Okay I just wanted to post a little about my project and I'm borrowing portions of my proposal because it's the most concentrated information I've written on the topic.
Dramatic television shows in the police office, crime scene, and detective genre portray gruesome crimes that occur in real life or are based on real life. While popular belief is that these dramatic television shows would produce viewer discussion on the horror of these fictional crimes and their relation to real world crimes, blog responses from viewers contain no such substantial topics. Instead, bloggers respond to the actors and character portrayal on the television show rather than the horrific crimes being portrayed. This is a problem in the media community because people are missing the hard issues and discussing frivolous, superficial details of the show and actors. This shows that the viewers of the television dramas in this genre prefer to distance themselves from the issues that cross over into the real world and instead preoccupy themselves with fan responses of the actors on the show.
My method for this project is to follow the path of communication through media chronologically. I will review episodes of the ninth season of Law and Order Special Victims Unit and critically analyze the content of the episodes that deal with rape as a particularly horrible crime that occurs in society as well as on television. Then I plan to analyze the content of blogs that respond to these episodes. This entails sorting the blog responses by categories such as actor/actress commentary, fan advocation, show critique, and issue critique. I then plan to show that these blogs feature more fan advocation type responses and less issue critique. I also want to talk about the lack of pathos evoked by the show in relation to these blogs. I think it will also be beneficial to my argument to discuss the idea that television shows like Law and Order Special Victims Unit evoke some kind of hard response from viewers but these responses never make it to blogs or forums. An interesting part of the project will entail a contrast between Jenkins’ story about how Harry Potter has captivated people to respond immensely on the Internet and Law and Order which does not produce anywhere near as great of an analytical or exploratory response. I hope to show through these analyses that this dramatic television genre does not illicit a response on serious issues and shows that people have a hard time facing difficult criminal issues as reality.
Any comments, opinions, or advice would be REALLY appreciated. Thanks!
Monday, March 3, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
bell hooks, not Bell Hooks
Ethnography: the study and systematic recording of human cultures; this term is also used to describe any work produced from this research
“Play with a puppy he’ll lick you in the mouth:” emphasizes the importance of distance; about the danger of falsely assuming familiarity and presuming to have knowledge of matters that had not been revealed (328)
In relation to cultural studies and race, this saying could be about an African-American assuming to be on the same level as a white person, but the white person treats the African American with contempt, thereby emphasizing “difference” and “otherness.”
As bell hooks reads works of literary and cultural studies that focus on race, she finds that white writers often assume the position that they are aware of the African-American views and write outside of white supremacy, but white writers do write as if shaped and informed by the context of white supremacy. She adds that these white writers don’t think they should address the fact that they write within the context of white supremacy. She then adds that scholars (who belong to groups who dominate, exploit and oppress) should be able to look through their work to find areas that imply the context of supremacy without being afraid or feeling guilty (328-329).
In the essay, hooks asserts that cultural studies is the area that seems most willing to include the race issue because it is more contemporary, and many scholars are focusing on “otherness,” post-colonialism, and also feminism (329).
The feminist movement is important in bell hook’s view because it brought about race as a political issue with which she attributes powerful African-American women (329).
She also tells that she is disheartened with the prestige and acclaim denied African-American studies. She is also upset with the way cultural studies programs are run by white men, as some of these programs are beginning to replace African-American studies and women’s studies. Immediately after these statements, bell says that cultural studies is exciting because it calls attention to race and gives academic legitimacy (329).
Later, bell asserts that scholars in the academy resist awkward or uncomfortable situations of diversity. She agrees with Cornel West in his suggestion that the domain of the academy should not highlight “otherness” because it marginalizes those people (330).
She is unhappy with a book (Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography) that admits to giving little attention to new realms of ethnography and with the idea that African-American scholars are not being counted in the field of ethnography as though no one has realized the importance of difference of experience (330).
“Play with a puppy he’ll lick you in the mouth:” emphasizes the importance of distance; about the danger of falsely assuming familiarity and presuming to have knowledge of matters that had not been revealed (328)
In relation to cultural studies and race, this saying could be about an African-American assuming to be on the same level as a white person, but the white person treats the African American with contempt, thereby emphasizing “difference” and “otherness.”
As bell hooks reads works of literary and cultural studies that focus on race, she finds that white writers often assume the position that they are aware of the African-American views and write outside of white supremacy, but white writers do write as if shaped and informed by the context of white supremacy. She adds that these white writers don’t think they should address the fact that they write within the context of white supremacy. She then adds that scholars (who belong to groups who dominate, exploit and oppress) should be able to look through their work to find areas that imply the context of supremacy without being afraid or feeling guilty (328-329).
