A World Without Technology

For my group's documentary, we stumbled upon a DVD outlining the ongoing issues in Burma. This DVD illustrated the corrupt government in Burma and how this government is treating Burma’s citizens. Thousands of people have fled their homes becuase of the military enforcement from the government. It was shocking to learn that only people who were picked by the government were allowed to have jobs and earn income. All forms of communication were cut off by the Burmese government, including phone lines and Internet. There is little known about the situation in Burma because of the lack of communication, and the little information that we have is coming from activist groups in Burma that somehow manage to get the word out. This sparked a thought in our minds that we would use this idea for our activist project.

After finishing this documentary, Robert, Elisha, Caitlin, and I discussed the issues portrayed in the DVD. We talked about how appalled we were at what was going on and why we had never heard of this situation before. We discussed how media has influenced the situation in Burma and how it continues to shape the events unfolding. We realised that there is not much media exposure on this issue mainly because there is no communication in Burma. Reporters and journalists are not allowed to report about the government in Burma, and if they do they are usually raped and killed. There is not enough awareness in more powerful countries such as the United States and Canada because no one knows about the issues, not that no one cares about the issues. We talked about how the DVD said that major companies have set up factories in Burma because it would be cheaper to pay Burmese people to work for them and we were unsure of why this was being allowed to happen. When well known companies in North America, such as Nike, set up shop in third world countries, it is all over the news and it was disturbing to know that Burma was being ignored.

We decided that for our activist project we would try to raise as much awareness as possible about the corrupt government in Burma. We thought of many ideas and after everyone in the group had seen the documentary we all decided to hold a benefit concert.

Through watching this documentary I learned how large the impact of global communication and media has had on the world. I learned that without communication and media, the problems occurring in the world have much less opportunity to be fixed. It is amazing how much we all rely on technology and communications and how we would not be able to imagine our lives without it. No phones, no e-mail, no Internet, no TV; this concept is foreign, especially to my generation that was born in the late 1980's. This reminds of what Mark Litpon said in class about how my generation has never seen a world without AIDS. My generation has also never seen a world without technology and mass communications - a world that is faced by the Burmese people daily.


Below is a clip from the DVD that I thought was most shocking and would illustrate why we decided to use this DVD for our documentary and our activist project.

Cited Work:

Human Rights in Burma. Dir. Burma Issues, Witness. DVD. Witness, 2007.

Teen-Queens

For the Media Hegemonies project, some complications arose. I do not know if we just did not understand the project, or if it was the group itself, but the project just did not work out.

I worked with Robert, Elisha, and Caitlin for this project and we all contributed our fare share of hostility. I think it may just be because we are all sick of this class and all the work we have to do in general, but we knew we still needed to do this project.

At first my group had decided to study the ownership that Viacom has. It seemed like an alright idea, but when I read the syllabus, our plan did not make sense to me. I was trying to follow the syllabus correctly and choose a theme and map the ownership that relates/influences our chosen theme. My group however, just basically wanted to complete the project – ok. We then decided not to map Viacom because we wanted to do something original other than the big six media owners.

We decided to map the media ownership of celebrities. We chose Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen because they have been in the media business their whole lives and are apparently the most well known stars alive. It fit perfectly because these twins have built an empire from the ground up. They have accomplished so much and have undoubtedly influenced today’s media.

We decided to turn to media for information on the girls. We browsed You Tube, and after finding many tribute videos to the girls, found what we were looking for. “The Fabulous Life of Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen” was our number one source of their media ownership – along with their official website.

We discovered that the Olsen’s were co-presidents of a billion-dollar-a-year business that markets the twins themselves. This business produces and sells millions of Mary-Kate and Ashley dolls, books, school supplies, videos, make-up and accessories, CD/players, games, electronics, beddings, fragrances, and clothing. They girls have stared in the most television shows and movies than any other child stars. They have sold over 40 million dollars worth of direct-to-video movies and have an agreement with Wal-Mart to dedicate 1400 sq. feet of store space to Mark-Kate and Ashley products. The girls are also co-presidents of their own production company, Dual Star Entertainment Group.

We believe that the Olsen twins are an excellent example of media hegemony because of their influence on ‘tweens’ and teenagers of all generations. Everyone has heard of them, and because of this their empire is growing stronger everyday.

