News, trust, and “truthiness”

As I read through my classmate's fourth blog entries it became more and more apparent how the public sphere benefits from 'culture jamming'. The satirical news programs that have become cultural phenomenons around the globe are immensely popular among my age demographic, it seems, and are, as I said for myself, important and relevant sources for obtaining world news. As my colleagues and I suggested, the element of humour and entertainment breathes life and livelihood into what would otherwise be mostly dull and dismal news stories. This, of course, is what brings in my demographic of viewers.

A perfect example of the jubilant effect 'culture jamming' has on society is, as Kirby (http://kirbychan88.wordpress.com/2013/11/22/is-the-fake-news-the-real-news/) noted, how the world has now awoken itself to the existence of Rob Ford during his scandalous mayoral tenure and how so much fun has been poked at him (at his expense). This news story has reached the minds of virtually every first world television and internet user and has benefited the public sphere by, without a doubt, building a greater awareness to the subject of political responsibility and power.

Madison (http://mb12qe.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/is-the-fake-news-the-real-news/) made a very important point on these programs, however, when she said that "If the public is able to look past the completely false information and just laugh about it, then it is a good form of media." I completely agree with her on this. It is important to remember that in order for these programs to be of any relevance in real life you must be able to filter through the dramatized humour and take from it the reality it is shallowly buried underneath. With that said, I found most of the people who wrote their blogs on these types of programs were able to accordingly separate these elements from one another and obtain the facts as they were presented. 

To close I will quote a line from Tosin's entry (http://tosinscpcfblog.blogspot.ca/2013/11/1f25-post-7-is-fake-news-real-news.html) when he mentioned how 'culture jammers' "...help us to better understand the truth that the real mainstream media would prefer that we do not know...". I find it crucial that these programs give us additional ideas and angles of stories that would never be seen on regular news programs. The importance of this is that without multiple angles and perspectives nothing could be believable. It takes two to tango and you'll never understand the dance until you have the two different dance partners to present their take on it. 

Is the Fake News the Real News?

“There’s no news, like bad news.” is a quote spoken by media baron Elliot Carver, the antagonist of 1997’s James Bond film ‘Tomorrow Never Dies’. The truth in the statement is that, in most cases, the most interesting and memorable news stories presented on each respective broadcast are the stories of disaster, death, and mystery; Stories of discovery, rescue, and celebration are far less emphasized and are easily pushed aside when something wickeder rears its ugly head. It is because of the depressive nature of the news that we have satirical news broadcasts and other satire-related forms of programming.

These programs are a form of what is called “culture jamming” which, as the text describes it, is a form of media activism that subverts and reworks the intended meaning of existing media texts, or parodies major corporations, public figures, and their media images.

Popular examples of these programs are ‘The Daily Show with Jon Stewart’, ‘The Colbert Report’, as well as the former Canadian sketch show, ‘Second City Television’.

           

These types of programs are an acquired taste and can, occasionally, be viewed as tasteless, needless, or offensive. For me, personally, I see these shows as a reliable and more entertaining way of acquiring important information that I would not otherwise find out about due to the news’ aforementioned dull and depressing nature. While they are not always, of course, the most reliably accurate and honest source of information they take steps further than their serious counterparts by adding the element of humour and entertainment. Not to say that they are always bending the truth or making up elements, however; these programs often only incorporate their own specific reaction and diagnosis’ which, like everyone at home, are to be taken as such and are not necessarily meant to reflect the opinions and ideas of the general public.

           

Problems that do occur with these types of programs are often related to that certain stories, personalities, and situations are no laughing matter. Making light of the starving children in Africa would most certainly stir up controversy and likely trigger a new media focus of its own, with the instigator being most likely shown as carelessly insensitive.

          

  Is the fake news the real news? To many, it is. I accept The Daily Show as a suitable news source and I know that I, and many others around me, would be otherwise blind to Rob Ford’s latest misadventures. To conclude I quote myself saying, “There’s no bad news, like bad news mayors…I MEAN BEARERS!”

Demonstrable Demographics

After reading several of my classmate’s third blog entries, it has become apparent to me that we all seem to share similar opinions on how advertising affects us (or at least how they try to affect us), in our respective demographics. It was a surprise, to say the least, to see how many entries based themselves on similar or identical advertisements (not excluding myself).

