Great movie, worth mentioning, of course.
NETWORK TRAILER:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUBbpvXk2A
CLIP FROM NETWORK: "mad as hell"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90ELleCQvew
Monday, December 20, 2010
Friday, December 17, 2010
Democracy and Media
The courage and effort of people such as Elizabeth Cochrne is outstanding to me. Especially for those times. The courage to actually get put into an institution and expose it from the inside out is incredible. As I was reading About "Nellie Bly" and Veronica GuerinI started to wonder what effort is being taken nowadays to expose what's going on? Is the leaked video of the Apache helicopter really something people didn't expect to see? Videos like this have been circulating on the internet since I can remember. I remember seeing a video at the start of the war of a group of possible insurgents around a truck, possibly getting ready to attack the chopper overhead. They fired, and the black and white thermal camera image showed the .50 cal rounds tear the people apart (I might be mistaken on the round size). Chunks of human, seen in shades of grey being sprayed around the ground near this truck were disgusting. The men shot, trying to drag their bodies to safety being fired at again, to finish them off.
Of course, it IS war, and nobody is going to be throwing teddy bears at the "enemy" so what reaction is one to have? Happiness that the forces of "good" can tally up a few more kills for the sake of safety and democracy? Indifference because of the nature of war and how it can never change in terms of casualties? Or perhaps despair that beliefs, and actions of specific people or governments are outside of our control? Maybe this is why we don't see these kinds of things in the first place. Because people wouldn't know how to react anyway. And what good is seeing these images if no action is taken? If life goes on the same way, without some sort of awareness, and positive action? That last statement might reek of naivety, but is awareness enough?
The one name that popped into my head as I thought about journalist putting their life on the line was Daniel Pearl. He was beheaded in 2002 and buried in 10 pieces after going to Pakistan trying to get interviews with Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, but instead was kidnapped and killed apparently because of Americas presence in Pakistan, and the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. It stopped me in my tracks when I realized how long this war has been going on, and how it's been since 2001. I also remember footage from the Gulf War when soldiers were coming back home and people were screaming in the streets in my old neighborhood (Rockaway Beach, Queens) "we won, we won!" I still remember military helicopters flying overhead around that time, I'm assuming flying towards the airport.
Of course, it IS war, and nobody is going to be throwing teddy bears at the "enemy" so what reaction is one to have? Happiness that the forces of "good" can tally up a few more kills for the sake of safety and democracy? Indifference because of the nature of war and how it can never change in terms of casualties? Or perhaps despair that beliefs, and actions of specific people or governments are outside of our control? Maybe this is why we don't see these kinds of things in the first place. Because people wouldn't know how to react anyway. And what good is seeing these images if no action is taken? If life goes on the same way, without some sort of awareness, and positive action? That last statement might reek of naivety, but is awareness enough?
The one name that popped into my head as I thought about journalist putting their life on the line was Daniel Pearl. He was beheaded in 2002 and buried in 10 pieces after going to Pakistan trying to get interviews with Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, but instead was kidnapped and killed apparently because of Americas presence in Pakistan, and the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. It stopped me in my tracks when I realized how long this war has been going on, and how it's been since 2001. I also remember footage from the Gulf War when soldiers were coming back home and people were screaming in the streets in my old neighborhood (Rockaway Beach, Queens) "we won, we won!" I still remember military helicopters flying overhead around that time, I'm assuming flying towards the airport.
Mass Media Business
The section here that stood out the most was definitely the VALS Framework. The fact that they simplify people into these categories in their Values and Lifestyles chart is a bit insulting. Maybe because the truth hurts? Some sections seem to make sense, but lumping people into these categories is exactly the heartless type of method that could alienate people. But I suppose as long as there are people around to consume, and as long as advertisers keep looking for ways to peddle products, things won't exactly change. That also makes me question whether my lack of resources is my reason for feeling this way. If I can barely afford bill money right now, nevermind textbooks then of course they'd lump me into a Survivor category.
Although, even when I had money to spare while working full time and not having to worry about rent, electric, internet, loan interest bills, I don't remember ever being guided by advertising to begin with. As a child, yes. Any commercial for a video game, especially with weird visuals and loud noises was like a reaction from Pavlov's dog. But as I got older, I cared less for what they were selling. I could be wowed by a commercial, or advertisement in terms of th idea, creativity, or flashiness - but as far as leading me to buy the product? doubtful. And I'm not the only one, I don't see too many people being led by advertising on tv and especially not from the streets or subways.
We experience ~2,000 forms of advertisements a day apparently, and I'd be hard-pressed to tell you any of what I saw, other han a few that stick out because they were funny. Such as:
Then again, it contains things I'm already interest in, or that I buy (although not from fresh direct). So it's not exactly something NEW to me. Now I wonder whether I'm simply unaware of the effect on me, on what category I fall into and whether I'm so desensitized and in denial that I refuse to accept that I'm as far in this as anyone else?
