Post Twelve: The End is Near...

I have used blogs before as a personal creative outlet both for sharing my own opinions about my own personal interests and to showcase my creative works. Although I have never had to maintain a blog for educational purposes, I have posted on threads and discussion forums for a few academic classes.

It was a good review for the week’s lectures, teachings, and ideas. It also allowed the opportunity to connect the general theories to real life examples. It also was a good alternative from homework and other unnecessary busy work.

I did not really encounter many technical problems in using the blogs. Sometimes it was difficult to come up with examples or relate the concepts in order to answer the given prompts. I was constantly worried about if I had answered the question properly or thoroughly enough.

For the most part, if I had a conceptual problem, I tried to find an example given in class or in the book and come up with a similar example and describe it with my own words.

I found the more interesting blog prompts to be ones that allowed for the opportunity to connect the theories to current events or real-life occurrences. I also enjoyed the blogs that asked for different aspects of actual production process of film and television. I remember specifically the blog prompts that I enjoyed the most were the ones about the theory of hegemony, selective process, Hollywood’s star structure, and describing the different shots and camera angle techniques. I recall having a hard time with more obscure theories such as globalization and honestly, found the radio prompt a bit boring because personally I see it as it an outdated form of media.

Although sometimes I believed the blogs were a bit redundant, it was a good way to keep up with each week’s intended readings and teachings. It was definitely a better alternative to many other classes’ assigned busy-work. I believe it gave students a good outlet to take theories and teachings and relate them in a creative way through a personal space. Everyone was given essentially the same concepts and the blogs acted as a beneficial way to present a specific viewpoint or ideas about them.

I sometimes wished that the blog prompts/blogs themselves were put in a more organized outline. It seemed as though the blog prompts were thought up a bit last minute and sometimes were even changed. The email system also seemed a bit jumbled and I think it could help if they were either solidified as part of the syllabus from the beginning of the year or placed in each section’s TA’s blog. I also think that if a short example was given along with the prompt, it might help the student realize exactly what the question was asking. I also think that maybe there should be a bit more interaction with people and their blogs within each section group. It would be interesting if people actually read the other students’ blogs and commented on one another’s posts.

Permission is granted to use my blog in a paper or report.

Post Eleven: Americanize This!

Globalization is an ongoing and dynamic process in which different cultures, spheres, and parties share and influence one another through a pervasive and subtle manner. In other words, it is a way that different cultures of people connect with one another and where differences intermingle and are adapted to the other cultures respectively. It is a process that has great potential as it offers many opportunities for communication, goods, and people to intermingle and travel across boundaries.

Cultural imperialism, specifically associated to Westernization, is a prime example of globalization. It is essentially an imbalance of globalization in which instead of cultures equally dispersing their own respective ideas, thoughts, beliefs, one culture actually dominates the other one. One of the consequences of slanted imperialism is that all cultures eventually will homogenize themselves or become the same, losing its own uniqueness in the process. As media steadily and quickly flows between cultures, some critics fear that it will construct a “global village” in which the village will become Americanized in the negative sense (consumerism, materialistic, individualistic). Others believe that the global village will stay open to other cultures as different cultures share different messages. Cultural imperialism tends to have a negative connotation because it is essentially an imbalance between two groups. It does not consider the “diversity of transnational [or] national media” nor does it consider the “context of production or reception”. It sweeps over the different parties without much individual attention and without this necessary attention, it can overwhelm rather than help connecting the vast and varied groups of people.

An example from the media that illustrates this process is the exchange between American and Japanese media. There seems to be a recent fad or rise of Japanese-related culture that has permeated the American culture. Anime is definitely an example of it; there are many young teenagers who have embraced the Japanese cartoon craze by willingly consuming related products such as manga (comic books), toys, and even dressing up as their favorite characters in comic-cons. MTV had adapted its own version of a popular Japanese game-show Silent Library and so did ABC with I Survived a Japanese Game Show.

