Social misfits

The Smartest Man And The Highest Priest

http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/120c6bfa9d6c9a73 (cut and paste to access)

http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/120c6c1864c3bba9

I had a real problem getting these pics up. Blogger wouldn't let me do it, and I'll be honest I cheated I have to admit it. The photo shop is done by a friend who really knows it, BUT the ideas are mine.

1. What is the purpose of the remix? I guess to see comedians in a new light,as real, intelligent critics of the times we live in.

The remix will circulate virally at first I think, youtube and other sites. the hopes would be that it make it into the mainstream via postcard, magazine, t shirt.

I believe I did repurpose the media text, and added value possibly culturally

Is it transformative? yes because through remix the meaning has changed. i wonder what the outcome would be if I denegrated the iconic figures, but I didn't I kept their value and made what could be read as equal or greater than the source figure images. That is a question I have is it fair use if I were to denegrate the idea of the source material? Does that matter?

The intended meaning is I consider George Carlin, or some comics as smart and as important as Einstein or the pope. There is a quiet fringe of people who might believe that, but with the remix I'd like to bring it to the forefront.

Technique and choices- i used Iconic figures against Carlin, to consider him just as Iconic, and I used a play on words, and of course the art of photo shop.

I believe the source image is fair use, that being Einstein and the pope

Barack Obama and Sam Cooke Remix

http://www.sendspace.com/file/0imz3w

If the streaming audio does not work please download the mp3 from the above link and listen while watching the slide show. I could not find a slide show that would allow me to upload my own audio track so the slide show is separate from the audio.


The purpose of my remix is to strike an emotional chord with Barack Obama supporters. The music, audio clips and slide show are meant to come together in a way that represents the importance of Obama's election as President of the United States. The remix, as a whole, should serve as a way to reflect back on a monumental time in American history. I do not plan on having this circulate anywhere other than this blog.

Recently I have been listening to a lot of Sam Cooke's music, and realized how relevant his song “A Change is Gonna Come” is to our current political climate. Because Sam Cooke was involved with the civil rights movement, I would imagine that “A Change is Gonna Come” held sentimental value in his life. The message of the song parallels many of the ideals represented by Obama's campaign and his administration. This involves hope for a better tomorrow through significant changes in policy. After choosing the song, I added clips from Obama's inauguration speech to really support the message of the lyrics and the tone of the music. In addition to the audio, I selected several photos which are meant to serve as a snapshot of what the song is saying. Many of these photos show Obama in candid situations, interacting with people and personifying hope for American people.


It is difficult to say whether or not my remix is considered to be fair use of the source texts. While there really are no negative connotations to be taken from the remix, it does infringe upon copyright laws. It seems unlikely that any sort of legal action would be taken against such a positive message, but the audio clips from Obama's speech certainly alter the song dramatically. It is interesting to look at how the convergence of two different pieces of audio and images can create such a meaningful message. If this piece were to be used for educational purposes I believe it would probably be considered fair use of the source texts. Hopefully this remix means something to somebody.

Remixing brings back amateurism?

Back in 1906, one of America's favorite composers John Philip Sousa, asked that Congress "remedy a serious defect in the...law, which permits manufacturers and sellers of phonograph records...to appropriate for their own profit the best compositions of the American composer without paying a single cent therefor"--a form of "piracy" as he called it." 

He was angry and upset that his copyrighted music was being reproduced at a low cost, and he wasn't making money from it. This kind of reminded me of Metallica filing a lawsuit against Napster. Anyone remember that? They claimed that Napster encouraged piracy by allowing copyrighted songs to be distributed for free. Sousa was very much like them back in 1906. As he was the first composer to speak out on the issue of music being duplicated into "mechanical music",  Metallica was the first from the recording artists to take a stand against P2P (peer to peer) sharing. Sousa probably would have had a heart attack if he knew that something like p2p sharing would come along...

It wasn't just about the money though. Sousa feared that this form of "mechanical music" would eliminate creativity and and cause a cultural emptiness.  He said that "we will not have a vocal cord left." He feared the death of "amateur culture." He feared that people would be less connected to practicing and creating that same culture. The love for music would be fizzle...