I read the assignment another time, and realised that we were supposed to make a poster – but we did not. I got a bed feeling because I knew we were not actually completing the project, so I took it upon myself to make a quick poster in Photoshop to go along with our theme.

Although we did do a lot of work researching for this theme and spent a lot of time discovering the Olsen’s media ownership, there was a lack of information and our points were blurred and had no strength. My group decided to ditch the Mary-Kate and Ashley theme and settle for a simple completion of this project. We now re-started this project and focused on the media ownership possessed by Time Warner.

We found that Time Warner owns the Atlanta Braves, the Atlanta Hawks, 82.4% of CNN, Live from the Situation Room, Larry King live, Anderson Cooper, TBS, TNT, The Cartoon Network, Warner Brothers, Court TV, animation 25% of A&E, the licensing for Loonie Toons, digital boxes owned by, local news channels, new line cinema corp. time, Turner Home Entertainment, Braves Clubhouse, People, Sports Illustrated, Essence, Southern Living, Cooking Light, Parenting Magazine, Mad Magazine, Popular Science, AOL, an alliance with Google, Movie Phone, Map Quest, the NASCAR, the PGA, 50% of DC Comics, 50% of America’s Talking, Oxmoor House publishing, Sunset Books, Little, Brown and Company, Time-Life Books, Warner Books, 50% of Central Comedy, Warner Brothers Television, Asia Week, The Warner Brothers Stores, 50% of Bravo, Baby talk Magazine, Warner Brothers motion pictures, and all of the Six Flags Amusement parks.

When looking at all of this information, it is shocking and astounding to see that one company owns so much, without having the majority of the public know. Upon completion of this project and many days of reflection, I feel I have learned a lot about media ownership. It is scary. One company, one entity is in charge of a large portion of media that not only I, but also the world consumes, and only a few more major companies own the other portions of media not owned by Time Warner. Does this vast media hegemony take away diversity from our media? In some sense it does. These huge media corporations manufacture all the media we see, and because of this the possibility of different points of view in media is put at risk. But at the same time, there is still freedom of speech and the right to creativity in Canada, enabling all points of view to be spoken. I suppose in the long run, all media will be coming from one source because the world is all about money. One company will buy another company and will begin to own everything.

I feel that if there were more people who will not be bought out in the media business, the future of Canadian media will be brighter. What media needs are a dose of integrity and a sense of pride.

Cited Work:

Hazen, Dan, and Julie Winokur. We the Media. New York: The New York Press, 1997.

Life Decisions International- Press Room. Life Decisions International. Retrieved October 19, 2007. http://fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=129

Blog

Well so far… I have enjoyed keeping a blog. It can be very stressful sometimes because I cannot think of what to write about, but when I find a topic I find myself typing away. I believe that this blog has created a sense of commitment in me. I feel that now I do not only do this blog because I have to, but because I want to. I sometimes get excited about what I write, knowing that at some point, eventually, it will get read.

The Invisible Art

Understanding Comics – My favorite required reading. I loved it – and by love I mean to represent the enjoyment and insight this book has brought me.

I have never thought about comics this way before. Reading this book has definitely expanded my knowledge of printed media and the history behind comic books and their influences. It was astounding how much knowledge and theory is in comics and I am at a loss of words on how to explain my feelings toward this wonderful sequence of inked panels on paper.

I suppose it is normal to feel a loss of words. After all these words do not mean anything unless my use of visible lines (or placement of light projected on your monitor by me) can be understood as words, and related to meanings that I wish to describe. My writing is only a mere form of media, one that “converts [my] thoughts into forms that can transverse the physical world and be re-converted by one or more senses back into thoughts” (McCloud, 195).

I find it amazingly interesting how the icons ^^^ are understood, even though they are truly nothing. They only have meaning because we give them meaning.

This book re-enforced the belief that everything is there for a reason. The panels are arranged in a particular way so that the reader has a path to follow, the balance between text and image, which is a skill that must be perfected for it to be beneficial, contributes greatly to the reader’s understanding, and the use of EXAGGERATED or dull color and font add deep emotion to the reading. Applying this to my life, I believe that I am now able to analyze media more thoroughly and understand what is really happening when I do not actually see the stabbing in the HoRrOr films (McCloud, 66).

