Today I thought I would examine a popular news source in terms of its layout, and the wording of its articles. I am currently looking at drudgereport.com (accessed April 29, 2008 at 5:30 p.m., http://www.drudgereport.com/) and I immediately notice two major headlines. At the top of the page, in a massive print size, the headline is "Obama Outraged by Former Pastor's Comments." In a column below, in far smaller type, is an announcement that Hillary Clinton will "appear for first time ever on FOX NEWS' 'The O'Reilly Factor' Wednesday night . . ." (drudgereport.com accessed April 29, 2008 at 5:30 p.m.). Personally, I find the second headline far more intriguing because it is something new (link to "The O'Reilly Factor" website: http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/).
Everyone I have spoken to (in an area densely populated by democrats) seems to be getting sick of the Obama/Reverend Wright saga. It seems fitting that Wright's sensational comments have been picked up by a sensationalist media, which ends up hurting Obama politically; however, the relationship between the two individuals has been so thoroughly addressed that it seems like the media has some kind of agenda in focusing on a story of someone who is portrayed (I have not seen his entire sermons, so I cannot be sure) as a religious and racial radical. The status quo is maintained through this portrayal by putting down Reverend Wright, even though some of his comments are truly ridiculous.
It's intriguing to me that it is more of a side story that something so monumental as Hillary Clinton agreeing to be on the controversial "O'Reilly Factor" Fox program. As a Republican, I will definitely be watching this programming, especially since Hillary Clinton is an individual that Bill O'Reilly would love to rip into. I will be curious to see how both individuals conduct themselves within the program. Furthermore, I question the intentions of Matt Drudge as well as other media sources that put a story in the headline that hurts Obama instead of letting people know about an incredible media event regarding Hillary Clinton and a stalwart conservative member of the media.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
The Persuaders
Today in media studies class, we watched the beginning half of a PBS special entitled "The Persuaders" (link to documentary website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/). I found this to be a rather thought-provoking documentary in that it gives an advertiser's perspective towards the different advertisements that bombard us everyday.
Specifically, I thought the example presented within the documentary of Song Airlines to be quite intriguing because of its advertising strategy. It was explained that Song was the result of Delta's idea to create a company that is removed from the (unpopular) Delta name. However, according to the documentary, the focus of the Song Airlines ad campaign is designed by an individual named Andy Spade. Now, Mr. Spade has some interesting ideas on how to engineer Song Airlines' ad campaign; he is busy creating a lifestyle that would appeal to customers (especially women) that would set Song Airlines apart from its competitors. I personally can attest that one of Song's competitors, Jet Blue, seems to be more of a "cool" company, with flat screen TVs in their terminals (at Boston Logan) and other gimmicks that are pleasing to the consumer's eye. Naturally, it seems that Song is trying to imitate this concept, except that, as was presented in the documentary, Song is pushing it to the next level by portraying the company itself as an easy-going lifestyle choice instead of a corporation.
I feel that while this advertising strategy is interesting, I predict it will fail. The documentary made an explicit point that fares and airplanes are not even mentioned in the television-based advertisements. Images of hip people in front of visually stunning backdrops seem to be the way Song has decided to go. However, people in the documentary did not know that Song was even an airline. I understand in the corporate world it is important to break away from competitors, and one of the methods of doing so is by selling an image. Apple does this among other companies. Furthermore, I do not feel that the commercial travel industry has this cultural potential, simply because of what it is: travel. Frankly, sitting on a plane for several hours is boring no matter how kaleidoscopic the colors of the headrests are. A corporation needs advertising to promote its message to the people; however, I feel Song Airlines specifically will face a conundrum in that, to the passengers sitting on the plane, its just another boring plane ride.