Remixing faces its own set of criticisms. Taking someone else's original, not to mention copyrighted work, to make something of your own is taking a lot of heat. But remixing produces two positives: the good of community and education. People learn from each other while remixing, People learn about what's going on around them through it. People inspire others to do it more by doing it. It's connecting people to their culture and stirring more interest in it. 

So does remixing bring back a sense of amateurism that Sousa once feared would be dead? Does remixing hurt further creation of original material? Or does it inspire it? 

Feminism & Genderlect Theories

“Feminist communication theory...begins with the goals of understanding and explaining gender, refusing to accept stock answers and unchallenged common-sense assumptions. Feminist communication theory begins with an assumption that we are in need of deep structural change to produce new social relations and just societies." Feminist communication theory theorizes gender, communication, and social change. Genderlect Theory views communication between men and women through a humanistic and scientific approach, stating that the differences between the communication styles that women and men use are cultural. Genderlect Theory claims that men are more concerned with power while women focus on connections, leading to "cross-cultural" misunderstandings between the sexes. An example of this difference that a supporter of Genderlect Theory may believe would be how men and women think about personal relationships with the opposite sex and how they talk about their problems in different ways. However, Genderlect Theory claims that men view the world through the lens of hierarchy and that women are only concerned with making connections. Do you believe this to be true? I myself have known plenty of men who think about or view relationships just as the women they are dating do, and miscommunications arise from personality differences, not miscommunications. I believe that Feminist communication theory relates to Genderlect Theory because I believe Genderlect Theory to be categorizing women and communication, using stereotypes to form the theory, which is what Feminist communication theorists strive to avoid.

Here is an example from the movie "He's Just Not That Into You" which tries to show how differently women and men think about relationships, which would support the Genderlect Theory if it were true:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJBUj-iF4Tg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m19MuX02mUw&feature=related

Genderlect Styles and Feminine Communication Theory

As I understand it Deborah Tannen views communication between men and women as cross cultural, and follows the rules inherent in learning another language. That language is Genderlect. She goes on to say that men speak with the idea of giving a "report" whereas women communicate in terms of gaining" rapport". This matches the idea that men seek independence and women community. There are certain signs to the language. For instance women engage in what is called cooperative overlap. men view this as a power move to take control of the conversation. Another term, the "tag question" again tries to create community even in a one on one situation such as "That movie was pretty good, don't you think? Tannen has many sharp critics completely opposed to her theory, suggesting that she forgot to consider male domination of women, both physical and mental. In essence this arguement states that men and women are not equal. this is the belief of Carol Gilligan. Gilligan's idea is where the article on Feminine Communication Theory picks up. That article states again that communication as a study has always been to better a white male society. It considers that even calling Feminine Communication a theory is political, basically saying we are not theorizing, Feminine communication is real. The two media texts I have are from movies. The first is from "Diner" by Barry Levinson. just watch the scene and see, but it is an example of two ways of communicating going on here. The man is reporting the signifigance of his records, and the women is looking for rapport with the man, and even with the records. The second clip is a montage of scenes from Annie Hall, BY Woody Allen. After the voice over the scene with them after tennis is revealling. Annie catches herself doing a cooperative overlap, she refers to it saying "oh how dumb, you said I was good, so i had to say you were. I'd like to know what anyone else picks up in the rest of the clips.