Although, even when I had money to spare while working full time and not having to worry about rent, electric, internet, loan interest bills, I don't remember ever being guided by advertising to begin with. As a child, yes. Any commercial for a video game, especially with weird visuals and loud noises was like a reaction from Pavlov's dog. But as I got older, I cared less for what they were selling. I could be wowed by a commercial, or advertisement in terms of th idea, creativity, or flashiness - but as far as leading me to buy the product? doubtful. And I'm not the only one, I don't see too many people being led by advertising on tv and especially not from the streets or subways.
We experience ~2,000 forms of advertisements a day apparently, and I'd be hard-pressed to tell you any of what I saw, other han a few that stick out because they were funny. Such as:
Then again, it contains things I'm already interest in, or that I buy (although not from fresh direct). So it's not exactly something NEW to me. Now I wonder whether I'm simply unaware of the effect on me, on what category I fall into and whether I'm so desensitized and in denial that I refuse to accept that I'm as far in this as anyone else?
Newspapers and books
I have vivid memories of getting the newspaper everyday. Then every weekend, then for the sake of those poor trees, my mom canceled it altogether. As a kid, my firs reaction was to jump to the funny pages, of course. As I got older, I got cynical like the rest of the teenagers out there who think they know everything they need to know about who's who and what's what. So I figured that the BS the nightly news was feeding me, was the same brand of BS that the newspapers fed people, but with a lot of pages, and a waste of paper.
Of course I wasn't aware of something like the partisan press, and I wasn't aware of much more that mightv'e made me a bit more appreciative of the sources of information we have nowadays, in one way or another. Though I do think that skepticism was a good thing when it came to the media, even if it was at an age where I really didn't have enough information to back up my beliefs.
The concept of partisan papers seems logical. Fair? maybe not. Informative? to an extent, but as we see nowadays, it is easy to lock onesself into a specific mindset and keep on that track indefinitely without so much as giving the other "side" a chance to inform us of their views, or facts. investigative journalism seems like the high point for journalism, with information to expose lies and injustices. Objectivity seems somewhat heartless. Sure, it might provide us with information, but in it's neutrality, it might just help to make people neutral and "ok" with what's going on instead of trying to give a message with it's writing. I suppose there is no perfect way to go about it, because either way, is anyone getting the WHOLE story without any hint of bias? I'm not sure where newspapers are heading, but I don't think that journalism is going anywhere, and as long as people know how to write, the written word will spread. As a fan of print in general, I hope it doesn't disappear, and doubt it will in entirety, although the only thing about print that bothers me is paper sources and how some sources cut down far too much forest (tree-hugger moment).
The invention of the kindle, the internet, e-book, and the ipad seem to have some sort of effect on printed books. And if not e-books, the internet (amazon) surely has an effect on book stores. I remember looking into e-books years ago, and after downloading a sample, I hated it. Of course, this was pre-ipad/and around the time ipods were gaining in popularity (though who wants to read a book on one of those?). Sitting there, in front of a computer, staring at the screen while reading was not a pleasurable experience. I'd rather sit there with a book, make some notes by hand, even if it means the page will never be the same. It's a disconnect from the era where every new form of technology that comes out seems to get closer and closer to having something that plugs in directly into our heads. People seem to be buying more books on amazon, even if book stores are getting less business. It's cheaper and provides us with an attitude-free way of getting what we want.
Of course, not all book stores are full of pompous jackasses that walk int he other direction,or give a crooked look if you actually dare to have a question for them. I walked into a book store with a friend a while ago during the Obama election (right before) and as we walk in, we are greeted and welcomed. There is a group of people discussing the debates and speeches, and laughing as McCain comes on to say his piece. There was a sharing fo ideas and an offer to help find what we're looking for without a sense of superiority or laziness. These are the people I empathize with. I hope these stores continue to get business. There is no way books in print will disappear anytime soon, but I could care less if stores like strand go bye-bye, even if they have a nice selection of books. Perhaps robot employees?
Of course I wasn't aware of something like the partisan press, and I wasn't aware of much more that mightv'e made me a bit more appreciative of the sources of information we have nowadays, in one way or another. Though I do think that skepticism was a good thing when it came to the media, even if it was at an age where I really didn't have enough information to back up my beliefs.
