Before taking RTF 305, I had never posted a blog. Doing the blog for this class was probably one of the easiest, yet most helpful assignments I had to do this semester. For many of the blogs, I had to review the material in the textbook as well as my lecture notes so I knew what I was talking about. Plus, there wasn't really a wrong or right answer, as long as I understood the material. The website was very easy to use, but I did have trouble figuring out what I was exactly supposed to write in the first couple of blogs. However, my TA helped me out and told me that I was trying to fit too much unnecessary info into the blogs and after that everything was peachy.
I especially enjoyed the blogs that dealt with movies, as I'm sure many others did. The prompts about camera angles and story structure let me study the details of my favorite movies and TV shows. The blog that was the least interesting was the one about the development of radio technology because it was more about history than about theories, which I find kind of interesting. The blog that was the most difficult to write about was the one I posted about the cultivation theory, because I really had to learn what the difference was between that theory and all of the others. I had not really listened to the lecture that week, so I had to reread the chapter to get a good grasp on the material.
I really believe that blogs are an easy and effective way to learn the material better, plus it is very easy to get a good grade on them. They should be used in other undergrad classes at UT, especially if most of the grades in the class are made of tests. Blogs kind of work like labs because they reinforce the what is taught in lecture and in the textbook. Of course, one thing that would make blogging more interesting would be more prompts about movies and TV. However, I know this can't really be done without discarding other important topics. Therefore, there isn't really much that can be done to make blogging better. In my opinion, the assignments are already a really cool way to learn, as well as express what you think about the topics.
Yes, you can use my blog in a paper or report.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The Increasing Interconnectedness
Globalization is the process of increasing interconnectedness among nations, cultures, and people. For instance, the infrastructure of mobile phones is growing, enabling more connection between not only people of the same country, but as well as other countries. Another example of globalization is digital convergence, which makes greater production possible in poorer places around the world. All in all, globalization is very much supported and accelerated by technological developments.
These technological developments and increase in connections between nations and people have resulted in cultural imperialism. As people across the globe have become more connected and less isolated, there has been a loss of local, indigenous, and national cultures. For example, indigenous people such as the Native Americans have lost much of their culture through technology that has advanced in the last century. In the past, Native Americans made things such as clothes and blankets using primitive, but traditional, weaving methods done by hand. However, now such blankets can be made in mass quantity by machines.
These technological developments and increase in connections between nations and people have resulted in cultural imperialism. As people across the globe have become more connected and less isolated, there has been a loss of local, indigenous, and national cultures. For example, indigenous people such as the Native Americans have lost much of their culture through technology that has advanced in the last century. In the past, Native Americans made things such as clothes and blankets using primitive, but traditional, weaving methods done by hand. However, now such blankets can be made in mass quantity by machines.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
The Appeals of Advertising
The countless number of advertisements that I encounter everyday is ridiculous. When watching television, which is the medium through which I see the ads the most, I try to ignore pitches by changing the channel or going to do a chore. However, every once in awhile I'll see an ad that catches my eye as being very appealing. One recent commercial that has had this effect on me is for the 5 Hour Energy drink.
For me to be intrigued by an energy drink commercial is very rare and odd, as I hardly ever drink such a drink and I am well aware of the negative effect they have on your body. The specific commercial I am speaking of is the "No 2:30 Feeling" one. The ad takes something most people can relate to and despise, which is the sleepiness and tired out feeling one gets in the afternoon, especially during something boring like class or work. The spokesperson offers a solution to this "2:30 Feeling" problem, which is what caught my attention. Often, I feel the need for a quick nap while I am in a lecture class or even while I am working or driving. This small drink seems like an easy and effective solution to this nuisance and notions that it could nurture my fatigue and help achieve more things during my day.
The appeals of nurture and achievement are very important factors in a successful advertisement and product. After all, most everyone wants to accomplish more things during their work day and a lot of people will seek the help of a product like 5 Hour Energy to help them go that extra mile. Furthermore, if a person is very busy everyday, such as a single mother or a busy office worker, than the product will seem even more appealing to them as a nurturing tool. When tired out folks can't find rest or energy in other things, they will seek out this energy drink because it claims that it will help people work throughout the day, therefore helping them be productive and have a positive feeling.
The 5 Hour Energy advertisement depicts drained people around the workplace seek in vain means of perking themselves up, such as coffee, soda, or a candy bar. The spokesman lets the viewer know that these methods are not nearly as affective as 5 Hour Energy. Soon after, it shows the workers drinking the energy drink and afterwords feeling very energetic and positive. When I saw this commercial, I thought of all of the times I had been in those people's position of feeling exhausted and trying failed methods of perking up. I knew that if I took a nap, I would waste hours of the day and not be as productive as I should have been. This commercial tempted me to pick up this product because of it's promise that it would nurture me through my tiredness and thus, help me achieve far more than if I did not invest in 5 Hour Energy. However, I am unaware of it's actual effects because I have never actually used this energy drink.