Specifically, I thought the example presented within the documentary of Song Airlines to be quite intriguing because of its advertising strategy. It was explained that Song was the result of Delta's idea to create a company that is removed from the (unpopular) Delta name. However, according to the documentary, the focus of the Song Airlines ad campaign is designed by an individual named Andy Spade. Now, Mr. Spade has some interesting ideas on how to engineer Song Airlines' ad campaign; he is busy creating a lifestyle that would appeal to customers (especially women) that would set Song Airlines apart from its competitors. I personally can attest that one of Song's competitors, Jet Blue, seems to be more of a "cool" company, with flat screen TVs in their terminals (at Boston Logan) and other gimmicks that are pleasing to the consumer's eye. Naturally, it seems that Song is trying to imitate this concept, except that, as was presented in the documentary, Song is pushing it to the next level by portraying the company itself as an easy-going lifestyle choice instead of a corporation.
I feel that while this advertising strategy is interesting, I predict it will fail. The documentary made an explicit point that fares and airplanes are not even mentioned in the television-based advertisements. Images of hip people in front of visually stunning backdrops seem to be the way Song has decided to go. However, people in the documentary did not know that Song was even an airline. I understand in the corporate world it is important to break away from competitors, and one of the methods of doing so is by selling an image. Apple does this among other companies. Furthermore, I do not feel that the commercial travel industry has this cultural potential, simply because of what it is: travel. Frankly, sitting on a plane for several hours is boring no matter how kaleidoscopic the colors of the headrests are. A corporation needs advertising to promote its message to the people; however, I feel Song Airlines specifically will face a conundrum in that, to the passengers sitting on the plane, its just another boring plane ride.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Internet Identity
Yesterday I was reading an article in the May 2008 issue of Esquire Magazine when I stumbled across an articled "MySpace.com/Doppelganger" by Chuck Klosterman. In this article, Mr. Klosterman discusses the creation of identities online, via MySpace or Facebook.
The most profound point that Mr. Klosterman made was "The self-portrait you upload on Facebook is what you look like...It does not matter if you've honestly enjoyed the movies you list as favorites or read the books you claim to love...Who is going to disagree?" (Klosterman 66). I feel that this statement blurs the line between what is reality and what isn't. Who is to say that a person's biography on their home page on a social networking site is not the actual person themselves? Internet link to article: http://www.esquire.com/features/chuck-klostermans-america/hannah-montana-0508.
The reason I find this so interesting is because it is individual people who create their Internet identity. People on social sites only see what other people want them to see. These social networking site pages are manifestations of different people's self-perceptions. They choose only the aspects of their personality or interests that may appeal to people or appeal to their own personal self-view. Mr. Klosterman takes this idea a step further by asking us not if people only project their best self-image, with the understanding that the image has a basis in reality. One cannot accurately try to conform to a specific group if they do not share the behavior of that group's members, i.e. (though I realize this is a stereotype) if one wants to be categorized as a metal music lover, there tends to be a series of bands to which most of the mainstream metal world listens (Metallica, Iron Maiden, etc.). Klosterman questions the validity of these online declarations of self, in essence saying that just because it's there, it's not true.
This leads into another topic. Why would people want to put false information about themselves on a social networking site. Personally, I believe that people will often try to self-categorize in order to fit into a specific group that they feel may be better than other groups. This sentiment of group egoism is ironic because, as Klosterman points out, some individuals may not belong to the groups to whom they claim allegiance.
Source: Klosterman, Chuck. "MySpace.com/Doppelganger." Esquire May 2008: 65-66
Thank you for Reading
The most profound point that Mr. Klosterman made was "The self-portrait you upload on Facebook is what you look like...It does not matter if you've honestly enjoyed the movies you list as favorites or read the books you claim to love...Who is going to disagree?" (Klosterman 66). I feel that this statement blurs the line between what is reality and what isn't. Who is to say that a person's biography on their home page on a social networking site is not the actual person themselves? Internet link to article: http://www.esquire.com/features/chuck-klostermans-america/hannah-montana-0508.
