My Two Cents and Yours

The Media Versus the People Versus the Government

2009-10-25T06:00:00.000-07:00

Power can come in many forms. Power, can come in the form of the masses. In many societies, the public is a stronghold that can formulate their own decisions and seek what’s best for them and fight for their rights. In virtually every corner in the world, we see a systematic power accepted by the masses put in place – Governments. They are the authorised body that governs the people, enforce laws and keep the peace. But a more subtle body is encroaching on the power of governments, – the Media. Those that control the media arguably hold the key to power as messages sent and received via mass communication invade our homes through the Internet, TV and so on. Which system holds more power? Or, would the combination of the latter two powers become a symbol of powerlessness to the people?

The media, according to sociologist Charles Wright (1959), fulfils these functions:
– Surveillance (information)
– Correlation (analysis and evaluation)
– Cultural transmission (education and socialisation of receivers)
– Entertainment (enjoyment and gratification)

According to Antonio Gramsi (1971), the media has the ability to monopolise opinions and exploit society. Looking at the functions of media, we as individuals, allow the media to influence the bulk of our culture, behaviour and basically, our perception of reality, through the eyes of – who exactly? Most times, the makers and transmitters (the gatekeepers) of the information we receive are unknown to us and yet we give our trust and permission for the media to enter into our lives – the advertisers, the news reporters, the media owners, the political groups.

It is here where the Government can use the media to their advantage, by being a gatekeeper who controls, filters, and produces information before reaching the receiving end of the mass communication channel. Debatably, the governments have the right and responsibility to filter certain messages. I think to a certain extent they should censor content, like the viral videos that have hit the Internet and propaganda setting messages that threaten to disturb the peace. Having said that, Governments can easily abuse this power, and distort media messages according to their own agendas. This is where the public is endangered of having no power at all.

So what can the public do? For one thing, they can voice their opinions. For example, in USA, Freedom Of The Press is an active website of firm believers in a corrupt-free government and truth-based media. In recent articles, this website has touched on the elections and delved back into the ‘truths’ behind the 9/11 attacks, the ‘real’ reason behind the economic downturn and the empty promises made by the government regarding national security, health and basically everything. Ironically the aim is 100% Truth-based news, but with their negativity and complete distrust for the Obama administration (and Bush and Clinton), it looks to me that not even this website can remain unbiased.

A Political Cartoon of President Obama by Freedom of the Press

We will never truly know how much information is filtered, distorted or withheld; thus, we can never confirm the ‘lies’ of the Government and Media. Due to our very nature of accepting and digesting all information (from the Internet especially) willingly, perhaps the media and the government will always have an unrelenting hold on the public.

References:
http://www.freedomfromthepress.net/wordpress/

The 'F' Factor

2009-10-17T23:38:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, I came across this video, proof that FUN can change behaviour - The Fun Theory.

Watch:

In the video, we can see that we are so reliant on the innovation of the escalator that we forget that we have our own mechanism – our legs – to climb up. So what has these Volkswagen folks come up with? A fully functioning piano stairs in a relatively busy setting, that make sound upon impact – which I think is sheer brilliance. Now, every passer-by will be tested:
A) use the escalator and save your knees further strain, but suppressing your curiosity at the same time -OR-
B) Take the stairs and please your prying eyes and enjoy those extra 30 seconds of your very own self-composed music.
Though both options have a benefit and a loss of varied quantity, only option B has the Fun factor.

It’s a great concept that has a lot of potential. The bottom line is that we humans are selfish by nature. One could argue that when strictly looking at a human’s innate self, we are individualistic because it is difficult for us to act unless it benefits our own personal goals, attitudes and values. And what better way can we benefit than fulfilling our need to convert our boredom to fun, submit to our curiosity and excite our dull lives?

Part of this need to alter our behaviour is because of our modern perception of time. Though different cultures perceive time as unlimited or limited, polychronic (synchronic / multi-tasking) or monochronic (sequential / one thing at a time), most people will not readily give their time to activities outside of their routine simply out of convenience and the belief that there is no point. By inserting fun in tasks, we can be conditioned to eliminate or reduce negative behaviours as well as highlight and utilise our positive behaviours.

Besides the motivation to reduce laziness, applying this theory to everyday activities can make people take the initiative regarding helping other people, the environment and the entire community, without even realising it! More videos have been put up in Youtube exploring more ways to apply The Fun Theory in real life. Like converting a chore of recycling bottles into an arcade game as seen in this video:

The only problem that I see with The Fun Theory is that over time, innovations such as the piano staircase will no longer motivate the pedestrian as time goes by and will revert to using the escalator once the levels of interest goes back down. Still, I personally would advocate initiatives such as these because sometimes it just takes a little bit of fun to motivate people to do things.