5 Hour Energy Drink Commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Sq25eToVo
For me to be intrigued by an energy drink commercial is very rare and odd, as I hardly ever drink such a drink and I am well aware of the negative effect they have on your body. The specific commercial I am speaking of is the "No 2:30 Feeling" one. The ad takes something most people can relate to and despise, which is the sleepiness and tired out feeling one gets in the afternoon, especially during something boring like class or work. The spokesperson offers a solution to this "2:30 Feeling" problem, which is what caught my attention. Often, I feel the need for a quick nap while I am in a lecture class or even while I am working or driving. This small drink seems like an easy and effective solution to this nuisance and notions that it could nurture my fatigue and help achieve more things during my day.
The appeals of nurture and achievement are very important factors in a successful advertisement and product. After all, most everyone wants to accomplish more things during their work day and a lot of people will seek the help of a product like 5 Hour Energy to help them go that extra mile. Furthermore, if a person is very busy everyday, such as a single mother or a busy office worker, than the product will seem even more appealing to them as a nurturing tool. When tired out folks can't find rest or energy in other things, they will seek out this energy drink because it claims that it will help people work throughout the day, therefore helping them be productive and have a positive feeling.
The 5 Hour Energy advertisement depicts drained people around the workplace seek in vain means of perking themselves up, such as coffee, soda, or a candy bar. The spokesman lets the viewer know that these methods are not nearly as affective as 5 Hour Energy. Soon after, it shows the workers drinking the energy drink and afterwords feeling very energetic and positive. When I saw this commercial, I thought of all of the times I had been in those people's position of feeling exhausted and trying failed methods of perking up. I knew that if I took a nap, I would waste hours of the day and not be as productive as I should have been. This commercial tempted me to pick up this product because of it's promise that it would nurture me through my tiredness and thus, help me achieve far more than if I did not invest in 5 Hour Energy. However, I am unaware of it's actual effects because I have never actually used this energy drink.
5 Hour Energy Drink Commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Sq25eToVo
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Three Acts
The most popular method of cinematic storytelling is the three act structure, which naturally encompasses the beginning, middle, and end of the story. A great cinematic story that uses this structure is Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977, d. George Lucas). At the movie's beginning, the viewer is told by text on the screen the setting of the movie and its back story (time 00:01 to 01:35, link 1). The viewer is then thrown into a space battle between what is learned to be the Galactic Empire and the Rebel Alliance. It is in this battle that the first main characters, C-3P0 and R2-D2, are introduced (time 02:12 link 1); it is through these two characters that the viewer meets other characters in Act I as well as learn more about the plot of the rebellion against the Evil Empire. Most of the first act takes place on the planet Tatoonie, which is where characters Luke Skywalker, Ben Kenobi,Han Solo, and Chewbacca are first introduced. Naturally, Act I is used to familiarize the viewer with the characters and explain their dilemmas and how they are going to solve them. However, near the end of the first act (09: 41, link 2 and 00:00 to 00:42, link 3), the main character's mission complicates, as they are captured by the Empire's Death Star. This is what is called a Plot Point, which is "mini climax" to the act which usually creates suspense, escalates the stakes, and propels the action into the next act where new questions will be answered.
After the characters and action of the movie has been set in Act I, the movie enters Act II. The second act is what complicates the action, as the character's mission is derailed when they are captured and learn that their destination has been destroyed by the Empire. Now, the mission is to escape from captivity as well as rescue the Princess Leia, who is also imprisoned (05:01 to 6:40, link 3). In the following events, everyone escapes except Ben Kenobi, who sacrifices himself for the sake of the mission. The heroes take the princess to the moon of Yavin IV, home of a Rebel base. However, they are unaware that the Empire had placed a tracking device on their ship, allowing them to be followed to Yavin IV (09:25 to 09:38, link 4). This is Plot Point Number Two of Star Wars, which lets the viewer know that all is not well for the heroes, and that the dangers and stakes are escalated even higher. The question of whether or not the Empire will destroy the Rebel base is the premise of Act III.
Act III begins with the Rebels figuring out that the Empire is closing in on them and therefore prepare an attack strategy. Skywalker joins the other pilots as they prepare for battle and their mission to destroy the Death Star. As the fight wages on, most of the Rebel Squadron has been obliterated by the Imperial Forces. Only accompanied by the other two remaining fighters, Skywalker begins to take his turn at destroying the only weak spot of the Death Star. Soon after, his two comrades have been disposed of, leaving it up to him to save the entire Rebel Alliance. This is where the movie nears it climax, as the next sequences of action are the deciding points of how the movie will end. Luckily, Han Solo appears from nowhere, giving Skywalker the help he needed in shooting his proton torpedoes at the Death Star's weak spot, thus destroying the galaxy's most powerful space station. The moment when the Death Star explodes into a thousand pieces is the movie's climax, as the problems have been resolved and everyone has been saved (08: 10 to 09:30, link 5). The movie ends with Skywalker, Solo, and Chewbacca being honored by the Alliance, therefore leaving audience's with a happy ending (00:20 to 01:15, link 6).