I REALLY HOPE MY JOY OF THIS BOOK IS EXPRESSED CLEARLY

THROUGH MY USE OF FONT, ICONS, AND COLOR!!!!

I would also like to note, Mark Lipton is correct when he said that all forms of technology and media are corrupted by pornography and other substances.

(McCloud, 190)

Cited Work:

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Kitchen Sink Press, 1993.

"Dumbledore is Gay"

When it comes to other readings, there is not that many books that I would like to read. Personally reading is not my favourite thing in the world, but I guess it has got to be done.

I have never been interested in the Harry Potter series before, and I think that is because when it first came out my parents forbid it because magic is evil. In recent headlines, at a press conference to promote the seventh Harry Potter book, J.K. Rowling admitted that the character Dumbledore is actually gay. This got my attention. I had never paid any attention to Harry Potter but now that I could possibly relate to it, I became intrigued.

No, I haven’t started frantically reading the books yet, but in the future I probably will. Not only are they revolutionary pieces of literature (not for their simple language that I have been told of, but because the books have started a generation of thousands of Harry Potter fans,), but also now I have a character to relate to in the books. I am also sure that by having a gay character, these books will set a tolerance with today’s youth. By exposing children to different types of people through such a popular piece of media, acceptance is a possible outcome in youth and adulthood.

The Harry Potter books have had a vast impact on today’s children and youth and quite possibly can affect the future of literature in media. There are also movies now, adding to Harry Potter’s media base. It is truly amazing how a fictional character can have such an impact on the world.

Cited Work:

Weingarten, Tara, and Peg Tyre. "Rowling Says Dumbledore Is Gay." Newsweek 16 Oct 2007 18 Oct 2007 .

A Privilege or A Right?

Today in class, there was a heavy debate between Mark and Caitlin. I am unsure of my feelings towards this situation because in some sense, I agree with both points made.

I agree that being able to attend an education institution is a privilege when compared to people in other countries who do not have education, but in Canada where we all live, I believe it is not a privilege because it is normal to have an education in Canada. Attending a post-secondary institution in Canada is something to work for, something that is 'better' than a normal, expected high school education and I believe that is what Cailtin was trying to hint at.

In terms of the actual debate, some may call it an argument; I feel I learned a lot about my two peers. I feel that I learned that Caitlin is somewhat headstrong, but with reason. She has valid points, but sometimes is unable to voice them. As for Mark, I believe that he is also headstrong because he is passionately thinking about the bigger picture, and for the sake of this class, I choose to agree with Mark because it is important to look at the bigger picture when concerned with media.

Social/Media/History

For the Timeline of Social/Media/History, our group decided to do a PowerPoint presentation. We were not too sure if we were doing this project right as it was confusing, but we feel our outcome was successful.

We interpreted the project as if we were supposed to choose a topic that is relevant to current culture and media, and choose 4-5 key technological inventions that have made that topic relevant. After brainstorming for a couple of hours, I thought of multiculturalism. So now we asked ourselves, which inventions from the beginning of time until the 19th century has made current multiculturalism possible. We thought of many ideas, and after starting our slideshow, we realised that our ideas were simply ideas, rather than technological inventions. We had to re-think our strategy, and finally we came up with the four inventions that have made current multiculturalism possible. We decided on Weaponry, The Alphabet, Farm Equipment, and Electricity.

We decided that on a timeline, Weaponry would come first. We decided this based on what I learned from ‘Understanding Comics’ by Scott McCloud. There is a chapter on human’s two basic instincts, one of which being survival. After I mentioned this to Robert and Elisha, we concluded that humans were defending themselves and killing animals for food before humans were having civilized conversations. In terms of more technological weaponry, we believe that guns are partly responsible for current multiculturalism. When the Europeans took over what is now known as Canada, they used weapons and rifles to take the land from the Native peoples. Guns were used heavily in the world wars, and this lead to more land being taken over.

Next came the alphabet. We believed that this invention helped multiculturalism because the ability to understand one another is necessary to live together. We realise that there were forms of alphabets in pre-historic times such as hieroglyphics and cave paintings, but we believe that the phonetic alphabet is what has enabled worldwide communication. People were able to write to each other, write books, and read after the alphabet was invented hundreds of years ago. Through the various readings created through use of the alphabet, people were able to learn about different cultures and places and enhanced the desire for people to travel and move to foreign civilizations, creating multiculturalism.