However, other aspects of the culture have not exactly been embraced but rather mocked or at least questioned. In this specific example of a Japanese commercial, there is a young girl dressed up as Little Red Riding Hood. She enters the scene and proceeds to dance and sing with a group of wildlife creatures. She then reacts when she sees a particularly well-endowed creature. Many comments on the video include how crazy the Japanese are and how their commercials do not make any sense. To some extent, their comments are reasonable. But they come from an egocentric perspective. We, Americans, are not used to these seemingly outrageous, nonsensical, and random commercials. No commercial resembling this Japanese one would ever be allowed to air on our televisions. When we see such an unfamiliar and perhaps absurd way of selling a product, we tend to take it out of context and find reasons to devalue it. In this, we consider our way the dominant way or the best way, disregarding the Japanese culture as a valid way of doing certain things.

Post Ten: M(Ad) Man

As an avid television watcher, I am constantly bombarded with advertisements that sneakily splice themselves into the most inopportune moments during my chosen shows. For the most part, I do not pay much attention to them; they are just a fact of life (unless of course, you are fortunate to have TiVo). And for the most part, advertisements follow a certain formula in order to achieve their goal of selling a certain product to a targeted audience. They use a variety of audience appeals, one of which (sex and gender persuasion) can be seen in the viral phenomenon of the most recent slew of Old Spice ads.

Many advertisements employ sex appeal or portray heightened gender roles in order to simplify its relationship or relevance to their targeted audience. In other words, advertisers will assume or follow a stereotype of either women or men and use them in order to sell their products. When a female viewer watches a makeup commercial, the advertisers are targeting their insecurities that come with a female role—that they can only be attractive when they buy and use this particular brand of makeup. When a male viewer watches a beer commercial, the advertisers will also exploit insecurities and try to portray the beer as a choice of the most masculine men. They will target the heightened gender stereotypes because it encompasses the majority of their targeted audience. For the most part, advertisers are not gender-neutral and will not accommodate those who are considered “outside” of the normal gender sphere such as homosexual or transgendered people.

The highly popular and viralized Old Spice ad plays on such an advertising ploy. It depicts a very masculine man who states that “sadly [your man] is not [him]”. However, if, you the viewer, purchases Old Spice or if the male viewer starts using Old Spice body wash, he will reach a higher level of masculinity. With this, advertisers also employ the idea or sense of aspiration: males should aspire to be the best or most masculine as possible. The Old Spice man even states that “if he stopped using lady-scented body wash”, what a emasculating shame it would be to smell like a woman! “[…] and switched to Old Spice, [your man] could smell like he is [him]”; the male viewer will never be as masculine as the one depicted in the commercial but at least he could smell like him. He then further proves his masculinity by producing “two tickets to the thing you [the woman] love” which soon changes into “diamonds” implying that with Old Spice, he is able to be the perfect man who can woo any woman, specifically the female viewer. He then solidifies the message with, “anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady”. They use this so-called highly masculine character who is trying to sell this product geared towards men by gearing it towards women. It is more likely that women will buy this Old Spice product for their significant others rather than men buying it because of the commercial.

Perhaps the success of this ad campaign comes from its satire. It seems as though the advertisers at Old Spiceare aware of the whole gender ploy and are essentially mocking it by making it overtly gender-stereotypical. Whatever the implications there are within the commercials, the Old Spice advertisers should get a raise seeing how the ad’s YouTube video has garnered close to 23 million views, a variety of spoofs, and a whole lot of attention.

Post Nine: I'll Take Three Please.

Within the standard Hollywood narrative implemented for most films, there are certain elements that can become expected from the audience. Usually with this type of movie, there is a single protagonist (the hero with whom we follow the story), goal-oriented (the protagonist has a goal that he or she wants to achieve and the pursuit of it by overcoming the obstacle propel the story forward), a three-act structure (includes an introduction, complication, and resolution), is in chronological order (events take place in order), and the end includes a clear resolution (the ending is not ambiguous and only allows a limited interpretation).