In the essay, hooks asserts that cultural studies is the area that seems most willing to include the race issue because it is more contemporary, and many scholars are focusing on “otherness,” post-colonialism, and also feminism (329).
The feminist movement is important in bell hook’s view because it brought about race as a political issue with which she attributes powerful African-American women (329).
She also tells that she is disheartened with the prestige and acclaim denied African-American studies. She is also upset with the way cultural studies programs are run by white men, as some of these programs are beginning to replace African-American studies and women’s studies. Immediately after these statements, bell says that cultural studies is exciting because it calls attention to race and gives academic legitimacy (329).
Later, bell asserts that scholars in the academy resist awkward or uncomfortable situations of diversity. She agrees with Cornel West in his suggestion that the domain of the academy should not highlight “otherness” because it marginalizes those people (330).
She is unhappy with a book (Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography) that admits to giving little attention to new realms of ethnography and with the idea that African-American scholars are not being counted in the field of ethnography as though no one has realized the importance of difference of experience (330).
In bell’s view, the picture in the beginning of the post shows the white male as authority and writer and the passive black or brown man.
Questions to think about:
Can the cover undermine radical writing (331)?
Can the cover undermine radical writing (331)?
Is bell just venting?
Why doesn't she ever mention the things she thinks should be heard?
Why does she use absolutes?
Do you agree with her opinions about the cover?
Do you think white writers write about African-American issues blindly?
Do white writers intentionally deny African-Americans the same privileges.
*Note: Instead of merely using her given name, bell hooks (a pseudonym) uproots the ability of others to define her by creating her own identity. Furthermore, and here is where she goes further down the path to linguistic equality, bell hooks does not capitalize the initial letters in the new name: a convention so fundamentally accepted that only ee cummings comes to mind as having also cast it to the proverbial curb. This simple defamiliarization is a constant reminder to take nothing for granted. Is the "b" really more important than either "l"? Or, more significantly, should a name stand above all else in a narcisistic uplifting? (PS I checked for some more info but didn't come across any)
Monday, February 25, 2008
The Differences Between Men and Women
I wanted to reflect on my personal reactions to Flynn's article on feminism, specifically the idea that morality of boys and girls differ even though they are usually both raised primarily by the female figure of the family. Lexi relayed on her blog post that women view morality as "conflicting responsibilities" and their solution is "contextual and narrative." She also posted that men think of morality in terms of "rights and rules."
This is so true and so mind-boggling! I don't have sibling so I can't say I see this first-hand, but to go to a close example, my godfather has a boy and a girl. They were raised mostly by their mom because she was home during the day and volunteered at school as they got older. Before reading this article, I would assume that my cousins would develop the same system of morality since they were raised the same way. Flynn says differently and I think in many situations, she is right. Women tend to be very emotionally driven with a strong sense of justice and fairness, but men tend to make quicker judgements supported by previous or given knowledge.
I think it would be interesting to poll a group of law students or lawyers about their feelings on controversial court cases. Do you think women would be more likely to look at the predisposition of the criminals and be sympthetic for their actions, which may have been caused by circumstances outside of the criminal's control? And would men be more likely to look the other way when a women robs a bank to feed her starving children because it is still against the law?
This is so true and so mind-boggling! I don't have sibling so I can't say I see this first-hand, but to go to a close example, my godfather has a boy and a girl. They were raised mostly by their mom because she was home during the day and volunteered at school as they got older. Before reading this article, I would assume that my cousins would develop the same system of morality since they were raised the same way. Flynn says differently and I think in many situations, she is right. Women tend to be very emotionally driven with a strong sense of justice and fairness, but men tend to make quicker judgements supported by previous or given knowledge.
I think it would be interesting to poll a group of law students or lawyers about their feelings on controversial court cases. Do you think women would be more likely to look at the predisposition of the criminals and be sympthetic for their actions, which may have been caused by circumstances outside of the criminal's control? And would men be more likely to look the other way when a women robs a bank to feed her starving children because it is still against the law?
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Continental Criticism: Deconstructionist or Marxist?
The deconstructionist and Marxist methods of criticism really grabbed my attention from all the readings for today's class. I want to reflect on each of them a bit.
I didn't know there was a name for critics who are specifically intrigued by the use of words. Well, that's me. I think I am deconstructionist in my critiquing and my writing. In my opinion, these deconstructionists are rebel-rousers. I linked then in my own mind to English Nazis (you know, those people who impulsively correct any verbal grammar mistakes you accidentally make). Again, that's me. I learned in one of my English classes to write with deliberate words in support of your argument. I think this lesson has in turn motivated me to pay more attention to the meanings of words in my formal arguments.
