In response to the discussion on memetics during class on Wednesday I found it appropriate to pose the question: What separates memes from reality, or in other words is there a distinction between memes and perspective? Philosopher George Berkeley posed the statement: "To be is to be perceived". There is so much validity to this statement, especially in conversing over memes.
If our validity and self-defining characteristics of being are simply comprised of how others view us, then our means of self-projection and how we carry ourselves is solely based on accepted memes. Value systems, trends, songs, morals, faith, these characteristics of self-identity are all memes, and thus memetics create our systems of self and of perception.
I enjoyed Dawkins' underlying message of our power to control meme replication. He describes memes to be in ways analogous to genetics in the way that memes are culturally replicated as genes are biologically. Genes create memes however through our genetically inherited thought processes and thinking capabilities, thus with our biologically inherited genes we have the potential to critically consider which memes we replicate and carry in our lives. This is important to consider in that rather than outlining the scary and pervasive role memes carry in our lives, Dawkins emphasizes that meme-replication depends on our transfer of memes from brain to brain. Our brains have the capability to filter memetics, and determine their validity.
I feel the discussion on memes is very appropriately fit for discourse on religion and faith structures, and undermines belief systems completely. The information presented on memetics lead me to question whether or not any idea or manifestation of ideas can truly be original.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Reaction Essay: The Merchants of Cool
Frontline's documentary: The Merchants of Cool does well to cast light on the hyper-focus marketers give to teenagers and United States' youth. The film outlines the industries $150 billion market for kids. The film is directed by Barack Goodman and written by Rachel Dretzin and relays its message quite effectively in the form of marketer testimonies, child interviews and a broad projection of the corners this market reaches and creates.
An early segment of the film depicts one marketer who leads a discussion on "what's hot" among teenagers. The discussion involves many kids who are paid fifty dollars to give their opinion on what's cool. When the facilitator first asks those in attendance "what's hot" he is given no direct response, outlining the many layers of cultural trends.
The narrator talks about this day's younger generation stating: "kids have more money and more freedom with that money today than ever before". The spending money kids acquire is deemed: "guilt money", money parents give their children out of guilt for self-defined neglectful behavior such as not spending enough time with their kids or lack of knowing who their kids are. The film points out that teenagers today are shown over 3,000 discrete advertisements per day, %75 of teens have a TV in their room and 1/3 claim to have a personal computer. Statistics seemingly outrageous to previous generations.
The documentary asks the question: How do you map what's cool? They provide the marketing tool or task as it were of "cool hunting", in my eyes a very interesting and scary concept. Not only do marketers seek to find what is cool, they actually hunt it. The documentary points out that once a trend is picked up and sold, the trend dies; thus "cool-hunting" and marketing research literally hunts what is cool and kills trends through selling them. Marketers steal the individuality from kids, sell it, and in doing so, kill it. The narrator points out that marketers penetrate teen culture seeking "trend-setting, leaders, attempting to grasp the sub-culture and then through this research diminish any "sub" about it. Quite paradoxical in nature.
The film first focuses on Sprite, a soft-drink turned into a bastion of hip-hop culture. The means of creating this union of soda and music however was created through more spending. Kids from the seemingly hip-hop sub culture were paid to attend a Sprite promo, displaying rising hip hop artists. MTV screened the event casting light on the artists and those chosen kids paid to think a drink is cool. The film poses the question of whether or not advertising expression has been erased and whether marketing is solely consumption.
The film uses MTV's promotion of Sprite as a segway into the pervasiveness of the corporation Viacom in terms of youth culture. Viacom owns MTV which, as depicted by the film, is all an advertisement and all infomercially based. The show is illustrated to air very cheap programming to serve as the leading force in creating what is cool to young viewers. Unfortunately, they remain the leading force and it costs them the least. Frontline attributes this to the company's screening location in Time's square, a hub of cultural strategy, among other things.
Frontline interestingly divides the culturally produced paradigm for girls and boys into two separate terms: the "midriff" and the "mook". The mook takes the form of a rebellious, gangster-type, reveling young male, where the midriff represents an insecure, very materialistic and superficial young female. These roles create the social dichotomy of American youth between secure, arrogant young men and insecure, vain young women. The midriff is a sex-object and the mook is in trouble; great images to instill in today's youth. In terms of the midriff, the film uses icons such as Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears that send the message: "Flaunt your sexuality, even if you don't understand it". The film interviews a thirteen year-old who is obsessed with looking older and fulfilling the marketable-midriff image. The girl strives to be "bought" by modeling agencies, for something quite far from whoever she is under the skin.