Race in Communication

Stuart Hall brings up a great point in his interview from the film Race: The Floating Signifier. He expresses his concern for the way in which race functions as a sort of “guarantee” in people's minds. In essence he is saying that common justifications used to describe a particular point of view, belief, action, etc. are generally not based on logical reasons but rather on what stereotypes are understood in that society. Because certain cultural traditions and political views, etc. are common among certain ethnicities, many people tend to understand these ideals and traditions as guarantees. Stuart certainly believes that this is not true and that people's beliefs cannot be directly associated with a genetic biological disposition. This means that the history of culture has everything to do with the ways in which people live their lives. It is the struggle or hardships of the past, that can be attributed to molding cultural ideals and not genetics. Black culture in America is an example of this and represents the growth and development of cultural ideals and the ways in which they are shaped by history. Being put in a certain position, over a long period of time, where certain conditions are to be faced, is the greatest determining factor in black culture and the struggle to overcome these challenges. It seems as though Hall is saying that biology has much less to do with the communication and social structure of society and politics than the histories of those people that are involved. It is important to understand how communication is affected by the structure of race in society. According to the video clip taken from Dateline, posted below, much of what people feel or understand about racial and cultural differences is subconscious and is not all that apparent at first look. It seems as though the stereotypes which society tends to accept, can over time, condition people to believe something that is simply not true. The Dateline video shows several professionals from different areas of expertise, being tested on their subconscious racial beliefs. While the results don't seem too surprising, it is certainly apparent that prejudice and racial stereotyping have much to do with the ways in which people are accepted in society. Although some people question the validity of the test, the findings could have serious affects on the ways in which cross cultural communication works, which in turn can affect major issues in the US and elsewhere. This idea is not only limited to black and white communication but all cross cultural communication. Do you think it is possible to communicate, cross culturally, without any bias and prejudice?


You only really need to watch about 4 minutes of this video to grasp the main idea.


In the article, Communication as Raced, these ideas are also presented in an argument that claims that the study of communication itself is raced. Because the study of communication focused almost exclusively on those who were in power, much of what people understand about studying communication could be from a biased perspective. There are many different aspects of cross cultural communication to consider when discussing this topic. The important question, is whether these issues will ever be truly resolved.

Stuart Hall's cultural studies is "a neo-Marxist critique that sets forth the position that mass media manufacture consent for dominant ideologies." Our text book says that Hall joins a "group of critical scholars who attack mainstream communication...narrowly focused on discovering cause-and-effect relationships." 

The book mentions that after 9/11, former president Bush somehow convinced Americans to show love and support for our country by essentially spending money. He made it clear that "this was an especially good time to buy a new car." As a result, "new car sales increased 31 percent in the first two months after the tragedy." How is it that patriotism and buying cars were put together in this equation? This was never answered but was clearly accepted by the population as the statistic above shows. 

I came across the cover for the latest issue of Newsweek, and the similarity both in the visual given and the message was pretty interesting. The Newsweek cover also has Uncle Sam telling us to spend our money in order to find relief. This time, our relief from the recession. Both images are shaping our ideology (frameworks through which we interpret, understand, and make sense of social existence). So if the campaign to spend worked out before, can it work this time as well? Who is behind the campaign this time and why? Will people question why this is a good idea or will they just succumb to the media again? These are some questions that I don't have a clear idea on after reading this chapter... 

cultural studies

Marx's epitaph is a statement for the cultural studies of Stuart Hall which states, "...the philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." Hall's main theoretical point is to empower people who are "on the margins of society."

I would have to say I agree with Hall's cultural studies, which puts emphasis on how the mass media "maintain the dominance of those already in positions of power." Although it is a cynical view of the media, I think that everyone must ask the question, how and when are we influenced by the media and not even realize it? When are our opinions influenced by what we see and what we hear within the mainstream? I bet the answer is more often than one would think.

As you may have noticed, Hall calls his studies "cultural studies" instead of "media studies." This is because Hall believes that academic isolation of the discipline of communication is counteractive. Hall is trying to "liberate people from an unknowing acquiescene to the dominant ideology of the culture." He wishes to "raise our consciousness of the media's role in preserving the status quo."

Are we influenced by the mass media and the status quote they set?
Are people in power influenced as well, or do you believe they are somehow "exempt" to the scewed messages the media sends to society? A video that fits into this study perfectly:



"When they own the information, they can bend it all they want."