I also love the fact that the deconstructionist "accepts no utterance at face value and instead examines a text for what they find interesting, whether or not it coincides with the author's intended interpretation" (315). The issue of finding the author's meaning versus finding your own has been on my mind since early in high school. The way I see it, a lot of writers have long died and didn't necessarily leave behind a SparkNotes outline so that readers know exactly what they were trying to get at in their works. So many novels don't have one message or one symbolic interpretation or one whatever to be absorbed from reading the book. If a reader gets some extraordinary message out of a novel that wasn't intended to be there, who cares? If you tell the reader he was wrong, it only destroys his message.
So as for Marxist critics, I have to say that I'm probably not one when it comes to literary critques but when it comes to cultural and especially political critiques, I am at least part Marxist. It may be my liberal minded political science teachers that have molded me into a little Marxist, but I do tend to question motives of actions in relation to monetary gain for the elite. It is fairly easy to find sources to criticize for using rhetoric to advance the elitist. Turn on the TV; wait five minutes. I think that a lot of the economic factors that the Marxists harp on are also social factors. Even the way a person speaks could have to do with their economic class. (The stereotype of Harvard frat boys.. similar to a Mr. Carlton Banks a la The Fresh Prince) But I think this criticism is very pessimistic of the government even though I think good points are made with Marxist criticism. It would be sad to devote yourself to Marxist criticism only.
I didn't know there was a name for critics who are specifically intrigued by the use of words. Well, that's me. I think I am deconstructionist in my critiquing and my writing. In my opinion, these deconstructionists are rebel-rousers. I linked then in my own mind to English Nazis (you know, those people who impulsively correct any verbal grammar mistakes you accidentally make). Again, that's me. I learned in one of my English classes to write with deliberate words in support of your argument. I think this lesson has in turn motivated me to pay more attention to the meanings of words in my formal arguments.
I also love the fact that the deconstructionist "accepts no utterance at face value and instead examines a text for what they find interesting, whether or not it coincides with the author's intended interpretation" (315). The issue of finding the author's meaning versus finding your own has been on my mind since early in high school. The way I see it, a lot of writers have long died and didn't necessarily leave behind a SparkNotes outline so that readers know exactly what they were trying to get at in their works. So many novels don't have one message or one symbolic interpretation or one whatever to be absorbed from reading the book. If a reader gets some extraordinary message out of a novel that wasn't intended to be there, who cares? If you tell the reader he was wrong, it only destroys his message.
So as for Marxist critics, I have to say that I'm probably not one when it comes to literary critques but when it comes to cultural and especially political critiques, I am at least part Marxist. It may be my liberal minded political science teachers that have molded me into a little Marxist, but I do tend to question motives of actions in relation to monetary gain for the elite. It is fairly easy to find sources to criticize for using rhetoric to advance the elitist. Turn on the TV; wait five minutes. I think that a lot of the economic factors that the Marxists harp on are also social factors. Even the way a person speaks could have to do with their economic class. (The stereotype of Harvard frat boys.. similar to a Mr. Carlton Banks a la The Fresh Prince) But I think this criticism is very pessimistic of the government even though I think good points are made with Marxist criticism. It would be sad to devote yourself to Marxist criticism only.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Political Criticism, Doing Rhetorical Criticism, The Nature of Rhetorical Criticism
The problem with departments of literature being the ‘place’ for our dissent and debate is that while no one will tell you WHAT to believe, the dept. of lit. tell us HOW to use language in ‘acceptable’ ways. What we think is constrained by specific rules of discourse.
This idea came from Leah's post on Eagleton's article, and I think it is an interesting topic for discussion. I actually agree and disagree with these statements at the same time. It is true that there are certain ways of grammar and argument that you learn in school. For the most part (at least until MLA decides they need more money) grammar stays the same, and you will learn the same rules throughout middle school, high school, and college. But the idea of learning how to use words and argument in a successful way differs with each teacher. (Side note: From personal experience I know that Jesuit and Dominican in New Orleans teach different methods of writing. I went to Dominican and proofread many a Jesuit paper. I usually had problems with the organization of the arguments and techniques used, but in the end that method got the Jesuit boy and A, while my totally different method also got me an A.) In college I was taught by a professor to argue a point by repeating key words over and over in order not to confuse the reader with synonyms and vague words. I grew attached to this technique, but when I applied it in another class I got a big fat C on my paper. So to get to my point, I think each professor or teacher has a different idea of what he or she considers a good argument with good rhetorical techniques and the smart student will find those echniques and use them to get the grade. But outside of class, I don't think people care how you write even when they critique or choose works to be considered in the canon. Conrad's Heart of Darkness hardly follows the use of any established technique as he resorts to the difficult to follow stream-of-consciousness. Emily Dickenson's poetry is widely loved but is also greatly awkward in its fragmentation. Also, many words have turned into parts of speech that are not acknowledged by Oxford (mostly slang like sketchy, facebooked, etc.). So I guess my final point for everyone to think about is "Do you feel constrained by rules of discourse?" I don't.. but maybe I've been brainwashed not to realize it.