Link I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YQR4Khcceg
Link II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjO7a8AMHEY&feature=related
Link III: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZLu73Ch_pg&feature=related
Link IV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY-hnOztiAw&feature=related
Link V: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9FWlu-eaRA&NR=1
Link VI: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p-BszlWZzM&feature=related
Remember, the Force will be with you...always.
After the characters and action of the movie has been set in Act I, the movie enters Act II. The second act is what complicates the action, as the character's mission is derailed when they are captured and learn that their destination has been destroyed by the Empire. Now, the mission is to escape from captivity as well as rescue the Princess Leia, who is also imprisoned (05:01 to 6:40, link 3). In the following events, everyone escapes except Ben Kenobi, who sacrifices himself for the sake of the mission. The heroes take the princess to the moon of Yavin IV, home of a Rebel base. However, they are unaware that the Empire had placed a tracking device on their ship, allowing them to be followed to Yavin IV (09:25 to 09:38, link 4). This is Plot Point Number Two of Star Wars, which lets the viewer know that all is not well for the heroes, and that the dangers and stakes are escalated even higher. The question of whether or not the Empire will destroy the Rebel base is the premise of Act III.
Act III begins with the Rebels figuring out that the Empire is closing in on them and therefore prepare an attack strategy. Skywalker joins the other pilots as they prepare for battle and their mission to destroy the Death Star. As the fight wages on, most of the Rebel Squadron has been obliterated by the Imperial Forces. Only accompanied by the other two remaining fighters, Skywalker begins to take his turn at destroying the only weak spot of the Death Star. Soon after, his two comrades have been disposed of, leaving it up to him to save the entire Rebel Alliance. This is where the movie nears it climax, as the next sequences of action are the deciding points of how the movie will end. Luckily, Han Solo appears from nowhere, giving Skywalker the help he needed in shooting his proton torpedoes at the Death Star's weak spot, thus destroying the galaxy's most powerful space station. The moment when the Death Star explodes into a thousand pieces is the movie's climax, as the problems have been resolved and everyone has been saved (08: 10 to 09:30, link 5). The movie ends with Skywalker, Solo, and Chewbacca being honored by the Alliance, therefore leaving audience's with a happy ending (00:20 to 01:15, link 6).
Link I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YQR4Khcceg
Link II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjO7a8AMHEY&feature=related
Link III: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZLu73Ch_pg&feature=related
Link IV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY-hnOztiAw&feature=related
Link V: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9FWlu-eaRA&NR=1
Link VI: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p-BszlWZzM&feature=related
Remember, the Force will be with you...always.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
The Situational Comedy
One of the most popular programs on television is the situational comedy, or the sitcom. Ever since the birth of the television, the sitcom has kept audiences glued to their sets with its characters and stories. However, while the characters and stories have changed over the past sixty years, the basic formula of the sitcom has not varied much. One of the aspects of the sitcom that stood the test of time is the half hour long format. Unlike television dramas which are usually an hour long so as to allow certain character growth and more resolution in each episode, the sitcom has relied on half hour episodes. This is because in the typical sitcom there is hardly any character development or major resolution for each episode, therefore there is no need for a full hour episode. This lack of dramatic themes in the sitcom is evidence of its comedic basis. Sitcoms are written to funny to the audience, and an overuse of dramatic elements could alienate some audiences. In most sitcom episodes, the characters will encounter a minor problem which will resolved at the episode's end; until the resolution, many comedic elements are thrown in, including the characters' lines or the characters themselves.
One fine example of the situational comedy is Seinfeld, which aired from 1989 to 1998 on NBC. Seinfeld was a half hour long show that certainly did not dwell on character arcs or developments or lessons. The four main characters, Jerry, Elaine, George, and Kramer, simply encountered a minor problem, such as not getting a seat in a restaurant or dating a woman who ate her peas one at a time. At the end of the episode, the problem would usually be resolved but the characters themselves would never change. The show hardly dived into dramatic themes, and if it did then it would usually be dismissed as stupid by the characters. Using comedic story lines and characters, the show was successful in striking a funny bone in audiences.
Here is an episode of Seinfeld where Jerry dates a woman who only looks good in certain places:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xi9kgnvjQE&feature=related
One fine example of the situational comedy is Seinfeld, which aired from 1989 to 1998 on NBC. Seinfeld was a half hour long show that certainly did not dwell on character arcs or developments or lessons. The four main characters, Jerry, Elaine, George, and Kramer, simply encountered a minor problem, such as not getting a seat in a restaurant or dating a woman who ate her peas one at a time. At the end of the episode, the problem would usually be resolved but the characters themselves would never change. The show hardly dived into dramatic themes, and if it did then it would usually be dismissed as stupid by the characters. Using comedic story lines and characters, the show was successful in striking a funny bone in audiences.
