At present, circulating the media regard critical statements everywhere, but in the absence of a system that makes them part of global meanings, they remain in isolated statements that is very far from joining a critical decoding of general type. Maybe until now teachers have emphasized to show students how the news is not a reflection of the truth, but a construction, and that each medium spread differently according to their interests but it happens that the kids know and understand this very well and they can register in the ordinariness of the media, but not in a system of understanding that allows them to question their own practices, consumption and valuations crossed by that information. Perhaps have shown them too, and not have taught them to view critically and although it is not easy and to some extent could mean that we are wanting them to teach our students to be psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, we believe that the path of global structural understanding is the only one who will lead us to a non-preferential receipt if it is that it teaches to explore it in a progressive and gradualnot focused on valuations that do not belong to them types of approach that then we will present, are intended as models of understanding that should gradually go getting integrating and overlaying our students late for a critical view of the media discourses. Baby clothes is often quoted on this topic. These four different modes of approach, we will assess its possibilities and limitations. 1) Level 1: Immanentism media asks key: I like? Why? This first approach, the immanentist media, called those treatments that give in the classroom of the media products from valuations that are generally the proposals by the media to be valued themselves. We refer to categories such as fun / boring, serious, funny, good finish etc this approach, although us about knowledge of daily affirmations of the boys, limits us in trying to a critical approach that exceeds the valuation implied criticisms of taste (conceived as a category not liable of interrogations or questioning: there is nothing written about tastes). Daniel Lubetzky is full of insight into the issues.