Farm equipment also relates to humans’ basic instinct of survival. We decided that the ability to produce crops and to harvest them is important for multiculturalism because in human’s history, many peoples have re-located because of food situations and the invention of the hoe for example, has enabled people to sustain a living standard where they are.

And finally, we have Electricity. We believe that electricity is an important invention that enables multiculturalism because it is what has enabled the world’s most common forms of communication and transportation. Without electricity, the people in North America would never have known anything about what is going on in China or Iraq, thus people may still believe that where they are living is the only land out there and would not have moved to different places.

When making the slideshow in PowerPoint, I was the technical one using the computer to do the actual slideshow. I found the images and got proper citations for the images that needed it and contributed valuable ideas for our topic. We all are responsible for the brainstorming and initial ideas of this project, but Elisha impressed me a lot with her ways of thinking. She just shot out multiple superb ideas, one after another. It came in handy when we kept getting stuck or found ourselves starting over. Robert was also very handy in this project because he was able to elaborate on Elisha’s thoughts when I did not fully understand. We believe that clear communication is attributed to this project’s success.

Through doing this project I learned the importance of invention. Mark Lipton’s saying, that when something is invented it doesn’t create a world with an invention, it creates a whole new world, is one that I now have a strong belief for.

In regards to the ‘Ecology of Media,’ I believe that all of these inventions have contributed to our media because in the 21st century, all forms of media are trying to be multicultural. I would assume the real reason behind the need for multiculturalism is money, but it is still nice to think that the media and multinational companies really care about everyone. Seriously though, I believe all the attempts at multiculturalism are to make more money. Companies advertise in a way to appeal to more people, more cultures, in order to sell more products and produce more revenue. Is that not what the media is all about these days? Targeted advertising? Creating Revenue?

All in all, I feel this project was a success.

A Different Point Of View

When I read the article “10 Things Wrong with the ‘Media Effects’ Model” by David Gauntlett, I became very intrigued. The first couple of paragraphs had me wanting more because this article presents common ideas from a different viewpoint. I find it immensely interesting to think about how media has influenced people, but this article broadened my perspective and introduced me to the idea that in fact, it is human qualities that influence the media.

Through reading this article, I have learned to think differently about how I judge media. It is very easy to judge the media and to say that it is trying to ‘brainwash’ us into thinking a certain way, but now I can take a step back and begin to understand why something is trying to ‘brainwash’ us. Everything is there for a reason, but it may not all be intentional. Yes, violence on TV may make children want to be violent, but as humans, children are already instinctually violent – just trained not to be.

In this article, it is stated that most child offenders do not have as much access to media as ‘normal’ children do, and that their violent tendencies are influenced first-hand experience, such as violent parents and broken homes, rather than being influenced by television and other forms of media (Gauntlett, 1). It also states that if adults were observed the way children were observed, the results would not be reliable because of an adult’s developed ‘common sense’ (Gaunteltt, 2).

Another aspect of this article that I believe taught me to see from different points of view is when it is talking about TV. It said that most people watch TV just to watch TV, that people usually do not have a specific program in mind and end up 'channel-surfing." I found this point of view very interseting because it is true. I notice this with myself, even though I do not watch television that often.

I really enjoyed this article because it exposed me to new and valuable ‘ways of seeing.’ Views that enable me to look outside the box of media and understand what something is all about, from a different point of view. In relation to one of my earlier posts, this article has helped me decide which media to analyze and which not to analyze.

Cited Work:

Gauntlett, David. "Ten Things Wrong with the 'Media Effects' Model." Approaches to Audiences - A Reader 1998 14 Oct 2007 .

What to do...

Now, in my last few posts, I have concluded that I now understand the reasoning behind 'Everything in media is there for a reason.' But what am I supposed to do with this new knowledge?

Mark, if you are reading this, please give me some feedback. I understand that your job is to make us students aware of the practices of what goes on in the media. And through various examples and moments of realisation, I believe that everything is there for a reason.

As media students, it is our job to understand that concept, as well as many others. Therefore, Mark you are doing a good job in that. But being aware is different from application.