Specifically, the three-act structure allows the audience to follow a clean and clear narrative. In the first act (introduction), what the film is about is defined usually in reference to what the protagonist’s role is in the story. The second act (complication) introduces the conflict that the protagonist has to try to overcome. The third act (resolution) is supposed to resolve the conflict and conclude the story. For a standard two-hour movie, the first act is approximately 30 minutes, the second act 30 – 60 minutes and the resolution 30 minutes.

Each act peaks at its respective plot point (with two plot points and the climax in the third act). A successful plot point ends the act and escalates the story even further by complicating matters even further. They essentially act as transitions between the acts by asking a question that the other act promises to answer.

In the example of the movie Finding Nemo:

The first act introduces the characters of Marlin and his son Nemo. It illustrates the dynamics and relationship between the two characters: Marlin is very overprotective of his only son and Nemo, like any other child, can become annoyed with his father.

The first act ends when Nemo is kidnapped by underwater divers and Marlin starts his journey through the sea in order to find his son. Thus the conflict is introduced.

Along with the conflict being introduced, another key character, Dory, enters the storyline as she tags along with Marlin as he tries to reach his goal of finding Nemo (hence, the title of the movie).The entire second act is composed of Nemo trying to get back to the sea and Marlin trying to find his son as he encounters sharks, jellyfish, and other perils of the big blue ocean.

The climax in the third act is when Marlin finally reaches the dentist’s office but sees Nemo upside down (implying that he is dead). He leaves, thinking that his son is dead.

However, Nemo is actually alive and finds his way out of the dentist’s office through the pipes and gets released into the ocean.

After Nemo is trapped one last time, the conflict is resolved when he finds his father and they live happily ever after.
In summary: The first act introduced the characters (Marlin and Nemo). The second act introduced the conflict and complications that arose as the characters tried to overcome the conflict (Nemo getting kidnapped and his father Marlin trying to find his son). The third act start with the climax and ended with the resolution (Marlin thinking that his son is dead goes back home but finding out that his son is actually alive and being reunited with him).

(Screenshots taken from the movie Finding Nemo)

Post Eight: Stay Tuned!

Ah, the television. Although many critics call the television the “idiot box”, the television has attracted quite a following amongst many different audiences from the comedy-seeking Modern Family watchers to the loyal 30 Rock fans. These sitcoms tend to be only a half-hour long (with commercials), humorous in content, episodic, and consist of hyperbolic or overdramatic plots (which typically would not happen in real life). One of the characteristics of the sitcom genre is that there is usually a pattern that progresses as the show does. This pattern or cycling establishes a routine within a particular show which in a way guarantees its audience somewhat of a comfort zone or an expectation from the show. This way, the audience can sit down every week at the same time to the same network and see the same leading characters and similar plot devices and not be overly surprised at what they are viewing. By using this method, sitcoms can create a loyal following amongst viewers.

The show Weeds is a sitcom that revolves around the protagonist/antagonist (depending on the viewer's perspective) Nancy Botwin. Recently widowed and unable to afford her expensive-suburban lifestyle, she resorts to dealing marijuana. As the show progresses with additional seasons, her involvement in illegal dealings also increases from dealing marijuana to becoming involved with an underground drug cartel in Mexico. As the seasons continue, the plot thickens and the characters find themselves in increasingly difficult and even hyperbolic situations. However, the pattern stays consistent: the Botwins find themselves new ways to deal the drugs and avoid legal authorities. For example, by the start of the fourth season and the following ones, the Botwins eventually relocate to a different place because they have to run from those who are after them. In season 4, the Botwins, on the lam, move to (fictional) Ren Mar. They then move to Mexico, after Nancy finds herself involved with the mayor of Tijunana and also the person controlling the underground smuggling activity. They then race to Canada and after being turned away, find themselves in Seattle. After facing more problems from the authorities and their past in season 6, the Botwins find themselves back on the road to an off-the-road trailer park and subsequently are chased out of town. The last episode hinted that they would be heading to Copenhagen.

This pattern and cycle of finding new destinations allow the Botwins to continue their illegal shenanigans, propel the story and continue the sitcom (it would end if they were ever to get caught!) The pattern also implies that no matter how outrageous the situation may be, Nancy and her group can always find a way out and the viewers can find out simply if they stay tuned…for next week!

