1987). Approaches to cultural analysis. Journal of American Culture, 10(2), 1–15.
Grossberg, L. (1993). Can cultural studies find true happiness in communication? Journal of Communication, 43(4), 89–97.
Hall, S. (1973). Encoding and decoding in the television discourse. Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies.
Hall, S. (1974). Marx’s notes on method: A ‘Reading’ of the ‘1857 Introduction’. Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 6, 132–171.
Harwood, K., & Cartier, F. (1953). On a general theory of communication. Audiovisual Communication Review, 1(4), 227–233.
Mintz, L. E. (1983). Recent trends in the study of popular culture: Since 1971. American Studies International, 21(5), 88–104.
Newsom, V. and Montenegro, D.A. (n.d.). 8.3: Popular Culture Studies: Bowling Green and Birmingham. In Communication Literary: An Introduction to Communication Studies. https://lor.instructure.com/resources/6632a178ac5040948fc971be0511f98c
Stevenson, G. (1977). The wayward scholar: Resources and research in popular culture. Library Trends, 25(4), 779–818.
Storey, J. (2018). Cultural theory and popular culture: An Introduction (8th ed.). Routledge.
Turner, G. (2005). British cultural studies. Routledge.
