This was a pretty interesting and controversial article to consider, and most of the responses seemed to narrow and inadequate to fully express all the different factors of this subject.
I believe that the transition to digital libraries is a good thing, for many reasons. First of, the value of books has greatly decreased since the introduction of the typewriter. People purchase and dispose of unnecessary numbers of books, because they can. The widespread introduction of e-readers would mean that the value of books would increase, since they would be harder to find, and this would require less being published, yet you would still be able to pick them up at your local library. This would also be a step in reducing humanities impact on the environment, and I believe that in general that would be beneficial. People can work with limited amounts of printed material, using them in tandem with unlimited amounts of e-material.
I believe it will still be a while before e-readers will be fully integrated with out lifestyle. While it is easier to upload it than publishing it, copyrights and other hinderences are common, but i believe the economical benefits of this new technology will convince large companies to utilize this new technology. New technology, especially eink makes this a reality, instead of a conventional display, it consists of tiny black and whits particles hald in capsules that are rearranged to produce the desired image.
The social benefits of books were mentioned, eg striking up conversations with someone about a book, but I believe that in modern society, students are more likely to start a conversation about their brand of laptop rather than the books they are reading. Many people, especially students, are become more familiar with computers than books, and e-readers present an easier and more efficient method of researching than books, with familiar functions like in text searchers, and i believe this is more relateable and easier for the computer generation to handle. I support the comment that said that e-readers may be viewed as the new Model T ford in a few years, a revolutionary item that changed the way people did tasks.
I believe that once e-reader technology becomes widely popular and copyright gaps are bridged, it will easily be integrated as a part of our society, since it reflects the faster, high tech, impatient culture that we hold today.
library
Monday, 7 December 2009
Thursday, 3 December 2009
Response to New York Times article
"In the New York Times article, the author writes: 'Indeed a manipulated image, which is often more powerful than the sum of its parts, can affect not just visual perception, but opinions as well.' Reflect on this statement. What specific power do photos have to tell the truth? Are there specific guidelines that we should follow? What limitations should there be on image manipulations, posed events, and other types of fakey? What counts as manipulation, and what counts as reasonable editing, cropping or enhancement?"
Photos used to be a powerful piece of evidence, because it was a irrefutable piece of material that could display the guilt or innocent of someone much more clearly and plainly than other items of evidence. They could capture a moment in time, and display it at a later date to many more people who were not intended to see the original moment. However, with today's technology, photographs are losing much of the influence they used to have, because it is now not difficult for them to be altered to spliced together to display a false image, and it reaching the point were fake photographs can be produced with no way to detect that they have been tampered with.
It would be hard to create and enforce laws that would put limits of photo manipulation in media, because of its rampant use today, it would be similar to trying to impose prohibition in the 1920's.
The line between manipulating an image to where it is false, and reasonable editing, is hard to distinguish. I believe that the best way to ensure that people receive truth when viewing magazine and newspapers, would be to impose laws that require either a small thumbnail of the original image on the corner, or a larger image on the back of the publishing for every image that has been computer manipulated. Also, a small description of what manipulations have been performed should be mentioned, eg light darkened, cleavage enhanced, ect. While it seems unlikely this will happen, I believe it is a great way to ensure that people receive the truth about images, and don't receive false impressions about the subjects in the pictures.
It would be hard to create limitations for photo manipulation, due to the range of manipulations that can be created,and almost impossible to enforce them
Photos used to be a powerful piece of evidence, because it was a irrefutable piece of material that could display the guilt or innocent of someone much more clearly and plainly than other items of evidence. They could capture a moment in time, and display it at a later date to many more people who were not intended to see the original moment. However, with today's technology, photographs are losing much of the influence they used to have, because it is now not difficult for them to be altered to spliced together to display a false image, and it reaching the point were fake photographs can be produced with no way to detect that they have been tampered with.
It would be hard to create and enforce laws that would put limits of photo manipulation in media, because of its rampant use today, it would be similar to trying to impose prohibition in the 1920's.
The line between manipulating an image to where it is false, and reasonable editing, is hard to distinguish. I believe that the best way to ensure that people receive truth when viewing magazine and newspapers, would be to impose laws that require either a small thumbnail of the original image on the corner, or a larger image on the back of the publishing for every image that has been computer manipulated. Also, a small description of what manipulations have been performed should be mentioned, eg light darkened, cleavage enhanced, ect. While it seems unlikely this will happen, I believe it is a great way to ensure that people receive the truth about images, and don't receive false impressions about the subjects in the pictures.
It would be hard to create limitations for photo manipulation, due to the range of manipulations that can be created,and almost impossible to enforce them
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
Is Digital Truth Important?
Is digital truth important, and in what ways?
I believe digital truth is very important, but the extent to which it is important varies. With harmless examples like the pyramids being photoshoped closer together by National Geographic, there is no harm caused, even though it is misleading, a photographic "white lie".
More serious however, is for example the fashion industry abusing photoshop, and making every model in a photo-shoot appear to have have perfect features, skin, body, ect. This type of digital editing can have negative ramifications, and as we talked about in class, is accountable for many body and self esteem issues in teenagers and pre-teens today. If misleading photoshop creations can lead to endangerment of human health, and even deaths in come cases, I think that something has to be done about it. The standards being portrayed to people who read fashion magazine are often adhered to by the readers, and if the readers are trying to live up to standards set by digital editing, they are trying to live up to standards naturally unobtainable even by profession models.
I think digital truth is important because without it, we can be shown an image and misled into thinking its real, when it is really the fabrication of someone who knows how to use photoshop. This can effect people in small, seeming pointless ways, for example the unusually sexy lady sipping from the coke-cola can. Or it could be used in ways that are a lot more serious, for example people fabricating evidence in courts.
The scenarios that can be portrayed through digital manipulation is almost limitless, and this make digital truth even more important.
I believe digital truth is very important, but the extent to which it is important varies. With harmless examples like the pyramids being photoshoped closer together by National Geographic, there is no harm caused, even though it is misleading, a photographic "white lie".
More serious however, is for example the fashion industry abusing photoshop, and making every model in a photo-shoot appear to have have perfect features, skin, body, ect. This type of digital editing can have negative ramifications, and as we talked about in class, is accountable for many body and self esteem issues in teenagers and pre-teens today. If misleading photoshop creations can lead to endangerment of human health, and even deaths in come cases, I think that something has to be done about it. The standards being portrayed to people who read fashion magazine are often adhered to by the readers, and if the readers are trying to live up to standards set by digital editing, they are trying to live up to standards naturally unobtainable even by profession models.
I think digital truth is important because without it, we can be shown an image and misled into thinking its real, when it is really the fabrication of someone who knows how to use photoshop. This can effect people in small, seeming pointless ways, for example the unusually sexy lady sipping from the coke-cola can. Or it could be used in ways that are a lot more serious, for example people fabricating evidence in courts.
The scenarios that can be portrayed through digital manipulation is almost limitless, and this make digital truth even more important.
Monday, 30 November 2009
Different Writing Styles
In class, you mentioned how men enjoy stories that contain more action, while women focus more on content, and I found something that reflect that pretty well. This is (supposedly) a college writing assignment, and it shows that the female aspires for a very mellow, relaxed, and in my opinion pointless piece, while the male is doing his best for an action story.Its pretty funny, (and a bit explicit.)
Chamomile Tea
ACTUAL COLLEGE THEME PAPER - HEY I COULDN'T MAKE THIS UP
Remember the book "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"?
Well, here's a prime example offered by an English professor
at an American University.
"Today we will experiment with a new form called the tandem story.
The process is simple. Each person will pair off with the person
sitting to his or her immediate right. One of you will then write
the first paragraph of a short story. The partner will read the
first paragraph and then add another paragraph to the story. The
first person will then add a third paragraph, and so on back and
forth. Remember to reread what has been written each time in order
to keep the story coherent. There is to be absolutely NO talking
and anything you wish to say must be written on the paper. The
story is over when both agree a conclusion has been reached."
The following was actually turned in by two of my English students:
Rebecca -last name deleted, and Jim - last name deleted.
------------------------------------------------------------
STORY:
(First paragraph by Rebecca)
At first, Laurie couldn't decide which kind of tea she wanted. The
chamomile, which used to be her favorite for lazy evenings at home,
now reminded her too much of Carl, who once said, in happier times,
that he liked chamomile. But she felt she must now, at all costs,
keep her mind off Carl. His possessiveness was suffocating, and if
she thought about him too much her asthma started acting up again.
So chamomile was out of the question.
-----------------------------------------------------
(Second paragraph by Jim)
Meanwhile, Advance Sergeant Carl Harris, leader of the attack
squadron now in orbit over Skylon 4, had more important things to
think about than the neuroses of an air-headed asthmatic bimbo named Laurie with
whom he had spent one sweaty night over a year ago. "A.S. Harris to Geostation 17,
he said into his trans- galactic communicator.