Post Seven: Shots, Shots, Shots...Everybody!

American Beauty is a critically acclaimed dark comedy that wonderfully depicts one’s man mid-life crisis. It also showcases a great variety of camera shots: long shot (establishing shot), middle shot, and the close-up shot.

• A long (establishing) shot does exactly what the name implies; it establishes or introduces the setting/characters/and overall and necessary information


• A medium shot is neither a long shot or close-up shot; it is something in the middle as the camera starts to focus on something in more detail


• A close-up shot is the most emotionally driven shot as the camera starts to show the more important details of the scene; usually the shot focuses only one person

In this scene, Lester Burnham, the protagonist is watching his daughter's dance performance.

The long-shot establishes that this scene is taking place in a high-school gym. His daughter is amongst the many other dancers. This shot essentially just tells the audience that the characters are in a gym and watching a dance performance.

The medium shots eventually start to pan and focus on a particular girl (who is not his daughter) who has caught Lester's eye. These two sequential shots show Lester's point of view (POV); he is not watching his own daughter's performance but is much more interested in this other girl, Angela Hayes.

The (extreme) close-up shot, which is eventually paired with an intense spot-light (and coincidentally, the disappearance of the other girls) shows the intimacy between Lester and his imaginary encounter with this particular girl. She has grabbed his attention and is the focus of Lester's POV. This is also the most emotionally-stimulating shot because the audience can actually feel the tension within the scene as Lester lusts after Angela.

Another example of these shots can be seen in the classic and possibly most well-known scene of the movie. In this scene, Lester is fantasizing about Angela naked in a field of roses.

Here, the viewing audience is introduced to the scene with both a long-shot and a high-angle shot. It establishes that the setting is in a bedroom with Lester. The high-angle is usually utilized when the director wants to take the power away from the subject. Here it is used to show Lester and his wife in bed (with his wife turned away from him) to imply that we are invading Lester's privacy.

A close-up shot of Lester tells us that he is in fact awake. Rose petals start to fall from above him and his fantasy starts. It cuts to...


A room with rose petals and a female figure in the middle as seen in this long-shot. With the quick cut from Lester and the rose petals still falling from above, the audience is introduced to Lester's fantasy and his POV again.

A medium shot slowly pans and focuses on the female figure in the middle.

It is revealed in this close-up shot that the female figure is Angela Hayes. The shot is intimate and detailed. Within his imagination, there is an interaction between her and Lester as she flirts with him. It also seems as though she is interacting with us as she looks straight-on to the camera during this shot.

(Scenes are screenshots taken from the movie American Beauty)

Post Six: The Stars Are Brighter Than Ever...

The very idea of Hollywood seems to convey a sense of wonder and amazement amongst its loyal followers and moviegoers. The industry is synonymous with phrases such as “the dream factory” or “movie magic”; it is where people can practice escapism. However, even with the “magic” that the industry is able to produce, it is still a business and has followed a certain system (also known as the studio system). This particular system and its ability to reinvent itself have enabled Hollywood to withstand time and revolutionary changes that have threatened the industry itself.

The most important and crucial aspect of the studio system has to be the emphasis that Hollywood placed on its film celebrities and their “star” qualities. Major film studios approached the business as a vertically integrated one, which meant that each studio controlled all aspects of production and distribution. They developed their own unique gathering of actors, writers, directors, and technicians that worked with the heads of the companies to produce certain types of films. With this system in place, Hollywood realized that members of the viewing audience were keen to see certain celebrities on the screen. They had developed a sense of loyalty and adoration towards certain actors and actresses and were willing to watch the movies as long as their favorites were showcased. Instead of emphasizing the type of movie or storyline, the studios marketed the celebrity actors as commodities. They took advantage of this growing phenomenon by putting the most popular celebrities in as many movies as they could and creating a specific storyline to showcase the actor or actress’ talents.