Perhaps the most notable ad that reappeared frequently during my observations was the very advertisement that I, myself, chose to blog about. That ad would be Old Spice’s “Smell Like a Man” series. I noticed at least four other bloggers (all male) chose to review the aforementioned ad. A striking observation made by Adam (http://at12nk.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/what-the-hail/) was how the man in the advertisements repeatedly refers to the viewer and then to himself; thus, unavoidably leading the viewer to compare himself with the man on-screen (hoping to trigger a negative self-conscious response and a desire to better themselves with the purchase of their product). Adam has also made a note of how the man on-screen refers to the consumer as an “Average Joe”. It all checks out, of course, in terms of how successful the ad campaign has been. Not often do we find such a blatant example of how society is all about appearances with very little interest in personality. You’d think that the measure of a man would be the way he represents himself socially and not physically. Obviously, however, Old Spice has done a smashing job reaching out to the physically insecure sap inside all of us and given us a seemingly important standard to attempt to achieve.

Another notable blog entry came from Berna (http://bernacayabyab.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/what-the-hail/) who, in response to a Covergirl ad she came upon in an issue of “Seventeen” (a glamour magazine aiming itself at girls younger than seventeen, naturally), came to the conclusion that this type of advertisement bets on its audience (again pre-teen girls) being superficial (similarly to Old Spice). With the idea implanted in these girls’ heads that makeup will enhance their beauty and give them a greater sense of power suggests that they think very little on the importance of themselves as humans and a lot on the importance of themselves as an image. Again, I must agree on that this is, in a lot of ways, true. Girls are being tossed countless types of media suggesting that they are in need of achieving certain levels of “beauty” that can only be reached by the use of their “beauty” products, and girls literally, “buy it”.

The third blog of interest belongs to Justin (http://justingmsblog.blogspot.ca/2013/11/what-hail.html) who referred to the famous Snickers Super Bowl ad featuring Betty White with the phrase “You’re Not You When You’re Hungry” tailing the ad. Justin’s note of how the commercial attracts and maintains its audience through the use of humour and celebrity endorsements is very valid seeing as the audience is quick to relate to the star of his/her favourite television/ movie/ music star when they have seen them countless times. The humour is achieved through the use of sex and we all know how successful sex is at getting everyone’s attention

What The Heil

The advertisement that I have decided to take a gander at is the popular “Smell like a man” television advertisement from Old Spice. This ad, as the phrase suggests, is aimed at men (of which I am). Concerning the age demographic, I would imagine this advertisement is focusing its attention on males that are between the ages of 15 to 30. What is it, exactly, that this (type of) advertisement is trying to suggest to us impressionable young men? Well, first and foremost, it is betting that we want to give off agreeable scents. I imagine there are not enough men who take pride in smelling foul to interest advertisers. Secondly, the ad makes the hopeful suggestion that we men want to smell masculine; Of course this comes hand-in-hand with being appealing to potential romantic partners. Finally, the ad is getting our attention by slamming a high standard in our face for us to achieve, thus giving us a challenge. Women will obviously look at the man on screen and bat their eyelashes in excitement and we, being who we are, will not stand for such a thing (at least in the eyes of Old Spice, we won’t).

Is the advertisement using a successful approach? I would have to say so. I know I have purchased their products on numerous occasions. I, find the scents of their products to be of a pleasant variety, and many of the people who I know also use their antiperspirants and body washes. As the 12^th chapter of the text suggests, simply imputing and reinforcing the desire to fit the standard of our sex affects who we are and what we strive to be. Our identities as members of our particular sex are engraved into our heads from day one and the media does its fair share of increasing the impact is has on us. This advertisement does nothing to dispute this argument and is, quite obviously, very much first-rate evidence that, as the text puts it, “being labeled as ‘boy’ or ‘girl’ may determine your behavior to some extent”.

1F25 Blog Response 1: Media Impact on Others

After reading through a number of my fellow classmate's blog entries on how the media has affected them, It is no surprise to me to tell you how little my opinion has changed on the media's influence. I still consider the majority of television programs to be a waste of my time and intelligence (as well as everyone else's) and current "popular" music is still mostly simplistic, superficial drivel (I can't stand one-finger synthesizers that songs like Martin Solveig's 'Hello' flourish because of). I am, however, delighted to say that reading everyone's blogs has brought a lot of interesting new information to my attention.