"Polar orbit established. No sign of resistance so far..." But before he could sign
off, a bluish particle beam flashed
out of nowhere and blasted a hole through his ship's cargo bay. The
jolt from the direct hit sent him flying out of his seat and across
the cockpit.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
He bumped his head and died almost immediately but not before he
felt one last pang of regret for psychically brutalizing the one
woman who had ever had feelings for him. Soon afterwards, Earth
stopped its pointless hostilities towards the peaceful farmers
of Skylon 4. Congress Passes Law Permanently Abolishing War and
Space Travel," Laurie read in her newspaper one morning. The news
simultaneously excited her and bored her. She stared out the window, dreaming of her
youth, when the days had passed hurriedly and carefree, with no newspapers to read,
no television to distract
her from her sense of innocent wonder at all the beautiful things
around her. "Why must one lose one's innocence to become a woman?"
she pondered wistfully.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Little did she know, but she had less than 10 seconds to live.
Thousands of miles above the city, the Anu'udrian mothership
launched the first of its lithium fusion missiles. The dim-witted
wimpy peaceniks who pushed the Unilateral Aerospace Disarmament
Treaty through the congress had left Earth a defenseless target
for the hostile alien empires who were determined to destroy the
human race. Within two hours after the passage of the treaty
the Anu'udrian ships were on course for Earth, carrying enough
firepower to pulverize the entire planet. With no one to stop
them, they swiftly initiated their diabolical plan. The lithium
fusion missile entered the atmosphere unimpeded. The President,
in his top-secret Mobile submarine headquarters on the ocean floor
off the coast of Guam, felt the inconceivably massive explosion,
which vaporized poor, stupid Laurie and 85 million other Americans.
The President slammed his fist on the conference table. "We can't
allow this! I'm going to veto that treaty! Let's blow 'em out of
the sky!"
---------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
This is absurd. I refuse to continue this mockery of literature.
My writing partner is a violent, chauvinistic semi-literate
adolescent.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Yeah? Well, you're a self-centered tedious neurotic whose attempts
at writing are the literary equivalent of Valium. "Oh shall I have
chamomile tea? Or shall I have some other sort of F***ING TEA??? Oh
no, I'm such an air headed bimbo who reads too many Danielle Steele
novels."
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Asshole.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Bitch.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Wanker.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
sl*t.
---------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Get f***ed.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Eat s**t.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
F**K YOU - YOU NEANDERTHAL!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Go drink some tea - w***e.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Teacher)
A+ I really liked this one.
Chamomile Tea
ACTUAL COLLEGE THEME PAPER - HEY I COULDN'T MAKE THIS UP
Remember the book "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"?
Well, here's a prime example offered by an English professor
at an American University.
"Today we will experiment with a new form called the tandem story.
The process is simple. Each person will pair off with the person
sitting to his or her immediate right. One of you will then write
the first paragraph of a short story. The partner will read the
first paragraph and then add another paragraph to the story. The
first person will then add a third paragraph, and so on back and
forth. Remember to reread what has been written each time in order
to keep the story coherent. There is to be absolutely NO talking
and anything you wish to say must be written on the paper. The
story is over when both agree a conclusion has been reached."
The following was actually turned in by two of my English students:
Rebecca -last name deleted, and Jim - last name deleted.
------------------------------------------------------------
STORY:
(First paragraph by Rebecca)
At first, Laurie couldn't decide which kind of tea she wanted. The
chamomile, which used to be her favorite for lazy evenings at home,
now reminded her too much of Carl, who once said, in happier times,
that he liked chamomile. But she felt she must now, at all costs,
keep her mind off Carl. His possessiveness was suffocating, and if
she thought about him too much her asthma started acting up again.
So chamomile was out of the question.
-----------------------------------------------------
(Second paragraph by Jim)
Meanwhile, Advance Sergeant Carl Harris, leader of the attack
squadron now in orbit over Skylon 4, had more important things to
think about than the neuroses of an air-headed asthmatic bimbo named Laurie with
whom he had spent one sweaty night over a year ago. "A.S. Harris to Geostation 17,
he said into his trans- galactic communicator.
"Polar orbit established. No sign of resistance so far..." But before he could sign
off, a bluish particle beam flashed
out of nowhere and blasted a hole through his ship's cargo bay. The
jolt from the direct hit sent him flying out of his seat and across
the cockpit.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
He bumped his head and died almost immediately but not before he
felt one last pang of regret for psychically brutalizing the one
woman who had ever had feelings for him. Soon afterwards, Earth
stopped its pointless hostilities towards the peaceful farmers
of Skylon 4. Congress Passes Law Permanently Abolishing War and
Space Travel," Laurie read in her newspaper one morning. The news
simultaneously excited her and bored her. She stared out the window, dreaming of her
youth, when the days had passed hurriedly and carefree, with no newspapers to read,
no television to distract
her from her sense of innocent wonder at all the beautiful things
around her. "Why must one lose one's innocence to become a woman?"
she pondered wistfully.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Little did she know, but she had less than 10 seconds to live.
Thousands of miles above the city, the Anu'udrian mothership
launched the first of its lithium fusion missiles. The dim-witted
wimpy peaceniks who pushed the Unilateral Aerospace Disarmament
Treaty through the congress had left Earth a defenseless target
for the hostile alien empires who were determined to destroy the
human race. Within two hours after the passage of the treaty
the Anu'udrian ships were on course for Earth, carrying enough
firepower to pulverize the entire planet. With no one to stop
them, they swiftly initiated their diabolical plan. The lithium
fusion missile entered the atmosphere unimpeded. The President,
in his top-secret Mobile submarine headquarters on the ocean floor
off the coast of Guam, felt the inconceivably massive explosion,
which vaporized poor, stupid Laurie and 85 million other Americans.
The President slammed his fist on the conference table. "We can't
allow this! I'm going to veto that treaty! Let's blow 'em out of
the sky!"
---------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
This is absurd. I refuse to continue this mockery of literature.
My writing partner is a violent, chauvinistic semi-literate
adolescent.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Yeah? Well, you're a self-centered tedious neurotic whose attempts
at writing are the literary equivalent of Valium. "Oh shall I have
chamomile tea? Or shall I have some other sort of F***ING TEA??? Oh
no, I'm such an air headed bimbo who reads too many Danielle Steele
novels."
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Asshole.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Bitch.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Wanker.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
sl*t.
---------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
Get f***ed.
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Eat s**t.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Rebecca)
F**K YOU - YOU NEANDERTHAL!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
(Jim)
Go drink some tea - w***e.
--------------------------------------------------------
(Teacher)
A+ I really liked this one.
Monday, 9 November 2009
Relates to Super Size Me
I thought this article was interesting because it relates to the "Super Size Me" video we watched earlier in the year. It says that junk food, and the sugars in it have a similar response as some illicit drugs. In Super Size Me, I remember the guy feeling really depressed and slow, until he ate McDonald's and he felt fine, and this kindof proves the articles point.
http://www.health.ninemsn.com.au/healthnews/924718/junk-foods-as-addictive-as-hard-drugs
http://www.health.ninemsn.com.au/healthnews/924718/junk-foods-as-addictive-as-hard-drugs
Sunday, 1 November 2009
'Can't Stop, Won't Stop': A History of Hip-Hop
I just wanted to comment on how I think hip hop is an example of an underground culture that has been exploited by commercialism. Hip hop began as a culture, that involved most prominently the urban lower class population, and as one song by Terra Firmma describes it "A one track mind with four bad habits,its tagging, breaking, rhyming, scratching." This line states that hip hop's main factors include spray painting, breakdancing, rapping and dj-ing. Another song by Hilltop Hoods says "In 1979 hip hop was a culture, not hip hops a business." I believe that this song sums up what has happened to hip hop. Major record labels have exploited the culture, and turned it into a money making industry. This is obvious in many popular hip hop songs today, were many of the lyrics involve degrading women, and most prominently, money making. Some artists avoided this though, in a another Hilltop Hoods song it states "I could've gone the short way, the easy option, but I chose to go the long way, the streets are watching." The rapper is stating than instead of signing to a label and having to make music for money, they chose to make it by themselves. They were offered many contracts from multi million dollar labels, including Sony and Universal, but they declined. Instead they lived of welfare, put up with minimum wage jobs for years, sold music from the back of their car for many years, moved up to iTunes, and erected their own record label, acheiving major commercial success earlier this year. Many other artists I knwo have chosen to decline offers by record labels, and surprisingly enough many of them live on welfare, they would rather support the culture and make real hip hop rather than selling out and being rich, its about more than money.
Friday, 23 October 2009
Propoganda Techniques
The explanation of propaganda techniques which you required us to read was very informative. The list of techniques utilized by the media to influence opinion and avoid the truth included techniques like; Doublespeak, fear, "glittering generalities" and name calling.