The concept of partisan papers seems logical. Fair? maybe not. Informative? to an extent, but as we see nowadays, it is easy to lock onesself into a specific mindset and keep on that track indefinitely without so much as giving the other "side" a chance to inform us of their views, or facts. investigative journalism seems like the high point for journalism, with information to expose lies and injustices. Objectivity seems somewhat heartless. Sure, it might provide us with information, but in it's neutrality, it might just help to make people neutral and "ok" with what's going on instead of trying to give a message with it's writing. I suppose there is no perfect way to go about it, because either way, is anyone getting the WHOLE story without any hint of bias? I'm not sure where newspapers are heading, but I don't think that journalism is going anywhere, and as long as people know how to write, the written word will spread. As a fan of print in general, I hope it doesn't disappear, and doubt it will in entirety, although the only thing about print that bothers me is paper sources and how some sources cut down far too much forest (tree-hugger moment).
The invention of the kindle, the internet, e-book, and the ipad seem to have some sort of effect on printed books. And if not e-books, the internet (amazon) surely has an effect on book stores. I remember looking into e-books years ago, and after downloading a sample, I hated it. Of course, this was pre-ipad/and around the time ipods were gaining in popularity (though who wants to read a book on one of those?). Sitting there, in front of a computer, staring at the screen while reading was not a pleasurable experience. I'd rather sit there with a book, make some notes by hand, even if it means the page will never be the same. It's a disconnect from the era where every new form of technology that comes out seems to get closer and closer to having something that plugs in directly into our heads. People seem to be buying more books on amazon, even if book stores are getting less business. It's cheaper and provides us with an attitude-free way of getting what we want.
Of course, not all book stores are full of pompous jackasses that walk int he other direction,or give a crooked look if you actually dare to have a question for them. I walked into a book store with a friend a while ago during the Obama election (right before) and as we walk in, we are greeted and welcomed. There is a group of people discussing the debates and speeches, and laughing as McCain comes on to say his piece. There was a sharing fo ideas and an offer to help find what we're looking for without a sense of superiority or laziness. These are the people I empathize with. I hope these stores continue to get business. There is no way books in print will disappear anytime soon, but I could care less if stores like strand go bye-bye, even if they have a nice selection of books. Perhaps robot employees?
Televison & Movies
When I grew up I never had cable TV. As a matter of fact, I didn't have cable TV until I moved in to my apartment two years ago because of a "deal" optimum was having, and I canceled right after those two months. I always managed to keep up with what was going on through friends, which was funny because even the friends whose families weren't well off would usually have cable tv.
Having said that, Network television was more than enough. I can remember more about the shows on tv from between 1988 - 1995 than I remember what I learned in school. For example: 21 jump street, family matters, fresh prince, quantum leap, full house, funniest home videos, the worlds funniest videos (people falling all over the globe!), and of course, cartoon favorites like looney tunes, ren and stimpy, rockos modern life, thundercats, sesame street, etc. I could go on for a while. In middle school, school tried to implement the "channel 1" tv show for homeroom, which was basically news geared towards kids, since the advertisements were "safe" for children. I suppose the schools figured that if kids are practically raised by tv, and have their minds rotting away sitting in front of it, why not try to teach them with it?
The show was no better than the evening news. Showing violence around the world, scaring kids that paid attention, and then turning them indifferent with an ad for stridex pimple pads. Nothing like showing a country in turmoil, and then telling kids their zit covered pizza faces made them weird, and dateless.
While reading through the "Other Enduring Trends & reality tv" (pg 162) throughout the tv and then movie section, I started to think about how people said programing was so much more worthwhile in previous years. It got me thinking about how awful reality shows are, even though some can be fascinating if involving wildlife education, or a guy drinking urine out of a hollowed out snake...at least I think that's what it was. Then I got to thinking about movies like transformers that are all visual, and no real content.
It made me nostalgic for a quick moment, until I realized how terrible some shows and movies were in the 80's. As much as Schwarzenegger movies rule, how is "Commando" any better than the typical, mindless action movie from the 2010's? Originality? No, Arnold even reused a line from Terminator. Perhaps it isn't the quality of the junk we see, just the amount. That I can agree with.
Though I will have to state that they simply don't make movies like Naked Gun, Airplane or Caddyshack anymore. And that's the real shame.
Having said that, Network television was more than enough. I can remember more about the shows on tv from between 1988 - 1995 than I remember what I learned in school. For example: 21 jump street, family matters, fresh prince, quantum leap, full house, funniest home videos, the worlds funniest videos (people falling all over the globe!), and of course, cartoon favorites like looney tunes, ren and stimpy, rockos modern life, thundercats, sesame street, etc. I could go on for a while. In middle school, school tried to implement the "channel 1" tv show for homeroom, which was basically news geared towards kids, since the advertisements were "safe" for children. I suppose the schools figured that if kids are practically raised by tv, and have their minds rotting away sitting in front of it, why not try to teach them with it?
The show was no better than the evening news. Showing violence around the world, scaring kids that paid attention, and then turning them indifferent with an ad for stridex pimple pads. Nothing like showing a country in turmoil, and then telling kids their zit covered pizza faces made them weird, and dateless.