The reason I find this so interesting is because it is individual people who create their Internet identity. People on social sites only see what other people want them to see. These social networking site pages are manifestations of different people's self-perceptions. They choose only the aspects of their personality or interests that may appeal to people or appeal to their own personal self-view. Mr. Klosterman takes this idea a step further by asking us not if people only project their best self-image, with the understanding that the image has a basis in reality. One cannot accurately try to conform to a specific group if they do not share the behavior of that group's members, i.e. (though I realize this is a stereotype) if one wants to be categorized as a metal music lover, there tends to be a series of bands to which most of the mainstream metal world listens (Metallica, Iron Maiden, etc.). Klosterman questions the validity of these online declarations of self, in essence saying that just because it's there, it's not true.
This leads into another topic. Why would people want to put false information about themselves on a social networking site. Personally, I believe that people will often try to self-categorize in order to fit into a specific group that they feel may be better than other groups. This sentiment of group egoism is ironic because, as Klosterman points out, some individuals may not belong to the groups to whom they claim allegiance.
Source: Klosterman, Chuck. "MySpace.com/Doppelganger." Esquire May 2008: 65-66
Thank you for Reading
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Applications...Again
I just completed an application and an interview. No, not the ones of the college variety that have been plaguing my fellow classmates and me for the past several months, these are for a summer job.
I just applied to work in Washington D.C. again. I officially have what my former internship coordinator called the "Potomac Fever," a term he used to describe the allure that Washington D.C. has over the individuals that visit or work in that city. I say that I have this "affliction" because, if I get the job for which I just completed an interview, I will have worked in Washington D.C. for the past three summers.
My friends can't understand why I would want to return to a job that I have done already for two summers that I previously did without pay. However, to me at least, there are several conditions that make this time around very different to those previous. First, I used a third party organization in order to find the positions in Washington D.C. This organization has proved instrumental in the development of my interest in the U.S. government and public policy. This time is different in that I am applying for a job independently of any job-finding organization. Secondly, this year has meant much for me in terms of the development of my political and ideological beliefs. Now that I have been going out of the way to read exploratory non-fiction books along with scholarly articles, I am much more acutely aware of world events and their causes/potential impacts. I have consumed this kind of media voraciously, and as a result, I have developed a new perspective on government. Furthermore, I believe that the kind of job a person has in the government or politics is a reflection of the beliefs and perceptions of the individual in that job. Some people can take their personal beliefs into their work and use them to make their work more enjoyable or worthwhile. In this way, though I may have a similar position that I have in the past two summers, it is a completely different kind of job, a job that fascinates me.
I just applied to work in Washington D.C. again. I officially have what my former internship coordinator called the "Potomac Fever," a term he used to describe the allure that Washington D.C. has over the individuals that visit or work in that city. I say that I have this "affliction" because, if I get the job for which I just completed an interview, I will have worked in Washington D.C. for the past three summers.
My friends can't understand why I would want to return to a job that I have done already for two summers that I previously did without pay. However, to me at least, there are several conditions that make this time around very different to those previous. First, I used a third party organization in order to find the positions in Washington D.C. This organization has proved instrumental in the development of my interest in the U.S. government and public policy. This time is different in that I am applying for a job independently of any job-finding organization. Secondly, this year has meant much for me in terms of the development of my political and ideological beliefs. Now that I have been going out of the way to read exploratory non-fiction books along with scholarly articles, I am much more acutely aware of world events and their causes/potential impacts. I have consumed this kind of media voraciously, and as a result, I have developed a new perspective on government. Furthermore, I believe that the kind of job a person has in the government or politics is a reflection of the beliefs and perceptions of the individual in that job. Some people can take their personal beliefs into their work and use them to make their work more enjoyable or worthwhile. In this way, though I may have a similar position that I have in the past two summers, it is a completely different kind of job, a job that fascinates me.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Gotta Catch 'Em All!
I was browsing through my memory banks, thinking for some kind of impact that media has had on my life and society. And them, WHOOM! It hits me with all the subtlety of a cudgel in the face. My life has been forever shaped by the international phenomenon known as Pokemon. (Link to Pokemon website: http://www.pokemon.com/).
