Make Like Mufasa and Remember Who You Are

We seem to have a deep-seated need to divide the world along racial and ethnic boundaries.  Maybe it helps us make sense of who we and others are.  Often, we jump to silly conclusions, based on very little evidence. Is this going to be more common with the exponential growth of globalization? Yes, globalization has been around for a while, it is far from new. But look at business, look at college students. Look at your phone. I got the new DroidPro a couple of weeks ago and it came with 3 international plug adapters so I will be able to charge if should I leave the country. The global specs of the phone are surprisingly substantial. But anyways, one cannot deny the fact that globalization has picked up in the last 5 years or so, and it's only picking up speed. 

So as a reaction, will we end up creating new dividing lines, clinging on to whatever remaining categorical knowledge we have of another culture? Or will be be able to accept a new blending of cultures? It's funny how humans always want to fit in and adapt, yet they want to be unique as well. Take Americans for example, many people take on a title of blank-American. You know, like Arab American, African American, Chinese American. Or often, they wont even add the American. Why? Because they are trying to associate themselves with the culture of that other identity. But why can't they just call themselves American? So when we start taking advancing steps in globalization, will these lines between cultures thicken or dissolve? I believe that regardless of how hard we try, no matter the effort, it is human nature to cling to these ethnic divides. These divides will prevent us for truly embodying the fruits of globalization. 

Is This Real Life? Is This Going to Be Forever?

The market for 3D visuals is currently booming. It seems a though more and more industries are coming out with 3D integrated product and services. The most recognized use of 3D visuals is within the movie industry, as companies like IMAX and RealD offer a unique viewing experience that immerses the audience into the movie. However, new technologies such are developing rapidly, and soon consumers will be able to view 3D images on their handheld devices, their home television screens, and even in the classroom. While 3D is an impressive and captivating technology, my concern is the potential influence this medium can have on society’s perception of reality.

          For example, many critics and researchers believe that playing violent video games as a young child can strongly influence an individual’s perception on violence. They argue that when violence is portrayed in such an entertaining and penalty-free light, gamers’ understanding of the severity of the negative consequences of violence. However, many argue that humans, regardless of age and maturity, have sufficient common sense to differentiate between real life and a video game.

However, what happens when the video game suddenly seems real. While playing a 2D game, regardless of how advanced the graphics are, the brain can easily distinguish the gamer from the game. There is a physical gap between the medium and the audience, allowing the individual to process the difference. However, replacing the 2D medium with a 3D medium erases this physical space, making it more difficult for the gamer to differentiate between the game and reality. So what happens when a 13 year-old boy is so immersed in a 3D game of CoD that he feels as though he is actually firing a real gun, and killing real people? What happens when he continues to get as much enjoyment out of this game, as he did when playing it in 2D, and potentially even a greater sense of entertainment? Finally, what happens when this same boy buys an Airsoft gun off the internet and starts simulating this game with his friends who also bought guns? The subtle progression of steps is more probable than most of us would like to admit, and for us entirely rule out the possibility that a young boy would replace his Airsoft gun with a real gun for a competitive advantage is foolish. Society has reached a point where the line between reality and fantasy is so thin that it is practically non-existent, or at least thin enough that it can easily be ignored.   So how will we keep ourselves from confusing the two? Or perhaps we shouldn’t even bother…

    

(Achoo) Nothing Happens When You Die.

Religion is a medium. Religion says a lot about a person, and it can be interpreted by others in many different ways. Even the absence of religion relays a strong message. I have always found the different responses to religion to be interesting. The views on this seem to be greatly different between age groups, cultures, countries, environments etc. For example, as a kid religion was never really considered. I had friends who had to go to CCD every week and I had other friends who had to go to Hebrew school. The actual beliefs behind the religion were never the focus, and it was seen as an activity that our parents made us do, but at least we had friends with us. In high school, it was pretty much ignored. In college, it is judged, especially at a business school. While everyone is excepting of different religions here, many times the concept of being religious is rejected. It is assumed to conflict with both the common college practices of socializing as well as the capitalistic business mentality.

... 