Sources:

The Fun Theory

Youtube.com - Piano Stairs

Youtube.com - Bottle Bank Arcade

Stomp, Bang, Clump and Clatter!

2009-10-10T11:05:00.000-07:00

Stomp ad in Singapore. (Unfortunately I was unable to take photos during the performance!)

This week on Thursday, I managed to catch a live performance in the Esplanade theatre of Stomp – a musical group who unconventionally utilises everyday objects and body to make percussion music. For a collaboration of ragged costumes in an alley setting using tools such as pots, garbage lids and sweepers, it was a lively, inspiring and a pretty darn clever act! Not only was it musical but artistic as it used choreographed kinesics (body movement) and music to coalesce into a single unit.

Stomp has been around for 18 years, starting in 1991 by the co-founding team of Luke Cresswell and Steve McNicholas. Besides live performances across the globe, they have also made a movie (Stomp Out Loud) and been featured in a documentary (Pulse: A Stomp Odyssey). I also remember studying their concept in Grade 9 Music class and they were even guest stars in Sesame Street!

The main concept is for a group of people to make unusual sounds out of ordinary objects –not just a crazy commotion of sounds – but music that adheres to an energetic beat and exudes a dynamic vibe. The aim is group synergy – where the effort of each group member becomes a greater outcome when combined as a whole.

Besides being a purely nonverbal act, think about the complex decisions that need to be considered into every single motion! The first thing I considered was the choreography. Every clatter, bang and thump is important and must be precise. Every step of a performer must be measured together with the stage so that he or she doesn’t fall or collide with other performers. Each time one performer bangs the garbage lid of the other performer or slides a chair halfway through the stage or a more challenging and calculated throw of a pot up in the air to catch by the other performer – it’s crazy just thinking about it!

The second is anticipation of things that can go wrong. Since it’s live, all outcomes must be addressed – an audience member forgetting to silence their mobile phone (lucky for them it was Esplanade so all calls were blocked), a performer slipping in the stage or losing the beat or an instrument breaking. This actually happened when I watched that night, in the very first performance the sweeper’s pole snapped! In a breeze, the performer groaned and raised his head and immediately, the crew chucked a new one and the show did not even halt for a second. Now that’s group communication in action!

The show definitely isn’t for everybody where at times some people may find it hard to distinguish what is music and what is noise. But overall, I admire the creativity and unconventionality of Stomp. It has become a culture of its own, reaching out to a large fan base worldwide and developing a new method of making music. Lucky for those who missed the show in Esplanade, there is a Blu-ray / DVD of Stomp – which I DO recommend or there are snippets of their performance which are available on Youtube.

Now it kind of makes me want to create music with my keyboard...

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stomp_(dance_troupe)

A Bundle of Joy

2009-10-03T00:27:00.000-07:00

Just three weeks ago, ‘Grey’s Anatomy’ and ‘The Ugly Truth’ star, Katherine Heigl introduced to the world a new addition to her family – a South-Korean baby girl. She has not gone through the usual 9-month pregnancy process but has gone through a different process altogether – adoption. As of 17th September, it is finalised that the 10 month baby is now theirs.

Katherine Heigl holding her new baby, Nancy Leigh 'Naleigh'

Adoption is a wonderful thing – bringing people, who would otherwise feel incomplete, together. In Knapp’s model of relational development, adopting is a symbol of commitment in the essential ‘bonding’ stage of a relationship. Katherine Heigl and her singer husband, Josh Kelley are among the many celebrities who have chosen this road. Lucky for her, she hasn’t been scrutinised by the public for using her celebrity status to get anything she wants, including Madonna’s two year struggle to adopt a Malawian boy.

A common issue that arises as a result of a celebrity’s decision to adopt is whether it benefits the child in the long term. First off, it is definitely going to bring drastic changes to her 2 year marriage with her spouse, where the focus of the relationship maintenance process changes. Can a couple with varied schedules throughout the year handle the pangs of raising a child? Will the incessant paparazzi snaps prove to be too much for an innocent child? Let’s not forget the crazy fans who might act as a threat to the families of their favourite actors.

When the relationship does falter, as becomes a likely outcome in Hollywood, what happens to the child? We’ve seen so many child custody battles, after the termination of the relationship, but sometimes we forget it’s the child who gets hit the hardest. It is not also just after the permanent disengagement of the relationship but also during the stagnations of the relationship that a child may be deeply affected.

One thing that is undeniable is the celebrities’ access to resources, especially medical aid. Heigl’s baby, christened with the name, Nancy Leigh, was born with a heart defect – a hole in the heart. Being a special needs baby requires high quality health services so that the baby can lead a relatively normal life. Undoubtedly, due to the ridiculously huge pay checks of celebrities how can adoption agencies say no? Ultimately, money is not an issue in the relationship; there’s no wonder why there is growing demand for special needs babies.