This idea came from Leah's post on Eagleton's article, and I think it is an interesting topic for discussion. I actually agree and disagree with these statements at the same time. It is true that there are certain ways of grammar and argument that you learn in school. For the most part (at least until MLA decides they need more money) grammar stays the same, and you will learn the same rules throughout middle school, high school, and college. But the idea of learning how to use words and argument in a successful way differs with each teacher. (Side note: From personal experience I know that Jesuit and Dominican in New Orleans teach different methods of writing. I went to Dominican and proofread many a Jesuit paper. I usually had problems with the organization of the arguments and techniques used, but in the end that method got the Jesuit boy and A, while my totally different method also got me an A.) In college I was taught by a professor to argue a point by repeating key words over and over in order not to confuse the reader with synonyms and vague words. I grew attached to this technique, but when I applied it in another class I got a big fat C on my paper. So to get to my point, I think each professor or teacher has a different idea of what he or she considers a good argument with good rhetorical techniques and the smart student will find those echniques and use them to get the grade. But outside of class, I don't think people care how you write even when they critique or choose works to be considered in the canon. Conrad's Heart of Darkness hardly follows the use of any established technique as he resorts to the difficult to follow stream-of-consciousness. Emily Dickenson's poetry is widely loved but is also greatly awkward in its fragmentation. Also, many words have turned into parts of speech that are not acknowledged by Oxford (mostly slang like sketchy, facebooked, etc.). So I guess my final point for everyone to think about is "Do you feel constrained by rules of discourse?" I don't.. but maybe I've been brainwashed not to realize it.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
CC Conclusion: The Grand Finale
Consumers are considering some media channels as "lifelines." Is this a bad thing that consumers are becoming so dependent upon these media channels?
I want to respond to Leah's question above. I think the jobs and lifestyles of each particular consumer has to do with their reliability on certain media channels. You can't judge whether or not it is a bad thing until the consumers' jobs and lifestyles are considered. For example, students in elementary school, middle school, and high school spend most of their time in school, doing extracurricular activities, and doing homework. These students are learning the basics and should not be dependant on media channels while they are learning the basics of education. If these students are so focused on television or text-messaging, they may miss out on the basics. To take this example to the next step with college students, I think it is okay to depend on some media channels because these students have already learned the basics of education and communication without media channels or with limited access to media channels (at least for my age group and older). Adults should be able to depend on media channels to manage their time with their jobs. Blackberries can be used to take advantage of long car rides and get some work done (especially for party planners or jobs with similar requirements). Other types of jobs like babysitting do not require the use of media channels as much and it would be adverse for those people to depend on media channels because it would distract them from their jobs.
I want to respond to Leah's question above. I think the jobs and lifestyles of each particular consumer has to do with their reliability on certain media channels. You can't judge whether or not it is a bad thing until the consumers' jobs and lifestyles are considered. For example, students in elementary school, middle school, and high school spend most of their time in school, doing extracurricular activities, and doing homework. These students are learning the basics and should not be dependant on media channels while they are learning the basics of education. If these students are so focused on television or text-messaging, they may miss out on the basics. To take this example to the next step with college students, I think it is okay to depend on some media channels because these students have already learned the basics of education and communication without media channels or with limited access to media channels (at least for my age group and older). Adults should be able to depend on media channels to manage their time with their jobs. Blackberries can be used to take advantage of long car rides and get some work done (especially for party planners or jobs with similar requirements). Other types of jobs like babysitting do not require the use of media channels as much and it would be adverse for those people to depend on media channels because it would distract them from their jobs.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Links for CC6
YouTube - Ben's Oreo TrueMajority.org
TrueMajority
YouTube - Donald Trump Fires President Bush
Anti-Obama Designs for tshirts and household items
The Anti Hillary Clinton Store : Shop The Right Conservative Republican & Christian : CafePress.com
Stop Her Now: homepage
JoeTrippi.com
FreakingNews.com - News Photoshop Pictures Contests - home page
TrueMajority
YouTube - Donald Trump Fires President Bush
Anti-Obama Designs for tshirts and household items
The Anti Hillary Clinton Store : Shop The Right Conservative Republican & Christian : CafePress.com
Stop Her Now: homepage
JoeTrippi.com
FreakingNews.com - News Photoshop Pictures Contests - home page
Sunday, February 10, 2008
CC6: Blog or Die
Main concept: Politics Meets Popular Culture
Minor concepts: Shift from Viewers to Participators, Joe Trippi Helps Shape New Politics, Blogging “Spoils” Government
The main idea in this chapter is that people have become more focused on popular culture and less interested in politics, so in order to generate more interest in politics, the two must meet. One example of how this has been attempted is the action of the True Majority Group. Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream founded this organization to increase voter participation and rally support behind a progressive agenda and advertised by producing an anti-Bush spoof of The Apprentice on the Internet (206). An important consideration of this video and other similar attempts are to get the ideas into the broadest possible circulation (207).