While reading through the "Other Enduring Trends & reality tv" (pg 162) throughout the tv and then movie section, I started to think about how people said programing was so much more worthwhile in previous years. It got me thinking about how awful reality shows are, even though some can be fascinating if involving wildlife education, or a guy drinking urine out of a hollowed out snake...at least I think that's what it was. Then I got to thinking about movies like transformers that are all visual, and no real content.
It made me nostalgic for a quick moment, until I realized how terrible some shows and movies were in the 80's. As much as Schwarzenegger movies rule, how is "Commando" any better than the typical, mindless action movie from the 2010's? Originality? No, Arnold even reused a line from Terminator. Perhaps it isn't the quality of the junk we see, just the amount. That I can agree with.
Though I will have to state that they simply don't make movies like Naked Gun, Airplane or Caddyshack anymore. And that's the real shame.
Mass Communication & The internet
The thing that stood out to me is the idea of "a diminished audience for high culture." Along with the Culture as a Skyscraper idea, this seems to make sense. The more low-brow programing, advertising and general distractions that are churned out by the media, the less inclined people will be to look towards more intelligent and worthwhile ways to spend their time. However, I don;t think this is as detrimental as it is set out to be. With the growing use of the internet, the distractions and sources for unintelligent or meaningless forms of entertainment grow as well. Americas funniest video used to be a half hour, or hour (I forget) of people falling, animals falling, a baby doing something "cute," and then some more people falling. This isn't a problem if it let's people laugh for a little bit, but the internet has let that hour a week of people falling down become an endless source of that kind of entertainment, and I love it.
Also, it has provided people with a faster way to find information about anything. Although the sources of information can be suspect at best sometimes, if they pique someones curiosity enough, surely they'll go out and learn about whatever it is they found interesting through other sources. I found out about a great book that lad me to other books by reading band lyrics online, that some people might find to be low-culture content, and contacting the singer who suggested I pick up "The Denial of Death" by Ernest Becker. That led me to explore Carl Jung, Soren Kierkegaard, Sartre, and Freud, not to mention some introspective exploration. All from a band that screams and isn't pleasing to the ear, but holds more value to me than lets say, the ballet.
In terms of younger audiences, I think it boils down to parents taking control of what their children are exposed to, to a certain degree and not letting the media teach their children a skewed perspective of the world. Of course, when parents work, and kids are left to their own devices, this can be difficult. As I was growing up I was pretty bright. I was apparently above high school level in reading and math as far as my progression, but then something happened. That something might have been Nintendo. I was a latch-key kid, left alone from 3 until my mom got home between 5:30 - 7. I wasn't allowed out thanks to some sketchy things in my neighborhood, and I sure as hell wasn't going to spend all that time doing homework, when I could be trying to beat duck hunt, or double dragon.
My cousins, 16, 13, and 10 respectively, are all incredibly bright kids. They're lucky enough to have two parents, one that makes sure they are doing homework, engaged in activities and not rotting away by the tv. BUT, they do play video games; xbox360, ps2, wii, computer, etc. And yes, they watch some typical kid-shows that offer no real education, but it doesn't keep them from being interested in things such as music, science, technology, etc. So while some of the media can be toxic, having control over exposure could make all the difference.
Also, it has provided people with a faster way to find information about anything. Although the sources of information can be suspect at best sometimes, if they pique someones curiosity enough, surely they'll go out and learn about whatever it is they found interesting through other sources. I found out about a great book that lad me to other books by reading band lyrics online, that some people might find to be low-culture content, and contacting the singer who suggested I pick up "The Denial of Death" by Ernest Becker. That led me to explore Carl Jung, Soren Kierkegaard, Sartre, and Freud, not to mention some introspective exploration. All from a band that screams and isn't pleasing to the ear, but holds more value to me than lets say, the ballet.
In terms of younger audiences, I think it boils down to parents taking control of what their children are exposed to, to a certain degree and not letting the media teach their children a skewed perspective of the world. Of course, when parents work, and kids are left to their own devices, this can be difficult. As I was growing up I was pretty bright. I was apparently above high school level in reading and math as far as my progression, but then something happened. That something might have been Nintendo. I was a latch-key kid, left alone from 3 until my mom got home between 5:30 - 7. I wasn't allowed out thanks to some sketchy things in my neighborhood, and I sure as hell wasn't going to spend all that time doing homework, when I could be trying to beat duck hunt, or double dragon.
My cousins, 16, 13, and 10 respectively, are all incredibly bright kids. They're lucky enough to have two parents, one that makes sure they are doing homework, engaged in activities and not rotting away by the tv. BUT, they do play video games; xbox360, ps2, wii, computer, etc. And yes, they watch some typical kid-shows that offer no real education, but it doesn't keep them from being interested in things such as music, science, technology, etc. So while some of the media can be toxic, having control over exposure could make all the difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)