I enjoyed the film's conclusion, focusing on the rap metal/rage rock musical group Insane Clown Posey or ICP. It was very interesting to watch a band grow from underground to mainstream through marketing and as the film first pointed out "cool hunting". ICP went from a few followers underground to music videos on MTV and spots on television for the world wrestling federation. The documentary concludes well with the questions: "Do today's youth have anything we can call our own? And "Who can today's youth look to, if anyone?". In final words, as best said by the film itself: "Welcome to the machine".
An early segment of the film depicts one marketer who leads a discussion on "what's hot" among teenagers. The discussion involves many kids who are paid fifty dollars to give their opinion on what's cool. When the facilitator first asks those in attendance "what's hot" he is given no direct response, outlining the many layers of cultural trends.
The narrator talks about this day's younger generation stating: "kids have more money and more freedom with that money today than ever before". The spending money kids acquire is deemed: "guilt money", money parents give their children out of guilt for self-defined neglectful behavior such as not spending enough time with their kids or lack of knowing who their kids are. The film points out that teenagers today are shown over 3,000 discrete advertisements per day, %75 of teens have a TV in their room and 1/3 claim to have a personal computer. Statistics seemingly outrageous to previous generations.
The documentary asks the question: How do you map what's cool? They provide the marketing tool or task as it were of "cool hunting", in my eyes a very interesting and scary concept. Not only do marketers seek to find what is cool, they actually hunt it. The documentary points out that once a trend is picked up and sold, the trend dies; thus "cool-hunting" and marketing research literally hunts what is cool and kills trends through selling them. Marketers steal the individuality from kids, sell it, and in doing so, kill it. The narrator points out that marketers penetrate teen culture seeking "trend-setting, leaders, attempting to grasp the sub-culture and then through this research diminish any "sub" about it. Quite paradoxical in nature.
The film first focuses on Sprite, a soft-drink turned into a bastion of hip-hop culture. The means of creating this union of soda and music however was created through more spending. Kids from the seemingly hip-hop sub culture were paid to attend a Sprite promo, displaying rising hip hop artists. MTV screened the event casting light on the artists and those chosen kids paid to think a drink is cool. The film poses the question of whether or not advertising expression has been erased and whether marketing is solely consumption.
The film uses MTV's promotion of Sprite as a segway into the pervasiveness of the corporation Viacom in terms of youth culture. Viacom owns MTV which, as depicted by the film, is all an advertisement and all infomercially based. The show is illustrated to air very cheap programming to serve as the leading force in creating what is cool to young viewers. Unfortunately, they remain the leading force and it costs them the least. Frontline attributes this to the company's screening location in Time's square, a hub of cultural strategy, among other things.
Frontline interestingly divides the culturally produced paradigm for girls and boys into two separate terms: the "midriff" and the "mook". The mook takes the form of a rebellious, gangster-type, reveling young male, where the midriff represents an insecure, very materialistic and superficial young female. These roles create the social dichotomy of American youth between secure, arrogant young men and insecure, vain young women. The midriff is a sex-object and the mook is in trouble; great images to instill in today's youth. In terms of the midriff, the film uses icons such as Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears that send the message: "Flaunt your sexuality, even if you don't understand it". The film interviews a thirteen year-old who is obsessed with looking older and fulfilling the marketable-midriff image. The girl strives to be "bought" by modeling agencies, for something quite far from whoever she is under the skin.
I enjoyed the film's conclusion, focusing on the rap metal/rage rock musical group Insane Clown Posey or ICP. It was very interesting to watch a band grow from underground to mainstream through marketing and as the film first pointed out "cool hunting". ICP went from a few followers underground to music videos on MTV and spots on television for the world wrestling federation. The documentary concludes well with the questions: "Do today's youth have anything we can call our own? And "Who can today's youth look to, if anyone?". In final words, as best said by the film itself: "Welcome to the machine".
Reaction Essay: The Corporation
The documentary The Corporation, directed by Jennifer Abbott and Mark Achbar and produced in 2004, although bias, opens many doors for discussion in regard to capitalism and the role of corporations in our lives. I found the documentary to be presented professionally, and filled with legitimate facts more so than extreme opinion. The documentary truly outlines the "all-pervasive" role the corporation has taken as the "world's dominant institution".
The film opens with a critique on the media's most widely-used metaphor to describe certain corporations as "a few bad apples". Among many newscasters quoted, George Bush is also shown belittling unjust corporations to a few bad apples. The documentary takes this and runs, so to speak, through exemplifying the short-sighted and belittling nature of this metaphor in describing the majority of the corporate world and its monopolizing, exploitive capabilities and tendencies. The film deems Dr. Frankenstein's creation to be analogous with the rise of corporations. The documentary illustrates corporations to have started as something for the "public good". The film discusses original chartered corporations with clear stipulations to avoid the multitude of injustices apparent today. This background information creates the outline for how far corporations have strayed from their role as a social betterment.