Previous media communicated from one to many, but new media involves participation, reciprocity, and peer-to-peer interaction (208). As the previous media shifts to new media, citizens will shift from sitting on the couch watching political debates to watching debates, commentaries, and spoofs and then following online watching more information, accessing data, and participating in polls and debates. This community will participate more and rely less on official experts (209).
Joe Trippi, Howard Dean’s campaign manager, wanted to harness emerging grassroots power and looked to the Internet in a time of digital culture (209). He used meetup.com to organize rallies and blogging to make the campaign more personal. Trippi argues that the Internet makes us smarter, more involved, and better informed, while TV left us dumb, disengaged, and disconnected (210).
Blogging “spoils” the American government as bloggers pool information, go to each other as experts, debate and scrutinize information (215). Bloggers track down information that has already occurred, but unlike spoilers, bloggers also attempt to shape future events (216). Blogging is also used as an outlet for bloggers to express their discontent with news media and politics. Blogging also brings about a political division in that people with similar ideas tend to visit like blogs, so that political debate doesn’t occur to the optimum of Internet capabilities (216).
Ideas to think about: Does popular culture when combined with politics really motivate people to vote? Which media source reaches the most viewers: TV or the Internet? Why did Trippi’s digital political revolution fail? Are political blogs useful if they only attract like-minded bloggers?
Minor concepts: Shift from Viewers to Participators, Joe Trippi Helps Shape New Politics, Blogging “Spoils” Government
The main idea in this chapter is that people have become more focused on popular culture and less interested in politics, so in order to generate more interest in politics, the two must meet. One example of how this has been attempted is the action of the True Majority Group. Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream founded this organization to increase voter participation and rally support behind a progressive agenda and advertised by producing an anti-Bush spoof of The Apprentice on the Internet (206). An important consideration of this video and other similar attempts are to get the ideas into the broadest possible circulation (207).
Previous media communicated from one to many, but new media involves participation, reciprocity, and peer-to-peer interaction (208). As the previous media shifts to new media, citizens will shift from sitting on the couch watching political debates to watching debates, commentaries, and spoofs and then following online watching more information, accessing data, and participating in polls and debates. This community will participate more and rely less on official experts (209).
Joe Trippi, Howard Dean’s campaign manager, wanted to harness emerging grassroots power and looked to the Internet in a time of digital culture (209). He used meetup.com to organize rallies and blogging to make the campaign more personal. Trippi argues that the Internet makes us smarter, more involved, and better informed, while TV left us dumb, disengaged, and disconnected (210).
Blogging “spoils” the American government as bloggers pool information, go to each other as experts, debate and scrutinize information (215). Bloggers track down information that has already occurred, but unlike spoilers, bloggers also attempt to shape future events (216). Blogging is also used as an outlet for bloggers to express their discontent with news media and politics. Blogging also brings about a political division in that people with similar ideas tend to visit like blogs, so that political debate doesn’t occur to the optimum of Internet capabilities (216).
Ideas to think about: Does popular culture when combined with politics really motivate people to vote? Which media source reaches the most viewers: TV or the Internet? Why did Trippi’s digital political revolution fail? Are political blogs useful if they only attract like-minded bloggers?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
CC5: Harry Who?
I'm glad that Lexi pointed out that the fan fiction websites are non-threatening. I think this is an important factor people need to know about these websites. The fact that they are non-threatening brings many more possibilities to the site. This means that the fan fiction website is not a place where children can be coerced into meeting creepy older men who pretend to be twelve year old friends. This also means that children can have an outlet for writing that parents will approve. Parents will not have a reason to tell their children that the site is dangerous if it protects the identity of the child, and after reading CC5 it seems like these websites don't require a real name (I also like this part because then kids- or adults- can create a make-believe name).