In Raven's blog she mentioned how "...it’s crazy to think how obsessed people can get over knowing the name or how a baby looks when you have no correlation with them or their parents." She, herself, admitted to having an interest in celebrity couples and the news that surrounds them (particularly the children they have together) but she also acknowledged that the very idea that such interests exist is an example of how the media is negatively affecting our society. I would have to agree. Although displaying interest in other human beings is perfectly normal behavior, when said interest reaches the point of obsession, it's a good time to step back and re-consider your values. You mustn't let the media do that for you.

Shannon brought up the very good point that "chances are, you’re only being told what they want to tell you"; The 'they' in that sentence, of course, being producers and broadcasters of various types of media. What she says is, most likely, very true. I cannot imagine anyone purposely sending a message to the public that, in any way, truly opposes their own stands on morality, virtue, or otherwise. Sometimes (in the eyes of the informant) the only safe way to tell the public about an event or circumstance is to hide information that could, otherwise, misguide their understanding or lead them to become suspicious. Yes, I am thinking about politicians at this point. I imagine you are as well.

I was reintroduced to what is, perhaps, my favourite thing about the media because of Adam's post. He is an avid soccer (or football, as you may call it) fan and is a regular viewer of the World Cup. after mentioning how nations often disagree and dispute with one-another on a regular basis, he reminded me of how "the tournament allows people from different nationalities to put aside whatever differences they may have and enjoy the beautiful game in a pro-multicultural environment." This wonderful phenomenon is, thankfully, not exclusive to soccer, or sports for that matter. Perhaps the single greatest aspect of the media is how it can shatter separatism and the poisonous prejudices that come along with it. We are all human beings that carry the potential to care for, reason with, and understand one-another and sometimes all it takes is a group of guys kicking around an air-filled ball to realize that.

In conclusion I suggest you to use the media to find what motivates, captivates, and inspires you (unless you are inspired by 'SAW' to kill people - don't do that.) and to avoid the parts of the media that simply do not bring out the best in humanity and, most importantly, yourself.

How significant do I think the impact of the mass media is on my worldview?

The media, primarily technology-based media, has never been as significant in everyday life as it is now; there is little reason to expect a decrease in usage anytime soon (unless a major progressive shift occurs out of nowhere). Considering how many ways people, in Western society alone, communicate with each other, it’s hard to suggest that the media isn’t, in some way, significant to everyone. I know I am no different than most. I, too, have, and frequently make use of, a computer, the online services it provides, a cellphone, a television, multiple video game consoles, a library of music, and a radio. But what have I gotten from using them? How significant are the media to me and how affected are my views on life and the world because of the media? That is the question being asked today.

For as long as I can remember there has been television in my life. It is probably the media form that has influenced me the most. This, of course, is due to that it was easily accessible for me as a youngling and was close to the only form of child-accessible media that existed (in its current, mass-produced form) at the time (being a child of the 90’s). I would like to say that as a child, for the most part, I used the television I watched to better my worldviews and give me a positive outlook on life. My habit of watching pro-social programming, I think, did a considerably good job at teaching me the fundamentals of friendship, loyalty, civility, and the use of hard work as a means of living a successful life. Unlike many, I’m sure, I didn’t have a particular interest in then-popular shows like Pokémon or Power Rangers because I felt that there was little to learn from them or relate to. Even certain scenarios on programs such as Arthur or Sesame Street would be uninteresting to me because of them being needlessly argumentative and supportive of using yelling and screaming to solve problems (which, to me, didn’t make much sense).

Needless to say I do think the media affected me negatively as a child at times, as well, when I began to get older. As more mature, not-necessarily-adult material began to enter my life, of course my curiosity of them increased. Ideas that dangerous stunts, bad language, alcohol, and drugs are normal parts of everyday life are hard to remove completely once firmly planted. The ideas, in the heads of many influential kids and teenagers, do sound appetizing and even harmless. In the end what I ended up picking up from them were questions like “why?” and “what do I get from doing this?” Of course, now, I am referring to other forms of media that I have used other than just television.

Concerning how I use the media today and how I let it affect me, I typically avoid television since most current shows seem to either reflect less-than-interesting lifestyles of the rich and brainless or showcase morbidly unhealthy morals and ethics, and the way I spend my time on the internet does not typically involve serious life topics. The time I spend on the internet mainly consists of researching for school, watching ‘Whose Line is it Anyway?’ (A show I WOULD watch if it was available), and the occasional game of Tetris. Basically I surround myself with (again I’ll say it) pro-social media to coincide with who, I feel, I am.