The film outlines the turning point to have occurred during the signing of the fourteenth amendment, this amendment was pushed between 1890 and 1910 in the name of free slaves. The amendment allots equal rights for individuals in terms of property, capital and the pursuit of happiness. The film highlights the fact that corporations skewed the amendment to include all corporations as individuals, thus allotting the rights of a person to a corporation. This in turn takes the blame off of many individuals leading a corporation and instead views them as one entity. The documentary quotes a white, male CEO of a company stating: "No soul to save, no body to incarcerate" this illustrates the danger in deeming corporations as persons.
The film utilizes the film maker Michael Moore, he is first pictured stating that corporations have "one incentive: make as much money as possible". Moore makes the interesting distinction that there is no marker for "enough", how much money is "enough" for a billionaire corporation?
The film places most emphasis on the "harms" of corporations, dividing segments into slides illustrating particular harms. The first segment depicts corporate harms to workers in the form of layoffs, union busts, factory fires, sweat shops etc. The film continues to outline harms to the environment in the form of dangerous production methods, toxic waste, pollution, synthetic chemicals, etc. The rise of synthetic chemicals is highlighted indicating this allows corporations to make everything at a lower cost, which as stated by the film is the monetary bottom line for all corporations. The documentary holds the corporate industry solely responsible for the United States' cancer epidemic.
The film also focuses on harms to animals: habitat deconstruction, factory farming, and animal experimentation which in my mind was the most influential part of the documentary: the discussion on the company Monsanto and animal hormones. The documentary discusses data showing the negative ramifications of the wide use of Monsanto products. The product Polisic is shown advertised for a needed increase in farming income, followed by proof of infection spreading to the milk we consume at home. Other hormones were discussed that in terms of humans affect the curability of infections in that a resistance to antibiotics is built. The example of staph infection was given specifically and our difficulty to maintain a cure due to resistance to antibodies. Back to Monsanto, the documentary stated that persons in the U.S. were able to sue the company $80million as compensation for health damages such as cancer caused by the company's Agent Orange used in Vietnam. The film listed a multitude of companies sued for over $1million in fines, however never mentioned in the press.
Most shocking in the discussion of Monsanto, is the film's coverage of a court case in which two Fox news reporters stood up for their right to serve as a valid news source. Two workers are depicted to have been assigned by Fox to change and hide their findings on the Monsanto companies' injustices and their inability to speak the truth. Rather than a happy ending, after hours of efforts, many letters, etc. the ex-workers received $425,000 as a settlement however only later to be withdrawn with shocking reasoning. The case closed with the conclusion that it is not technically illegal to produce false news. The workers lose and the corporation wins, thus pus still remains in our milk and most people, save those fortunate to hear the uncensored truth, will continue to drink it with smiles.
The film opens with a critique on the media's most widely-used metaphor to describe certain corporations as "a few bad apples". Among many newscasters quoted, George Bush is also shown belittling unjust corporations to a few bad apples. The documentary takes this and runs, so to speak, through exemplifying the short-sighted and belittling nature of this metaphor in describing the majority of the corporate world and its monopolizing, exploitive capabilities and tendencies. The film deems Dr. Frankenstein's creation to be analogous with the rise of corporations. The documentary illustrates corporations to have started as something for the "public good". The film discusses original chartered corporations with clear stipulations to avoid the multitude of injustices apparent today. This background information creates the outline for how far corporations have strayed from their role as a social betterment.
The film outlines the turning point to have occurred during the signing of the fourteenth amendment, this amendment was pushed between 1890 and 1910 in the name of free slaves. The amendment allots equal rights for individuals in terms of property, capital and the pursuit of happiness. The film highlights the fact that corporations skewed the amendment to include all corporations as individuals, thus allotting the rights of a person to a corporation. This in turn takes the blame off of many individuals leading a corporation and instead views them as one entity. The documentary quotes a white, male CEO of a company stating: "No soul to save, no body to incarcerate" this illustrates the danger in deeming corporations as persons.
The film utilizes the film maker Michael Moore, he is first pictured stating that corporations have "one incentive: make as much money as possible". Moore makes the interesting distinction that there is no marker for "enough", how much money is "enough" for a billionaire corporation?
The film places most emphasis on the "harms" of corporations, dividing segments into slides illustrating particular harms. The first segment depicts corporate harms to workers in the form of layoffs, union busts, factory fires, sweat shops etc. The film continues to outline harms to the environment in the form of dangerous production methods, toxic waste, pollution, synthetic chemicals, etc. The rise of synthetic chemicals is highlighted indicating this allows corporations to make everything at a lower cost, which as stated by the film is the monetary bottom line for all corporations. The documentary holds the corporate industry solely responsible for the United States' cancer epidemic.