I was in the fourth grade when I first came across those adorable little pocket monsters. I was a little behind the curve when it came to acquiring the hottest game around, as I lacked a nintendo gameboy on which to play it. However, when I popped the cartridge into the gameboy and turned on the screen to see a cute little "charmander" staring me in the face (http://guidesmedia.ign.com/guides/9846/images/charmander.gif). I knew I was in love. I could not stop playing this game. It was frighteningly addictive; it was a physical impossibility to put the gameboy down.
Though I was young at the time, I realize in retrospect how much the Pokemon craze had completely immersed American pop culture. The images of Pikachu (http://anthropoasis.free.fr/IMG/gif/Pikachu.gif) and other cute little critters were on television shows, clothing, spring-off video games, and the Internet. It's incredible to me that a foreign-made video game was able to completely take over the youth of a country. To me, this popularity wave, supported by marketing groups looking to exploit the pokemon frenzy, is part of a market that exploits the impressionability of kids who are looking for entertainment. This makes sense to me, in that children are a class of individuals who demand market consumption from their parents. However, this market deluge changed kids lives. It's kind of sad that when I think of my childhood, I think of the different video games I've played. People have many different kind of influences on their lives, but I am a product of an age where targeted marketing campaigns have drastically changed the culture of my youth.
I was in the fourth grade when I first came across those adorable little pocket monsters. I was a little behind the curve when it came to acquiring the hottest game around, as I lacked a nintendo gameboy on which to play it. However, when I popped the cartridge into the gameboy and turned on the screen to see a cute little "charmander" staring me in the face (http://guidesmedia.ign.com/guides/9846/images/charmander.gif). I knew I was in love. I could not stop playing this game. It was frighteningly addictive; it was a physical impossibility to put the gameboy down.
Though I was young at the time, I realize in retrospect how much the Pokemon craze had completely immersed American pop culture. The images of Pikachu (http://anthropoasis.free.fr/IMG/gif/Pikachu.gif) and other cute little critters were on television shows, clothing, spring-off video games, and the Internet. It's incredible to me that a foreign-made video game was able to completely take over the youth of a country. To me, this popularity wave, supported by marketing groups looking to exploit the pokemon frenzy, is part of a market that exploits the impressionability of kids who are looking for entertainment. This makes sense to me, in that children are a class of individuals who demand market consumption from their parents. However, this market deluge changed kids lives. It's kind of sad that when I think of my childhood, I think of the different video games I've played. People have many different kind of influences on their lives, but I am a product of an age where targeted marketing campaigns have drastically changed the culture of my youth.
Monday, April 21, 2008
The Little Freedoms
I go to a school that had many strict rules that often seem gratuitous to the students. I have to obey rules such as asking a faculty member if I can be ride in our friend's car, even though I am technically an adult. I have to ask someone who is apparently more of an "adult" than I am if I can take my girlfriend of roughly two years up to my room (these supervisors are hardly ever in the dorm). Now, today my school received an email from our Dean of Students that was met with much wailing and much gnashing of teeth, as it introduced a new policy that covered a topic that most students considered a save haven: permission to go to a friend's house that is within walking distance.
According to the new policy, one must obtain permission from one's house counselors or cluster dean as well as have the friend's parent call to confirm that they will be present in order to make the five minute journey to visit that house. In my personal experience, when I go to a friend's house downtown, I am just visiting to say hello and to say hello to the parents of my friend. It is a different dynamic when you visit a friend at their home, and you interact with your friend's parents. These little visits build someone's relationship with his or her friend as well as her parents. These trips are also safe havens from the oppressive bubble that is my school.
I can understand that my school wants to protect itself from any potential litigation actions that a student's parents may take against the school because the student somehow got hurt or drank themselves into a stupor at the friend's house. It's understandable that my school as an institution wants to protect itself from these kinds of legal risks, but come on. I already have so many little aspects of my life that is managed and controlled that my school, though it professes as its mission to broaden the minds of its students, has limited my experiences. As a result, I feel I have not been as fully "educated" or experienced as many things as I could because I have nit-picking rules that hold me back. One may say, if the rules are so trifling, why don't you just take care of them? I'd love to. However, I as a person hate having my individual liberties being restricted by a bunch of individuals for reasons I think are stupid. Yeah, the school has to look after itself, so what if my parents (I think they would) wrote a letter that said "my technically adult son has the right to ride in whichever car he wants, and can go wherever he wants, whenever he wants."