At the end of the day, we as the watchful public eye can only hope for the best. What these kids obtain is the opportunity for a family and for me, that’s enough for a nod of approval on celebrities adopting. It is a selfless act of love to open your heart and doors to a child biologically unrelated to you and accept them regardless of race, age or need.

Family picture with Katherine, Josh and Nancy Leigh

Sources:
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/09/22/2009-09-22_katherine_heigl_and_josh_kelley_are_among_growing_number_of_parents_adopting_spe.html

http://www.sdentertainer.com/lifestyle/katherine-heigl-adopts-naleigh-korea/

Images:
http://www.jasonheiglfoundation.org/news.html

Celebrating OneWebDay with FAILURE

2009-09-26T00:45:00.000-07:00

When I am either down, completely bored or simply procrastinating, there are two websites that guarantee a momentary source of laughter – Failblog.org and Engrish.com . Okay, so this is old news since the websites are well established but I would like to profess my admiration for these comedic websites since 22nd September 2009 was OneWebDay.

What may this day be? It is a day recognised since 2006, to declare and celebrate to the world how the biggest communication channel, the Internet, has made an impact in our once lacklustre lives. So here is my declaration, I like to waste my time surfing these two websites which allow viewers from all over the world to submit photos or videos that they deem as a failure in communication.

Failblog.org has proven to be a successful Internet phenomenon when winning the Webby Award 2009 (an international web award created in 1996) for the Entertainment category of Humor and Weird. Drawing on the highly popular web catchphrase, fail and epic fail, the blog presents a series of unsuccessful, senseless and downright stupid things people do captured on video or picture.

Some examples of Failblog entries

Viewers are encouraged to rate the blog entry according to the scale of fail, marked by 5 Thumbs Down. FailBlog concentrates on the nonverbal communication, using the combination the objectics (the use of objects), kinesics (body language) proxemics (distance) among other elements to paint the complete picture of the amusing situation. I find it absolutely hilarious knowing that I am not the only one in this world who does stupid things! I think that’s what makes it so popular, knowing there are more stupid people out there than just you.

On the other hand, Engrish.com is more specific to the mistakes Asian countries (such as China and Korea) make when translating from their language or dialect into English. It is basically a collection of the unfortunate mix-up in the translation process when dealing with the relationship with semantics (the meaning of words) and pragmatics (context). This website demonstrates how easily misunderstandings can occur as a result of bypassing in linguistics.

Some examples of featured photos in Engrish.com
Whilst browsing the Net, I found an article demonstrating the Internet concepts (known as Internet memes) and websites that have evolved, including the aforementioned FailBlog.org . Some of the ones listed include websites of the very recent trend of parodying Kanye’s VMA drama I'mmaletyoufinish.com, ThisIsWhyYoureFat.com and PeopleofWalmart.com . Some comedic memes are definitely funny and aimed to poke light-hearted fun but it is debatably insulting and mean to certain groups of people. Are these websites on the brink of being offensive? You decide.

PeopleofWalmart makes fun of the kinds of people that shop there and their clothes

The newest Internet meme website, parodies Kanye West's VMA drama

Indeed our lives have been dramatically affected by the Internet, in some ways bad but let’s face it; we can’t live without our World Wide Web. Whether it’s to keep in contact with geographically distant friends, downloading and processing new information, or just keeping up with the Internet memes, let’s be thankful for the Internet. Although I am a couple of days delayed in saying this, Happy OneWebDay!

Sources:
http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/09/celebrating-onewebday-internet-meme-edition.ars

Images:
Courtesy of FailBlog.org, Engrish.com, PeopleofWalmart.com, I'mmaLetYouFinish.com

Green Hypocrisy

2009-09-19T04:00:00.000-07:00

We are less than a decade into the 21st Century and never has the world, as a global community, shown so much awareness for the environment. It’s the Green Movement: the rise of advocates for reversing the climate change, the switch to chemical free products and most of all, the golden triplet, ‘Reduce, Re-use and Recycle’. But beyond the shades of green, a trail of hypocrisy of the typical consumer needs to be unearthed...

Environmental awareness is so popular and so marketable now that in order to remain competitive, companies need to prove to their potential buyers that their products are ‘green’. It is now becoming part of the selection process to choose ‘green’ products. In fact, a new language has materialised in the consumer market. Terms such as eco-friendly, environmentally friendly, organic, carbon footprint and most typically, green, have become less of a jargon and are now part of our verbal communication to describe support for the environment.