The film also focuses on harms to animals: habitat deconstruction, factory farming, and animal experimentation which in my mind was the most influential part of the documentary: the discussion on the company Monsanto and animal hormones. The documentary discusses data showing the negative ramifications of the wide use of Monsanto products. The product Polisic is shown advertised for a needed increase in farming income, followed by proof of infection spreading to the milk we consume at home. Other hormones were discussed that in terms of humans affect the curability of infections in that a resistance to antibiotics is built. The example of staph infection was given specifically and our difficulty to maintain a cure due to resistance to antibodies. Back to Monsanto, the documentary stated that persons in the U.S. were able to sue the company $80million as compensation for health damages such as cancer caused by the company's Agent Orange used in Vietnam. The film listed a multitude of companies sued for over $1million in fines, however never mentioned in the press.
Most shocking in the discussion of Monsanto, is the film's coverage of a court case in which two Fox news reporters stood up for their right to serve as a valid news source. Two workers are depicted to have been assigned by Fox to change and hide their findings on the Monsanto companies' injustices and their inability to speak the truth. Rather than a happy ending, after hours of efforts, many letters, etc. the ex-workers received $425,000 as a settlement however only later to be withdrawn with shocking reasoning. The case closed with the conclusion that it is not technically illegal to produce false news. The workers lose and the corporation wins, thus pus still remains in our milk and most people, save those fortunate to hear the uncensored truth, will continue to drink it with smiles.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
media journal entry #5
Recently I re-read John Milton's "Paradise Lost" for a Survey of British Literature class. I must ask myself how much of the bible creates our common archetype for Adam and Eve's original sin and how many components of the archetype can be attributed to Milton for this piece. Milton's epic poem portrays the story of the devil's fall from heaven, humanity's first original sin, and highlights the esteemed garden of Eden. Reading this piece critically and especially keeping in mind the power of the media in regard to forming individual perceptions of life, "Paradise Lost" emphasizes patriarchal social values, along with values associated with free will humanity's god-fearing tendencies. The piece also serves to highlight in many ways the mentality of the United States as the land of the free mirroring the garden and humanity's present fall from this garden of freedom, or in general humanity's fall from a garden of Eden paradigm for existence post the presence of fearing God, as emphasized by Milton.
Eve's temptation highlights her superficial beauty and takes advantage of her yearning curiosity. Eve's quest for fruit from the tree of knowledge and her humility and loss of innocence following tasting the fruit imply a woman-based blame for sin. Eve's action is seeking knowledge to cure her own ignorance and by allowing knowledge into the garden, Eve has fallen and is banned. The brings to question our present notions of what is sinful. Milton's story creates the binary of knowledge vs. ignorance/innocence and Eve's decision provides the common notion that innocence and blind following are in some way more chaste than seeking truth. This may in ways be the foundation for so many individuals' stubborn diligence in keeping to beliefs of creationism and fundamental Christianity. Knowing God and fending curiosity seems more important and esteemed than pushing the mind and yearning for knowledge in this sense.
The story of Adam and Eve has many other layers worth examining in "Paradise Lost" such as justice, mortality, and vanity. In terms of this entry it is more so just worth noting the roles and values of individuals in literary pieces widely circulated and observing how people mirror the media, in this sense literature. Meaning is always based on one's reading of a text or acceptance of given media and when reading texts even texts elevated past the merit of traditional authors such as the Bible, we must always remember to keep a critical mind. Even if the criticism entails contradicting values instilled in what we're critique. Kudos to Milton's Eve for seeking knowledge and standing up, past her angel-on-his-shoulder, sheep-like counterpart Adam.
Eve's temptation highlights her superficial beauty and takes advantage of her yearning curiosity. Eve's quest for fruit from the tree of knowledge and her humility and loss of innocence following tasting the fruit imply a woman-based blame for sin. Eve's action is seeking knowledge to cure her own ignorance and by allowing knowledge into the garden, Eve has fallen and is banned. The brings to question our present notions of what is sinful. Milton's story creates the binary of knowledge vs. ignorance/innocence and Eve's decision provides the common notion that innocence and blind following are in some way more chaste than seeking truth. This may in ways be the foundation for so many individuals' stubborn diligence in keeping to beliefs of creationism and fundamental Christianity. Knowing God and fending curiosity seems more important and esteemed than pushing the mind and yearning for knowledge in this sense.
