In the second video posted on the website about McLuhan, it opens with his quote "Societies have always been shaped more by the nature of the media by which men communicate than by the content of the communication." I found this to be 100% true and we even discussed it in class on occasion. McLuhan states that people are more affected by the delivery of a message by the media moreso than what the medium is actually trying to say. For example, when the presidential election was in full swing, many news channels were putting up these fancy graphics that are interactive with the TV personality that is discussing them. The information can sometimes be lost in the grand appearance of the graphics, sometimes cluttered and over-the-top.
It's not just that particular instance that is a good example, there are many more. Commercials are an excellent example of the validity of his statement. Everyone can agree that at one point or another in their life they have had a commercial "get stuck in their head". The designers of the commercials' objective wasn't necessarily to get you to formulate a very positive opinion about their product, but just to remember it. The more recognizable a commercial is, the more successful it is. An example for me is that terrible Toyota commercial with the song "Saved by zero" with all the Toyota racing on and off the screen. I don't know much more about Toyotas but I certainly can't forget that commercial, regardless of how obnoxious it is.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Research
QUESTION: Has the media negatively or positively affected your view on Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin?
METHOD: I would ask an even number of self proclaimed Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and "undecided" voters. That's one of the most important factors to avoid a bias response by asking too many Democrats (who will likely say they see her in a more negative light now) and too many Republicans (who will likely claim she is unfairly put in a negative light or that she is actually being put in a positive light). Independents will likely give a more objective response, but the undecided voters are the real wild card. Their responses are totally unpredictable and can't be predicted too effectively.
HYPOTHESIS: More people will have a more negative view on Sarah Palin because of the media's potrayal of Palin.
METHOD: I would ask an even number of self proclaimed Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and "undecided" voters. That's one of the most important factors to avoid a bias response by asking too many Democrats (who will likely say they see her in a more negative light now) and too many Republicans (who will likely claim she is unfairly put in a negative light or that she is actually being put in a positive light). Independents will likely give a more objective response, but the undecided voters are the real wild card. Their responses are totally unpredictable and can't be predicted too effectively.
HYPOTHESIS: More people will have a more negative view on Sarah Palin because of the media's potrayal of Palin.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Religulous
Firstly, on Thursday I called Bill Maher a prick in class for making this movie. I was wrong about that. He made the movie to raise a consciousness about the (possible) pitfalls of religion. The trailer (click here) was very misleading. He makes religion out to be a joke in the trailer, which I took personal offense to but the movie wasn't him mocking it or the people who follow it. It was his plea for the people who blindly follow religion and with radical fashion that it is highly damaging to the Earth.
The movie was certainly very interesting. He interviewed people who are very active within their faith and asked them questions that are contradictory to what his/her respective religion claims to teach and believe in. He gives them fair shot to defend themselves, but surprisingly he actually really knew his stuff. He started with Christians, particularly Catholics. His first one was called the "Truckers Chapel" where truckers can stop and pray to God and attend a service. Many of the people there didn't have much of a good rebuttal to what Maher was saying to them, they were rednecks for lack of a better word.
The two best interviews he had in the entire movie were to Catholic priests. He didn't rip them for the whole sexual abuse with children controversy, but instead spoke to them logically and fairly. The first was a Catholic priest who was also a Doctor in Astronomy. The man openly admits that the Bible should not be consulted as a scientific reference on whether God exists. The priest explains that there is an obvious problem that the Bible was written from 2,000 B.C. to about 50 A.D. and that "modern science" began around 1500 A.D. That huge gap in time doesn't allow science to be used objectively in the times that Bible was written in.
The second interview I previously mentioned was with a Sr. Priest in the Vatican (which Maher was quickly kicked out of). The priest displays his distaste of the overall grandness of the Vatican, its huge pillars, marble floors, ancient huge statues and everything in it that without a doubt costs a lot of money. This obviously differs from the Bible's teaching of humbleness and sharing your possessions with people who really need them. Also, he says the days of "burning in a firey death in Hell for eternity" as over. The priest seemed to have an extremely modern view on today's religion.
He also targeted Muslim and Jewish faiths, but those weren't so focused. There were a few interviews with Jewish and Muslim worshippers, but none were nearly as interesting, possibly because I myself am a Christian. So perhaps I lost a little interest in those interviews. There was one interview, however, in which he interviewed a Jew who is in favor of making Israel "disappear" - not destroying it, making it "disappear". When Maher brought up the fact that he met with the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who openly discussed eradicating Israel and its people and he denied. It then cut to a video of that exact man hugging the President Mahmoud Ahmadinejadat that speech that he stating these claims that Israel must be destroyed.
He took a few stabs at Mormonism, with one interview of ex-Mormons, and one quick jab at Scientology but those two were basically spared. Overall, the movie surprised me. It wasn't the mocking of religion that I expected and at a few moments I was even laughing at some of the commentary Maher had laid out there. It was typical Bill Maher - informed, witty, funny, and never intimidated.
The movie was certainly very interesting. He interviewed people who are very active within their faith and asked them questions that are contradictory to what his/her respective religion claims to teach and believe in. He gives them fair shot to defend themselves, but surprisingly he actually really knew his stuff. He started with Christians, particularly Catholics. His first one was called the "Truckers Chapel" where truckers can stop and pray to God and attend a service. Many of the people there didn't have much of a good rebuttal to what Maher was saying to them, they were rednecks for lack of a better word.