Here is an episode of Seinfeld where Jerry dates a woman who only looks good in certain places:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xi9kgnvjQE&feature=related
Sunday, October 17, 2010
The Shot Progression
The camera shots of a film determines the language of the movie and helps the viewer learn more about the setting, the characters, and the emotions of the scene. Most, if not all, films use the film language illustrated in camera shots extensively. Recently I have noticed this use of language in the movie Chasing Amy, which was written and directed by Kevin Smith. In the selected scene, Ben Affleck's character Holden McNeil is in deep thought about whether or not he should let his girlfriend's past affect their relationship.
The first shot of McNeil in this scene is a long shot of him sitting on a swing set. This swing set was seen earlier in the movie, as it was where McNeil and his girlfriend, Alyssa Jones played by Joey Lauren Adams, first bonded and formed an attraction towards one another. Using this long shot, Smith lets the viewer know of the familiar setting; this also directs the viewer to notice the correlation and contrast of Holden's relationship with Jones. It also illustrates the emotions of McNeil, who is revisiting a place that resurfaces happy memories. It is important to notice the empty swings swaying beside him, which indicates the loneliness of Affleck's character.
The next camera shot is the close up, which gives the viewer more of an idea of what McNeil is doing. In this shot it can be seen that he is solemnly gazing down at something, although the viewer does not know what it is. Here his emotions are clearly conveyed, as they were indistinct in the long shot. He is slightly slumped over, taking breaths as he is in a deep trance of thought; this shot shows the body language of depression.
The next shot is the extreme close up. This shot reveals what McNeil was gazing at, which turns out to be a yearbook turned to the page of his girlfriend's school photo. The step allows the reader to realize what exactly McNeil was pondering about, which gives more meaning to the entire scene. Since the close up did not let on to what McNeil was staring at, Smith uses an extreme close up to point out the details that were extremely important to the scene, as well as to the story. As the scene progressed, it's content morphed from very general to very specific, with more vital information given in each shot.
The shot progression from long shot to extreme close up is from time maker 2:12 to time marker 2:20:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w14JjfDdFKw&feature=related
The first shot of McNeil in this scene is a long shot of him sitting on a swing set. This swing set was seen earlier in the movie, as it was where McNeil and his girlfriend, Alyssa Jones played by Joey Lauren Adams, first bonded and formed an attraction towards one another. Using this long shot, Smith lets the viewer know of the familiar setting; this also directs the viewer to notice the correlation and contrast of Holden's relationship with Jones. It also illustrates the emotions of McNeil, who is revisiting a place that resurfaces happy memories. It is important to notice the empty swings swaying beside him, which indicates the loneliness of Affleck's character.
The next camera shot is the close up, which gives the viewer more of an idea of what McNeil is doing. In this shot it can be seen that he is solemnly gazing down at something, although the viewer does not know what it is. Here his emotions are clearly conveyed, as they were indistinct in the long shot. He is slightly slumped over, taking breaths as he is in a deep trance of thought; this shot shows the body language of depression.
The next shot is the extreme close up. This shot reveals what McNeil was gazing at, which turns out to be a yearbook turned to the page of his girlfriend's school photo. The step allows the reader to realize what exactly McNeil was pondering about, which gives more meaning to the entire scene. Since the close up did not let on to what McNeil was staring at, Smith uses an extreme close up to point out the details that were extremely important to the scene, as well as to the story. As the scene progressed, it's content morphed from very general to very specific, with more vital information given in each shot.
The shot progression from long shot to extreme close up is from time maker 2:12 to time marker 2:20:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w14JjfDdFKw&feature=related
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Star System
The key to the success of the Big Five studios during the Golden Age of Hollywood was that each studio controlled every aspect of the movie making process. The Big Five, which includes MGM, Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros., and RKO, produced, distributed, and exhibited the movies in their own theaters. However, the dominance of the Big Five studios limited the availibility that had surfaced in independent filmmakers. Because of vertical intergration, it was practically impossible for new filmmakers to have their movies made, much less seen by audiences. This lack the studios' new material and creativity threatened to make the movies of each studio indistinguishable to audiences. Yet, studios solved this dilemma utilizing the "studio system".
Using the studio system, each studio enlisted the same Hollywood stars so as to promote their movies. Stars were key to the success of the Classical Era, as it helped to bring in audiences as well as distinguish each studio from the next. Therefore, each studio began to specialize in a certain genre and develop its own style of movie that would fit its array of stars. If a studio had a star that was a dancer, then that studio would often make musicals. If a studio had a comedian under its roof, it would be sure to produce comedies. This helped audiences who were fans of specific genres and movie stars know which theaters to attend. This certainly helped moviegoers tell the difference between studios and made Hollywood less bland and more diverse.
For instance, Paramount paired singer Bing Crosby and comedian Bob Hope and followed in producing buddy movies in which the duo both starred. Paramount found huge success with Crosby and Hope's "Road to..." series. To serve as the perfect vehicle for crooner and the comedian, the series of movies included many songs and were full of joke telling. Audiences knew that a movie with Crosby and Hope would make use of both men's talents. Therefore, audiences who were fans of that genre or the two entertainers would be certain to attend and invest their money in Paramount theaters. Each studio could be defined by the style of movie they specialized in as well as the stars it had under its belt. Movies did not have top notch production if it had popular movie stars in them. Each studio could have moviegoers streaming through the theater doors if that studio had a wide array of Hollywood stars under its wings.