The story of Adam and Eve has many other layers worth examining in "Paradise Lost" such as justice, mortality, and vanity. In terms of this entry it is more so just worth noting the roles and values of individuals in literary pieces widely circulated and observing how people mirror the media, in this sense literature. Meaning is always based on one's reading of a text or acceptance of given media and when reading texts even texts elevated past the merit of traditional authors such as the Bible, we must always remember to keep a critical mind. Even if the criticism entails contradicting values instilled in what we're critique. Kudos to Milton's Eve for seeking knowledge and standing up, past her angel-on-his-shoulder, sheep-like counterpart Adam.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Reaction Essay: "Simulacra and Simulations"
My foundation for understanding simulacra is through my high school epistemology course. Simulacra was discussed through our discourse concerning ways in which knowledge is acquired and accepted criterion for truth. In my mind, the best way to define simulacra is "a copy without an original". Through a basic understanding, I was able to better comprehend
Jean Baudrillard's piece, which I have also been exposed to as a text for the truth of knowledge, epistemology course.
The introductory quotation is first worth reacting to. Beaudrillard's inclusion of this quotation is ingenious in that it is simulacra in itself. The quote "The simulacrum is never that which conceals the truth--it is the truth which conceals that there is none. The simulacrum is true." 'Ecclesiastes. Now there is doubt to the validity of this conclusion, but my professor in high school led the class to dissect the Bible's Ecclesiastes for this statement regarding simulacra, and we all came up empty handed. It may be that Baudrillard geniously and intentionally compiled this quotation and credited Ecclesiastes to illustrate the power of simulacra for creating truth. This quote, if not from Ecclesiastes, is in itself a simulacrum, and in line with the quotation, through the word "Ecclesiastes" it becomes true and accepted knowledge.
I found it important that Baudrillard points out that at a point simulation and representation had beautiful characteristics in terms of coextensivity, where cartographers were able to produce projects where "charm" lies in the concept itself aside from the charm of what's real and being represented. Baudrillard points out that the differences between abstractions of the past and abstractions of today lie in the fact that today's simulations are comprised of a difficulty to differentiate between the concept and the real thing. This is best said in the author's statement: "It is no longer a question of imitation, nor of reduplication, nor even of parody. It is rather a question of substituting signs of the real for the real itself".
The language Baudrillard uses to illustrate his point is complex and creates difficulty in comprehending his ideas. When he uses Disneyland as an example of the hyperreal, I imply he is suggesting that the concept of Disneyland and similar theme parks, create a simulated reality that makes it seem like what is outside the park is "real". This "real" world however in fact as presented by Baudrillard is no more real than Disneyland. Baudrillard writes: "Disneyland is there to conceal the fact that it is the "real" country, all of "real" America, which is
Disneyland (just as prisons are there to conceal the fact that it is the social in its entirety, in its banal omnipresence, which is carceral)." I found this breakdown, or statement toward prisons fascinating. Our country's means of carceration serve to incarcerate those previously entrapped by an imprisoning society? Is this what Baudrillard is saying? Our prisons hide the fact that society in itself is carcereal as Disneyland through creating imaginitive settings conceals the imaginative nature of all life?
I enjoy how Baudrillard also discusses how the task of restoring the truth to the simulacrum is a "false problem" considering the simulated has become truth through mental acceptance rather than from a valid or true original. Baudrillard illustrates through complex language that simulation has serious blows to mortality and his piece catalyzes further academic discourse on truth.
Jean Baudrillard's piece, which I have also been exposed to as a text for the truth of knowledge, epistemology course.
The introductory quotation is first worth reacting to. Beaudrillard's inclusion of this quotation is ingenious in that it is simulacra in itself. The quote "The simulacrum is never that which conceals the truth--it is the truth which conceals that there is none. The simulacrum is true." 'Ecclesiastes. Now there is doubt to the validity of this conclusion, but my professor in high school led the class to dissect the Bible's Ecclesiastes for this statement regarding simulacra, and we all came up empty handed. It may be that Baudrillard geniously and intentionally compiled this quotation and credited Ecclesiastes to illustrate the power of simulacra for creating truth. This quote, if not from Ecclesiastes, is in itself a simulacrum, and in line with the quotation, through the word "Ecclesiastes" it becomes true and accepted knowledge.
I found it important that Baudrillard points out that at a point simulation and representation had beautiful characteristics in terms of coextensivity, where cartographers were able to produce projects where "charm" lies in the concept itself aside from the charm of what's real and being represented. Baudrillard points out that the differences between abstractions of the past and abstractions of today lie in the fact that today's simulations are comprised of a difficulty to differentiate between the concept and the real thing. This is best said in the author's statement: "It is no longer a question of imitation, nor of reduplication, nor even of parody. It is rather a question of substituting signs of the real for the real itself".