The two best interviews he had in the entire movie were to Catholic priests. He didn't rip them for the whole sexual abuse with children controversy, but instead spoke to them logically and fairly. The first was a Catholic priest who was also a Doctor in Astronomy. The man openly admits that the Bible should not be consulted as a scientific reference on whether God exists. The priest explains that there is an obvious problem that the Bible was written from 2,000 B.C. to about 50 A.D. and that "modern science" began around 1500 A.D. That huge gap in time doesn't allow science to be used objectively in the times that Bible was written in.
The second interview I previously mentioned was with a Sr. Priest in the Vatican (which Maher was quickly kicked out of). The priest displays his distaste of the overall grandness of the Vatican, its huge pillars, marble floors, ancient huge statues and everything in it that without a doubt costs a lot of money. This obviously differs from the Bible's teaching of humbleness and sharing your possessions with people who really need them. Also, he says the days of "burning in a firey death in Hell for eternity" as over. The priest seemed to have an extremely modern view on today's religion.
He also targeted Muslim and Jewish faiths, but those weren't so focused. There were a few interviews with Jewish and Muslim worshippers, but none were nearly as interesting, possibly because I myself am a Christian. So perhaps I lost a little interest in those interviews. There was one interview, however, in which he interviewed a Jew who is in favor of making Israel "disappear" - not destroying it, making it "disappear". When Maher brought up the fact that he met with the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who openly discussed eradicating Israel and its people and he denied. It then cut to a video of that exact man hugging the President Mahmoud Ahmadinejadat that speech that he stating these claims that Israel must be destroyed.
He took a few stabs at Mormonism, with one interview of ex-Mormons, and one quick jab at Scientology but those two were basically spared. Overall, the movie surprised me. It wasn't the mocking of religion that I expected and at a few moments I was even laughing at some of the commentary Maher had laid out there. It was typical Bill Maher - informed, witty, funny, and never intimidated.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Baghdad Image
With a sandstorm blowing behind him, Defense Secretary Robert Gates greets a reporter on his way to a television interview at Camp Victory in Baghdad. This image (from Time.com) was particularly interesting to me moreso than the other "Images of the Week" because of the irony of the picture. The Defense Secretary, there to restore order and calm, is speaking with a reporter while a wild sand storm is raging behind him. In a way the sand storm could be an odd metaphor for the general turmoil in Iraq. The two seem to be unaffected by the sand storm which is strange because it seems as though they are right in the middle of it. Perhaps the same could be said about the fighting in Iraq in general with these two men.
Friday, September 5, 2008
What media has affected me the most?
I know it's easiest to just answer this question with the internet- of course it is, I use it dozens of times a day for everything from school to passing time playing stupid games to ease the boredom of living at home in a small town with a group of friends who are always broke. I was going to try to be different and say a cell phone but I hate my cell phone. Texting is a pain in my ass, if you're going to send me a 4 page text just call me, so sometimes I view my phone as an inconvenience just like it is a convenience. Anyway, hands down the internet has affected me the most by leaps and bounds like it probably has with most people in class.
The internet can be used for so many things today, both constructive and destructive. I personally use mine for mostly school work, checking bank account, writing e-mails, and of course personal entertainment. I never watch the news on TV anymore, there's too many boring stories filled in between the stories I care about. When I check the news online, I get to exactly the news I care about and not any filler stories that television chooses to insert into their newscast. Not only can I get the news, but I can also read reactions from thousands of people on a single news story, which sometimes opens my eyes to alternative views on a story that I maybe would have never thought about. The internet has made school work much easier too. Now instead of me driving 45 minutes to school to use the library for research, I can just do it from the comfort of my desk. Article databases are readily available and are updated constantly so there's never a shortage of information on a given topic. The print book is almost a thing of the past for students now when it comes to research. It's all digital. The internet didn't only affect the way I do school work, it affects the way I use my spare time too; fantasy football and baseball online, Facebook, MySpace, an occasional online game on XBox 360 Live, etc. The internet has shaped my views on every topic in life and will continue to do so for my foreseeable future.
The internet can be used for so many things today, both constructive and destructive. I personally use mine for mostly school work, checking bank account, writing e-mails, and of course personal entertainment. I never watch the news on TV anymore, there's too many boring stories filled in between the stories I care about. When I check the news online, I get to exactly the news I care about and not any filler stories that television chooses to insert into their newscast. Not only can I get the news, but I can also read reactions from thousands of people on a single news story, which sometimes opens my eyes to alternative views on a story that I maybe would have never thought about. The internet has made school work much easier too. Now instead of me driving 45 minutes to school to use the library for research, I can just do it from the comfort of my desk. Article databases are readily available and are updated constantly so there's never a shortage of information on a given topic. The print book is almost a thing of the past for students now when it comes to research. It's all digital. The internet didn't only affect the way I do school work, it affects the way I use my spare time too; fantasy football and baseball online, Facebook, MySpace, an occasional online game on XBox 360 Live, etc. The internet has shaped my views on every topic in life and will continue to do so for my foreseeable future.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)