| Richard Hofstadter's Anti-intellectualism in American Life (1963), analyzing the histories of education, religion, politics and business, demonstrated that American culture has been anti-intellectual since the early 1800s. He defined “anti-intellectualism” as “resentment and suspicion of the life of the mind and of those who are considered to represent it; and a disposition constantly to minimize the value of that life,” a phenomenon that takes many forms. Jacoby, Bloom and others have written closely-related works. Daniel Rigney's 1991 Sociological Inquiry article advanced a three-pronged, Hofstadter-based theory of American anti-intellectualism: religious anti-rationalism, populist anti-elitism, and unreflective instrumentalism. Rigney asserted that Hofstadter was remiss in not considering mass media's role(s).; European theorists (Gramsci, Foucault, Habermas, Garnham and others) have explored relationships between intellectuals, anti-intellectualism, higher education and/or the mass media. In the United States, only the relationships between higher education and intellectuals or mass media receive much attention. Hage (1956) wrote the only previous work on U.S. media's anti-intellectualism, and research on higher education, intellectuals and anti-intellectualism has almost entirely omitted media's role(s).; Three research questions are posed regarding how popular magazines generally and specifically help construct anti-intellectualism in U.S. culture, and whether they resist it. Evidence was collected from articles covering selected aspects of higher education published in five popular magazines: Reader's Digest, Time, Ladies' Home Journal (each from 1944–1998), Life (1944–1972), and Nation's Business (1972–1998). A textual analysis was conducted after slightly modifying the method used for Paper Voices: The Popular Press and Social Change, 1935–1965, by A. C. H. Smith et al.; The evidence's organization parallel's Rigney's theory. Extensive support was found for unreflective instrumentalism and populist anti-elitism, with slightly less support for religious anti-rationalism. Magazines gave more space to anti-intellectual content than to “pro-intellectual” content, and, because of their roles in modern culture, are themselves anti-intellectual institutions. Media's anti-intellectualism is dangerous to democracy, journalism, and media's own economic health. Journalism education also needs to be modified. |