I remember how the Fox documentary mention that they would rather use the word "Sharpshooter" instead of "Sniper", because of the negative connotations associated with the latter. This is an example of doublespeak, where they use words that obscure the meaning of the word. It can also be used in the opposite way, for example to assassinate a enemy leader, the term "take out" makes assassination sound not so bad.
I believe fear is also a technique often employed by politicians to get the public to do their will, the government can convince people to go to extreme measure whenever a attack or epidemic is happening. It could be possible that political parties could use the same fear to their advantage.
I remember how the Fox documentary mention that they would rather use the word "Sharpshooter" instead of "Sniper", because of the negative connotations associated with the latter. This is an example of doublespeak, where they use words that obscure the meaning of the word. It can also be used in the opposite way, for example to assassinate a enemy leader, the term "take out" makes assassination sound not so bad.
I believe fear is also a technique often employed by politicians to get the public to do their will, the government can convince people to go to extreme measure whenever a attack or epidemic is happening. It could be possible that political parties could use the same fear to their advantage.
Thursday, 22 October 2009
Advertising
I was watching MTV a week or two ago and i noticed something that i thought was pretty interesting, and ties in with the whole media consumption concept.
In Lady Gagas video "LoveGame", the video keeps showing a shot of a lady dancing out of focus, with a bottle of Campari, a "party" drink, taking up half the screen and in focus. the video is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fDwRRZ7eUo&feature=fvsre3 , with the shot occurring at 21 seconds.
I think it interesting how pop icons advertise things so blatantly like this, and it shows that advertising has entered the music industry, even during songs. Many teenagers and even pre teens listen to her music and watch her videos, which are broadcast almost non stop on MTV, and i think it would be pretty bad if they start to associate alcohol with being famous.
Its also worrying at the sexuality which Lady Gaga shows of. "lets have some fun this beat is sick, i want to take a ride on your disco stick." She is trying to promote promiscuality, basically sluttiness, and making it seem cool and popular to sleep around.
In Lady Gagas video "LoveGame", the video keeps showing a shot of a lady dancing out of focus, with a bottle of Campari, a "party" drink, taking up half the screen and in focus. the video is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fDwRRZ7eUo&feature=fvsre3 , with the shot occurring at 21 seconds.
I think it interesting how pop icons advertise things so blatantly like this, and it shows that advertising has entered the music industry, even during songs. Many teenagers and even pre teens listen to her music and watch her videos, which are broadcast almost non stop on MTV, and i think it would be pretty bad if they start to associate alcohol with being famous.
Its also worrying at the sexuality which Lady Gaga shows of. "lets have some fun this beat is sick, i want to take a ride on your disco stick." She is trying to promote promiscuality, basically sluttiness, and making it seem cool and popular to sleep around.
Anti Fox Documentary
I noticed that the documentary we watched today contained many of the elements that postman referred to when he was giving examples of how news has become entertainment. There was no extended talking done by a single person, and every so often they would include something, like an exert from Fox's programming, that made it more visually appealing. This is comparable to Postmans views about only short flashes of news occurring, before anyone has the chance to change the channel.
They also used music, especially in the last part. It was talking about how we can "rise up" against Fox, and playing corny motivational music in the background. They also had humor, perhaps unintentional, with the whole "Shut Up" segment.
Irrelevant pictures were also used. In one section where they had a person who wanted to remain anonymous talking, they had a strange machine with a changing sound bar on it which wasn't coordinated to the talking, and was just added to look impressive. They would rather put a random video clip than not have anything moving on the screen.
I think its interesting they used these techniques because without them, the video would have been extremely boring and i doubt anyone in the class would have been able to sit through it. It proves that the methods used that make news into entertainment work at making more people interested and enable them to concentrate longer. I wonder if we would be able to concentrate more if traditional news wasn't presented in the way it is, and maybe the problems the younger generations have concentrating are due to news, and other media being presented in the way it is.
They also used music, especially in the last part. It was talking about how we can "rise up" against Fox, and playing corny motivational music in the background. They also had humor, perhaps unintentional, with the whole "Shut Up" segment.
Irrelevant pictures were also used. In one section where they had a person who wanted to remain anonymous talking, they had a strange machine with a changing sound bar on it which wasn't coordinated to the talking, and was just added to look impressive. They would rather put a random video clip than not have anything moving on the screen.
I think its interesting they used these techniques because without them, the video would have been extremely boring and i doubt anyone in the class would have been able to sit through it. It proves that the methods used that make news into entertainment work at making more people interested and enable them to concentrate longer. I wonder if we would be able to concentrate more if traditional news wasn't presented in the way it is, and maybe the problems the younger generations have concentrating are due to news, and other media being presented in the way it is.
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
Norris 5
Using the “Norris 5”, find a news story online and analyze its merit according to the criteria.
Because of the video we watched on Fox News today, I went to the website of Fox News and found this story "Top White House Official Says Obama Team 'Controlled' Media Coverage During Campaign" Which is interesting because Fox is accusing someone else was controlling the media. link:
The article claims that Anita Dunn, Obamas press strategist told an overseas crowd that Barack Obama controlled every aspect, only giving information to the press if they could completely control it. It states Anita Dunn actually was in a argument with Fox News prior to the article, because she called them "opinion journalism masquerading as news."
The article seems to misconstrue some of the information. It claims that Obama preferred live interviews because it would allow only his opinion through, instead of TV editors to edit it and perhaps alter it, Fox claims that this is an example of how he would "control" the media. I believe this is not correct, and in fact Obama preferred live interviews because it prevented the Press from controlling what he wanted to portray.
The Norris 5
Informative vs. Superficial
This is more superficial. It seems to be looking for revenge on Anita Dunn rather than presenting legitimate data.
Accurate and Truthful vs. False and Deceptive
Im not sure how truthful this is, it states she said the comments regarding controlling the media to an unspecified "overseas audience". This coupled with the unsubstantial evidence used in the article make it seem as if this may have been a personal attack rather than a news story.
Objective vs. Biased
Biased, it also has negative remarks towards another of Obamas administration, without actually quoting any sources or having any legitimate information.
Pluralistic vs. Insular Viewpoint
The story is very pluralistic, if this actually occurred then it would serve as an example as to how media manipulation can effect our choices.
Balanced vs. Weighted Side
Weighted, it carries only the opinion of the writer without getting professional opinions or quotes from any of the people incolved.
Because of the video we watched on Fox News today, I went to the website of Fox News and found this story "Top White House Official Says Obama Team 'Controlled' Media Coverage During Campaign" Which is interesting because Fox is accusing someone else was controlling the media. link:
The article claims that Anita Dunn, Obamas press strategist told an overseas crowd that Barack Obama controlled every aspect, only giving information to the press if they could completely control it. It states Anita Dunn actually was in a argument with Fox News prior to the article, because she called them "opinion journalism masquerading as news."
The article seems to misconstrue some of the information. It claims that Obama preferred live interviews because it would allow only his opinion through, instead of TV editors to edit it and perhaps alter it, Fox claims that this is an example of how he would "control" the media. I believe this is not correct, and in fact Obama preferred live interviews because it prevented the Press from controlling what he wanted to portray.
The Norris 5
Informative vs. Superficial
This is more superficial. It seems to be looking for revenge on Anita Dunn rather than presenting legitimate data.
Accurate and Truthful vs. False and Deceptive
Im not sure how truthful this is, it states she said the comments regarding controlling the media to an unspecified "overseas audience". This coupled with the unsubstantial evidence used in the article make it seem as if this may have been a personal attack rather than a news story.
Objective vs. Biased
Biased, it also has negative remarks towards another of Obamas administration, without actually quoting any sources or having any legitimate information.
Pluralistic vs. Insular Viewpoint
The story is very pluralistic, if this actually occurred then it would serve as an example as to how media manipulation can effect our choices.
Balanced vs. Weighted Side
Weighted, it carries only the opinion of the writer without getting professional opinions or quotes from any of the people incolved.
Monday, 19 October 2009
Coporate Ownership
I remember you told us to write down what identifies us as unique, and then link it to corporate ownership, but we never got around to handing it in, here it is anyway:
Tv
• Entourage- owned by HBO which is owned by Time Warner
• Flight of the Conchords- owned by HBO, owned by Time Warner
Movies
• Lords of Dogtown- owned by Columbia Pictures, Owned by Sony pictures.
• Boondock Saints- Owned by Franchise Pictures, a independent company which is now bankrupt.
Music
• Hilltop Hoods- Independent with there own record label, Golden Era Records.
• Funkoars- Independent, have their own label “Peepshow Entertainment”
• Pace Won- Signed to independent record label “Row Poetix Records”
• Ciecmate- Signed to independently owned “Broken Tooth Entertainment”
Other
• Australian Flag- Owed by the country
• Rugby ball- Often made by Nike, Sherrin.