I was not aware of the fan fiction realm of the web until reading this book, but I have to say that I think it is a great idea. I think that if there was an opportunity like this when I was younger and had more free time (and I realized it) I would have participated. It is hard to believe that the corporations would want to limit the creativity of children, if they really understood fan fiction. It seems so obvious to me to let it go as long as no profits are involved. I'm not sure if the corporations saw their characters being used and automatically went to the lawyers about copyright infringement or actually took the time to understand the process and still persecuted kids for being creative. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt, eh?
I was not aware of the fan fiction realm of the web until reading this book, but I have to say that I think it is a great idea. I think that if there was an opportunity like this when I was younger and had more free time (and I realized it) I would have participated. It is hard to believe that the corporations would want to limit the creativity of children, if they really understood fan fiction. It seems so obvious to me to let it go as long as no profits are involved. I'm not sure if the corporations saw their characters being used and automatically went to the lawyers about copyright infringement or actually took the time to understand the process and still persecuted kids for being creative. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt, eh?
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
CC2: Which One Are You?
Terms:
Zappers constantly change channels and watch pieces of shows instead of concentrating on one. (74)
Loyals pick their favorite shows and give themselves over fully to them. (74)
Casuals may have a favorite set of television programs but only watch when they have nothing better to do and actually remember. (74)
Concept:
The media industry must know its viewers in order to attract them.
Arguments:
-Interactive television should and will be designed for zappers. (75) –Phillip Swann
-On the contrary, loyals are more valuable than zappers. (76) –Jenkins
-Evidence: Initiative Media did a study that showed that loyals have a higher rate of brand recall, which means advertising is absorbed more by loyals. Because of this and other research, advertisers realize that they need to invest money during shows with high favorability and not during shows with high ratings. (76)
Therefore, new Concept:
The goal of the media industry is to attract loyals, slow down zappers, and turn casuals into fans. (76)
Example:
Concept: American Idol wants a large audience and must use knowledge of television viewers to appeal to their wants.
Arguments:
-Attract loyals to create a large audience.
-Evidence: Satisfactory entertainment experiences pull in long-time viewers. (77)
-Evidence: Serialization rewards those who keep coming back. (77)
-Evidence: Cliffhangers leave loyals hooked to tune in to the next episode. (77)
-Slow down zappers to expand large audience.
-Evidence: Short, highly emotionally charged units attract zappers’ attention. (77)
-Evidence: Sometimes an entire show is dedicated to recapping the season so that zappers can see what they have missed and get hooked on the remainder of the season. (77)
-Turn casuals into fans to expand audience viewing.
-Evidence: Short recaps and updates in every episode catch the casual viewer up and draw them into the rest of the season. (77)
-Evidence: Unresolved elements pull casuals to a more committed relationship with the show. (77)
Therefore, new Concept:
American Idol is designed to support and sustain multiple levels of engagement. (77)
...I'm a casual... and the marketing strategies work on me
Sunday, January 27, 2008
CC3: I Want Both Pills
I wonder where the members of these knowledge communities find time to immerse themselves in a make believe world. I think it makes more sense for the people who participate to be children because they have the most free time. Jenkins asserts that "transmedia storytelling is perhaps at its most elaborate, so far, in children's media franchises" (128). Well I feel that this makes more sense, at least until critics start analyzing too much. Education professors David Buckingham and Julian Sefton-Green that children may watch cartoons as a way of gathering knowledge that they use later when playing video or card games. I don't agree at all. I think children play games and watch television according to how much they feel like participating at any given time and may access the same brand or group of characters through different sources because they like the characters or the scenario. I don't mean to say that kids don't learn as they play but most kids don't watch cartoons in the hopes that something they see will help them at a later time (unless something from the company has told them to tune in to a particular episode to get a code that can be used to unlock something in the video game). I thought back to when I was younger and had video games and video tapes with the same content (Little Mermaid) but I didn't assume they were connected--only that they had the same characters that I liked. But this could very well be completely different from the way kids now play, although I have done my fair share of babysitting and I don't think they gathered knowledge from one source to use in another. So I guess my question is how many people are really involved in these knowledge communities and uses multiple sources to live in a pretend world? I don't know any of these people.. do you?