The language Baudrillard uses to illustrate his point is complex and creates difficulty in comprehending his ideas. When he uses Disneyland as an example of the hyperreal, I imply he is suggesting that the concept of Disneyland and similar theme parks, create a simulated reality that makes it seem like what is outside the park is "real". This "real" world however in fact as presented by Baudrillard is no more real than Disneyland. Baudrillard writes: "Disneyland is there to conceal the fact that it is the "real" country, all of "real" America, which is
Disneyland (just as prisons are there to conceal the fact that it is the social in its entirety, in its banal omnipresence, which is carceral)." I found this breakdown, or statement toward prisons fascinating. Our country's means of carceration serve to incarcerate those previously entrapped by an imprisoning society? Is this what Baudrillard is saying? Our prisons hide the fact that society in itself is carcereal as Disneyland through creating imaginitive settings conceals the imaginative nature of all life?
I enjoy how Baudrillard also discusses how the task of restoring the truth to the simulacrum is a "false problem" considering the simulated has become truth through mental acceptance rather than from a valid or true original. Baudrillard illustrates through complex language that simulation has serious blows to mortality and his piece catalyzes further academic discourse on truth.
Consumption Log: Media Much Lately?
It almost seems appropriate to comment that the notion "we are immersed in media" is an understatement. Creating this log reminds me and makes me realize more deeply, how the media does not necessarily fill a void in communication it makes life outside the media the void, these days its hard to find an uninfluenced minute. Here's a slice of my consumption:
Tuesday February 10, 2009
8:00 am Rise and shine.
Open computer to music playing on Pandora.com, my Miles Davis station. I change the station to Medeski Martin and Wood. I log into fortlewis.edu and check my e-mail, I also log into wellsfargo.com and check my account information. The Wells Fargo website is filled with advertisements in favor of their bank.
The TV is on in the living room, I do not recognize the movie, my roommates are half-transfixed, half-asleep. I proceed to breakfast. The fridge is filled with media in the form of labels. I make Nest Fresh eggs, drink Diet Coke, and toast Ezekial bread.
My shower falls in the same category, many labels. Suave, Dove, Dr. Bronner's, Kiehl's etc. Old Spice, Burt's Bees, and Tom's follows. My clothing dresser is an advertisement in the form of stickers for Durango Brewing Co. beer, Poppy's and NOLS.
9:00-10:10 am
Drive my Jeep to school, an advertising tool in itself. Stickers include: Musical artist-based stickers, restaurant advertisements, an Estes Park sticker, etc. The ride to the Fort is filled with radio messages and music, a small amount of radio news, signs in windows, more sticker-bearing cars, business signs such as Subway, Diamond Shamrock, the Ebay store, Wendy's etc. Pick up hitchhiker driving up the hill who resembles trends across the cover of a magazine, her clothes and mine are unfortunately products of the media.
10:10-12:10 pm
Walls at FLC advertise Nappy Roots and Bassnectar. Education class revolves around the text book Effective Instructional Strategies by Kenneth Moore. Made progress on a group presentation where I am utilizing the media The Education of Little Tree the book and film in order to teach a lesson on environmental education. On the way out of class, I grabbed The Independent with the article “Sex” advertised on the cover.
12:10-3:00 pm
Listened to car radio, mainly classic rock Big Dog 106.7. The commercials streamed between music consist mainly of credit ads and ways to reduce miscellaneous costs. I drove to Wal Mart to buy cat supplies. Wal Mart is completely covered in media images and advertisements. Choosing a litter box and food for my cat was much more difficult than it would be with the absence of so many slogans and logos pushing different options. Driving home I listened to a friend’s ipod which played Railroad Earth, and Hot Buttered Rum. Obama stickers are everywhere on the road.
3:00-5:00 pm
Teacher education practicum work at Needham elementary tutoring a second grader. I utilized media in the form of a second grade class-produced book “Bee Mine” and drawings to aid in pronunciation and rhyming.
5:00-8:00
For homework read beginning of John Milton’s "Paradise Lost" which as a type of media has served as an accepted archetype for the story of Adam and Eve. Continued to read for pleasure Kerouac and Burrough’s And the Hippos Were Boiled in Their Tanks. I wrote in my journal, creating personal media and proceeded to converse on my cell phone about upcoming music in Durango.
8:00-10:00 pm
Played board game Labyrinth with friends. Drank Mickey’s brand beer with media under the caps in the form of picture riddles. Listened to Ani Difranco and The Rolling Stones. In light of friend’s birthday, drank Captain Morgan rum. Periodically friends mimicked the captain’s pose, media in action.