• Star of David- Not owned.
Tv
• Entourage- owned by HBO which is owned by Time Warner
• Flight of the Conchords- owned by HBO, owned by Time Warner
Movies
• Lords of Dogtown- owned by Columbia Pictures, Owned by Sony pictures.
• Boondock Saints- Owned by Franchise Pictures, a independent company which is now bankrupt.
Music
• Hilltop Hoods- Independent with there own record label, Golden Era Records.
• Funkoars- Independent, have their own label “Peepshow Entertainment”
• Pace Won- Signed to independent record label “Row Poetix Records”
• Ciecmate- Signed to independently owned “Broken Tooth Entertainment”
Other
• Australian Flag- Owed by the country
• Rugby ball- Often made by Nike, Sherrin.
• Star of David- Not owned.
You should watch a national or local news program on television and apply the criteria used in the newspaper evaluation exercise today. You should list the stories that were covered and write answers to questions 4 and 5: Did the newspapers meet the criteria for what is news? Explain.What news was relevant or useful to citizens of the local area, including young people? In what way was it useful or relevant?
I don’t have cable TV, so instead I watched a streamed version of BBC, and selected three news stories with varying subjects and relevancy. The stories I chose are;
US balloon boy case ‘was a hoax’- Which is about the recent story were a six year old boy was supposedly accidentally lifted up in a hot air balloon for two hours.
This news story is very superficial, being based an another superficial story, there is nothing really informative about it, however it may interest people to see how many people believed the bogus original story, since it displays how media can quickly and efficiently spread a fictional story.
I believe it has a more pluralistic viewpoint than the original view than the original story, since it is relevant to anyone who saw the original story. By itself, there is a very small amount of people who it effects, however it may interest people to see how many people bought the original story, since it displays how people believe the media.
It is a truthful news story, stating the facts, as you would expect from BBC.
The article is slightly biased. It had a few quotes from the police, but it lacked quotes from the family, instead the reporter only stated their side of the story, but this seems logical as they had already admitted the story was fake.
I believe this story is considered news-worthy, putting aside the news worthiness of the original story, many people would have seen it and believed it to be true. This article would serve as to show that the original story was fake, and without it people would just go on believing false news. The original story would be more interesting, “filler” entertainment news.
Iran 'doubts' over nuclear deal- Which involves the long time controversy over Iran wanting to build legitimate nuclear enrichment plants.
This story was very informative, and the situation in Iran regarding nuclear material is one which could have an impact in the world, and represents a big step forward for the country.
It seems to be a truthful article, and if it wasn’t I wouldn’t know.
It has a pluralistic viewpoint. Many people in the world are concerned about nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran, this story would interest many people over the world. It also states that Iran has a second illegitimate nuclear enrichment facility, which makes it a more interesting article.
It was very balanced and objective, stating the positions of both sides, while avoiding advocating one side. It mentioned that America was worried that nuclear weapons could be produced, as well as stating that Iran claims to have no harmful intentions.
I believe this is definitely a news worthy story, since it is a development in a long and often considered intractable conflict between countries.
And Scientists announce planet bounty- Where scientists have discovered many more planets in our galaxy.
I believe this is a pretty superficial story. There are so many planets we already are aware of, and there is no point in telling us ore have been discovered. Also, the technology used only shows very basic data, if there was evidence of a planet which could support life, it would be more informative.
The news is vague, but accurate and truthful.
There is no viewpoint to be biased towards, and no side to be weighted towards. There’s only facts in this story.
This is relevant only to a few people in the scientific community. There is not much point in knowing there are planets there, without any information about them.
I believe that this is considered news, but should only be broadcast on specific channels that have to do with astronomy and space science.
I don’t have cable TV, so instead I watched a streamed version of BBC, and selected three news stories with varying subjects and relevancy. The stories I chose are;
US balloon boy case ‘was a hoax’- Which is about the recent story were a six year old boy was supposedly accidentally lifted up in a hot air balloon for two hours.
This news story is very superficial, being based an another superficial story, there is nothing really informative about it, however it may interest people to see how many people believed the bogus original story, since it displays how media can quickly and efficiently spread a fictional story.
I believe it has a more pluralistic viewpoint than the original view than the original story, since it is relevant to anyone who saw the original story. By itself, there is a very small amount of people who it effects, however it may interest people to see how many people bought the original story, since it displays how people believe the media.
It is a truthful news story, stating the facts, as you would expect from BBC.
The article is slightly biased. It had a few quotes from the police, but it lacked quotes from the family, instead the reporter only stated their side of the story, but this seems logical as they had already admitted the story was fake.
I believe this story is considered news-worthy, putting aside the news worthiness of the original story, many people would have seen it and believed it to be true. This article would serve as to show that the original story was fake, and without it people would just go on believing false news. The original story would be more interesting, “filler” entertainment news.
Iran 'doubts' over nuclear deal- Which involves the long time controversy over Iran wanting to build legitimate nuclear enrichment plants.
This story was very informative, and the situation in Iran regarding nuclear material is one which could have an impact in the world, and represents a big step forward for the country.
It seems to be a truthful article, and if it wasn’t I wouldn’t know.
It has a pluralistic viewpoint. Many people in the world are concerned about nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran, this story would interest many people over the world. It also states that Iran has a second illegitimate nuclear enrichment facility, which makes it a more interesting article.
It was very balanced and objective, stating the positions of both sides, while avoiding advocating one side. It mentioned that America was worried that nuclear weapons could be produced, as well as stating that Iran claims to have no harmful intentions.
I believe this is definitely a news worthy story, since it is a development in a long and often considered intractable conflict between countries.
And Scientists announce planet bounty- Where scientists have discovered many more planets in our galaxy.
I believe this is a pretty superficial story. There are so many planets we already are aware of, and there is no point in telling us ore have been discovered. Also, the technology used only shows very basic data, if there was evidence of a planet which could support life, it would be more informative.
The news is vague, but accurate and truthful.
There is no viewpoint to be biased towards, and no side to be weighted towards. There’s only facts in this story.
This is relevant only to a few people in the scientific community. There is not much point in knowing there are planets there, without any information about them.
I believe that this is considered news, but should only be broadcast on specific channels that have to do with astronomy and space science.
Wednesday, 14 October 2009
Doves "Real Beauty" Campaign
Looking at Dove’s “Real Beauty” campaign, its appears as if it is a legitimate program designed to bolster the confidence of young girls who suffer from self-esteem issues, by limiting the influence that beauty stereotypes have on them. It is partnered with reputable associations like the girl scouts, and claims to have helped almost four-million young women with self esteem issues, with a target of five-million by 2010.
It includes many facts and statistics about how beauty is defined, and how unrealistic these standards have become. It features many headshots of women, who are attractive, but not supermodel attractive.
I believe that this is definatly a good concept, and I agree with all the statements the site makes about having to redefine beauty to prevent self esteem issues. However, I do wonder at the legitimacy of a program like this created by Dove, a billion dollar corporation that makes a large amount of money from people who believe they can be more attractive by using Dove’s products. If all women were satisfied with how they look, then Dove would probably eventually cease to make money. I am skeptical as to whether there is not a hidden motive behind the campaign, perhaps Dove is aimed at trying to disassociate themselves with the beauty stereotype, and so the average person who aspires to be only attractive will purchase it, intending to only look good, not perfect. Maybe Dove hopes to associate itself with a new stereotype, where beauty is not unrealistic, and this way many people will encourage its positive message, by buying Dove products, or perhaps using Dove products to enhance their natural beauty. This association could enable them to make more money in the long run, by being the first to promote realistic stereotypes they could also be known as the first to do this, and maybe a symbol that represents realism.
I doubt this campaign is completely noble, it goes against the usual unethical practices of the beauty business, and the fact that they used photoshoped models shows that they are still promoting some kind of standard. Watching the commercials for the Campaign, you can see that non of the girls in it are downright ugly, and it appears if certain aspect of some shots, for example the skin looking very clean, eyes being brighter, teeth being whiter, may have been photoshop enhanced. They are still advertising happiness and confidence, even though they are using a different technique to deliver it.
It includes many facts and statistics about how beauty is defined, and how unrealistic these standards have become. It features many headshots of women, who are attractive, but not supermodel attractive.
I believe that this is definatly a good concept, and I agree with all the statements the site makes about having to redefine beauty to prevent self esteem issues. However, I do wonder at the legitimacy of a program like this created by Dove, a billion dollar corporation that makes a large amount of money from people who believe they can be more attractive by using Dove’s products. If all women were satisfied with how they look, then Dove would probably eventually cease to make money. I am skeptical as to whether there is not a hidden motive behind the campaign, perhaps Dove is aimed at trying to disassociate themselves with the beauty stereotype, and so the average person who aspires to be only attractive will purchase it, intending to only look good, not perfect. Maybe Dove hopes to associate itself with a new stereotype, where beauty is not unrealistic, and this way many people will encourage its positive message, by buying Dove products, or perhaps using Dove products to enhance their natural beauty. This association could enable them to make more money in the long run, by being the first to promote realistic stereotypes they could also be known as the first to do this, and maybe a symbol that represents realism.