Semiotics and the Swastika

It seems as though much of Roland Barthe's work, in Semiotics, was a result of his obsession with analyzing cultural material, and the contradictions that are represented in terms of ideal perception and actual reality. He found that the manipulation and hidden agendas behind messages, especially in media, are part of a process by which signs (comprised of a signifier and signified) are changing to become the signifier of a secondary (connotative) meaning. In essence, the material being interpreted loses its original roots to a new connotation. Barthe's work is very much concerned with this relationship between the signifier and the signified, which every sign is made up of. Often the connotative signs that make up media messages such as advertising reflect and uphold the status quo (which may or may not be truthful, moral/ethical). Although they convey a particular message, connotative signs are mythical and have lost their historical referent because the denotative sign has now become the signifier of an entirely new sign.

While it is a fairly obvious example, of the transformation of meaning within signs, the video below depicts how the connotation behind the swastika has transformed. The women in the video explains the widespread use of the symbol and its meaning to some of those people. It is apparent that, for centuries, the swastika has represented a positive message to many different cultures around the world. Some of these messages include life, sun, power, strength and good luck. When Hitler and the Nazis of World War II adopted this symbol as their own, they took the symbol and the sign it represented, and transferred it to become the signifier of a secondary system. As the symbol became the a representation of the Nazi regime, it also represented everything the group stood for and the horrible acts they committed. Thus the symbol is now part of a sign system in which it represents the horrific agendas and ideals of Nazi Germany to which most people are still sensitive. It is extremely interesting to look at how dramatically the meaning of signs can be transformed. The fact that a symbol, which was once distinctly positive, can be so severely tainted is remarkable. More reflection on this topic, I'm sure, will lead to the realization or discovery of many other examples of this transformation of meaning and the breaking down of already developed sign systems. Are there any other examples that you can think of?




The beginning of this next video depicts the ways in which the Nazis used the swastika but If you fast forward to about 0:35 you will see its depiction from other cultural backgrounds.

Semiotics, The Golden Arches, and Baby McFry

Semiotics is the study of signs. Roland Barthes is the main theorist of semiotics.He saught to decipher the cultural meaning of visual signs, particularly those perpetuating dominant social values. Before Barthes a swiss theorist designed the components that make up any analysis of a sign, his name was Saussare. Saussare said in every analysis of a sign there is a signified and a signifier.The chapter really explores more of what Barthe called mythologies of the sign, for instance the symbol of the "yellow ribbon". I found it so interesting how it's meaning was deconstructed over time. it still begs the question how did that start? In my search for representative media for semiotics I found much of it dealing with simply the sign and the signifier, and signified, but I am really interested in Barthes idea of the mythology for signs. Something I considered comparable to the "yellow ribbon" are the world famous McDonalds "Golden Arches", because in it's simplest form it is really just a letter M, but when it became the golden arches the implications became so much more. It now has a mythology. I think in some ways just the word arches denotes it's like a "wonder of the world" the 8th, right up there with the statue of liberty and the Taj Mahal. it sounds crazy, but it is so engrained in us as actual arches that the word and image have that power. It's really a stroke of advertising genuis. Arches meaning always welcoming, and big enough to house the whole world. This may be going too far but there is also something spiritual, biblical, angelic in the figure of a golden arch, like walking under it will bring health, etc, and to think it's really just an M in the word McDonalds. i think the arches are half of the reason McDonalds is the biggest fast food chain in the world. This is a theory of my own, i guess, and I could not find anything specific linking the arches to semiotics, but just when I'd about given up hope I came across this, baby McFry. So what can we see in this image, what are the signs saying? I think a lot.

Media Ecology

Media Ecology is the study of different personal and social environments created by the use of different communication technologies. Marshall McLuhan analyzes human history by dividing it into the tribal age, literate age, print age, and the electronic age. While I think that each of the four periods have strong points that allows them to stand apart from one another, they all seem to be "inherently intangible and interrelated." Even though with each new age a new technological development and sense receptors are used, one leads to another and directly or indirectly influences the predecessor. 