The Rhetor
Every adult person has at some point been given the opportunity to become a rhetor, and I also think it is safe to say that everyone has taken this opportunity (except maybe hermits). Rhetors also vary in their degree of ability. It can begin with someone responding to an awkward silence on a date who tries only to make the situation more comfortable but who doesn't really have anything intelligent or interesting to say. The degree of ability would end at a person who specializes in rhetoric and who writes presidential speeches during times of emergency. The speaker's degree of ability is important to consider when critiquing rhetoric. It is likely that there isn't much to say about the guy on the awkward date because his only purposes are to make the date a success and get the girl to like him. He could be fumbling with words that really don't come together in meaning or he could be making up a fantastical lie to pique the girl's interest. Much of the analysis of this rhetoric would have to do with the ethos of the guy--whether he is trustworthy and looking for love or conniving and looking for a one night stand. In the case of the political speech writer, there would be a great deal more to analyze. Much of this was explained in the ALT reading on the speaker, but there are plenty of motivations for manipulating the audience to think, act, react, or judge in a particular way, which would benefit the president, the government, and the nation.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
CC2: Behind These Hazel Eyes
"American Idol and many other reality shows may devote an entire episode to the season's highlights, designed to provide and easy entry point" (77). OOH! These episodes in the middle of the season (when I used to actually have time to watch my favorite shows religiously) used to make me so angry because I had already watched the season so far and knew what had happened. I always assumed that the producers couldn't come up with enough material for the amount of shows they planned to air or wanted to get an extra week out of the season without spending the amount of money usually needed for a normal episode. It never dawned on me that this was a ploy to attract more viewers. Now that I'm actually thinking about it, I wonder if this ploy really attracts that many more viewers. I don't think I would get hooked after a brief recap of the season because one half or full hour program can't present the full image of a season's worth of events. I think it would be different if there was a marathon of all the aired episodes because that would give the viewer access to all possible information previously broadcasted. I guess this could also depend on whether the viewer was a zapper who only looks for clips or a loyal who prefers to see the whole picture.
Jenkins also explained in this chapter how reality television often starts with a large cast that is reduced as the season progresses. He adds that some of the members of the cast become audience favorites and get more air time. He related these ideas to American Idol, because he related everything in this chapter to American Idol, but I want to push it a little further. I think MTV has embraced this idea with their Real World/Road Rules challenges. For those of you who don't know--MTV selects certain members of previous reality show casts (The Real World and Road Rules) and pins them against each other in crazy challenges to win great prizes and a large cash sum. I'm not sure about Road Rules, but I know the Real World has been on air since the early 90s and some of these early cast members participate in the challenge. These challenges are a way to attract all MTV Real World and Road Rule viewers from past seasons to watch MTV again. They can still relate with their favorite characters even if they were originally on TV fifteen years ago. It also attracts newer viewers from the seasons that aired in the past few seasons, even if these viewers are graduating from college and becoming "too old for MTV." By keeping cast members from the past decade, MTV brings back old viewers to relive their past and keeps other viewers from moving on to something else.
Jenkins also explained in this chapter how reality television often starts with a large cast that is reduced as the season progresses. He adds that some of the members of the cast become audience favorites and get more air time. He related these ideas to American Idol, because he related everything in this chapter to American Idol, but I want to push it a little further. I think MTV has embraced this idea with their Real World/Road Rules challenges. For those of you who don't know--MTV selects certain members of previous reality show casts (The Real World and Road Rules) and pins them against each other in crazy challenges to win great prizes and a large cash sum. I'm not sure about Road Rules, but I know the Real World has been on air since the early 90s and some of these early cast members participate in the challenge. These challenges are a way to attract all MTV Real World and Road Rule viewers from past seasons to watch MTV again. They can still relate with their favorite characters even if they were originally on TV fifteen years ago. It also attracts newer viewers from the seasons that aired in the past few seasons, even if these viewers are graduating from college and becoming "too old for MTV." By keeping cast members from the past decade, MTV brings back old viewers to relive their past and keeps other viewers from moving on to something else.
Not Really Pertaining To Class..
I just wanted to let you all know that there has been a death in my family this past week, which is why I was not in class on Thursday. I also wanted to apologize for my lack of posts, but I am hoping to be caught up as soon as possible considering the other work I also have to keep up with. If anyone has anything to say to update me on the class I missed I would really appreciate it. Thanks for understanding. :-)
Monday, January 21, 2008
CC1: Outwit, Outplay, Outlast
I had no idea this "spoiling" thing was a big deal. Crazy! The most interesting idea I came across when reading about spoiling came from Shawn the history student and Suckster/Spoiler. He related the skills he learned in class for his major to the skills used in spoiling. In an interview with Jenkins he explained "I like to dig. I like to look at primary source information. I like to find official manuscripts of an event. I like to find out who were the people there, what did they see. I want to hear it from them. That's part of my love of spoiling. I like to dig to the bottom. I like it when people don't just say here's who got booted--here you go, but elaborate a little bit about where they get their information" (52-53). Reading Shawn's motivation for spoiling changed my mind about it. When I began the chapter, I thought these spoilers had no friends and no social lives, but it really isn't about that. The process is a mystery and a treasure hunt where the tools aren't a magnifying glass or a shovel, but every form of interactive media available combined with brain power. If someone introduced me to Shawn, the nerdy history student with a crazy fascination with discovering information about Survivor, I would have judged him in a snap. But thinking about what I've read, Shawn is getting a head start on some graduate level research with a more current topic.