I doubt this campaign is completely noble, it goes against the usual unethical practices of the beauty business, and the fact that they used photoshoped models shows that they are still promoting some kind of standard. Watching the commercials for the Campaign, you can see that non of the girls in it are downright ugly, and it appears if certain aspect of some shots, for example the skin looking very clean, eyes being brighter, teeth being whiter, may have been photoshop enhanced. They are still advertising happiness and confidence, even though they are using a different technique to deliver it.
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
TV characters
1. Name of program- Entourage
2. Medium- TV show
3. Genre- Comedy, Drama
4. Name of Character
a. Ari Gold
b. Vincent Chase
c. Turtle
d. Sloan
e. Lloyd
5. Gender
a. Male
b. Male
c. Male
d. Female
e. Male
6. Main Character
a. Not the main character, but a large part of the show
b. The main character
c. Secondary Character
d. Backup Character
e. Secondary Character
7. Occupation
a. Agent of main character
b. Actor
c. Doesn’t work, just went back to college to get a degree.
d. Girlfriend of Eric, works as a party planner of some sort
e. Ari Gold’s’ secretary
8. Level Of education
a. Harvard Graduate, MBA from University of Michigan
b. Dropped out of High school
c. Dropped out of high school
d. College Graduate
e. MBA at Stanford Business School, and a Art Degree from Sarah Lawrence College.
9. Race
a. White
b. White
c. White
d. Filipino
e. Chinese America
10. Marital Status
a. Long term marriage
b. Single (bit of a player)
c. Just broke out of a long term relationship
d. Recently Married to Eric
e. Dating (He’s gay by the way)
11. Age
a. 30-40
b. 42
c. 32
d. 28-35
e. 40
12. Number of Children
a. 2
b. 0
c. 0
d. 0
e. 0
13. Appearance
a. Attractive, Buff
b. Attractive, Bit of a pretty boy
c. Short, bit overweight
d. Glamorous
e. Not really… Very small of stature
14. Body Type
a. Very muscular+ athletic
b. Slim, tall
c. Above average weight
d. Slim, tall
e. Average
15. Personal characteristics
a. Devious, straightforward, self reliant, dependant, intelligent, in control of situation, aggressive, slightly sexual, emotional (yells, laughs) extreme confidence, intimidating, dedicated
b. Very sexual, laid back, flirtatious, confident, humorous, dependant on his friends, laughs a lot
c. Sarcastic, dependant, emotional (cries very occasionally, laughs), object of ridicule, flirtatious, not very confident. Not the smartest of characters
d. In control, abrupt, nurturing, emotional (cries, laughs, yells, occasional whine), intelligent,, straightforward, direct, down to earth, sexual, humorous, passive
e. Object of ridicule, not very confident, explosive anger, emotional (cries, yells) intelligent, intimidated easily, passive
16. Role of the Character
a. A lead character, essential to the show,
b. Hero, main character
c. Secondary character, comedic character
d. Love interest, supporting character
e. Comedic character, backup
17. Impact of character in narrative
a. Positively effects storyline
b. Positively effects
c. No Effect
d. Positively effects
e. No effect.
It seems that all of the most influential and important characters tend to be white, male, attractive, confident and pretty sexual.
In the show, Eric is often portrayed as being a long term relationship type of guy, and he is often ridiculed and labeled "Did she take your balls as well E?." Because he wants to be in a long term relationship, his friends consider him less manly. This is also evident is one episode where the main characters breaks down and cries, and he is ridiculed non stop for a long time. This was also after a long term relationship, and the show seems to promote that being in a long term relationship reduces the masculinity of someone. The only recurring married character is Ari Gold, and there are often scenes where he is seen being pushed around and occasionally humiliated by her. It promotes the stereotype that women are needy and will end up commanding you. Vince, however is never seen in a long term relationship, and he is portrayed as the most layed back character, sleeping with different women almost every episode.
The only really obvious sterotype is Lloyd. He is a homosexual Chinese/American, and he's shown as a weak and humiliated character, "Get in here Lloyd, before I kick your ass like its Pearl Harbour."Ari regularly ridicules his race and sexuality, and this is always hilarious, even if the things he are saying would be disgraceful in real life.
2. Medium- TV show
3. Genre- Comedy, Drama
4. Name of Character
a. Ari Gold
b. Vincent Chase
c. Turtle
d. Sloan
e. Lloyd
5. Gender
a. Male
b. Male
c. Male
d. Female
e. Male
6. Main Character
a. Not the main character, but a large part of the show
b. The main character
c. Secondary Character
d. Backup Character
e. Secondary Character
7. Occupation
a. Agent of main character
b. Actor
c. Doesn’t work, just went back to college to get a degree.
d. Girlfriend of Eric, works as a party planner of some sort
e. Ari Gold’s’ secretary
8. Level Of education
a. Harvard Graduate, MBA from University of Michigan
b. Dropped out of High school
c. Dropped out of high school
d. College Graduate
e. MBA at Stanford Business School, and a Art Degree from Sarah Lawrence College.
9. Race
a. White
b. White
c. White
d. Filipino
e. Chinese America
10. Marital Status
a. Long term marriage
b. Single (bit of a player)
c. Just broke out of a long term relationship
d. Recently Married to Eric
e. Dating (He’s gay by the way)
11. Age
a. 30-40
b. 42
c. 32
d. 28-35
e. 40
12. Number of Children
a. 2
b. 0
c. 0
d. 0
e. 0
13. Appearance
a. Attractive, Buff
b. Attractive, Bit of a pretty boy
c. Short, bit overweight
d. Glamorous
e. Not really… Very small of stature
14. Body Type
a. Very muscular+ athletic
b. Slim, tall
c. Above average weight
d. Slim, tall
e. Average
15. Personal characteristics
a. Devious, straightforward, self reliant, dependant, intelligent, in control of situation, aggressive, slightly sexual, emotional (yells, laughs) extreme confidence, intimidating, dedicated
b. Very sexual, laid back, flirtatious, confident, humorous, dependant on his friends, laughs a lot
c. Sarcastic, dependant, emotional (cries very occasionally, laughs), object of ridicule, flirtatious, not very confident. Not the smartest of characters
d. In control, abrupt, nurturing, emotional (cries, laughs, yells, occasional whine), intelligent,, straightforward, direct, down to earth, sexual, humorous, passive
e. Object of ridicule, not very confident, explosive anger, emotional (cries, yells) intelligent, intimidated easily, passive
16. Role of the Character
a. A lead character, essential to the show,
b. Hero, main character
c. Secondary character, comedic character
d. Love interest, supporting character
e. Comedic character, backup
17. Impact of character in narrative
a. Positively effects storyline
b. Positively effects
c. No Effect
d. Positively effects
e. No effect.
It seems that all of the most influential and important characters tend to be white, male, attractive, confident and pretty sexual.
In the show, Eric is often portrayed as being a long term relationship type of guy, and he is often ridiculed and labeled "Did she take your balls as well E?." Because he wants to be in a long term relationship, his friends consider him less manly. This is also evident is one episode where the main characters breaks down and cries, and he is ridiculed non stop for a long time. This was also after a long term relationship, and the show seems to promote that being in a long term relationship reduces the masculinity of someone. The only recurring married character is Ari Gold, and there are often scenes where he is seen being pushed around and occasionally humiliated by her. It promotes the stereotype that women are needy and will end up commanding you. Vince, however is never seen in a long term relationship, and he is portrayed as the most layed back character, sleeping with different women almost every episode.
The only really obvious sterotype is Lloyd. He is a homosexual Chinese/American, and he's shown as a weak and humiliated character, "Get in here Lloyd, before I kick your ass like its Pearl Harbour."Ari regularly ridicules his race and sexuality, and this is always hilarious, even if the things he are saying would be disgraceful in real life.
Thursday, 8 October 2009
extra reading
Manhood on the Mat: The Problem is Not that Pro Wrestling Makes Boys
Violent. The Real Lesson of the Wildly Popular Pseudo-Sport is More Insidious
I believe that the article “Manhood on the Mat” gives sound reasoning to explain how professional wrestling has contributed to male violence, towards women and other men.
Male dominance has been a social and cultural norm in history, and this is seen in almost all cultures. The comparatively recent movements that introduced women’s rights and promotes equality, has caused some men, not all, who preferred being “in charge” to view wrestling as a definition of masculinity, where women are objectified, and brute strength, bullying and violence are promoted and encouraged.