Education is in the classroom and in life experiences. My school covers the first point, but tries to control the other. With such pedantic restrictions and almost petty threats of petty punishment, it is hard to be educated from the second source.
According to the new policy, one must obtain permission from one's house counselors or cluster dean as well as have the friend's parent call to confirm that they will be present in order to make the five minute journey to visit that house. In my personal experience, when I go to a friend's house downtown, I am just visiting to say hello and to say hello to the parents of my friend. It is a different dynamic when you visit a friend at their home, and you interact with your friend's parents. These little visits build someone's relationship with his or her friend as well as her parents. These trips are also safe havens from the oppressive bubble that is my school.
I can understand that my school wants to protect itself from any potential litigation actions that a student's parents may take against the school because the student somehow got hurt or drank themselves into a stupor at the friend's house. It's understandable that my school as an institution wants to protect itself from these kinds of legal risks, but come on. I already have so many little aspects of my life that is managed and controlled that my school, though it professes as its mission to broaden the minds of its students, has limited my experiences. As a result, I feel I have not been as fully "educated" or experienced as many things as I could because I have nit-picking rules that hold me back. One may say, if the rules are so trifling, why don't you just take care of them? I'd love to. However, I as a person hate having my individual liberties being restricted by a bunch of individuals for reasons I think are stupid. Yeah, the school has to look after itself, so what if my parents (I think they would) wrote a letter that said "my technically adult son has the right to ride in whichever car he wants, and can go wherever he wants, whenever he wants."
Education is in the classroom and in life experiences. My school covers the first point, but tries to control the other. With such pedantic restrictions and almost petty threats of petty punishment, it is hard to be educated from the second source.
Friday, April 18, 2008
Long Weekend Alone
It's the time of the long weekend. All of the local boarders and day students are nowhere to be found throughout campus. What's worse is that it is also college visiting weekend. Because of this, even kids who live far away will leave campus to go visit the college of their choice. This is great for these students; I earnestly hope that these people find an institution of higher learning that suits their needs and wants.
I, however, was accepted by a binding early decision. This means that I am legally obligated to go to the one school tho which I was accepted. Now, I am completely fine with these terms, but as I am definitely going to this particular school, there is no real reason for me to go and revisit the school. As a result, I will stay by my lonesome on campus, with the few individuals who remain to keep me company.
This is not entirely bad though. In my experience of being left alone on campus, there are plenty of small victories to be won through the exploration of the campus or local town along with finding random adventures. One may find an interesting little store downtown that was previously overlooked, explore the forest nearby, or settle down to read a good book. The fact that I am left to myself (I believe) is a blessing in disguise, that I have the opportunity to do certain things that I would not be able to do if others were here to distract me. For example, I may now be able to spend quality time with an individual with whom I do not usually interact. Being able to do things outside of the norm aides people in becoming a more complete, cultured individual, and I hope I may be able to expand myself in this way.
I, however, was accepted by a binding early decision. This means that I am legally obligated to go to the one school tho which I was accepted. Now, I am completely fine with these terms, but as I am definitely going to this particular school, there is no real reason for me to go and revisit the school. As a result, I will stay by my lonesome on campus, with the few individuals who remain to keep me company.
This is not entirely bad though. In my experience of being left alone on campus, there are plenty of small victories to be won through the exploration of the campus or local town along with finding random adventures. One may find an interesting little store downtown that was previously overlooked, explore the forest nearby, or settle down to read a good book. The fact that I am left to myself (I believe) is a blessing in disguise, that I have the opportunity to do certain things that I would not be able to do if others were here to distract me. For example, I may now be able to spend quality time with an individual with whom I do not usually interact. Being able to do things outside of the norm aides people in becoming a more complete, cultured individual, and I hope I may be able to expand myself in this way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)