For example, MGM boasted that they had the greatest ensemble of actors (which were contracted to work only with that company) which included Judy Garland. She was extremely popular with moviegoers; the studio used her as another way of hyping or promoting other stars. The studio consistently type-casted her as a naïve, innocent young lady, one that the audience grew to expect would burst out into dance and song at least once during a movie. Thus, audience members began to associate her with a certain genre and would go into a movie starring Judy Garland with the expectations that she would perform a certain way. And because this genre was so successful, MGM became known for its consistent production of musicals.


Even today’s film studios take in account who they cast in their movies. Many moviegoers will base their decision on whether or not they will see a movie on the film ensemble. If it is someone that they enjoy watching or have a sense of loyalty towards, chances are, he or she will see it despite the weak premise, storyline, or other technical aspects. Many actors and actresses have also started a trend of working with the same people over again to the point where moviegoers expect a certain style from them. Examples include director Tim Burton working with Johnny Depp to create absurdist and dark films, Adam Sandler and Rob Schneider with their multiple tongue-in-cheek comedies, and Wes Anderson and Bill Murray with their dry-humor-driven films. Even if the movie itself does not show much promise, people will still go to see these movies because of the people behind and in the movies. Even actors and actresses criticized for their lack of talent will still bring in ticket sales as long as a loyal fan base is willing to pay. In addition, celebrities are also used in advertisements to push products: “you will be like Angelina Jolie if you use this perfume!” Even glancing at a cover of a tabloid in a supermarket will tell someone exactly how celebrity-driven our society has become. Actors and actresses are scrutinized, followed, and photographed as people obsess over their most intimate and private details. The idea that an actor is a commodity is still very prevalent.

Post Five: All in the Family vs. Modern Family

All in the Family was a very popular sitcom which ran from 1971 to 1979 (IMDB). According to the IMDB website, All in the Family had a premise of “a working class bigot [who] constantly squabbles with his family over the important issues of the day” (IMDB). One of the many contemporary family-based television situation comedies currently airing is called Modern Family which also deals with a family working through every-day issues and problems. All in the Family and Modern Family share differences and similarities as both shows deal with broad issues within the family setting.

All in the Family mainly deals with the main protagonist (or antagonist depending on the outlook) Archie Bunker and his conservative ideals and how his surrounding family members deal with them. In the All in the Family episode shown in class, it deals with the subject matter of homosexuality and the issue of homophobia. Archie Bunker is seen as unable to cope with his homophobia, pointing fingers at whomever he believes to be a “faggot”. He mocks his son-in-law’s effeminate friend and becomes shocked when his very masculine friend reveals his own unconventional sexual orientation. Archie is an archetype of a conservative and homophobic male unable to accept changing gender roles.

Modern Family is only in its second season so far but has shown itself to be a very progressive show because not only does it take the conventional family setting and actually makes it humorous in a refreshing way, but it also includes two homosexual fathers taking care of an adopted child. The two men are Cameron and Mitchell Tucker—one of them plays up the stereotype of flamboyant and obvious homosexuality while the other is more muted and does not cater to people’s predisposed perceptions of homosexuality. With this pair, Modern Family is able to subtly explore questions and the issues of homosexuality in today’s society. As a matter of fact, the last episode “The Kiss” aired on September 29, 2010, showed the two men giving each other a small kiss. Not many shows or major networks allow this sort of depiction and with this small little gesture, the ABC network was able to move a little bit forward.

Both shows are the similar because they deal with different issues within a family setting. They bring up issues that the American people and families probably ask themselves on a daily basis or at least of which have an opinion. They usually include a moral or lesson learned at the end. Both shows can be considered progressive when compared to their television counterparts. In All in the Family, the male main character Archie is portrayed as a conservative bigot whereas in Modern Family, the members are more supportive (although Jay, Mitchell’s father, sometimes is uncomfortable with the subject). All in the Family is much more blatant and negative with the exploration of the subject, even throwing around the word “faggot” around. Modern Family takes small steps and is much more subtle in dealing with the issue of homosexuality, taking a much more lighter note about it as the show tries to depict the two men as fun-loving and sweet caretakers. In addition, All in the Family has a very serious political undertone, as Archie scoffed at “socialists” who he believed were ruining the country. Although both shows show varying degrees of radicalism, it seems as though All in the Family was able to get away with a lot more. Even though Modern Family can still play with unconventional ideas, it has to keep in mind that it has to take the issues with some degree of hesitation so that it does not offend or alienate any of its viewers or the network.