Outwit, Outplay, Outlast: How perfect is this slogan? The whole game of spoiling is about finding out the information about Survivor that is supposed to be kept secret before it airs. It's also about discerning real truth from fake truth by using any means of technology available, including thought. Can the producers outwit the spoilers by posting fake info? Can the spoilers outplay the producers and the spoiler spoilers by figuring out which info is fake? Can the spoilers outlast the series by figuring out all the answers? Or will the series outlast the spoilers? Will technology step up and provide better means for solving the problems? Just something to think about...
Outwit, Outplay, Outlast: How perfect is this slogan? The whole game of spoiling is about finding out the information about Survivor that is supposed to be kept secret before it airs. It's also about discerning real truth from fake truth by using any means of technology available, including thought. Can the producers outwit the spoilers by posting fake info? Can the spoilers outplay the producers and the spoiler spoilers by figuring out which info is fake? Can the spoilers outlast the series by figuring out all the answers? Or will the series outlast the spoilers? Will technology step up and provide better means for solving the problems? Just something to think about...
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Convergence Culture Intro and Rhetoric Articles
I find the idea of a convergence culture interesting, but other than giving a definition to the term I did not find much new information in the introduction of Convergence Culture. Jenkins did give many entertaining examples in the intro but as far as information goes, I think I will wait until I read some of the actual book before praising or criticizing whatever Jenkins has to say.
The one major thing I did learn from the intro was the definition of convergence culture, or more appropriately Jenkins' definition of convergence culture. Before opening the book, I defined convergence culture as something along the lines of "the meeting of technology and media with information" on the information sheet we filled out on Tuesday. This definition is not in sync with Jenkins' definition, but I wouldn't call myself wrong. I think the two words put together form a vague compound that could logically be defined in numerous ways. In my own words, Jenkins describes a convergence culture as a society that lives in an environment highly influenced by the availability of content from numerous, differing sources. This includes the production aspect of content and media as well as the dispersal , use, and interactions that follow content.
After reading the articles on rhetoric from Blackboard, I am safe to say that I am decently confused. I first read The Rhetorical Situation and thought I understood it to be an instance that calls for discourse or rhetoric due to an event that occured, such as an unexpected death provides an instance during which someone needs to inform others of the details surrounding the death. Then I read The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation. Now I'm not sure which writer to trust. Vatz made valid points that some of Bitzer's ideas are contradictory or at least confusing. But after reading both articles, I am confusing the stipulations that must occur to create a rhetorical situation as given by each respective writer, so for now I will hope class discussion helps me sort these ideas, and I plan to stick by my first definition of the rhetorical situation.
The one major thing I did learn from the intro was the definition of convergence culture, or more appropriately Jenkins' definition of convergence culture. Before opening the book, I defined convergence culture as something along the lines of "the meeting of technology and media with information" on the information sheet we filled out on Tuesday. This definition is not in sync with Jenkins' definition, but I wouldn't call myself wrong. I think the two words put together form a vague compound that could logically be defined in numerous ways. In my own words, Jenkins describes a convergence culture as a society that lives in an environment highly influenced by the availability of content from numerous, differing sources. This includes the production aspect of content and media as well as the dispersal , use, and interactions that follow content.
After reading the articles on rhetoric from Blackboard, I am safe to say that I am decently confused. I first read The Rhetorical Situation and thought I understood it to be an instance that calls for discourse or rhetoric due to an event that occured, such as an unexpected death provides an instance during which someone needs to inform others of the details surrounding the death. Then I read The Myth of the Rhetorical Situation. Now I'm not sure which writer to trust. Vatz made valid points that some of Bitzer's ideas are contradictory or at least confusing. But after reading both articles, I am confusing the stipulations that must occur to create a rhetorical situation as given by each respective writer, so for now I will hope class discussion helps me sort these ideas, and I plan to stick by my first definition of the rhetorical situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