10:00-12:30 am
Went to the bar the Roadhouse to celebrate. Football game screening over the bar area however in background. Main focus pool tables and music. Display of liquor bottles in specific designs and colors along with displayed cigarettes for purchase indicative of media. The Roadhouse is one of few bars where smoking is still permitted due to grandfathered-in tradition. U2 was first playing on the jukebox. We played David Bowie’s “Fame” and The Band “Ophelia”. The bar crowd has a certain feel and even my friends take on a different persona that can perhaps be attributed to the esteemed look of smoking cigarettes in bars illustrated in many Hollywood productions.
Tuesday February 10, 2009
8:00 am Rise and shine.
Open computer to music playing on Pandora.com, my Miles Davis station. I change the station to Medeski Martin and Wood. I log into fortlewis.edu and check my e-mail, I also log into wellsfargo.com and check my account information. The Wells Fargo website is filled with advertisements in favor of their bank.
The TV is on in the living room, I do not recognize the movie, my roommates are half-transfixed, half-asleep. I proceed to breakfast. The fridge is filled with media in the form of labels. I make Nest Fresh eggs, drink Diet Coke, and toast Ezekial bread.
My shower falls in the same category, many labels. Suave, Dove, Dr. Bronner's, Kiehl's etc. Old Spice, Burt's Bees, and Tom's follows. My clothing dresser is an advertisement in the form of stickers for Durango Brewing Co. beer, Poppy's and NOLS.
9:00-10:10 am
Drive my Jeep to school, an advertising tool in itself. Stickers include: Musical artist-based stickers, restaurant advertisements, an Estes Park sticker, etc. The ride to the Fort is filled with radio messages and music, a small amount of radio news, signs in windows, more sticker-bearing cars, business signs such as Subway, Diamond Shamrock, the Ebay store, Wendy's etc. Pick up hitchhiker driving up the hill who resembles trends across the cover of a magazine, her clothes and mine are unfortunately products of the media.
10:10-12:10 pm
Walls at FLC advertise Nappy Roots and Bassnectar. Education class revolves around the text book Effective Instructional Strategies by Kenneth Moore. Made progress on a group presentation where I am utilizing the media The Education of Little Tree the book and film in order to teach a lesson on environmental education. On the way out of class, I grabbed The Independent with the article “Sex” advertised on the cover.
12:10-3:00 pm
Listened to car radio, mainly classic rock Big Dog 106.7. The commercials streamed between music consist mainly of credit ads and ways to reduce miscellaneous costs. I drove to Wal Mart to buy cat supplies. Wal Mart is completely covered in media images and advertisements. Choosing a litter box and food for my cat was much more difficult than it would be with the absence of so many slogans and logos pushing different options. Driving home I listened to a friend’s ipod which played Railroad Earth, and Hot Buttered Rum. Obama stickers are everywhere on the road.
3:00-5:00 pm
Teacher education practicum work at Needham elementary tutoring a second grader. I utilized media in the form of a second grade class-produced book “Bee Mine” and drawings to aid in pronunciation and rhyming.
5:00-8:00
For homework read beginning of John Milton’s "Paradise Lost" which as a type of media has served as an accepted archetype for the story of Adam and Eve. Continued to read for pleasure Kerouac and Burrough’s And the Hippos Were Boiled in Their Tanks. I wrote in my journal, creating personal media and proceeded to converse on my cell phone about upcoming music in Durango.
8:00-10:00 pm
Played board game Labyrinth with friends. Drank Mickey’s brand beer with media under the caps in the form of picture riddles. Listened to Ani Difranco and The Rolling Stones. In light of friend’s birthday, drank Captain Morgan rum. Periodically friends mimicked the captain’s pose, media in action.
10:00-12:30 am
Went to the bar the Roadhouse to celebrate. Football game screening over the bar area however in background. Main focus pool tables and music. Display of liquor bottles in specific designs and colors along with displayed cigarettes for purchase indicative of media. The Roadhouse is one of few bars where smoking is still permitted due to grandfathered-in tradition. U2 was first playing on the jukebox. We played David Bowie’s “Fame” and The Band “Ophelia”. The bar crowd has a certain feel and even my friends take on a different persona that can perhaps be attributed to the esteemed look of smoking cigarettes in bars illustrated in many Hollywood productions.
Friday, February 13, 2009
media journal entry #4
Tomorrow is Valentine's Day. A day originating with the Catholic church and St. Valentine and now somehow representative of perhaps our society's simulacrum for love. I wanted to post a Valentine's-related video for this post and found the following commercial from the UK interesting. Commonly V-Day ads are geared toward a male audience in light of their "obligation" to charm or lure their loved one or sweetheart with gifts. This ad also appeals to a male audience in that the view focuses on scantily clad women but the tag line of the commercial "give him wood this Valentine's day" implies the product is geared for women to please their male significant other instead. This is a provocative ad, most likely never air-worthy in the United States.