Post Four: Number One Listener

The development of radio is a fascinating one because every factor correlates to one another in a way that without one of them, radio may not have become such a popular and defining entity in America’s media culture. Many forces helped to precipitate the rise of the radio including technological change (Marconi’s “wireless telegraph”), industries and institutional factors (competition between networks), regulation and government intervention (Federal Radio Commission), and audience demand. However, the most influential force behind the spread of radio had to be and still is the audience’s constant demand which consequently leads to the other aforementioned factors.

Radio stations started to compete with one another to provide for the audience’s demands. Media is always a fickle industry because it is based on communication—a process that needs two or more parties. Obviously, radio stations can only be successful if they can find someone to listen to them. Radio stations applied networking which is “the linking of stations together to share programming costs” (Straubhaar 163) and allowed each station to keep up with the expenses. Further competition forced stations to gather affiliated ones and to adopt a variety of shows and music genres to appeal to different audience members. The stations experimented with comic books, adventure shows, and pulp-fiction westerns. Furthermore, radio stations created radio personas that helped promote advertisements on shows. They also tried to create regular programming so that listeners would invest themselves into the shows as part of their daily routine.

Since then, radio has had to work extremely hard in order to keep up with the wavering audience demand. In the late 1940s, television’s popularity grew exponentially; radio struggled to keep its stability within its audience members. The radio had to figure out quickly how to regain some of its power and focused on cheaper entertainment such as localized content including music, news, and talk shows. Even today, radio stations have to constantly change and keep up with the audience’s wandering attention spans in order to stay profitable. Nowadays, radio stations have to keep tabs on and research who their targeted listeners are and how they can succeed in reaching them. It is crucial that the medium tries new innovative ways to stay current whether it is playing popular music or offering their sounds through the internet.

Post Three: I Watch What I Wanna Watch

The concept of selective process argues for and helps to support the idea that people are the ones who sustain the power in the exchange of media. It states that audiences exercise selective exposure by avoiding media circuits that espouse certain messages with which members may not agree. In addition, certain members will watch those which advocate in what they already believe or propagate. This further confirms their beliefs as they find support from those considered more knowledgeable. By adapting this way of digesting information from the media, people can undergo selective retention which means their perceptions can become distorted or skewed to the point where they remember what they want to remember instead of what actually happened. This selective reception in which a person chooses what he or she wants to watch decreases media’s hold and impact on its audience members but can also negatively proliferate ignorance.

An example of selective process can be seen in this article. The Today Show, a significantly popular daytime and morning show, has decided to open its Modern Day Wedding competition to same sex couples after discussing the matter with GLADD, a pro-LGBT rights group. Many (in my opinion, progressive) people have applauded The Today Show for showing an interest in equality concerning gay marriages. However, The Today Show has also found its share of criticisms from other people who are not as like-minded. As seen in the comments below in the article, many people who are against the recent change have declared that they will be protesting the show.

A few of the comments:

DeeBoo: “I will watch another channel in support marriage being between a man and woman.”
JDTransplant: “I won’t watch NBC any longer.”
nj_tax_man: “As of now, I will no longer watch any NBC programming.”
Oksusieq: “I for one, will not be watching, nor do I condone same sex marriage. I am so disappointed that NBC has given in to ‘peer pressure’ to encourage the moral decline in the country.”