On the contrary, within a religious environment, one is judged by how devout he or she is. In addition, in many other countries, a religious outlook on life is not encouraged but expected. However, those who are not religious strike me as the most interesting. Religion, regardless of what it is provides an individual with a meaning for life and a set of rules or guidelines that promise peace of mind. I have yet to figure out how one can go through life that has no overarching meaning. An individual who does this only has dreams and goals that end before death, after which they vanish. This is the message that I cannot read. 

Happy Hallow..awkward...

This weekend was Halloween weekend. At Babson, it is one of the biggest weekends all year. Well.. It is supposed to be at least. Halloween is a time for us to dress up as something we are not. We are allowed to not only create an obvious veneer, but also we are encouraged to do so. The more original the better. This weekend I saw so many hilarious costumes, from Avatars to infants. Everyone is free to send out whatever message he or she wants to.

...

However, I began to question this after seeing a couple of costumes this weekend. Are we actually free to send out whatever message we want? Of course, there is the freedom of speech, and we have debated this in class quite a lot. However, what about our ethical responsibilities? Or do we not have them? For example, I saw someone dressed up as a Chilean coal miner. While I admit it is a clever costume, it is also very insensitive. Maybe it is not sensitive at all. Maybe he is trying to turn the coal miners into heroic characters by creating them into a costume. And really when other people saw this costume, many of them didn't really know how to react. Some people chuckled nervously, other's gave a sympathetic sigh. And of course many just laughed out loud. The lady at Trim even took a picture hahaha

...

Another example I saw was someone dressed up as an oil transporter who worked for BP. His nametag had the BP logo and the phrase “Bad Planning”. His costume was covered in fake oil stains. The costume was met with both laughs and awkward side comments. While this also is a very clever costume, it is also a little bit insensitive since the oil spill is still a huge crisis. Sometimes I wonder if while we have our fun, do we still have this social responsibility to censor our own messages, not for the sake of law or even morality, but more so for the sake of compassion.  

Uhhh... What?

...

I was driving into Boston the other day and I couldn't help but notice all of the graffiti along the masspike. There were all of these initials and random sayings. I started thinking about how graffiti is a medium.
What I find most interesting about graffiti is that the artist is trying to portray a very specific message, but that there is only a limited audience that will be able to understand this message. The message can be anything from territorial marks to corporate advertisements.
For example, below is an advertisement for a well known company.

...

...

But after looking at it, I don't think most people would be able to figure out what it was advertising, especially if one was driving by it briefly. The mural is an advertisement for Converse, as you can see by the logo under the B in BRUTAL. 

Graffiti is also used to show respect for a famous individual. For example the image below is a mural painted in honor of John Coltrane. 

...

...

It's also interesting to see how graffiti styles vary between country or location. For example the three example above were all from Boston. The examples may or may not be from different locations. Looking at them, I wonder how many people would be able to tell a difference. 

...

   

...

The places these murals are from are Holland (Amsterdam), Ireland, and South Africa, and Ecuador respectively. And looking at these I have no idea what the messages are from any of them. The one from Ireland could possibly be interpreted as something about the horrible living conditions in the city, but to be honest I there is no way to know for sure.Perhaps there is a targeted audience that can understand it better than I can. 

Blah.Blah.Blah.

I was at work on Friday and I had to deliver a stack of papers to a professor. As I was walking down the hall towards his office, I saw hi face through the doorway. He looked bored out of his mind, and actually maybe even a bit pained. As I got closer, I saw that there was a women talking to him; she was pitching a marketing program. This woman had the most annoying voice I had ever heard. It was wicked high pitched and everything she said sounded like a question. You know the type.

...

This made me realize that our voices are one of the most important personal mediums that we have to portray our message to others. I remember, during my freshman year, I read an article saying that there was a study done showing that sorority girls had a harder time dropping their “sorority girl voice” than fraternity guys had dropping their “frat guy voice” during job interviews. Tone of voice really speaks volumes as to what we are trying to say. Our accents, vocabulary, volume all influence the message we portray to those around us. For example, if I hear somebody speak rudely to another, especially to an elder, I am going to form very specific opinions about that person. Another example, if I hear someone using big words with an English accent, I cannot help but think of that individual as being quite intelligent, even if what he is saying does not make any sense at all.

Below is an article from AdOps Online that describes a study that was showed that the male voice and the female voice make different impressions on various types of people.