Road to Morocco:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_w3UG6C_Mo
Using the studio system, each studio enlisted the same Hollywood stars so as to promote their movies. Stars were key to the success of the Classical Era, as it helped to bring in audiences as well as distinguish each studio from the next. Therefore, each studio began to specialize in a certain genre and develop its own style of movie that would fit its array of stars. If a studio had a star that was a dancer, then that studio would often make musicals. If a studio had a comedian under its roof, it would be sure to produce comedies. This helped audiences who were fans of specific genres and movie stars know which theaters to attend. This certainly helped moviegoers tell the difference between studios and made Hollywood less bland and more diverse.
For instance, Paramount paired singer Bing Crosby and comedian Bob Hope and followed in producing buddy movies in which the duo both starred. Paramount found huge success with Crosby and Hope's "Road to..." series. To serve as the perfect vehicle for crooner and the comedian, the series of movies included many songs and were full of joke telling. Audiences knew that a movie with Crosby and Hope would make use of both men's talents. Therefore, audiences who were fans of that genre or the two entertainers would be certain to attend and invest their money in Paramount theaters. Each studio could be defined by the style of movie they specialized in as well as the stars it had under its belt. Movies did not have top notch production if it had popular movie stars in them. Each studio could have moviegoers streaming through the theater doors if that studio had a wide array of Hollywood stars under its wings.
Road to Morocco:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_w3UG6C_Mo
Saturday, October 2, 2010
The Family Based Sitcom
"All in the Family" is considered by many to be one of the most important television shows of all time. It was groundbreaking in its content and commentary and it helped usher in a new era of television. The series was very influential on many family based sitcoms that came after, including the show "Home Improvement". Now while "Home Improvement" has not been on the air for over a decade, I have chosen to compare it to "All in the Family" because I do not watch new television series. However, I do view "Home Improvement" as "contemporary" since it was only ten years ago and it is still popular in reruns. I believe that while the two TV shows had two decades between them, the two characters are somewhat the same, but they deal with their problems in different ways.
Both TV shows are centered around the father as the main character. Both Archie Bunker of "All in the Family" and Tim Taylor of "Home Improvement" are do it yourselfers and are reluctant to seek help of another, especially a woman. They resiliently believe in "man power" and how that power should be evident in the home. Both men are womanizing and faithfully preach and practice the act of not letting women do "man's work". Neither of them feel comfortable about sharing their deeper feelings and emotions and this seems to be the source of problems at one time or another. Archie and Tim are very stubborn in their beliefs, though Archie is more so than Tim, and are reluctant to allow their spouses, or anyone else for that matter, teach them a new lesson or give them a lecture. Male viewers usually can relate to these two main characters because they represent opinions and thoughts that are found in many males. Most men have no problem relating to Tim's reluctance to step away from the football game or Archie's stereotype and phobia of homosexuals. While it seems the entire world is attempting to be politically correct, it is refreshing to see two characters that seem totally disinclined to care.
However, while Archie seems to never budge from his viewpoints let alone his chair, Tim becomes more willing throughout each episode to change his perception or bad habit to reach resolution. This is simply the personality of each character, as both are surrounded by people who relentlessly attempt to alter their viewpoints. In "All in the Family", Archie Bunker is lectured to mostly by his daughter and son-in-law while Tim Taylor's talks are usually between his wife and neighbor. Archie's wife, non-opinionated housewife Ethel, is almost the exact opposite of Tim's wife Jill, who works and goes to school and is not afraid to tell her husband exactly what she thinks. This presentation of the wife reflects the changing times of the late 20th Century, as Ethel is forced by Archie to be the last surviving housewife and Jill is the woman of '90s who is determined to succeed in the workplace. Naturally, the same goes for Archie and Tim, as both men are forced to realize the changes taking place in the home or society, and both men react differently. Archie holds firm in his beliefs and values while brushing off new acceptances in the rest of society to be wrong and stupid. He also refuses to watch "The Mary Tyler Moore Show". On the other hand, Tim realizes that it's the '90s, and he needs to learn to understand and cope with the changing of times.
Although, throughout the years, I have never seen a "Home Improvement"episode that commentated on national affairs like "All in the Family" did. In many episode of the latter, Archie commentates and critizizes former President Nixon on what the President was actually doing at that point in time; "Home Improvement" never strived to center their problems around something political but rather focused on family and social issues. In fact, most episodes of "Home Improvement" were centered around family issues and how to deal with them. While I'm sure there is one, I have never seen an "All in the Family" episode that gave Archie enough sentiment to put his daughter Gloria on his knee and teach her a lesson about drugs like Tim did with his son Brad. Both fathers were caring for their families, the character of Archie was incapable of uttering words of compassion in most episodes, while Tim did so in most of "Home Improvement's" run.