Many children enjoy watching shows like WWF, and while it does not cause much imitative violence, it can influence them into believing that bullying and violence are part of being masculine. And in WWF, since the “tougher” man usually comes out the victor, it may cause them to aspire to be more tough, aka more of a bully. It also promotes homophobia, as the words “wimp”, which mocks the other mans masculinity, is a common insult, and this can lead children to children growing up and viewing homosexuals inferior, since they display less masculinity.
Women professional wrestling centers on scantily clad bimbos on top of each other, or the “ho-train”, where models are walked in front of the crowd. Wrestling regularly objectifies women, and this can lead children to objectifying women.
In conclusion, I believe that most of the conclusions drawn by the writer are valid, and that professional wrestling does in fact promote a ideology that violence leads to higher masculinity, and that those of less masculinity deserve less respect, even bullying. While from what I have seen, it seems only rural rednecks regularly watch wresting, but it still promotes an ideology that advocates many negative aspect, and is incompatible with many of the ideologies held by the general public. While watching professional wrestling may lead to spousal abuse, women abuse, violence and bullying, I doubt that wrestling is the cause of a majority of these cases. I believe that people outlook on masculinity and women is mainly influence by their parents, and who they grew up with and around.
Violent. The Real Lesson of the Wildly Popular Pseudo-Sport is More Insidious
I believe that the article “Manhood on the Mat” gives sound reasoning to explain how professional wrestling has contributed to male violence, towards women and other men.
Male dominance has been a social and cultural norm in history, and this is seen in almost all cultures. The comparatively recent movements that introduced women’s rights and promotes equality, has caused some men, not all, who preferred being “in charge” to view wrestling as a definition of masculinity, where women are objectified, and brute strength, bullying and violence are promoted and encouraged.
Many children enjoy watching shows like WWF, and while it does not cause much imitative violence, it can influence them into believing that bullying and violence are part of being masculine. And in WWF, since the “tougher” man usually comes out the victor, it may cause them to aspire to be more tough, aka more of a bully. It also promotes homophobia, as the words “wimp”, which mocks the other mans masculinity, is a common insult, and this can lead children to children growing up and viewing homosexuals inferior, since they display less masculinity.
Women professional wrestling centers on scantily clad bimbos on top of each other, or the “ho-train”, where models are walked in front of the crowd. Wrestling regularly objectifies women, and this can lead children to objectifying women.
In conclusion, I believe that most of the conclusions drawn by the writer are valid, and that professional wrestling does in fact promote a ideology that violence leads to higher masculinity, and that those of less masculinity deserve less respect, even bullying. While from what I have seen, it seems only rural rednecks regularly watch wresting, but it still promotes an ideology that advocates many negative aspect, and is incompatible with many of the ideologies held by the general public. While watching professional wrestling may lead to spousal abuse, women abuse, violence and bullying, I doubt that wrestling is the cause of a majority of these cases. I believe that people outlook on masculinity and women is mainly influence by their parents, and who they grew up with and around.
Tuesday, 6 October 2009
Stereotypes
Some people assert that all stereotypes are based on some measure of truth. Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?
I believe that almost all stereotypes are based on a warped version of some people part of the stereotyped group. A stereotype tends to depict the negative traits of group of people, but the stereotype is created by what is most apparent in a group. An example of this is the Arab stereotype of terrorism. Arab are a foreign people, and the average westerner will not know to much about them and their beliefs, but when they see terrorist attacks by people coming from the Middle East, they will make the connection. Before terrorism there was probably a completely different stereotype of Arabs, but because terrorism from the middle east, and the media association created between the two, “Arab Terrorists” has unfortunately become a stereotype.
Stereotypes can also be created by history, and if many members of a group display similar behavioral pattern or traits it can be developed into a stereotype. Supposedly this is how the Jewish stereotype for being good with money was developed. In Medieval Europe, jobs that required money handling and lending were considered unfit for Christians, so Jews and other minorities would have to work these jobs. This, coupled with Jews being prohibited from many other jobs in that time, set up for the Jewish Money Handling stereotype that is still widely seen today.
I believe that almost all stereotypes are based on a warped version of some people part of the stereotyped group. A stereotype tends to depict the negative traits of group of people, but the stereotype is created by what is most apparent in a group. An example of this is the Arab stereotype of terrorism. Arab are a foreign people, and the average westerner will not know to much about them and their beliefs, but when they see terrorist attacks by people coming from the Middle East, they will make the connection. Before terrorism there was probably a completely different stereotype of Arabs, but because terrorism from the middle east, and the media association created between the two, “Arab Terrorists” has unfortunately become a stereotype.
Stereotypes can also be created by history, and if many members of a group display similar behavioral pattern or traits it can be developed into a stereotype. Supposedly this is how the Jewish stereotype for being good with money was developed. In Medieval Europe, jobs that required money handling and lending were considered unfit for Christians, so Jews and other minorities would have to work these jobs. This, coupled with Jews being prohibited from many other jobs in that time, set up for the Jewish Money Handling stereotype that is still widely seen today.
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
The Merchants of Cool
1.1. “The Merchants of Cool” describes the practice of “under-the-radar” marketing, including hiring teens to log-on to chat rooms to talk up bands and recruiting college freshman to throw campus parties where they distribute marketing materials.Ironically, marketers have justified “stealth” marketing as necessary because teens have become more media savvy. Do you think that “stealth” techniques are ethical? If a marketer offered you money to log-on to chat rooms or throw a party, would you? When you are tuned in to a concert (like the hip hop concert feature in the program), or reading a message in a chat room, how important is it to know whether or not it is a commercial? Can you identify the “storytellers” behind the media you consume most often?
The documentary “The Merchants of Cool” showcases one of the most sneaky and deceitful methods of influence present today, stealth marketing. Teenagers have become aware of the media around them and the goals of the corporations sponsoring this media, and, they do not wish to be controlled and influenced by a corporation. The corporations and advertising companies are instead trying to promote their product, without revealing to the consumer that a corporation is actually sponsoring the advertisement.
Stealth marketing works by tricking the consumer into believing that the product is being advocated by one of their peers, or someone who they believe would not gain anything from advertising the product. To me, this seems like the consumer is basically being lied to, and I believe this practice is completely unethical. A common place to encounter stealth marketing is on the Internet, where people will promote a certain product acting as if they know it is worth buying from personal experience, while actually they are being paid by a corporation. The anonymity and mutual trust of the Internet facilitate stealth marketing, and many different corporations, including Sony, have made use of this advertising. Stealth marketing is also employed in many other ways, for example a celebrity being paid to spray on a cologne in public, saying its his own, or Sony Ericson paying actors to ask people to take pictures of them with the new phone, while saying what a great phone it is.
I believe that in many cases stealth marketing is tricking and essentially lying to the consumers, and unethical. While it is not too out of character for the media to employ a tactic like this, I believe people have a right to know when they are being sold something, and even compared to other types of media this is underhanded. I want to know if what I’m being told is the opinion of someone, or being presented with an advertising technique. I know the public hold the same view, because when stealth media is exposed, it can lead to a drop in sale and a public backlash, the opposite of what the company was hoping to achieve, and this happened to Sony when one if its stealth advertising techniques was exposed. I would like to think that I wouldn’t promote commercial products like this, but if someone offered me a few hundred or thousand dollars for throwing a party, I would have a hard time turning them down.
The documentary “The Merchants of Cool” showcases one of the most sneaky and deceitful methods of influence present today, stealth marketing. Teenagers have become aware of the media around them and the goals of the corporations sponsoring this media, and, they do not wish to be controlled and influenced by a corporation. The corporations and advertising companies are instead trying to promote their product, without revealing to the consumer that a corporation is actually sponsoring the advertisement.
Stealth marketing works by tricking the consumer into believing that the product is being advocated by one of their peers, or someone who they believe would not gain anything from advertising the product. To me, this seems like the consumer is basically being lied to, and I believe this practice is completely unethical. A common place to encounter stealth marketing is on the Internet, where people will promote a certain product acting as if they know it is worth buying from personal experience, while actually they are being paid by a corporation. The anonymity and mutual trust of the Internet facilitate stealth marketing, and many different corporations, including Sony, have made use of this advertising. Stealth marketing is also employed in many other ways, for example a celebrity being paid to spray on a cologne in public, saying its his own, or Sony Ericson paying actors to ask people to take pictures of them with the new phone, while saying what a great phone it is.
I believe that in many cases stealth marketing is tricking and essentially lying to the consumers, and unethical. While it is not too out of character for the media to employ a tactic like this, I believe people have a right to know when they are being sold something, and even compared to other types of media this is underhanded. I want to know if what I’m being told is the opinion of someone, or being presented with an advertising technique. I know the public hold the same view, because when stealth media is exposed, it can lead to a drop in sale and a public backlash, the opposite of what the company was hoping to achieve, and this happened to Sony when one if its stealth advertising techniques was exposed. I would like to think that I wouldn’t promote commercial products like this, but if someone offered me a few hundred or thousand dollars for throwing a party, I would have a hard time turning them down.