The ear(hearing), along with the sense of touch, taste, and smell was dominantly used during the tribal age. Everything was done verbally and on the spot. While this granted people with a deeper feeling of community, tangible proof or evidence, amongst other things, would have been difficult to obtain. This leads to the age of literacy which the text says is a visual point of view. Being able to see things in print allowed people to have more trust in things. However, things were less personable now and things could now get lost in translation. The print age took what the literary age brought, and made it available to all. This brought on aloneness and alienation from others. So to connect people once more, the electronic age was born. With many different mediums, everyone is connected again. What people have gained from the print age seems to be rapidly diminishing, especially nowadays. With computers, the internet, and cell phones, we are growing into an increasingly paperless world. Visual senses are ignored, and we're back to hearing and touching. 

 Now people are predicting a fifth age called the digital age. This will build upon the electronic age and the future seems to be limitless in what it can achieve. Is this necessarily a good thing? Can too many advances in a short amount of time be a bad thing? This video contains future predictions in technology. While it is somewhat extreme and seemingly not so credible at least at first glance (many of the claims were taken from Wikipedia), it got me thinking. What would it be like to really revert back to previous ages, as opposed to progressing further and further into what human history could possibly turn out to be. 

Agenda-Setting Theory

Agenda-Setting Theory as proposed by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in Chapter 28 of the Griffin text puts forth the belief that "mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of items on their news agendas to the public agenda." In other words, mass media does not try to influence a viewer's opinions on the issue, but rather, tells the audience where to focus its attention. Viewers are shown by mass media which issues are deemed "important" (which issues to focus on), which is at all times determined by the mass media. “Position” and “length” are very important to how prominent a story is within the media. Many news outlets are competing to be the most viewed or the most heard. So these outlets use public opinion to determine the stories which should be set forth with the most prominent positioning and length. Media outlets want to own the attention of the viewer, and make certain issues more “salient.” (“’Salient’ means we pay greater attention to these issues.) However, “framing” is also an effective tool which the media uses to actually influence what the viewer thinks about AND what the viewer thinks about the issue.


Examples of Agenda Setting within the Mass Media:

In this horrible political ad, agenda setting is practiced:

Agenda Setting Theory; So, what do you think? You think what we want you to!

It's not as simplistic as that in Agenda Setting Theory, but it is close. The quote used to sum up the theory is that "the press may not tell you what to think, but it is strongly successful in telling it's readers what to think about(Griffin 360). One of the most famous cases of Agenda Setting is the Watergate scandal. It was a little known story, that eventually would not go away, and had the power to sway the public to realize the dishonesty of Nixon. Components of the theory start with a hypothesis.

The Agenda Setting Hypothesis states that mass media has the abiltity to transfer the salience of items on their news agenda to the public agenda. It is not however a one way street theorists reaearch public agenda too, which are the most important issues measured by public opinion survey. Framing is another very important aspect of agenda setting. It is a selection of a restricted number of thematically related attributes for inclusion on the media agenda when a particular object or issue is discussed.

News doesn't select itself. Who sets the agenda for the agenda setters?(Griffin,362).

This is an example of a pervasive media agenda. This agenda is created by the continual message that candidate Ron Paul is insignifigant to this election, even though he has gaind widespread support,as the facts dictate.This is more about what is kept from being said then what is being said. I'd like to add that I saw this from the other side too, such as MSNBC. The election coverage to me was so disheartening, because it was a sea of talking heads expert at framing the news, and agenda setting. Where is the real news anymore? The second clip is an example of framing. This is a fox news show, known as an Obama bashing outlet. The issue here is whether these pundits have skewed the news for their own framing, or whether this is real valid debate on a important issue, or in this case phrase. Needless to say the clip ends with one of the pundits storming out, frusturated I assume by the needless framing over this issue. You decide.

Cultivation Theory

George Gerbner's concept of cultivation through television programming is an idea that represents a skewed perspective of the world outside of the consumer's living room. Because television is such a widely used medium, it is only fair to say that it's content has an affect on its viewers. While Marshall McLuhan would argue that the television, itself, has the largest influence over its viewers, Gerbner found the theme of violence to be a great influencer in the lives of viewers. “Gerbner was convinced that TV's power comes from the symbolic content of the real-life drama shown hour after hour, week after week.” (Griffin, pp. 349)

It seems important to note that, although television programming can often be violent, people are generally smart enough to differentiate between a staged violent occurrence, on TV, and something that might occur in real life, on the street. Even more important is the constant and consistent exposure to the violence on TV. Essentially, the television serves as a conditioning device for people who watch a lot of programming. Over time the attitudes and events, which take place, on TV, become a way of thinking and understanding the outside world. Since the television is a staple in most homes, it seems fair to say that pretty much everyone is influenced by television, in one way or another. Those who spend a lot of time watching TV are more susceptible the conditioning and cultivation of false ideas.