But due to the popularity of the Green Movement, consumers are now purchasing the more expensive marketed ‘green’ products to boast a higher status and to symbolise being a do-gooder for the environment above actually performing the deed. Instead of staying true to the very essence of being environmentally aware, the ‘green’ label is now becoming a fashion statement or a non-verbal cue to show off to the world that you’re being altruistic and self-sacrificing by choosing the expensive and more eco-friendly product.

The 'I'm Not A Plastic Bag' Craze became a Fashion Statement above being a plastic bag saver

One instance I recall in the news was the ‘I’m Not A Plastic Bag’ designer tote bag that was later sold out in British retail stores (for around 6 pounds) and sold on eBay for 200 pounds. Or the occasional smart car, a travelling advertisement for wealth and self-sacrifice for environment's sake.

This Hybrid Car seeking attention for its 'green' status

In a recent study called, ‘Green Living Pulse’ conducted annually in the US, this hypocrisy is further revealed in these self-labelled ‘green’ consumers. Where a ‘green’ consumer’s biggest concern should be the environment, only 8% agreed. Where a ‘green ‘consumer’s main motivation for reducing energy use should be to lessen impact on the environment, only 26% agreed.

In another study led by author, Vladas Griskevicius, results showed that ‘green’ consumers were inclined to purchase environmentally friendly products in public shopping locations and made less eco-friendly choices when shopping online, in order to have an audience when flaunting the purchases. Yes, forget cutting costs and increasing efficiency online when you can show off being ‘green’ in public.

I’m sure the foremost aim, at first, was to help spread the message of the importance of environmental conservation. But what is happening is a distortion of this overrated ‘green’ label due to the perceptual error of exuding a higher status and selfless character. This hypocrisy has to cease, either be ‘green’ wholeheartedly or don’t pretend to be.

Sources:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1992148

http://www.greenerpackage.com/green_marketing/report_busts_six_big_myths_regarding_green_consumer

Images: Click picture for original link

AIDS IS A MASS MURDERER

2009-09-12T15:18:00.000-07:00

The main logo, with the slogan ‘Protect Yourself!’

What does Hitler and AIDS have in common? Murder – apparently. The ‘AIDS is a Mass Murderer’ campaign created by a German charity group, ‘Regenbogen’ (or ‘Rainbow’), is sparking heavy controversy for its graphic and shocking approach to safe sex and perhaps, even abstinence.

The advertisement is borderline soft-core pornography that would never air in Singapore, portraying a woman and an unidentified man having sex in a hotel room. Then it becomes a horror movie as this man is none other than Hitler, grinning malevolently and sinfully, as if to say ‘Hey, you’re going to die because I passed the virus to you!’

The man is revealed to be Hitler, smiling maliciously.

If their aim was to shock, disgust and to bring revulsion to the unsuspecting viewer, it’s safe to say they have achieved that. But when it the ad carries with it the burden of controversy, then maybe ‘Rainbow’ went too far. I suppose it really comes down to perception and what AIDS and Hitler means to both sides of the scale.

In the ‘for’ side, it is assumed that the role of Adolf Hitler to everyone is the infamous mass slayer and in a cultural studies perspective, the epitome of racism and sexism. Responsible for the killings of tens of millions of people, no wonder ‘Rainbow’ has created parallels to the deadly disease which has already taken 28 million lives and counting. Undoubtedly, the ad campaign, which also features other notorious political figures such as Joseph Stalin and Saddam Hussein in posters, will evoke fear and disgust in the viewers of this ad. In some aspects I can understand how using political symbols of evil and murder is a means of persuasion, appealing to the emotions of the viewer or ‘pathos’ when it comes to spreading precaution measures to sex and promiscuity.

In the ‘against’ side, AIDS Awareness Groups such as Britain’s National AIDS trust is saying, “It is very important we take HIV more seriously in Europe, but this campaign, however well intentioned, is not the way to do it. It is over the top, misleading and harmful.”

Why? Maybe it is because the ad is pointing a finger at AIDS victims suggesting that their sole intention is to spread the disease, in way belittling AIDS victims to maniacal, malicious, beasts. Or perhaps the content of the ad is too explicit to carry out a positive awareness message to AIDS (but it might be argued that Europe is lenient with nudity in the media). I am probably leaning more towards the ‘against’ side; it has no sympathy for AIDS victims and paints them as the enemy. Is the ad supposed to induce guilt as well, whenever someone is not being careful in their sexual conquests?

So far, the contentious ad campaign has been getting more thumbs down then up. Perhaps it’s because the social and political contexts of the majority of viewers have made it difficult to accept not what the ad is communicating (the ‘logos’) but how it is communicated (the ‘lexis’).

Thus, the controversy.

Sources:
http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/09/11/Hitler-AIDS-ad-stirs-controversy/UPI-72201252722529/

To learn more about the AD Campaign (WARNING: Graphic and Explicit Content), visit: http://www.aids-is-a-mass-murderer.com/