Monday, 28 September 2009
Advertising Exposure
3:15
During practise, see many advertisiments for addidas and nike on shoes
430
on comuputer, advertisiment: TvShack, colon cleansing tablets...., mega video, Entourage
Entourage has subtle and obvious advertiments in it, a large portion of the show has billboards ion the back grounding, advertsing cars and coke, they also all use apple appliaces, eg. ipod, mac, iphone. I have noticed that in pretty much all tv shows i watch regularly have appl products all through them, which probably means apple has a contract with many of the studios.
430
Firefox, apple, blackboard, powerschool, facebook, microsoft word, Orbit
i have an australian flag on my wall, i expect thats media
During practise, see many advertisiments for addidas and nike on shoes
430
on comuputer, advertisiment: TvShack, colon cleansing tablets...., mega video, Entourage
Entourage has subtle and obvious advertiments in it, a large portion of the show has billboards ion the back grounding, advertsing cars and coke, they also all use apple appliaces, eg. ipod, mac, iphone. I have noticed that in pretty much all tv shows i watch regularly have appl products all through them, which probably means apple has a contract with many of the studios.
430
Firefox, apple, blackboard, powerschool, facebook, microsoft word, Orbit
i have an australian flag on my wall, i expect thats media
Sunday, 20 September 2009
The Corporation vs. Ad and Ego
Question: What do you think is the impact of consumerism on our /your media environment and the public’s ability (or lack thereof) to remain informed?
After watching the documentary "The Corporation" and "The Ad and the Ego', I was exposed to a wide array of shocking information which I was not aware of. These films display how much the media has been impacted and controlled by the consumerism culture, and the motivation behind the media. Almost all of the media we are exposed to is owned by a corporation, which aims to make money by influencing the consumers. These corporations will abuse the media, incorporating millions of dollars, and whole divisions of companies into producing ads that will influence what we want, both consciously and subconsciously. “The Corporation” helped me to understand the real motives behind corporations, that while they will occasionally contribute back to the community, they are concerned mainly with profits. “The Ad and the Ego” delves into a more specific part of a corporation, how they influence consumers to purchase their products, and the techniques employed to manipulate the consumer market.
“The Corporations” displayed that while many companies will claim to be eco friendly, there is always another factor in play, and that is profit. Without making profit, the corporation will slowly cease to exist, and the more profit, the better. While most corporations will promote themselves as a lifelike character that promotes only positive aspects, for example McDonalds or Disney, but this is nothing like the actual “mind” of the corporation. Many corporations have grown to the point where they can disregard laws, and would rather dump there waste where they want and suffer the fine, than being eco friendly. This arrogance has led corporations to become very damaging to the environment, and this leads to human health problems as well. An example of this is sweatshops. Corporations like Nike will try and minimize the amount of money they have to pay to produce their products, so they will base their production line in third world countries and exploit the local citizens, paying them as low as possible, and selling to us for as high as they can. The corporations will of course not display this fact, so when we purchase a nice pair of shoes, we only see what is in front of us, not the exploitation of the environment and countries far away. We need documentaries like this to demonstrate the effects we can inadvertently have by purchasing certain products, and to encourage us to take responsibility to purchase from companies which don’t exploit.
“The Ad and the Ego” shows how much the corporations try to influence our decisions, and shows advertising as a multi billion industry by itself. Before watching us, I was obviously aware that the corporations try to influence us, however I was oblivious to the amount of thought and manipulation incorporated into the advertisements. The film shows how advertisement started out by just displaying the product, but this has become drastically warped over the years. Nowadays, The corporations basically try to advertise happiness, and we are meant to buy their product because it is associated with happiness and content. Of course, they can’t deliver this, but they try to convince us that their product is needed. They aspire to turn life into a competition, where everyone wants to be, act, look better than the next person, and they need keep spending their money to achieve this. They also try to affect us physiologically, because while many people actually watching an ad wont be effected by it, if we dredge information up while not concentrating on the ad there is a better chance it will influence us.
In conclusion, both “The Corporation” and “The Ad and the Ego” reveal a lot that I bet corporations wouldn’t want the public to know, and we need independent films like this to expose the inner working of these million dollar businesses. I learnt a lot about the corporation, and how they will manipulate the public into supporting them. Consumerism has effected out media hugely, with most of what we see in media promoting a product. These corporations aim to please us, with their products and reputation, and because of this will attempt to hide certain information, for example, exploitation of the environment and people. We need films like these to present us the real facts and help us make informed choices about what we buy and wear. We can see the corporations do not strive to satisfy us, but they aim towards profits, and we need to distrust what the corporations project to us if we want to make informed choices.
After watching the documentary "The Corporation" and "The Ad and the Ego', I was exposed to a wide array of shocking information which I was not aware of. These films display how much the media has been impacted and controlled by the consumerism culture, and the motivation behind the media. Almost all of the media we are exposed to is owned by a corporation, which aims to make money by influencing the consumers. These corporations will abuse the media, incorporating millions of dollars, and whole divisions of companies into producing ads that will influence what we want, both consciously and subconsciously. “The Corporation” helped me to understand the real motives behind corporations, that while they will occasionally contribute back to the community, they are concerned mainly with profits. “The Ad and the Ego” delves into a more specific part of a corporation, how they influence consumers to purchase their products, and the techniques employed to manipulate the consumer market.
“The Corporations” displayed that while many companies will claim to be eco friendly, there is always another factor in play, and that is profit. Without making profit, the corporation will slowly cease to exist, and the more profit, the better. While most corporations will promote themselves as a lifelike character that promotes only positive aspects, for example McDonalds or Disney, but this is nothing like the actual “mind” of the corporation. Many corporations have grown to the point where they can disregard laws, and would rather dump there waste where they want and suffer the fine, than being eco friendly. This arrogance has led corporations to become very damaging to the environment, and this leads to human health problems as well. An example of this is sweatshops. Corporations like Nike will try and minimize the amount of money they have to pay to produce their products, so they will base their production line in third world countries and exploit the local citizens, paying them as low as possible, and selling to us for as high as they can. The corporations will of course not display this fact, so when we purchase a nice pair of shoes, we only see what is in front of us, not the exploitation of the environment and countries far away. We need documentaries like this to demonstrate the effects we can inadvertently have by purchasing certain products, and to encourage us to take responsibility to purchase from companies which don’t exploit.
“The Ad and the Ego” shows how much the corporations try to influence our decisions, and shows advertising as a multi billion industry by itself. Before watching us, I was obviously aware that the corporations try to influence us, however I was oblivious to the amount of thought and manipulation incorporated into the advertisements. The film shows how advertisement started out by just displaying the product, but this has become drastically warped over the years. Nowadays, The corporations basically try to advertise happiness, and we are meant to buy their product because it is associated with happiness and content. Of course, they can’t deliver this, but they try to convince us that their product is needed. They aspire to turn life into a competition, where everyone wants to be, act, look better than the next person, and they need keep spending their money to achieve this. They also try to affect us physiologically, because while many people actually watching an ad wont be effected by it, if we dredge information up while not concentrating on the ad there is a better chance it will influence us.
In conclusion, both “The Corporation” and “The Ad and the Ego” reveal a lot that I bet corporations wouldn’t want the public to know, and we need independent films like this to expose the inner working of these million dollar businesses. I learnt a lot about the corporation, and how they will manipulate the public into supporting them. Consumerism has effected out media hugely, with most of what we see in media promoting a product. These corporations aim to please us, with their products and reputation, and because of this will attempt to hide certain information, for example, exploitation of the environment and people. We need films like these to present us the real facts and help us make informed choices about what we buy and wear. We can see the corporations do not strive to satisfy us, but they aim towards profits, and we need to distrust what the corporations project to us if we want to make informed choices.
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Media Blob #3
Sunday September 14
11-00 am
colgate, cheerios, ripcurl, listen to about 40 minutes of music, mostly independant artists
12-00
Apple, Firefox, Facebook logo, skype, Blackboard logo
1-00
lynx, scrubs, puma sign
4-00
Music, watch movie "The Bank Job"
6-00 to 12-00
read a John Girsham Novel, do homework (blackboard, firefox)
11-00 am
colgate, cheerios, ripcurl, listen to about 40 minutes of music, mostly independant artists
12-00
Apple, Firefox, Facebook logo, skype, Blackboard logo
1-00
lynx, scrubs, puma sign
4-00
Music, watch movie "The Bank Job"
6-00 to 12-00
read a John Girsham Novel, do homework (blackboard, firefox)
Monday, 14 September 2009
Comparative Article Essay
The two reviews on the movie “Super Size Me” starring Morgan Spurlock present contrasting views and feelings toward the subject. The New York Times presents the movie in a positive light, claiming it elaborates on and brings light to the current obesity “epidemic” and the causes of it. Although the movie is criticized for certain aspects, for example, being to critical of the effects of fast food, and that it can be part of a healthy diet, it is a generally favorable response. On the other hand, the TCS Daily gave “Super High Me” a very negative and derogative review, with the article being titled “A Supersized Distortion”. This review claims that the movie pointed at fast food as being the cause of Americas obesity, ignoring the other factors, for example a lack of exercise, or that any calorie dense food eaten in excess can lead to health problems.