The Coolest Article in the World. (But not really).

Pirates. Drugs. Gay Marriage. - Everything's Funnier with TPain.

In chapter 8 our text book spends a short bit of time explaining that many people use media for entertainment. I was surprised to read that we shouldn't make a sharp distinction between "fun media" and "serious stuff". And while I do partly agree with this, it's also quite obvious that we won’t be able to get anywhere in life if we spend all our time watching TV and surfing the web. But I then started thinking about different ways to mesh these two categories together. Even though the book is talking about taking fun more seriously, I personally think it would be more productive to approach serious subject matter with a less severe perspective.

...  

The example I thought of is called "Auto-Tune the News". For those of you who are familiar with the musical artist TPain, this is basically a couple of guys infusing TPain's voice generator with the news to make a melodic and comedic YouTube video.

... 

Basically these guys take what I consider fairly mundane and dry news reports of important happenings around the world (although it's more specific to the US) and make it more enjoyable (actually much more enjoyable) to watch. The videos are hilarious. 

... 

This is a perfect example of how you can infuse the entertainment aspect that we all value (especially our generation today) and merging it with the "serious stuff that really matters". I personally would love it if there was a news channel on TV that had all of their news reports in this format. 

...

You Sneaky Sneaky Flobots You.

In chapter 7 we read about how media can influence our political perceptions. This immediately made me think of a concert I went to in my senior year of High School. I went to a Flobots concert in Cambridge, MA with a friend and it was absolutely amazing. This concert however was very different from any other concert I had been to. The concert had a theme, and the theme was anti-war, and the band members after every song spoke about how our troops should be taken out of the Middle East. At one point they even unrolled this massive flag/banner of the American flag and an Army helmet.

In High School I was never very involved with politics. To be honest I’m still not as active as I should be. But remember walking into that concert not really caring about what was going on with the war. I saw both sides of the issue; one side being that we had too many men and women dying over there, and the other being that if we left suddenly chaos would erupt and tear pretty much the entire Middle East. Basically it was a lose-lose, so I tried to stay out of it. After all, I couldn’t even vote then.

However, I left the concert very concerned. I wanted those troops out of the Middle East at all costs. I was suddenly blinded by the excitement from the concert. I stood in a basement of a club for 2 hours listening to a band and I came out a political activist. Of course the passion barely lasted a week, but it made me realize how strong of an impact media can have on our political views and opinions.

Racism Fueled by the News

In class we talked about how stereotypes of different races are strongly linked to the media. I think that television specifically holds most of the responsibility for encouraging and fueling these stereotypes. Sure movies and commercials, and paper advertisements also play a role in this, but they aren't as repetitive as the shows on TV. News stations especially encourage stereotyping of race. For example when there is a report about a criminal, the very first thing they do is identify the gender and the race of that individual. So when viewers see this report they automatically, and most likely subconsciously associate the crime with the criminal's race. And over time they may even pick up on trends. For example if I hear a report of a man suspected of making a bomb I'm going to assume he's Arab. If I hear a story of a man who was shot in the streets of Boston, I'm going to assume he was Black. If I hear a report about a man who kidnapped a young boy, I'm going to assume the man was white. I can't pinpoint specific stories that I've seen to lead me to these assumptions, but I have them. And I would be surprised if I was the only one who unintentionally makes these assumptions. 

I always hate when news reporters say anything about a potential terrorist scare because one of the very first things they say is whether or not the suspects were Arab. I understand that the majority of terrorist attacks and plots against the US are by Arabs. However the Middle East is really big and there are only a few countries responsible for these attacks. Saying that the Arabs attacked the US again doesn't inform anyone of anything. Taking the tragic event of 9/11 for example. I'm sure the majority of US citizens don't fully understand the reasoning behind the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and that most people have no idea that the conflict between the US and Al Qaeda has been going on for at least 20 years before 9/11. Yet because of the news reports on TV, most Americans only received the message that "the Arabs" were attacking the US. And now Arab Americans have to live with that stereotype for a very long time, if not forever. 