As media students, are we now supposed to look at everything we see and hear and analyze their meanings? Are we supposed to take every advertisement and think about its deep meanings, besides buying Gap jeans?

What is our goal in understanding this concept?

Who/What is the Media?

A couple classes ago, on October 3rd, I was very confused. I did not understand what Mark was talking about and was frustrated with the way the argument between Mark and Caitlin turned out. I decided to raise my hand, and ask a question for clarification. The details of the question and the response seem to have left my memory, but the way the question was answered made me think.

Mark put a situation into context for me, because I did not understand what we were talking about. The situation made the idea clear to me and I understood the subject. In the explanation, Mark referred to homosexuals and put them into context with this issue. At first, I thought that he just thought up homosexuals from the top of his brain, and used the idea innocently. Soon, I became sceptical of the innocence. I began to think that Mark only used homosexuals because I asked the question. I felt stupid because I thought that Mark only thought I would understand if he used something that relates to me specifically. Aside from the negative feelings I had towards Mark from the argument with Caitlin, I was offended.

Last night, I could not get to sleep. I laved in my bed thinking about how far behind I am in everything and I remembered my negative feelings from the explanation. Than it sprung a memory from the past and sparked discussion in my mind. I remembered one of my friends showing me their My Space page. I noticed that there was an ad on the top for a gay spa. I said to my friend that I had never seen a gay oriented advertisement on My Space before. He silenced my remark saying that they were only there for people who had their orientation in their profile set to gay.

A connection became clear. It was targeted advertising. My status was not set to gay, so therefore I had never seen a gay ad before. The situation was put into a context that was clear that I would react to because I am open about my orientation. The question is, did mark target his response at me? Or was it just a coincidence?

I was also confused by how loosely my classmates, professors, and I had used the term ‘Media’ in conversation. Do I really know what I mean when I say ‘The media created targeted advertising?’ Who is this media I speak of?

I now believe, that everyone and everything is a part of the media. How people interact and interpret is what makes up the media. When Mark mentioned homosexuals, it was a form of media to me. Was it targeted, or a coincidence? I choose to believe it was targeted, only for the reason that I hope Mark hoped I would make a connection like this from his targeted response. That he was hoping I would realise that everything is there for a reason. It is one thing to tell us that everything is there for a reason, but seeing it in your own context and life is a different form of understanding.

Everybody Comes to Hollywood

In class today we discussed a commercial for Gap jeans featuring Madonna and Missy Elliot. I have seen this commercial before, and I loved it. I loved how upbeat the music was and I already enjoy both Madonna and Missy Elliot. My first impression of this commercial was “AMAZING!” But I also felt as if I did not even remember what the commercial was for. The actual product, Gap jeans, did not leave as much of a lasting impression as the mastered pop sounds of Madonna and Missy did.

When Mark Lipton told us that this video was racist, my jaw hit the floor. I thought the complete opposite. Madonna is white, Missy is black, and they were performing together in perfect harmony. I have also witnessed other occasions when ‘Misdemeanour’ and the ‘Material Girl’ have worked together, illustrating no strong signs of racial tension.

At the MTV Video awards, the AMAZING “Like A Virgin” compilation consisting of Madonna, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, and Missy Elliot (AKA the infamous Britney Spears and Madonna lesbian kiss), has factors that can be interpreted as racism.

For the life of me, I will never understand why no one remembers that Missy Elliot was in this performance too. She was amazing, but completely out of her element. Some could say that it was racist because only the white girls kissed each other, and that Madonna not kissing Missy was making a racial statement. I disagree. Like I said, Missy was out of her element. I believe that she would not have wanted to commit to a same-sex kiss; it is just not a part of her personality.

I would just like to acknowledge a point about this performance and it’s surrounding media (completely un-related to this topic) that has frustrated me for quite some time. Why did the media forget about X-tina kissing Madonna? It was way hotter than Brit's kiss.

But back to the Gap commercial, I agree that there are many instances in this video that could be screaming racism, but I do not believe that was the message in this video.

A thesis – “Madonna is on Top” (Lipton).