Both TV shows are centered around the father as the main character. Both Archie Bunker of "All in the Family" and Tim Taylor of "Home Improvement" are do it yourselfers and are reluctant to seek help of another, especially a woman. They resiliently believe in "man power" and how that power should be evident in the home. Both men are womanizing and faithfully preach and practice the act of not letting women do "man's work". Neither of them feel comfortable about sharing their deeper feelings and emotions and this seems to be the source of problems at one time or another. Archie and Tim are very stubborn in their beliefs, though Archie is more so than Tim, and are reluctant to allow their spouses, or anyone else for that matter, teach them a new lesson or give them a lecture. Male viewers usually can relate to these two main characters because they represent opinions and thoughts that are found in many males. Most men have no problem relating to Tim's reluctance to step away from the football game or Archie's stereotype and phobia of homosexuals. While it seems the entire world is attempting to be politically correct, it is refreshing to see two characters that seem totally disinclined to care.
However, while Archie seems to never budge from his viewpoints let alone his chair, Tim becomes more willing throughout each episode to change his perception or bad habit to reach resolution. This is simply the personality of each character, as both are surrounded by people who relentlessly attempt to alter their viewpoints. In "All in the Family", Archie Bunker is lectured to mostly by his daughter and son-in-law while Tim Taylor's talks are usually between his wife and neighbor. Archie's wife, non-opinionated housewife Ethel, is almost the exact opposite of Tim's wife Jill, who works and goes to school and is not afraid to tell her husband exactly what she thinks. This presentation of the wife reflects the changing times of the late 20th Century, as Ethel is forced by Archie to be the last surviving housewife and Jill is the woman of '90s who is determined to succeed in the workplace. Naturally, the same goes for Archie and Tim, as both men are forced to realize the changes taking place in the home or society, and both men react differently. Archie holds firm in his beliefs and values while brushing off new acceptances in the rest of society to be wrong and stupid. He also refuses to watch "The Mary Tyler Moore Show". On the other hand, Tim realizes that it's the '90s, and he needs to learn to understand and cope with the changing of times.
Although, throughout the years, I have never seen a "Home Improvement"episode that commentated on national affairs like "All in the Family" did. In many episode of the latter, Archie commentates and critizizes former President Nixon on what the President was actually doing at that point in time; "Home Improvement" never strived to center their problems around something political but rather focused on family and social issues. In fact, most episodes of "Home Improvement" were centered around family issues and how to deal with them. While I'm sure there is one, I have never seen an "All in the Family" episode that gave Archie enough sentiment to put his daughter Gloria on his knee and teach her a lesson about drugs like Tim did with his son Brad. Both fathers were caring for their families, the character of Archie was incapable of uttering words of compassion in most episodes, while Tim did so in most of "Home Improvement's" run.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
The New Technology
The form of media known as radio was one of the most important factors in the modernizing of 21st Century America. It connected people across the nation through sports, news, and entertainment. It is no surprise that this new form of media was a product of the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries. It was Italian inventor Guglielmo Marconi who created a telegraph that used radio waves to send messages in Morse code, thus creating a new era of media and industry through this immense change in technological advancement.
Developments in radio technology spawned more ideas for the radio left and right. As new advances were being made, new purposes were being made for the medium and for the industry. Also, as these new methods of using radio were being utilized, new laws were produced by the government so as to regulate the airwaves. It was on account of these great industrial progressions that the relationship between the radio industry and the government started. The industry's new purposes and methods of using radio were met with new rules, regulations, and restrictions.
As new radio technology was allowing companies to broadcast music nationwide, radio became more and more popular. New companies such as AT&T and RCA were founded, thus increasing the number of waves sent out within the broadcast band. While the Radio Act of 1912 required the licensing of transmitters, it was not very powerful in regulating the industry. With the Radio Act of 1927 came the Federal Radio Commission, which stated the broadcast band, made frequency terms regular and standard, and restricted the number of stations operating at night. This new law reduced the interference between stations.
Developments in radio technology spawned more ideas for the radio left and right. As new advances were being made, new purposes were being made for the medium and for the industry. Also, as these new methods of using radio were being utilized, new laws were produced by the government so as to regulate the airwaves. It was on account of these great industrial progressions that the relationship between the radio industry and the government started. The industry's new purposes and methods of using radio were met with new rules, regulations, and restrictions.
As new radio technology was allowing companies to broadcast music nationwide, radio became more and more popular. New companies such as AT&T and RCA were founded, thus increasing the number of waves sent out within the broadcast band. While the Radio Act of 1912 required the licensing of transmitters, it was not very powerful in regulating the industry. With the Radio Act of 1927 came the Federal Radio Commission, which stated the broadcast band, made frequency terms regular and standard, and restricted the number of stations operating at night. This new law reduced the interference between stations.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The Cultivation
The media is a great way to inform the public of whatever is happening locally, nationally, or internationally. It gives the people a certain view of the world from a different perspective, that being the subjects of the stories. While these stories may be truthful, they are not always applicable to the entire world. However, sometimes the more a person watches issues across the world being covered on the news, the more he or she feels threatened in his or her own home; this explanation of how media effects the public is called the cultivation theory.