The video below is an example of how cultivation theory affects a person who is a heavy television viewer (4 hours or more a day). The character expresses his fear of leaving his house and credits his discomfort, with the outside world, to the content on his television. His place on the couch is his haven. “That's guaranteed reliability,” the character says. “It's dangerous out there, man.” His entire existence is maintained through the mediated environment of his own house. The character would rather live inside than venture outdoors into the world of the unknown where anything could happen at anytime.

It is interesting to note that Gerbner's studies took into account the fact that television enters people's lives at infancy. Therefore, his experiments retrieved information based on the amount of time spent watching television rather than a before and after test for the effects of violence. Cultivation Differential is the term used to describe the data that Gerbner was able to collect based on different watching habits. Just as represented by the paranoid character in the video below, he found that heavy viewers indicated that they thought their odds of encountering violence outside of their house was 1 out of 10 on a weekly basis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wn6phBkcyqk (embedding was disabled, sorry)


This second video (below) is basically a montage of violent scenes from television and movies. This video is a representation of how TV conditions viewers over time. Gradually people become more and more connected to the violence that is depicted, and eventually accept it as truth. Because these people have come to accept these acts of violence as regular occurrences, it becomes difficult to actively participate in society without fear. These are the types of violent scenes that Gerbner would attribute to cultivating a television viewers way of life.

Burke's Dramatism: Guilt, redemption through victimage

"Guilt is Burke's catchall term for tension, anxiety, embarrassment, shame, disgust, and other noxious feelings intrinsic to the human condition" (Griffin 292). According to Burke, there are two ways to redemption from the guilt, mortification and victimage. 

Mortification is the confession of guilt and request for forgiveness. Victimage on the other hand is placing the blame, or scapegoating, on someone else for everything that is going wrong (Griffin 293).

The video above shows clips of former President Bush addressing the current economic situation along with our need/demand of energy. While Bush does not hold congress responsible for all of our nation's problems, he does blame it for our most current and prominent issues. Having watched the video, I can see that Bush's choice of redemption was through victimage. 

Not once in his speech does Bush acknowledge any fault or wrong doing on his part, and maintains that he has made multiple attempts to right the wrongs of our country. It is evident that guilt(Burke's definition) was present in his speech through the tone and use of words. This reluctance to confess his guilt and take responsibility as the nation's leader (at the time), tells me that mortification is not a possibility here.

Burke believed that getting rid of guilt is the basic plot of the human drama and that rhetoric is searching for a perfect scapegoat at its root (Griffin 293). If that is the case, is Bush or anyone else for that matter, justified at all for seeking redemption through victimage? Or is this pattern throughout history enabling or encouraging people to follow others in placing blame rather than taking responsibility?

Aristotle's Rhetoric

Martin Luther King Junior's "I Have a Dream" speech clearly exemplifies Aristotle's theories of rhetoric. Rhetoric can be defined as "a searching study of audience psychology." Aristotle closely studied "the effects of the speaker, the speech, and the audience." Aristotle also believed that "rhetoric is the art of discovering ways to make the truth seem more probable to an audience that isn't deeply convinced."

"...The available means of persuasion are based on three kinds of proof: logical (logos), ethical (ethos), and emotional (pathos). Logical proof comes from the line of argument in the speech, ethical proof is the way the speaker's character is revealed through the message, and emotional proof is the feeling the speech draws out of the hearers" (Griffin).