Of course she is! She has done amazing work for decades; she deserves all of my respect in regards to her profession because of her talents as a musician and because she is responsible for a musical revolution. I do not dispute this thesis. Madonna is on top, and will hopefully be on top forever. I believe that this may have been the real intention of this video and I would not be upset if it was proven as a fact.

As far as all of the effort put into this video by Madonna’s or the Gap’s production people come, at first I was sceptical. In all cases where there is a celebrity or musician in the media, they are always made out to be superior. If they were not thought of as superior there would be no reason why they were celebrities. Madonna is controversial, Paris Hilton is stupid, Brad Pitt is hot – that is why they are famous. Yes, the ‘top’ in the background is convincing, but I am still sceptical of its intentional placement. On the other hand, in other Madonna music videos it is clear that there are words written on the ground to help express the mood of her songs/videos – maybe her PR people have figured out a way to advertise/convince people both subtly and obviously.

But than again, it may just be a conincidence.

Cited Work:

Get Into The Groove. Dir. Gap Jeans. Perf. Madonna, Missy Elliot. Gap Jeans. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQpN3ToVtmQ>.

What If. Dir. Stephen Scott. Perf. Scott Stapp, Mark Tremonti, Brian Marshall, Scott Phillips. DVD. Warner Music Canada, 2004. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEijnCAg2-8>.

Hung Up. Perf. Madonna. Maverick, 2005. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CosUSYHGQeM>.

Plagarism Shocker

I found this article in the newspaper a bit ago, and I was intrigued by the page space it was given. I did not think that an issue such as plagiarism would be given as much page space as it was. It made me think about how much this issue affects our daily lives and the materials we produce.

The article talks about how many ideas are not original, because they are sparked form past observations and other people’s ideas. The article states that people plagiarize without knowing that they are stealing someone else’s idea, known as unconscious plagiarism (McCallum Living, L1).

Reading this article made me think about the ‘Fairy Use Tail’ video that we watched in class. If people plagiarize everyday without knowing it, are we all at risk of prosecution? Do all of our ideas root from someone else’s ideas? This makes it hard to be creative and to think of projects knowing that your ideas may not be your own.

The article also describes ‘memory glitches.’ This is when you subconsciously remember certain details of something, like a board meeting, and forget the rest (McCallum Living, L3). This made me think of the Gap commercial we watched with Madonna and Missy Eliot. If we only remember certain parts of things, than it makes sense that the Gap, or Madonna’s public relations people would spend so much time and money making sure that all we remember is Madonna’s presence in the commercial.

Cited Work

McCallum, Conrad. Plagarism shocker: Blame your brain." Toronto Star 18 September 2007: L1, L3.

Negativity Within

Today's class was one that has left me undecided. I for one am not a follower of politics, and I hope I never will be. I do not know exactly why, but I have never been interested in politics. Like I wrote in a persuasive essay for my English class, I believe I may not be interested because I have never been encouraged to participate in politics. I had thought up various reasons why the government, schools, and daily living sitatuations/occurances such as media and advertisements, did not encourage youth to participate. I must have had some good points because I achieved an 80% on the assignment.

I remember in high school, I had to do a project for my civics class. My partner and I collected over 500 signatures from the Hamilton area on a petition in support of Bill C32 (at the time this bill would have enforced stricter legislation against animal cruelty and negligence), as well as over 600-signed letters from people who agreed with our beliefs. We sent a copy of the petition and the letters to each of Ontario's senate members and the Prime Minister at the time, but did not receive much response. Months later, we received a letter from one of the senate members stating that the legislation we were fighting for had left parliament and that our concerns would be attended to when it comes back to parliament. I think that this may have been what solidified my negativity towards politics.

But after today's class, my opinion on politics is a bit more tolerant. The whole idea of being heard is what really got to me. I do not know if what Mark said was true about politicians/government people ignoring a letter if the sender is not on the voter's list, but it is a plausible explanation. I now wanted to vote, and re-submit my materials to see if I would receive a different outcome, but a part of me in the back of my mind stopped me from exploring my new interest. This negative part of my mind exists because all I ever hear about politics is the negativity that exists within.

I believe that media is responsible for this negative image I have of politics. On television, the only thing that is ‘news-worthy’ is when a politician does something wrong or goes against their word. The positive side of things in politics is rarely discussed and I for one am unimpressed because of that.