The cultivation theory can be used to explain why folks who frequently interact with the media feel more endangered to being victimized by things such as crime. People that are affected by cultivation tend to lose sight of what the real world is like and instead use what they view on TV or movies as evidence of their beliefs. Although it may be unintentional, this is another method that allows the media to instill certain perceptions into the minds of it's audience. Sometimes, the viewer's real world experiences only reinforces the things he or she sees happening in the world; this is called mainstreaming. On the other hand, it may be that the viewer's reality only ratifies the views of the media, thus the cultivation effect is increased through what is called resonance.
Just because the streets of South Central Los Angeles may be littered with violence at times, "George" in Cooper, Texas should not have to worry about the dangers of walking to get the mail when he arrives home late. However, George's reality of being on the street late at night is cluttered with paranoia, especially since he just watched "Boyz n tha Hood". That movie's view of violence in the streets along with crime reports George sees on the news combines with his real life situation of being out late; this is mainstreaming. If George happened to actually live in Compton and he accepts the crime he sees in media, his fear of reality would decrease through what is resonance; he assumes that violent crime is the standard for the entire world so he doesn't worry.
Throughout the early 1990s, George may have been feeling the effects of cultivation because of the following media coverage:
"Boyz n da Hood" trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4sKiGkzKJo&feature=related
Rodney King Riots News Coverage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx-8R2juK3A
The cultivation theory can be used to explain why folks who frequently interact with the media feel more endangered to being victimized by things such as crime. People that are affected by cultivation tend to lose sight of what the real world is like and instead use what they view on TV or movies as evidence of their beliefs. Although it may be unintentional, this is another method that allows the media to instill certain perceptions into the minds of it's audience. Sometimes, the viewer's real world experiences only reinforces the things he or she sees happening in the world; this is called mainstreaming. On the other hand, it may be that the viewer's reality only ratifies the views of the media, thus the cultivation effect is increased through what is called resonance.
Just because the streets of South Central Los Angeles may be littered with violence at times, "George" in Cooper, Texas should not have to worry about the dangers of walking to get the mail when he arrives home late. However, George's reality of being on the street late at night is cluttered with paranoia, especially since he just watched "Boyz n tha Hood". That movie's view of violence in the streets along with crime reports George sees on the news combines with his real life situation of being out late; this is mainstreaming. If George happened to actually live in Compton and he accepts the crime he sees in media, his fear of reality would decrease through what is resonance; he assumes that violent crime is the standard for the entire world so he doesn't worry.
Throughout the early 1990s, George may have been feeling the effects of cultivation because of the following media coverage:
"Boyz n da Hood" trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4sKiGkzKJo&feature=related
Rodney King Riots News Coverage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx-8R2juK3A
Saturday, September 11, 2010
The Frame
Today, there are many different methods in which a person could be entertained or informed. Of course, many of these methods come from the media. With such a wide variety of media, such as movies, TV, the Internet, and newspapers, one would think they would be able to view a wide variety of information, opinions, and entertainment. However, what some do not relize is that the media decides what they leave out of a story and what they put into a story; this is called framing.
Framing is the concept that those who present the media can alter and morph the way it is presented. The presenter is able to mutate the implication or the notion of the story by using certain tones in his or her's choice of words. The presenter can even flat out decide what facts to include in the story, so as to illustrate the information that he or she desires or the information that he or she is pressed to illustrate. Thus, although the viewer may be told that freedom of press exists in our society, the media itself is censored constantly and often the censors are the presenters themselves.
Take for instance, one of the founders and current publisher of Rolling Stone, Jann Wenner is a outspoken liberal and has been for many years. His recent interviews for Rolling Stone include the likes of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama. As one looks through RS, he or she may notice that each of the magazine's "National Affairs" articles are almost always written to support liberals and insult or criticize conservatives. The reader could presume that Jann Wenner chose "National Affairs" writers Matt Taibbi and Tom Dickinson because they are also outspoken liberals and the reader could also presume that Taibbi and Dickinson write to criticize conservatives because they desire to keep their positions as two of the magazines's contributing editors. Taibbi and Dickinson realize that the consistency of the content in their work pleases Wenner and it also fits with the other standards of RS. Therefore, Taibbi and Dickinson choose what to leave out and what to put into their stories, so as to sway the reader's opinion to the that of not only themselves, but Wenner's as well. Frankly, I only read Rolling Stone for the music articles and hardly read the political articles, but it does scare me a little that media outlets like my beloved magazine would choose to be so biased. It would seem as though a casual reader would not be able to find a "National Affairs" article depicting Democrats negatively, therefore the article would not be entirely truthful. It would seem as though Taibbi and Dickinson refuse to report objectively on the Democrats or the Republicans; because "National Affairs" is included in every issue and seen by millions, I'm sure this pleases Wenner.