I claim that Valentine's day can be deemed an example of simulacra or as I understand a copy without an original, something we have created to stand representative of an illusory idea. Love takes on different connotations in different circumstances and candy, pink, chocolate and lace belittle a sacred union and feeling between lovers and friends. The corporate holiday frustrates me, however despite my cynicism toward the day it still serves as an excuse to spend too much money and date someone. Here's the ad:
I claim that Valentine's day can be deemed an example of simulacra or as I understand a copy without an original, something we have created to stand representative of an illusory idea. Love takes on different connotations in different circumstances and candy, pink, chocolate and lace belittle a sacred union and feeling between lovers and friends. The corporate holiday frustrates me, however despite my cynicism toward the day it still serves as an excuse to spend too much money and date someone. Here's the ad:
Thursday, February 5, 2009
media journal entry #3
Without a tape deck or CD player in my car I am often listening to the radio. Next to the Internet, this is my biggest source of mass media daily. Lately I have been frustrated, saddened and over all confused as to the commercials streaming most frequently. There is no doubt we are suffering an economic crisis, however every other commercial these days has the facade of a rescue scheme however seems to go right along with our reasons for deficit. I can't count the number of commercials advertising quick-fix tax refunds and complete removal of credit. U.S. society runs on short-sighted, short-term rewards and the streamed remedies are seemingly only perpetuating this mentality. The commercials and fright remind me of how easily manipulable the human brain may be and our tendency to settle for cop outs. Cop outs similar to those advertised over the radio where the real beneficiaries are the companies putting out the ads.
I watched a documentary tonight entitled Jesus Camp. The film revolves around an Evangelical Christian minister who spends her life preaching to children and running a Jesus camp called Kids on Fire. The children interviewed gave testimonies in regard to how they were saved from their previous lives of sin, the oldest interviewed aged eleven. The children are not only completely transfixed and mesmerized by the minister but actually proceed to independently spread "God's word". The documentary depicts startling statistics such as 75% of home schooled kids are Evangelical as well as 25% of the U.S. population. Other interviews had practicing Christians discussing how Evangelicals have the power to sway the vote and unite the nation "under one God". The documentary also depicts children and parents believing adamantly in creationism, and showing frustration in the instruction of evolution in schools. Parents and children are also shown at school (at home) discussing the petty nature of global warming and how it "isn't really even that big of a deal" says the main child in the documentary. The film repeatedly presents families shrugging off science and declaring how science removes Jesus' meaning from life, thus promoting intelligent design.
I can compare my experience with radio commercials and human tendencies to fall for commercial rescues with the lives depicted in Jesus Camp. I find those prepared to let another credit company take care of their bad credit and those who disregard found truths in exchange for scripture are manifestations of manipulated minds. As disrespectful as it may sound, I feel like I witnessed the realities of two cults today, one I experience on a daily basis: the credit cult, and one that has the potential to undermine our democracy: the cult called Christianity. I find it so sad that a minister would devote her life to indoctrinating the minds of children, in a way removing the free will so widely acknowledged by their savior Jesus.
I watched a documentary tonight entitled Jesus Camp. The film revolves around an Evangelical Christian minister who spends her life preaching to children and running a Jesus camp called Kids on Fire. The children interviewed gave testimonies in regard to how they were saved from their previous lives of sin, the oldest interviewed aged eleven. The children are not only completely transfixed and mesmerized by the minister but actually proceed to independently spread "God's word". The documentary depicts startling statistics such as 75% of home schooled kids are Evangelical as well as 25% of the U.S. population. Other interviews had practicing Christians discussing how Evangelicals have the power to sway the vote and unite the nation "under one God". The documentary also depicts children and parents believing adamantly in creationism, and showing frustration in the instruction of evolution in schools. Parents and children are also shown at school (at home) discussing the petty nature of global warming and how it "isn't really even that big of a deal" says the main child in the documentary. The film repeatedly presents families shrugging off science and declaring how science removes Jesus' meaning from life, thus promoting intelligent design.
I can compare my experience with radio commercials and human tendencies to fall for commercial rescues with the lives depicted in Jesus Camp. I find those prepared to let another credit company take care of their bad credit and those who disregard found truths in exchange for scripture are manifestations of manipulated minds. As disrespectful as it may sound, I feel like I witnessed the realities of two cults today, one I experience on a daily basis: the credit cult, and one that has the potential to undermine our democracy: the cult called Christianity. I find it so sad that a minister would devote her life to indoctrinating the minds of children, in a way removing the free will so widely acknowledged by their savior Jesus.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