Filling Up The Room

It didn't take me very long to decide on which medium to write about first. One might assume it would be facebook since it's currently tempting me to switch browser screens. But no, I chose iTunes. How could I not? I have it running right now, it's filling up the room...it's kind of hard to ignore. That's what's great about it too; you can use it while you pretty much do anything. Doing homework, exercising, hanging out with friends, whatever you're doing you can have your music playing in the background. But does iTunes have any cultural importance? Obviously it does. It pretty much defines the innovation and advancement of our generation. iTunes has really made the music industry step its game up. Even though record labels have been freaking out about piracy and artists have lost a significant amount of sales because of it, iTunes has also been putting a pressure on them to produce more music. When you think about it, before iTunes, people relied on CDs. Now that we can put all our music together and change the album and artist with just a push of a button means that we are listening to music more often. Furthermore, we are able to pick and choose different songs that we like; we don’t have to buy the entire album. iTunes has also made our society more social. While some may argue that listening to so much music replaces time when people would be talking to others, I believe instead that iTunes has created a whole new way of communicating with others. It serves as a device to connect different people with a common thread, music. Even looking at iTunes now, I can see that I can listen to my friend’s iTunes library who is sitting in a different dorm from me right now. That’s a connection that could never have been made through CD players.

The use of iTunes can be connected to ideology in media. Musical artists can use iTunes to get a message across about society that could reach a vast audience, and they can do so in such a subtle way. iTunes even categorizes these different ideologies for you, by categorizing your music into different genres. A bunch of punk bands probably have a similar ideology about our society, but one that is vastly different from Pop music, which will be completely different to Rap. iTunes has the ability to take different ideologies from different parts of the world, and put them all next to each other in groups on one screen. Again, this is something that would be more difficult to do in years past before the existence of iTunes.

What are Media?

Media are the tools used in society to get information from point A to point B. Although it may seem simple on the surface, the meaning behind media goes much deeper than that. What is this information that is being transferred? What is point A, and where is point B? Media are everywhere, and over time they have become more and more advanced. For example, as we discussed in class Homing Pigeons were used as a medium to send messages from one individual to another. Nowadays, we have email, texting, tweeting, and other internet sites that can do the same thing for us, only a lot more efficiently.

McLuhan said, “The medium is the message”. What does that even mean though? The medium is the message, or is the message the medium? I believe that both statements are correct. For example if I am watching the news on cable television, the media are the television set, the television station, the news report, the news reporter, as well as the story the reporter is telling. All of these separate parts are helping to get information to point A to point B. In this case, point A would be the story that the news station has, and point B would be me, the viewer. This is an example of the statement the medium is the message. The message can also be a medium. This is because the fact that the news station as decided to broadcast this specific news report, it is sending information from point A (the station), to point B (the viewer). In this case, the information is not the actual message, but other embedded opinions within the message. For example, by telling a specific story, the news station is sending the subliminal message that this story should be important to society, to the community. This way, the news station has the power to dictate what our community finds important to know about, thus showing the strong influence it can have over society.

I was debating with myself as to whether the message being transferred from point A to point B had to be an intentional message that has been thoroughly thought out. For example, would a crying baby be considered a medium? Let’s say for the sake of argument, the baby is crying because he is hungry. Is this baby a medium because technically it is getting a message from point A (the baby) to point B (the nearby parent)? However, it is not like the baby sat there and thought, “If I cry now, my mother or father will receive the message that I am hungry and want some food”. This type of transfer of information is much more simplistic and instinctual than again, watching a news report on the television. I believe that the crying baby and other such examples are in fact media. However, they are not considered as “The Media”. I reserve this capitalized version of media for the entertainment tools used by society, such as the television, the internet, the cell phone, video games etc. Although technically there is no official distinction made in the real world, in my head, there is a vast distinction. Technically you really could make anything a media. There are messages hidden in everything, whether it is intentional or unintentional. For example, if you see a bunch of round tables in a cafeteria, it may cause you to make connections and assumptions about the community there, such as the fact that the members of that community must be close and comfortable with each other. The fact that these table invoked thought within you shows that it is a medium, even though the individuals who decided to use round tables, for whatever reason they chose, did not intend for you to think about them in such a way. The Media and media are two different categories in my mind, yet they are all tools used to transfer information from point A to point B. Whatever that message may be, and wherever those points are, it does not matter.