While the movie did occasionally point to directly at fast food as being the cause of obesity, and neglecting facts like the lifestyle of Americans contributes greatly to what there weight is, TCS Daily can’t deny that only eating McDonalds bought about may detrimental effects to his health. The movie showed how McDonald’s is the nations largest fast food corporation, and how they try to influence people of all ages to eat there as much as possible. So while the article tries to take the blame of fast food for the cause of weight loss, when something consumed, advertised and even loved by some many people is shown to have such shocking health effects, it is clear that a huge amount of people are consuming something that perhaps should not be consumed by such a large percentage of the population. So even if Fast Food is not the cause of obesity, it still is clearly responsible for many health problems, and possibly an impairment of the quality of life for heavy consumers.
The New York Times seems to take the movie more seriously, and viewed as a more positive and truthful documentation. They state that the effects to his body were very detrimental, although who’s responsibility is it to eat responsibly, the corporations or the consumers?
Both articles seem to agree that fast food is bad for an individual is consumed excessively, although the effect of fast food on the nation is still contested. I believe that the New York Times review was the more correct of the two, and disregarding the effects on the nation, Fast Food does present a hugely greater health risk that people know, and I’m sure many of the constant consumers would want to change their diet if they knew of the potential consequence.
While the movie did occasionally point to directly at fast food as being the cause of obesity, and neglecting facts like the lifestyle of Americans contributes greatly to what there weight is, TCS Daily can’t deny that only eating McDonalds bought about may detrimental effects to his health. The movie showed how McDonald’s is the nations largest fast food corporation, and how they try to influence people of all ages to eat there as much as possible. So while the article tries to take the blame of fast food for the cause of weight loss, when something consumed, advertised and even loved by some many people is shown to have such shocking health effects, it is clear that a huge amount of people are consuming something that perhaps should not be consumed by such a large percentage of the population. So even if Fast Food is not the cause of obesity, it still is clearly responsible for many health problems, and possibly an impairment of the quality of life for heavy consumers.
The New York Times seems to take the movie more seriously, and viewed as a more positive and truthful documentation. They state that the effects to his body were very detrimental, although who’s responsibility is it to eat responsibly, the corporations or the consumers?
Both articles seem to agree that fast food is bad for an individual is consumed excessively, although the effect of fast food on the nation is still contested. I believe that the New York Times review was the more correct of the two, and disregarding the effects on the nation, Fast Food does present a hugely greater health risk that people know, and I’m sure many of the constant consumers would want to change their diet if they knew of the potential consequence.
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
Media consumption log no. 2
Monday September 6th
11-11:30: Wake up, watch half n hour of scrubs.Briefly ook at the newspaper and see a advertisement for some type of drink.
12-12:30- Watch an episode of family guy, fight of many pop-ups advertising different products, including software, movies, ...penis enlargement, fake hormones and spiritual guidance
12:30-2- Do Homework,every website has advertising. From colon cleansing to couch stain remover.
2-2:30- Go out, see bottles lying around advertisement coke, sprite ect. Play PS3 for an hour, Call of Duty 3
2:30-4 sleep
6: Watch a movie while eating, Mr and Mrs Smith
There was less media i encountered this day than the last blog, because it was a chill day, didnt do much or encounter much
11-11:30: Wake up, watch half n hour of scrubs.Briefly ook at the newspaper and see a advertisement for some type of drink.
12-12:30- Watch an episode of family guy, fight of many pop-ups advertising different products, including software, movies, ...penis enlargement, fake hormones and spiritual guidance
12:30-2- Do Homework,every website has advertising. From colon cleansing to couch stain remover.
2-2:30- Go out, see bottles lying around advertisement coke, sprite ect. Play PS3 for an hour, Call of Duty 3
2:30-4 sleep
6: Watch a movie while eating, Mr and Mrs Smith
There was less media i encountered this day than the last blog, because it was a chill day, didnt do much or encounter much
Tuesday, 1 September 2009
Media Blog number one
Tuesday- September 1
7:00
Listen to 20 minutes of music
7:50
Watched a few minutes of scrubs before I left, listened to the radio on the way to school
8:00
Listened to some music during free block
1:40
Was shown a youtube video during class
6:00
Watched Entourage (tv show)
This is all the voluntary media I encountered, I doubt it would be possible to write a blog detailing all the different kind of advertisement media I accidentally see and hear each day while walking around or on the internet.
7:00
Listen to 20 minutes of music
7:50
Watched a few minutes of scrubs before I left, listened to the radio on the way to school
8:00
Listened to some music during free block
1:40
Was shown a youtube video during class
6:00
Watched Entourage (tv show)
This is all the voluntary media I encountered, I doubt it would be possible to write a blog detailing all the different kind of advertisement media I accidentally see and hear each day while walking around or on the internet.
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
War of the Worlds
During class we listened to part of this 1938 radio broadcast. What were your reactions to this broadcast?
After listening to this broadcast and being told of the effects it had, I believe it demonstrates the amount of influence media has over our lives. If the media can convince so many people that aliens from mars are attacking us, then what other, less significant details could it warp without us knowing? While a stunt like this would not create the pandemonium it did back in 1938, I believe this is an example of why people have to properly understand the media, the message it conveys and its intentions.
What do you think about this statement?
I believe that this article has a valid point. The media has a substantial amount of influence over our lives, controlling much of what we see, view and hear. People have to ensure that they can perceive the real intentions of the media, and ensure that they act independently and rationally. If we were to absorb all the media presented to us, we could be coerced into behaving irrationally, without realizing it.
After listening to this broadcast and being told of the effects it had, I believe it demonstrates the amount of influence media has over our lives. If the media can convince so many people that aliens from mars are attacking us, then what other, less significant details could it warp without us knowing? While a stunt like this would not create the pandemonium it did back in 1938, I believe this is an example of why people have to properly understand the media, the message it conveys and its intentions.
What do you think about this statement?
I believe that this article has a valid point. The media has a substantial amount of influence over our lives, controlling much of what we see, view and hear. People have to ensure that they can perceive the real intentions of the media, and ensure that they act independently and rationally. If we were to absorb all the media presented to us, we could be coerced into behaving irrationally, without realizing it.
Friday, 21 August 2009
Who Owns the Media
Isaac Oliver
Miss Beno-zellio
English 11
Miss Beno-zellio
English 11
The media is not owned or controlled by a single person, entity or organization; rather, the media is an ever-changing multifaceted entity, a collaboration of many different factors and distributing techniques combined. It is possible to pinpoint the owners of certain types of media, but with others it is impossible to locate the original distributer. While no single person owns the media, the closest thing to ownership is control so who controls the media? I believe that the main factor in deciding what will be displayed in the media is the audience watching, an audience which has many different morals, views and perspectives on world issues. News programs like BBC and Al Jazeera all aim to please their audience, and give different and sometimes contradicting perspectives on news stories because their audiences have different views and expectations. So while a majority of the media is essentially owned and controlled by a few multi-billion dollar companies, for example Viacom, AOL/Time Warner, AT&T, ect, the decider of what media will be presented is the public watching. This also applies for advertising, with ads being placed in specific places designed to pique the observers’ interests, depending on a number of factors like age and culture, and the chance that the specific media will influence what they will purchase next. In this sense, the public controls where and when advertisement media is displayed, without knowing it, and may not even notice if they absorb the media which is being presented to them. An example of this is coke cola. The likely target audience for this is teenagers, who have money to burn and enjoy having a good time. To reach this audience, the company might choose to place an advertisement at the beginning of a new, popular teenager movie, hoping that teenagers will purchase their product sometime in the near future. The add would probably give of a vibe on happiness and fun, and just like that, teenagers have inadvertently chosen the time, placement and theme of the advertisement. Another example of media is video of events that would usually be taboo for filming, for example clashes between the government and the people of China. A gateway to this now comes in the form of camera phones, allowing ordinary citizens to take footage that the press wouldn’t be able to acquire. People will upload this footage to the Internet, because they know other people will want to see it, for various reasons and motives, but there is an audience non the less. I believe that where, when and how media is produced is all dependent on the audience, and if the audience ceased to pay attention to the media, consciously and sub-consciously, then the media would cease to exist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)