The "enthymeme" is noted as the "strongest of the proofs." Aristotle stated that "...because they are jointly produced by the audience, enthymemes intuitively unite speaker and audience and provide the strongest possible proof...The audience itself helps construct the proof by which it is persuaded." After watching the "I Have a Dream" speech by Martin Luther King Junior, one can hear examples of the "logical" proof Aristotle spoke of with King's overall theme and that King obviously knew his audience quite well. King hinted in his speech that "God will reward non-violence," the civil rights movement must continue and that it also must continue to happen non-violently, and that "God will grant us our dream."

Aristotle believed that the speaker must also be credible, as "many impressions are formed before the speaker ever begins." Three qualities Aristotle wrote that help build credibility were "intelligence, character, and goodwill." In the example of Martin Luther King Junior, during the "I Have a Dream" speech, most would agree he exemplified all three of Aristotle's credibility traits.

"Pathos," another one of Aristotle's theories on rhetoric, describing how a speaker can get the audience to feel a certain way. Aristotle cataloged emotions and how to move and audience to feel these, just as Martin Luther King Junior did in 1963.

Aristotle also came up with the popular theory of the "five canons of rhetoric." The five canons are invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery- which are all shown in Martin Luther King's speech, and can be found my exact example in Griffin from pages 325-326.

Hey

Hey everyone.

My name is Paul Kim. I am currently a psychology major but am looking to switch over to communications, reason being I just realized it wasn't for me as I studied it more. My first passion would have to be film. More specifically, I'd love to get into screenwriting and hopefully try that out in the future. The other thing that takes up a lot of my time is tennis. I play in USTA tournaments and leagues.

Mass communication is important to me because it allows me to keep in touch with not only friends and family who I don't get to be near all the time, but keeps me updated and connected to the outside world. Whether it be news/current events or updates on an upcoming film or anything else that sparks my interest, it is a big part of my everyday life.

I'd like to learn more about different aspects of communication that I probably am not aware of on a conscious level. Having read just the first chapter from the textbook, I realized that my own definition of communication is rather limited. I'd like to apply what I learn from this class in future for work, relationships, and just everyday life.

Scene from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Chester French performing She Loves Everybody

Hello everyone,

I'm Brian. I am a Junior Comm major. I recently moved back to the area from NYC, where I lived for four years. i come from a theater background meaning I went to school for acting, at The North Carolina School Of The Arts. I have worked in theater professionally off and on in Philadelphia and New York. Most recently I was in two films in a Ny film festival called The Flywheel film fest. http://www.theworldsfirstloopablefilm.com/ In Ny I had a day job as a teaching asst/ tutor for writing and english at The Borough Of Manhattan Community College which I really loved. Currently I teach acting, beginner and intermediate, theater and on camera to kids mostly 9-13 yrs old, but I am also directing a one woman show about Amelia Earhart,a great challenge.Mass media does completely affect my everyday life, but I don't like being a slave to it, sometimes I even go on a media fast. I have a real love/hate relationship with mass media to the point where sometimes I just irrationally deactivate my facebook or myspace, but at the same time I just started up on Twitter, and by the way I don't get it, twitter that is. What I bring to Mass Media knowledge is a love as much as a hate which has made me become more objective,and that is something I want to use more, so it is something I want to explore in the class, because I can tend toward being interpretive, so I'd like to learn to be objective too. I also have performance background as well as writing, directing and teaching. I also play guitar and have been in short lived disastrous band formations ever since high school playing Velvet Underground covers. My latest was an R.E.M. cover band for which I was told to affect "stipisms". I'm working on a screenplay of the experience because it was so painful. In reflection one of my happiest times was living in Woodstock Ny doing theater, before email, before text, before facebook, and I seem to think I was happier, so I guess I'm secretly a hippy at heart too. One thing about media and entertainment that excites me the most is collaboration and process, working together in collaboration. I look forward to finding out what my media diet is, and soaking up what media learning I can. p.s. The picture is of CuChulainn,a kick ass Mythical Irish hero. The videos are of the band Fleet Foxes, and the other is a short film from the festival I was in.

