Agenda Setting: The cartoonists is not telling you exactly what to think, but rather what to think about. For example, in many of our cartoons, we depict Mexican drug lords with some kind of reference to drugs and marijuana. The cartoonist is trying to get our thoughts directed to the relationship between marijuana and drug gangs. In a lot of these cartoons the artist does it successfully with little, or no words. Our thoughts are what carry on the rest of the meaning, but by the power of the drawing we are more inclined to take the side of the cartoonist.
Framing: Framing is the most used media effects theory, from what we observed. In all of our cartoons that have an image of someone currently smoking or recently done smoking marijuana, the characters are shown as being slothful and irresponsible. They are framing marijuana as being something that will make us less of a person when consuming it. Never in any of the cartoons does it show the benefits that one gets from pot in a positive light. Many cartoons only show the negative side using marijuana can have.
Cultivation: Over a long period of time if people are exposed to these kinds of cartoons, they will never vote to legalize marijuana. The majority of the cartoons that we have seen, and almost all the cartoons that we chose, give a negative perception of the effects marijuana would have on America. If people base their opinions solely off of the images they see, they will always view marijuana as being a negative law and will keep it prohibited. We also will always have the mindset that whoever smokes marijuana is foolish and doesn’t contribute to anything productive. If marijuana ever hopes to get passed it would help dramatically to start posting cartoons that shine a positive, heavenly light upon the issue.
Selective Perception: The theory states that humans “see” the world based on individual differences of upbringing, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and life experiences. Naturally, the result of these differences is that people interpret and see the world in a different light. There are two ways to view the media effect theory of selective perception pertaining to prop 19 and the legalization of marijuana. First, you may apply this to the context of the cartoonist. All cartoonists have different backgrounds, and were brought up in different situations. One artist may have negatively formed opinions on legalizing pot, based on the way he was raised, and experiences that have been called his own. A separate individual who published an editorial cartoon may have been brought up by potheads in Northern California, and may see nothing wrong with legalizing the drug. Second, you may apply the theory of selective perception to the reader. All people who view the editorial cartoons regarding prop 19 will interpret the meaning in different ways, depending on their perception, how they were raced, their race, gender, and so on.