Of course, RS has had articles criticizing Presdient Obama and other liberals as well, so one might say that the magazine aims to be critical of all political affairs. There was the article questioning Obama's progress as president and the article about General McChrystal, and that is pretty refreshing. However, neither of those articles were written by Taibbi nor Dickinson. Go figure. Now while I rarely read the "National Affairs" articles, I do glance over them long enough to know that most of the time, they are very one sided. I know that sounds like I don't know what I'm talking about, but anybody could see it. Further more, all of his Wenner's political donations have gone to the Democrats, so you have that as well.
Now some people might argue that Rolling Stone has an agenda to meet, and that agenda is being mostly liberal. Those people might also say that that is why the magazine has so many liberal minded articles, so that it can fulfill its duty to its mostly liberal minded readers. Good point. However, could a person suggest that Rolling Stone has a liberal agenda to meet because Wenner is a liberal. Wenner and co founder and music critic Ralph J. Gleason (died in 1975) created this magazine to encompass things they were interested in. Wenner made sure that he had mostly writers who had the same ideals he had and he surely chose want went in and what came out of his magazine. Doesn't Wenner's agenda reflect what framing he decides to use in his magazine?
Rolling Stone offers their magazine online and here are links to some of the "National Affairs" articles:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64863
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64858
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64765
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12493/64386
Framing is the concept that those who present the media can alter and morph the way it is presented. The presenter is able to mutate the implication or the notion of the story by using certain tones in his or her's choice of words. The presenter can even flat out decide what facts to include in the story, so as to illustrate the information that he or she desires or the information that he or she is pressed to illustrate. Thus, although the viewer may be told that freedom of press exists in our society, the media itself is censored constantly and often the censors are the presenters themselves.
Take for instance, one of the founders and current publisher of Rolling Stone, Jann Wenner is a outspoken liberal and has been for many years. His recent interviews for Rolling Stone include the likes of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Barack Obama. As one looks through RS, he or she may notice that each of the magazine's "National Affairs" articles are almost always written to support liberals and insult or criticize conservatives. The reader could presume that Jann Wenner chose "National Affairs" writers Matt Taibbi and Tom Dickinson because they are also outspoken liberals and the reader could also presume that Taibbi and Dickinson write to criticize conservatives because they desire to keep their positions as two of the magazines's contributing editors. Taibbi and Dickinson realize that the consistency of the content in their work pleases Wenner and it also fits with the other standards of RS. Therefore, Taibbi and Dickinson choose what to leave out and what to put into their stories, so as to sway the reader's opinion to the that of not only themselves, but Wenner's as well. Frankly, I only read Rolling Stone for the music articles and hardly read the political articles, but it does scare me a little that media outlets like my beloved magazine would choose to be so biased. It would seem as though a casual reader would not be able to find a "National Affairs" article depicting Democrats negatively, therefore the article would not be entirely truthful. It would seem as though Taibbi and Dickinson refuse to report objectively on the Democrats or the Republicans; because "National Affairs" is included in every issue and seen by millions, I'm sure this pleases Wenner.
Of course, RS has had articles criticizing Presdient Obama and other liberals as well, so one might say that the magazine aims to be critical of all political affairs. There was the article questioning Obama's progress as president and the article about General McChrystal, and that is pretty refreshing. However, neither of those articles were written by Taibbi nor Dickinson. Go figure. Now while I rarely read the "National Affairs" articles, I do glance over them long enough to know that most of the time, they are very one sided. I know that sounds like I don't know what I'm talking about, but anybody could see it. Further more, all of his Wenner's political donations have gone to the Democrats, so you have that as well.
Now some people might argue that Rolling Stone has an agenda to meet, and that agenda is being mostly liberal. Those people might also say that that is why the magazine has so many liberal minded articles, so that it can fulfill its duty to its mostly liberal minded readers. Good point. However, could a person suggest that Rolling Stone has a liberal agenda to meet because Wenner is a liberal. Wenner and co founder and music critic Ralph J. Gleason (died in 1975) created this magazine to encompass things they were interested in. Wenner made sure that he had mostly writers who had the same ideals he had and he surely chose want went in and what came out of his magazine. Doesn't Wenner's agenda reflect what framing he decides to use in his magazine?
Rolling Stone offers their magazine online and here are links to some of the "National Affairs" articles:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64863
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64858
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64765
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12493/64386
Sunday, August 29, 2010
The Reason
Well, I ended up taking Media Now because the class was included in my Freshman Interest Group. However, the class does strike interest with me, as I've always liked learning about the media. I also am interested in becoming an RTF major, and I figured this class would come in handy. I don't know exactly what I want to do with RTF, so hopefully this class will help me decide. I really just love movies, TV, and music and the effects that stuff has on our culture. I wonder what else media has an effect on, and how much farther can the power of media go? How does certain positions of power affect the media and who now decides what goes in and what comes out? How do certain movies, etc. have influence over other areas of the media? When I really think about it, I have lots of questions pertaining to the media. By the looks of the book it seems as though this class will answer most of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)