About ME

Mass communation is a important part of my life, because it has to do with relating to people, and understanding where there coming for no matter what it is about. I think it will help me out considering I was born with a different way of learning than most people. When it comes to relationships it helps you understand and be excepting of people. I always seem to get judged by people before people get to know me just because I'm a little bit different. I can't help having a learning disabilty I was born with it. My belief is if you can't except someone for who they are that's you problem and you are shallow and stupid, grow up. If a man cannot keep pace with his companions, maybe it's because he hears the beat of a different drummer, let him step to the music that he hears however measured, or far away- thoreau I try to work hard at everything I do, because it takes me twice as long to get things as most people, but it doesn't mean I can't learn. My ambition is to follow in my younger sisters footsteps, and do something in the media. My sister work for NBC as a news anchor, so thats kinda the thing I'm interested in, in front or behind the camera. I was also a theater major at Temple Main so I also want to get in to the acting biz if I can. So hollar at me if you want, ttyl Eli

Hey everyone!

Hey everyone, I'm Lauren.

I'm a senior year communications major, graduating in May. I originally transferred here last winter from University of Hartford (The Hartt School), where I majored in musical theatre and performing arts management. Needless to say, I love showtunes, and have a secret obsession with country music and whiney punk. I live on the Ambler campus, work two jobs, and still perform whenever I am able. Also, I am happily addicted to coffee.

Mass communication is an important factor in my life because I, like everyone else, am influenced by it without even realizing it, almost every minute of every day. I believe that mass communication is a good thing, although I think that the mediums can be overused and the information provided can be overly digested and overly-consumed. I believe that one of the problems with mass communication would be that the information provided is rarely analyzed firsthand by the consumer.

Mass communication helps me to keep in touch with friends and family through social networking sites, conveniently apply for jobs and get quicker responses through email, keep in touch with the news through internet information sites and newspapers, and receive mass text messages from friends, along with the many other ways I use it each day.

From this class I hope to gain a sense of how to be a smarter consumer of mass communication which will benefit my everyday life.

I will offer this group public speaking and organizational skills, along with a fresh perspective on mass communicating through music and the arts.

Hello

My name is George Torre and I am a Broadcast Telecommunications and Mass Media major here at Temple University. Although I am extremely interested in audio production I tend to be fairly pessimistic about what the future may hold in terms of career options in the recording field. I have been playing the drums for most of my life and have enjoyed playing in several different musical groups. Some of my more recent musical endeavours have been a rock group called The Great American Soundtrack and a Metal-core (I guess) band called One Dead Three Wounded. In recent years i've had the opportunity to travel the US several times performing music, most recently with One Dead Three Wounded. Essentially, mass communication plays a large role in my life because music is important to me. Although music, itself, is a medium for communication (on both large and small scales), I find that I have met many of my closest friends from the culture surrounding the music. I also enjoy creating media messages (music) and recording in my project studio. It's safe to say that mass communication has a direct influence on my everyday life.



I hope to learn as much as possible in Mass Communication Theory. It seems as though this class has much to offer in terms of really analyzing the way people receive and create messages. Hopefully I can walk away from this course with a broader understanding of the communication process and find parallels, within my own life, to apply them to.



Although I am extremely shy I hope to contribute to the group with some of my own perspectives on communication. Hopefully my experience with music will be relevant to our discussions.

Welcome D-Team

Welcome D-Team: Lauren Cooper, Brian Kelly, Paul Kim, Eli Tarantal, and George Torre.

For your first post, respond briefly to the following:

• Introduce to yourself generally
• How is mass communication an important factor in your life? (answer in terms of your identity, relationships, philosophy, beliefs, habits, work and/or ambitions)
• What do you want to gain from this class?
  
• What perspectives will you offer the group from your experience with mass media and communication?

Since this is an academic blog, please write primarily in complete sentences and standard English.

To post, click on the orange and white "B" icon (for blogger) in the top left corner. That will bring you to your dashboard for your Google accounts. Then click on the button to add a post to this blog. You should be able to figure out the rest.

If you have trouble, use the help functions. You can also try contacting your group members (here or through Blackboard) for help.

Welcome aboard!