In addition, one user (Traveling1) summarized selective exposure very well: "You always have the option of not watching...but America is the land of voyeurs. We are so anxious to not live our own lives that we have to turn to TV to live the lives of others. Well, if those TV lives are not what you like, live your own and turn the damn thing off. Better yet. Sell it! lol"

As exemplified in the aforementioned snippets taken from the comment section of the article, many people are choosing to end their support of NBC and The Today Show in order to show their disapproval. They are using the selective process in order to avoid messages that contradict their own beliefs and so-called values. Granted, I do believe that they all have a choice on what they decide to watch. At least selective process attempts to correct the imbalance that media and its audience have with one another. However, media and television are great technological inventions and should be used to progress society’s amount of knowledge and open up its ability to access other peoples’ opinions and perspectives. Ignorance and such examples of bigoted thinking and shutting off completely to media circuits solely because they do not agree with your personal perspective end up stinting society’s growth rather than helping it along.



Credit
Credit

Post Two: Another Spoonful Please!

The creators and owners of the media use hegemony advantageously in order to control exactly what the audience sees and to influence how the audience reacts to what it is seeing. According to James Lull, “hegemony is the power or dominance that one social group holds over others” and a “method of gaining and maintaining power” (Lull 62). According to Stuart Hall, it is a “framing [of] all competing definitions of reality within [the dominant class’s] range […]” (Lull 62). In other words, through the process of hegemony, the media insists on its power in order to influence subordinate parties in accepting their definition of what is normal and acceptable.

As the gatekeepers of media use agenda setting to advocate what issues are most important and relevant to the audience members’ lives, it also uses framing to influence how the audience should react to such pertinent issues. Framing is how the owners of media decide how and under what settings a story or issue should be presented. Media has the power, the resources, and reasons to take an event or subject matter and distort or skew it in its favor. And when the audience recieves what the media tells it based only on face-value, the media can and has gotten away with quite a bit!

Take for example of the recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and its effects on the locals and the workers. News companies reported that many clean-up workers directly in contact with the oil spill had become ill and had to be hospitalized. However, according to this article, CEO Tony Hayward and his public representatives responded to such reports by shrugging it off, saying that it was probably “food poisoning.” It was also reported that the workers did not receive gas masks because the company did not feel as though they were necessary; the company tried to make the oil spill look less harmful than it actually is. In addition, according to this video on the BP YouTube channel, the company is currently taking the effort and time to take care of the workers and locals. BP tries to frame the oil spill incident as a tragic event but an opportunity for them to come together as a community. BP tries to make it look as though they are taking the steps to approach the oil spill in the most acceptable and productive way by spinning the situation with a positive light.

Sadly, it is a very cynical yet true view of the media as a conglomeration of elitist companies sitting on their high-horses spoon-feeding the audience whatever it takes to keep them under their control. Framing is a very prominent technique and used quite frequently by media companies. Because of this, I personally have to make sure I do a double-take and re-evaluate what I had just read or viewed. Understandably, everything in media has a certain perspective behind it and so framing is just a part of the process. However, when it is done maliciously or with certain intent behind it, the exchange between the producers and the audience becomes more complicated and sometimes more so than necessary. In the aforementioned example of BP, I am not easily persuaded by its attempt to make it look as if the workers’ health is not jeopardy nor does its “attempts” to alleviate those who are affected.

Post One: At Least I Don't Have To Tweet

My name is Amanda Yam and am currently an English major. I am taking the RTF class because I am hoping to dual-credit in Radio-Television-Film as well. I am a pop-culture fiend (ask me about Lady Gaga, please) and love everything about the media with high hopes of being a part of it someday. I find the ability to communicate with one another fascinating and am always eager to hear peoples' stories. What I hope to get out of the class is an overlook of the media sphere and how truly pertinent it is to our society. I want to learn about how media works and its different mediums. I am looking forward to learning more about film and hopefully about it how it works and how to critique it. Be warned: I can be a total film snob! I also have never seen "The Godfather" (which is a shame, I know) so I am excited that we will be viewing it in this class. Basically, I just want to learn about the media through a different perspective that will make me stop and think about my own outlook on everything.

One of my favorite (current) blogs actually belongs to one of my friends. She is currently doing the JET program (Japan Exchange Teaching Program) and it’s fun to follow her on her escapades (especially since that’s one of the things I want to do once I graduate from college).

Also here is a YouTube video of two Corgi puppies walking on a treadmill. Make it viral!