Category talk:Media

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should this category be fitted into Category:Technology instead of Category:Culture? Category:Mass media is already in Category:Culture. Walden 22:53, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)

I think the dedication to storage media is not helpful. There are plenty of communications media that are not mass media. Charles Matthews 17:03, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps you could you add some examples of these? Personally, I think the content of Category:Mass media should be converted to this category, and leave all kind of special media things in sub-categories of it. Something should be done with this category, thats for sure. regards, Walden 17:22, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC)

I think "mass media" deserves to be its own category. The word "media" is much broader. Maurreen 14:50, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, the term media covers mass media also. Most readers will associate this word first with this publication/broadcasting term, not the technological storage/communication concepts. That was what this category change was about. If you feel there is a need for a sub-category called mass media, you can implement that, or help to clean-up this category. regards, Walden 15:29, 2004 Oct 4 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion discussion archive

An archived deletion discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_July_31#Media-related_categories.

[edit] reopening this category

yes, it is my fault. but interactive media and locative media are media (in the sense of media of communication) and still not "mass media". the "mass" in "mass media" alone shows clearly that there are media that are not "mass media". i agree to the charles mathews that there are communication media that are not mass media. think of mcluhan and his examples of media (e.g. currency and roads). think of letters and media art projects. i am for re-opening the category "media" and re-establishing a wiki page on "media" instead of having only "mass media" with references to "non-mass media" (and undeniably speech is not the least important medium).

there is academic discourse over media that goes beyond mass media. it should be reflected in wikipedia.yes, it is my fault. but interactive media and locative media are media (in the sense of media of communication) and still not "mass media". the "mass" in "mass media" alone shows clearly that there are media that are not "mass media". i agree to the charles mathews that there are communication media that are not mass media. think of mcluhan and his examples of media (e.g. currency and roads). think of letters and media art projects. i am for re-opening the category "media" and re-establishing a wiki page on "media" instead of having only "mass media" with references to "non-mass media" (and undeniably speech is not the least important medium). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinpi (talk • contribs)

The mass media category should be directed here. Otherwise, the false implications are that media isn't important unless it is applied to the masses. Oicumayberight (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)